So You're one POI away from Map Completion .... - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

So You're one POI away from Map Completion ....

2

Comments

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Boogiepop Void.6473 said:
    The Consul's Tomb is particularly egregious. While you can get in without the story, you do so with RNG. this could mean you have to run the same character through the meta multiple times on multiple days trying to roll entrance to the POI. I am not happy about the horde POI, but at least that one is guaranteed if you complete the pair of Meta events.

    I agree complaints about Consul's Tomb are less unreasonable. Locking map completion behind story or rng is different from locking it behind playing the map. Complaining about Hammer's Hoard is like complaining about Dragon's Stand . . .

  • Aye.8392Aye.8392 Member ✭✭

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:
    Gonna have to agree with OP on this. I got around to doing map completion after the story and I was only able to get the last POI because there was a Mesmer offering ports to the POI in question (always tip your Mesmers, btw). Having to wait around for meta events just to do map comp isn't fun. It wasn't fun back in the Orr days (it still isn't fun if you're doing Core Tyria map completion) and it's not fun now. The only difference between Orr maps and this map is that people still do Orr map metas on a semi-frequent basis. Unless Anet has some long term plans for this new map then getting map comp done will be very difficult when the next Living World episode drops.

    I just had a flash of Mesmers striking at Thunderhead Keep... It made me happy :)

  • @Gop.8713 said:
    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game,

    It's not available by simply "playing the game." You have to be present for two meta events, neither of which run often. They take considerable amount of time and aren't guaranteed to succeed. Then you have to do a JP. This differs from all existing POI: the worst of which requires mere participation in a single, successful meta.

    2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp,
    For 9 gold. That's also unrealistic for many people. And it's wildly different from any other POI in the game.

    3) using a mesmer port
    Dependent on other people doing this, whereas no other POI in the game requires that.

    4) tp to a friend,
    Actually, that doesn't work unless you're already in the same instance. And the 'friend' has to remain there, without logging out. One can't leave a toon there; they get booted out in any new instance

    so there is no issue.

    That depends on how one defines an issue. I maintain that it's an issue with whether the map is fun to complete.

    the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist,

    The variety is a good thing. But it's a variety that doesn't really include something that fits in with the previous patterns of map completion.

    such a change is unnecessary . . .

    Agreed, it's not absolutely "necessary;" it certainly doesn't 100% prevent map completion. This isn't a blocking issue in terms of the game.

    It's something that undermines people's enjoyment of the map.


    As I've said before, it's up to ANet to decide what designs they think will suit the game & the community best. And it's up to me to point out that this is the sort of thing that discourages me from returning to the map.

    "Face the facts. Then act on them. It's ...the only doctrine I have to offer you, & it's harder than you'd think, because I swear humans seem hardwired to do anything but. Face the facts. Don't pray, don't wish, ...FACE THE FACTS. THEN act." — Quellcrist Falconer

  • hugo.4705hugo.4705 Member ✭✭✭✭

    They already done that with domain of kourna with the research vault beta POI, I'm done with that. They have to stop locking poi behind events... but that one in the last map have the record.

    +++In creative mood. New Engie Elite spec' , Housing , New asuran expansion , Designing a new lounge , New GameMode
    +++NEW: AEP Asuran Expansion Project available on WIKI.
    +++New: GEM GW2 Exploration Map: Discover unusual places around tyria: Here (OSM map)

  • Illconceived Was Na.9781Illconceived Was Na.9781 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 11, 2019

    Today's patched fixed a bug (according to ANet) so that the POI unlocks from outside the green room.

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/796914/#Comment_796914
    Fixed a bug in which the Hammer's Hoard point of interest could not be activated from outside of the gate.

    "Face the facts. Then act on them. It's ...the only doctrine I have to offer you, & it's harder than you'd think, because I swear humans seem hardwired to do anything but. Face the facts. Don't pray, don't wish, ...FACE THE FACTS. THEN act." — Quellcrist Falconer

  • Iris Ng.9845Iris Ng.9845 Member ✭✭✭

    So no one complains about the PoI that locked behind the assault event in South Auric Basin? That no one bothers doing any pre-events anymore except the meta and that doesn't inconvenience anyone enough to protest?

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 11, 2019

    Good that this got patched. I hope they will remember that people do not like this kind of design while doing the next LS map.

    @Iris Ng.9845 said:
    So no one complains about the PoI that locked behind the assault event in South Auric Basin? That no one bothers doing any pre-events anymore except the meta and that doesn't inconvenience anyone enough to protest?

    That's probably because that event chain can be soloed. Done that a few times when i got tired of waiting for other players.
    Notice also, that getting that point does not even require succeeding at the last step of that event chain - merely starting it is enough. Although i agree, that access to that point is way too limited, as you can get in there for only a short moment in the 2-hour long meta.

    If that event was much harder and failed more often i bet you'd hear complains more often.

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

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Cristalyan.5728 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    Although you claim you read the post I have serious doubts you understood what the point (of interest) of this topic is. The complains are from players who want to 1) - play the game when they do map completion.

    If you have no problem with 2) - letting other players to play the game for you OR 3) to buy the map completion OR 4) waiting for a mesmer (this is in fact 2+3) then this map is OK for you and I don't understand why you write here. Because even if this topic will solve somehow the issue (erasing variant 2) and 3) and 4) ) you will still have variant 1) at your disposal. Or you don't like variant 1) - playing the game for map completion? This can explain your attitude.

    Not to speak about the time when the map will be old enough. You will have to wait and wait and wait for players. Even if you want to play the game / or you want to buy the POI. In a old map this may be a difficult task. You cannot solo two meta events.

    I'm sorry but I honestly cannot understand what you are trying to say in the first two paragraphs . . .

    I do understand the question in the last paragraph, and it was solved by the item being tradeable. If it over time the plates were to become rare enough to be valuable, it would become worth it for ppl to org the metas. The solution is built right in . . .

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Today's patched fixed a bug (according to ANet) so that the POI unlocks from outside the green room.

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/796914/#Comment_796914
    Fixed a bug in which the Hammer's Hoard point of interest could not be activated from outside of the gate.

    It's interesting that they 'fixed' the one that could be accessed by playing the map but not the one that depends on story or rng . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

  • @Gop.8713 said:

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Today's patched fixed a bug (according to ANet) so that the POI unlocks from outside the green room.

    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/796914/#Comment_796914
    Fixed a bug in which the Hammer's Hoard point of interest could not be activated from outside of the gate.

    It's interesting that they 'fixed' the one that could be accessed by playing the map but not the one that depends on story or rng . . .

    Yes.
    I wonder how hard it is to adjust the trigger radius on a POI. And I wonder whether they saw the reports about the treasure room one (since people have been porting that right & left) but didn't notice reports about the other(s).

    I did see a dev there on the first day, hanging out. During that time, people were porting green, but not to any other POI. Probably just a dev working on the puzzle themselves, but maybe checking out what the fuss was.

    "Face the facts. Then act on them. It's ...the only doctrine I have to offer you, & it's harder than you'd think, because I swear humans seem hardwired to do anything but. Face the facts. Don't pray, don't wish, ...FACE THE FACTS. THEN act." — Quellcrist Falconer

  • @Iris Ng.9845 said:
    So no one complains about the PoI that locked behind the assault event in South Auric Basin? That no one bothers doing any pre-events anymore except the meta and that doesn't inconvenience anyone enough to protest?

    I have consistently lodged protests about any map completion gating since the game launched.
    That POI in AB got only moderate attention from me, because there are ways around the assault event (even before mounts). There were other, more egregious "gates" in that map before it was adjusted about 6 months after HoT started. I'm also more annoyed at a pet that can't be charmed without the DS meta, about how much of that map remains locked behind the meta, and about how annoying Lake Doric is to complete. I stopped doing multiple map completions with Lake Doric, because it simply wasn't fun. Before that, I had done story and map on a lot of alt toons ... because it was fun to see what I could do faster, better. With Doric, it wasn't fun at all (for me, anyhow).

    But after a while, if ANet chooses not to act, then I try not to let it bother me. Some things are worth bringing to their attention over the years, but for me, map completion isn't one. They know that some people don't like the gating and they still think it makes a better game somehow. Since they have been succeeding at quality games for 10 years, I'm willing to accept that they might know better than I what works for the community.

    tl;dr yes, people do protest. Sometimes ANet agrees and sometimes not. A lot of people choose not to keep spending their energy on worrying about that.

    "Face the facts. Then act on them. It's ...the only doctrine I have to offer you, & it's harder than you'd think, because I swear humans seem hardwired to do anything but. Face the facts. Don't pray, don't wish, ...FACE THE FACTS. THEN act." — Quellcrist Falconer

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

  • Gehenna.3625Gehenna.3625 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    I think that ArenaNet are certainly interested in making their content last longer and that they'd rather go a little too far and backpedal a little when people complain. There is the issue of course that people don't all play one character or 41 in your case. I've got 8 and have 10 slots myself. So to keep all of these people busy without getting bored is tricky. ArenaNet seems to focus around how much time things cost and how they can extend that. The usual tools are repetition or grind as some call it and setting up barriers that you have to take time to cover. Barriers like masteries and straight material or gold cost. I'm finding that out especially now there is at last a legendary skin that I do like (Pharus). There are parts of this that I like doing, but the straight up gold and material cost of some things are a bit disheartening. I mean the mystic coins and amalgamated gemstones are a huge deal for someone like me, but also getting 7 more mastery points in the core mastery which requires me to do a lot of things I don't really enjoy just so it enables me to spend 100 gold on mystic Anyways that's just one example and you'll be aware of this anyway but yeah, just to illustrate that everything that they do from map size to collections all are made with the idea in mind that it takes a long(er) time to do it.

    That's not necessarily the most exciting tool set for me as a player and in part they also do this to make money since it can push people to buy gems to get gold to cover a lot of the more tedious grind. However, I think that there are a few elements where they should really hold off on that and map completion is one of them. They've tried similar things on different maps before. Like the POIs that you need a roller beetle for to get to and as far as I can tell, every time they do something like this there is a big backlash. So I have to wonder why they keep doing it. I guess most of the time people will stop complaining and workarounds are found.

    In this case I'm also glad they changed it because there aren't always Mesmers standing around to port you in like some have said.

    "In my experience, if you can't say what you mean, you can never mean what you say. The details are everything." ~ Minister Durano

  • Tekoneiric.6817Tekoneiric.6817 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'm glad they fixed the one POI but The Consul's Tomb POI cost me a Teleport to Friend and I didn't even get a key from map complete.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

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

    @Gop.8713 said:
    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Considering that the map acces itself is gated behind story? Not especially.

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

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Astralporing.1957 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Considering that the map acces itself is gated behind story? Not especially.

    Except it's not. You have to do the first part of the story on one toon, after which you can access the entire map freely with all of your toons . . .

  • im not happy with anet, if u dont do the story for ur alts, u can (or could) only finished 1 map completion p/day p/account.... srsly anet????

  • TheOrlyFactor.8341TheOrlyFactor.8341 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 12, 2019

    @Tekoneiric.6817 said:
    I'm glad they fixed the one POI but The Consul's Tomb POI cost me a Teleport to Friend and I didn't even get a key from map complete.

    While I agree that it would be nice for Anet to do the same for The Consul's Tomb POI like they did for The Hammer's Hoard POI, there are more efficient, guaranteed, and less grindy ways to get keys.

    Asura fanatic.
    World's largest Zojja fan.
    Illconceived Was Na fanboy.

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 13, 2019

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

  • Donari.5237Donari.5237 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Tekoneiric.6817 said:
    I'm glad they fixed the one POI but The Consul's Tomb POI cost me a Teleport to Friend and I didn't even get a key from map complete.

    While I agree that it would be nice for Anet to do the same for The Consul's Tomb POI like they did for The Hammer's Hoard POI, there are more efficient, guaranteed, and less grindy ways to get keys.

    It's not necessarily for keys. You also get 25 map currency, which at least in Jahai is very handy -- meant it only took me a few days and learning a very efficient map completion path to get 750 currency for Requiem skins. I don't know the Keep well enough yet to know what I want out of map completion there but that currency has to be handy. And some people are completionists.

    So I agree, that poi should be reachable by cuddling the gate. Poi aside, I haven't even reached the treasure room on my own yet because the one time I had two meta plates thus far the vet bugged and wouldn't drop its plate for me. I tried yesterday and south failed so that was it for the day's attempt. I'd be willing to spend a gold or two, but not 8 to 10.

  • Just had this happen today. Only got map completion because of a friendly Mesmer, otherwise I would have to do the meta AGAIN just to maybe access a single POI.

  • TheOrlyFactor.8341TheOrlyFactor.8341 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Donari.5237 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Tekoneiric.6817 said:
    I'm glad they fixed the one POI but The Consul's Tomb POI cost me a Teleport to Friend and I didn't even get a key from map complete.

    While I agree that it would be nice for Anet to do the same for The Consul's Tomb POI like they did for The Hammer's Hoard POI, there are more efficient, guaranteed, and less grindy ways to get keys.

    It's not necessarily for keys. You also get 25 map currency, which at least in Jahai is very handy -- meant it only took me a few days and learning a very efficient map completion path to get 750 currency for Requiem skins. I don't know the Keep well enough yet to know what I want out of map completion there but that currency has to be handy. And some people are completionists.

    I definitely agree. For me, map completion is a combination of completionist goals as well as for character story/role playing reasons. It's nice to get rewards from doing map completion but that's not why I do it.

    Asura fanatic.
    World's largest Zojja fan.
    Illconceived Was Na fanboy.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

  • Maria Murtor.7253Maria Murtor.7253 Member ✭✭
    edited January 13, 2019

    Todays GW 2 experience: https://imgur.com/a/eohtmVq

  • TheOrlyFactor.8341TheOrlyFactor.8341 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I always wondered what that song was called. Thanks @Maria Murtor.7253

    Asura fanatic.
    World's largest Zojja fan.
    Illconceived Was Na fanboy.

  • Astralporing.1957Astralporing.1957 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 14, 2019

    @Gop.8713 said:
    And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out.

    I'd say this has less to do with timing (although that is indeed a factor) and more about rewards. Especially when compared to difficulty. HoT metas are just far more rewarding. I doubt many players would try to do Serpent's Ire, for example, for anything else than achievements even if it was on predictable schedule.

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

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

  • Balsa.3951Balsa.3951 Member ✭✭✭

    finished the map without even trying

  • keenedge.9675keenedge.9675 Member ✭✭✭

    @Khanco.1584 said:
    It does seem strange that, after they acknowledged this was an issue in Jahai, they'd make it even worse here. Especially now that there are real issues with locking map completion behind events.

    Because the stat meters show the map content and story was devoured by veteran players in less than 4 hours.

    I expect MORE of these completion blocking techniques in future maps.

    Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.

  • keenedge.9675keenedge.9675 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 14, 2019

    It seems the root problem is having fresh story content that keeps players amused for more than a day. The hearts were supposed to draw out the time. Having repeatable hearts with time-gated materials has been a fairly decent mechanism for that, but the heart goals are too often just "Go kill 10 rats".

    Personally, I realized finishing map completions and collecting meta objects is so much better in the first day/week of story release that I push myself to be available to crunch it down. If I wait 2 weeks, completion of objectives is nearly impossible because the veteran players are back on hiatus and map population is scant.

    Perhaps instead of a single poi gated by a meta or puzzle you could make it 10 pois that are each gated by different lore related exploration chores that give decent rewards and challenge.

    ( Aside: developing critical mass for a meta is often trashed by threat of impending map closure during the pre-events. This occurs on any map. When this is occurring, be sure to try a few LFGs and get a big squad that has found a single map )

    Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

    I am a solo person, actually. And I feel like I have plenty to do. I've played the new map for a few hours a day for about a week now . . .

    And the reason I gave for thinking it was okay to lock map completion behind the metas on this map was bc the metas are fundamental to the map . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 15, 2019

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

    I am a solo person, actually. And I feel like I have plenty to do. I've played the new map for a few hours a day for about a week now . . .

    And the reason I gave for thinking it was okay to lock map completion behind the metas on this map was bc the metas are fundamental to the map . . .

    But they're still on a schedule which means I still have to watch a clock. Sorry but the reason you gave is not a good enough reason to kitten a percentage of players off. As I said, Anet changed it already they probably agree.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

    I am a solo person, actually. And I feel like I have plenty to do. I've played the new map for a few hours a day for about a week now . . .

    And the reason I gave for thinking it was okay to lock map completion behind the metas on this map was bc the metas are fundamental to the map . . .

    But they're still on a schedule which means I still have to watch a clock. Sorry but the reason you gave is not a good enough reason to kitten a percentage of players off. As I said, Anet changed it already they probably agree.

    I think it's a great reason. Other ppl are going to feel it is somewhere on the spectrum of a great to terrible reason, and I'm pretty much okay with that . . .

  • Vayne.8563Vayne.8563 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 17, 2019

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

    I am a solo person, actually. And I feel like I have plenty to do. I've played the new map for a few hours a day for about a week now . . .

    And the reason I gave for thinking it was okay to lock map completion behind the metas on this map was bc the metas are fundamental to the map . . .

    But they're still on a schedule which means I still have to watch a clock. Sorry but the reason you gave is not a good enough reason to kitten a percentage of players off. As I said, Anet changed it already they probably agree.

    I think it's a great reason. Other ppl are going to feel it is somewhere on the spectrum of a great to terrible reason, and I'm pretty much okay with that . . .

    You didn't give a reason. You only said why it's okay. You didn't elucidate the benefits of having it that way. It's all moot of course. Anet changed it. Feel free to get the last word, since there's no point in continuing this conversation.

  • Locce.8405Locce.8405 Member ✭✭✭

    @Balsa.3951 said:
    finished the map without even trying

    And commented without reading, too. Congratulations! :smirk:

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Vayne.8563 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @TheOrlyFactor.8341 said:

    @Gop.8713 said:
    I don't really see how this is an issue. Map completion is being tied to events in the map. If you don't want to do the events, the items that give you map completion are tradeable on the tp. So players have multiple paths to achieve the goal of map completion and one of those paths is actually, y'know, playing the map. So where's the issue? It's not like some nefarious players swooped in and scooped up all the available items leaving the rest of us with no ready means for acquiring more. I'd say this choice represents a lesson well learned, so kudos to anet :)

    If you actually read the thread you'd see that many people have brought up why this is an issue.

    If you did read the thread then let me say the following: just because it's not an issue for you doesn't mean there's no issue.

    Yeah that is really frustrating when ppl post in a thread without reading it and it happens a lot on this forum so I can forgive you for thinking I might have done so, but I did not . . .

    Supposing you have also read the thread you would have seen that the poi in question is available by 1) playing the game, 2) letting someone else play the game for you and buying the map completion item off the tp, 3) using a mesmer port or 4) tp to a friend, so there is no issue. Now if anet wants to move the poi or expand its radius so that it is available to players too cheap, lazy and friendless to get it through one of the existing methods I'd have no problem with it, but that wouldn't change the fact that given the variety of means of access to the poi that currently exist, such a change is unnecessary . . .

    While the rest of the game, most of it, is alt friendly, this is NOT alt friendly. I like to complete zones on alts. Zone completion in itself is a fun thing to do. Locking this behind 2 different metas, means repeating 2 metas on 41 alts, which is 82 times I'd have to do the meta to get a POI. Or buy them 41 times for the trading post. I don't see why you or anyone would think this is a good design decision.

    You're doing it with one character it's no big deal I agree. But punishing people who spent extra on character slots is never good business in my opinion.

    Maybe they didn't like the thought of your getting ten bl keys for free. The reason I, specifically, like this is that the last episode offered its rewards to ppl who liked to log in and stand next to the tp. At least so far, this episode is offering greater rewards to ppl who log in to play the game. I like playing the game, so this makes me happy . . .

    For free? lol

    First of all 41 characters going through isn't likely to give you 10 black lion keys anyway. Secondly well over $300 of character slots is not free either. And I am playing the game.

    That said, out of all the zone completes so far, this decision would be the worst of them. In fact, the decision was so bad, Anet changed it and made it so you could get that POI without doing both metas. Apparently they don't care how many characters I complete zones on.

    To that end, I currently have 13 characters that have completed every story and zone in the game. I don't do it for the keys. I do it because it's what I enjoy. Essentially Anet is moving the bar by adding the second meta and then a puzzle on top of it. The community called Anet on it and Anet backed down. You can say, I suppose, that Anet wanted to push the limits of what they could "get away" with, with regards to zone complete and found the community was agitated enough that this crossed a line that they previously haven't crossed.

    At any rate, as of the last update it's no longer an issue, since you can get that POI without doing the meta. The other POI I get from doing the story which I'll be doing anyway.

    That doesn't seem to make sense. Your original complaint was that being forced to play the map for map completion wasn't alt-friendly bc you didn't want to do the metas. Now you're saying you don't care that you still have to do the story bc you were going to do the story anyway. Do all the players who want to do map completion without doing the story not concern you . . ?

    Actually my complaint was 2 metas seperated by an hour. Story was never my complaint. In Kourna we have to do a meta to get map complete anyway and an event. But the event appears frequently as does the meta. This complaint is about upping the anti. Making it 2 metas and a puzzle to get that point of interest WHICH ANET FIXED. Obviously they must have thought the complaints had some merit too.

    Upping the ante is the problem. If we don't say something now, next time it might be six metas, and four puzzles.

    Yes, I understand what you are saying, what I am looking for is the why. Why is it unacceptable to lock a poi behind map metas but acceptable to lock them behind the story? To me the metas are a more natural barrier. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect ppl to play the map in order to complete the map. The relationship of the story to the map is more tenuous. The two things are released concurrently and one introduces the other but the story is less related to the map than the actual events that comprise the map. To say you must complete the story in order to complete the map still seems reasonable to me, but it is less reasonable than saying you must complete the major events in the map in order to complete the map, which is borderline tautological. The only counterargument you've provided is that you don't want to do the metas and you don't mind doing the story, which isn't very persuasive . . .

    I guess this is a matter of perspective. I can start a story any time I want, at MY convenience. I don't have to wait for a timer. It doesn't hold me up. If I have ten or fifteen minutes here and there, I can do a story...whenever I want. Waiting on a scheduled time, which might be as much as two hours to get something like that done is not acceptable because Anet now is asking me to go on their schedule. That was one of the complaints about HoT.

    A person who plays the same time every night ends up getting the same events every night, even if he wants/needs a different event. The meta in Kourna and the other event you need come up pretty fast, and I was never waiting an hour for it. Now I have to wait up to an hour for each one. Just seems different to me.

    Stuff I have to do to complete a zone that I can solo and do on my time I find more acceptable. I mean I have seen, on off maps, this meta fail even, particularly the south meta, if you don't have enough people to defend two outposts. I haven't seen it fail often but I have seen it fail. To me, that means waiting even more to complete a zone.

    Do you know what my chances are of failing a story?

    Without a bug that would be nil.

    I can see that the story is less work, but I don't see that as a persuasive reason to include it as a barrier to map completion while excluding the map's meta events. I don't feel like asking someone to spend an hour on map completion is unreasonable, but even that hour is not required. You only have to log in to do the metas, you don't have to hang out for the break in between if you don't want to. Though that would be a great time to get all the other pois, hearts and vistas. I think forcing a toon to spend some amount of time in a map before it achieves map completion is a good thing . . .

    And I too have seen the metas fail, but only on maps I have happened to be in by chance, never when I am actually looking to do the meta and use lfg to find like-minded players. But even if it does fail and you don't have time to wait you can just do it another day. The plate halves don't expire . . .

    You're still missing the point. It's not about how long it takes. It's about having to be on a schedule. You may like to show up at 2 PM to do something. But there's an organic nature to the game that's sacrificed because of timers. Having to remember to do something at a specific time, or having to stop what I really want to do to be there at a specific time makes the game less enjoyable for me, and for other people as well. It was one of the complaints about HOT metas. Do you know why bounties were added instead of more metas in PoF. Because it's content on demand.

    Do you know why they included content on demand? Because of player complaints.

    If you don't mind, that's fine for you. But Anet isn't going to make a game just for one person. They're making a game for a player base that has vastly different play styles, and vastly different needs. I've given you a good reason why I don't like it, even if it doesn't affect you at all. You've yet to give me a good reason why it's better being that way. All you're really saying is it doesn't bother me, so it's okay. That's not a good enough answer for some of us.

    And to be fair, Anet changed it so maybe it's not a good enough answer for them either.

    Now you're really talking about two separate things -- whether it's justifiable for the metas to bar map completion and whether it's better for content to play on a schedule or on demand. I would argue for content that requires a significant number of players, it is better to run on a schedule. It is easier to get a large group together at a set time than it is to get a large number of ppl to agree on a time they would all like to show up. And to use your example the lasting popularity of HoT maps and relative unpopularity of PoF maps would bear that theory out. As for the inconvenience, the metas each require a player to show up once at any one of twelve different times on any day. That doesn't seem particularly onerous to me. Expecting large scale content on demand seems inconsistent with the concept of an mmo, which as you point out must cater to all the players, not just the one who wants to do map completion on yet another alt right this very second . . .

    You're right. For content that requires a significant number of players it is better to run on schedule. Which doesn't provide any reason at all to lock map completion behind that sort of schedule.

    The idea that there'll always be enough people at every hour of day in every map is just not true. And if you don't happen to get on that first map and it fills you're screwed. Is that really the best way you can think of a year or two down the road to deal with stuff like zone completion? Realistically, zone completion should be a more or less solo experience. I'm not sure why anyone things it's a good idea to make zone complete a group experience anyway.

    Again, now it's not a big deal but you can't make an MMO just for now.

    To me, map completion should be about the map -- both the group and solo content . . .

    And I have always heard ppl predict that maps are going to 'die', but I've never actually seen it happen. And I speak from experience. I've done a pretty good job of keeping up with this season but historically I'm always late to the party. Didn't finish ls2 until years after release, didn't even buy HoT until it had been out for a year or so, still have some work to do in PoF, was months behind on finishing a lot of ls3 maps, etc. Yet I have never once found anything in this game that I could not do bc I couldn't find other ppl to do it with me. Until that actually happens, I'm not going to rate that as a serious concern. And if it did come to pass that interest in this map's metas was so low that they became impossible, I would argue that in and of itself would be a problem to solve, regardless of whether map completion was locked behind it or not . . .

    First of all, the game is older now than it was, and it's only going to get older. It's going to die is inevitable for all games. But more to the point, there is plenty of group content now, but there's far less solo content in new zones. So locking zone complete, which was a solo endeavor for most of the game behind stuff you need large groups for makes no sense. People didn't like HoT because of it and that cost the company players and money. You might not personally care, but HOT did not do that well at least in part because it didn't support people who want to solo.

    Here we have you,. saying you think it's okay and a portion of the community who clearly doesn't feel it's okay. No one is saying take the metas out. You can still have metas and metas can still be rewarding. But what you're saying here is you think map completion should have a group component, yet you give no reason except that you personally think it's fair game.

    Give the solo people something to do, and let them do it, because you won't be hurt by it. The game will be hurt if you drive solo players off, because you know, they support the game as well...probably in bigger quantity than many suspect.

    Again again, for the umpteenth time, Anet has already changed this, so this argument is pointless anyway. Obviously enough people complained for Anet to change it, whether any one person cares about this or not. The decision was already made in favor of people who don't want map complete locked behind two metas. Note they didn't change the story component one.

    I am a solo person, actually. And I feel like I have plenty to do. I've played the new map for a few hours a day for about a week now . . .

    And the reason I gave for thinking it was okay to lock map completion behind the metas on this map was bc the metas are fundamental to the map . . .

    But they're still on a schedule which means I still have to watch a clock. Sorry but the reason you gave is not a good enough reason to kitten a percentage of players off. As I said, Anet changed it already they probably agree.

    I think it's a great reason. Other ppl are going to feel it is somewhere on the spectrum of a great to terrible reason, and I'm pretty much okay with that . . .

    You didn't give a reason. You only said why it's okay. You didn't elucidate the benefits of having it that way. It's all moot of course. Anet changed it. Feel free to get the last word, since there's no point in continuing this conversation.

    I actually gave my reasons before you accused me of not having any reasons, then responded with reason to that accusation lol . . .

    Which makes me suspect you're just trolling me at this point, but that's okay, no harm done :)

  • Vyrulisse.1246Vyrulisse.1246 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 18, 2019

    You would think they would learn by now but no they just keep doing it. Move the PoI or give it a more generous range please A.net. Feels like every map players have to ask this for at least one.

    Seems if you're lucky you can get it outside the gate but seems a bit random.

  • lexxguard.2690lexxguard.2690 Member ✭✭
    edited June 1, 2019

    Okay Devs please move this POI out of the locked room. Here is the issue I am having. Even if I complete both the Metas and get the Light of Deldrimor. I still dont get a Purple Plate. It seems that you only do 4 of the 6 rooms available. Which means you have a 66% chance to get the Purple Plate. I have done this 6 times now and RNG has not been kind enough to give me the Purple Plate. Therefore you are blocking player map completion progress based on a random chance to get an item.

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