IndigoSundown.5419

Report them, it's all you can do.

More anecdotal evidence about what a travesty defending has become. Defense of T3 Bay keep: defend event procced 4 times; my weekly kill count went from 21 to 49; no Keep Keeper credit. Meanwhile, my roommate was at the same event and got credit 2x for the defend event. So, if you have to kill enemies who damaged the structure or did enough damage to a guard to pass some unknown threshold, how do I know which member(s) of the 40 person blob constantly shrouded in visual effects to kill? Fix the farce, please.

Well, yes, I would say that trolling is a psychological issue -- like any asocial or anti-social behavior.

Calling emoji use passive-aggressive behavior is a stretch. Sure, you can guess, but there are much simpler explanations for negative emoji use than the complex psychological factors that cause passive aggression. Two examples are "trolling," or "cba to post."

So, does that mean that all requirements for legendary items need to be made available in a variety of game modes to suit those who don't want to...? Because I don't like what has to be done to get Gifts of Exploration.

Defense is NOT dead, it's just a lot more difficult to get credit for, especially for small groups and roamers. Repair happens, when it does, because people care about keeping control of the structure. I'm telling my group to repair T2 and higher, and not to bother with T1 or Paper.

One trick ponies. 🤤

My guild group now only goes to objective defense to get weekly or daily kills. Barring that, we don't really bother responding. Given that I'm not willing to run a public tag and not respond, it also means I'm running private more often, even though there are plenty of requests like, "Any tags?" Too bad for those players, amirite? So, congratulations, ANet. In choosing to use the lowest common denominator solution to the "problem" of SMC defense, you've negatively impacted most players who aren't running in the 50 person blobs. Way to go. I'm adding my request to the OP's, though I have NO faith that ANet will ever do anything about this issue.

"Lack of endgame content" is often used as a criticism by many different people who want different things. What do YOU mean by it OP? After all, ANet might deliver what I want but not what you want -- and If you didn't specify, you'd have no right to complain that they "didn't listen," which is another frequent criticism.

While I can see that was what you meant, the OP is not that precise, and I lack faith in humanity.

Need? No, they would not need it. However, some will ask (demand), as players have asked (demanded) anytime any developer in any multiplayer game has removed something that players "earned" via play or bought with in-game resources or cash.

Perhaps the motto of World v World should be, "Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own."

Two Answers 1) I play about an hour a day, often as a commander with anywhere from ~5 to ~15 players along. So far, I've gotten the weeklies done with a day or more to spare every time. So, no, I don't think that the weekly rewards are out of reach for casual play, unless you restrict yourself to both roaming and playing casually. 2) Yes, the rewards have changed my playstyle some. I'm noticing that there are a lot more very large enemy groups (guilds or guilds plus militia). This is a change from my experience except when we were linked with a T1 server (like Maguuma). I dislike gameplay where I have zero chance to win, and since my group is never likely to get bigger, that state of affairs is occurring a lot more often, and I am both playing less and enjoying WvW less as a result. Disclaimer: It seems to me that ANet wants WvW to consist of large-scale fights if not in its entirety then in large part. If so, then they will see the changes which came about as a result of the reward revamp as a positive thing. Too bad for me that I don't.

My hope (Calling it an expectation would imply that I thought ANet would actually do something about CC, and I have no such expectation) would be that if you've been successfully CC'd (i.e. not just lost a stab stack), a short immunity to CC would be applied. There would have to be some differentiation between area denial and loss of control skills. I could see where CC immunity should not allow you to ignore area denial, but it could protect against being chain pulled, launched, knocked down, stunned, and daze.

Daredevil. Didn't notice his boons, he wasn't around long enough in the second or less he was visible for me to look at his buff bar. We were 5 and had a healer so he wasn't going to kill anyone. While the OP's contention that there is no counter-play is not correct, the counter-play options are sparse. We didn't have them. It happens and I am sure that if we had and gotten him revealed, he would have escaped, because that's what Daredevil and most thieves do. What I will give this player is that he executed the attack-stealth endless chain very well. He also was willing to go at a larger number of players. What I feel is broken is the ability to attack over and over and never be attacked back. Ommv, but to me, perma-stealth is almost as broken as the CC proliferation in zerg fights.

Saw a DD in WvW just yesterday. It would attack-stealth-attack-stealth-attack-stealth ad infinitum. Broken.

What's broken about CC is there is no short-term CC immunity after you've been CC'd. Good games have it.

You are correct. Defending is not dead. However, all of SBI's siege will only get them defend credit if they use it to defeat an enemy player who is deemed to be "attacking" those objectives by ANet's criteria. Also, while defending as a roamer or in a small group is not technically dead, it is feeling proper poorly. The only incentive for such players to go to defend is if they want to gamble enough people will show up to actually hold the objective in the face of a large enemy group, or in those rare instances when the attacking group is small.

In GW2, you won't "fall behind" due to the non-existent progression curve. Find something else to play and come back to GW2 when there is stuff you might want to do.

As a subjective consideration, I don't consider mount skins to add sufficient value to my game experience to warrant the expense. While I did buy one package a long time ago, I have avoided buying mount skins with that exception. Again, "not worth it to me" is not the same as "overpriced." "Overpriced" as an objective consideration is a matter of what you can get similar items for elsewhere. Other games have cosmetic mounts for sale in their cash shops. Do some comparison shopping. The last time I checked, GW2's mount skin prices were competitive with other games. That may have changed, but since GW2 has neither changed skin prices nor gem prices, any change would be in GW2's favor. Are you doing it wrong, OP? Maybe. "Costs too much" in the GW2 "gems for gold" setup is a function of time, not money. Here's a couple of suggestions. 1) Be patient 2) Periodically check the gold to gems conversion rate. When you have some gold surplus, and the rate is down in your favor, pick up gems even if there's nothing you want right then. If you only buy when there are desirable items for sale, you will get less gems for your gold.

Way to go, OP. Your idea would put a third dagger into small group and roamer play. ANet's rewards made WvW less friendly to those demographics for dagger one, and the elimination of repair as a means to get defend credit put dagger two. Why not go for the Trifecta?

ONE Any serious reduction in boon sharing would have to be accompanied by changes to AOE and CC. Boons are what keep a group from wilting in the bazillion red circles put out by the other guys. THREE Another option exists -- a short CC immunity once someone has been CC'd. Many other games have such a mechanic Something similar is sorely needed in GW2, where it is very possible to have 10 stacks of stab stripped in a couple of seconds, burn through your stun breaks and then bounce around like a ping-pong ball until defeated.

If the problem is Stonemist, maybe they should cap the number of times you can defend it in a day or week rather than take away defend keep/tower rewards for small groups, roamers and support across all maps. Typical ANet, amputate when applying a band aid would do.

They failed to take the camp. Working as intended and as make sense. If they had succeeded, any in the cap circle would have got capture event credit. We succeeded in defending the camp, but most got no credit for the defend. Would they get credit if they killed us in the circle and were not in said circle when the cap completed? Maybe, maybe not, that's as iffy as defending. Should they get credit under that circumstance? I'd say yes. The point, though, is that capture credit's mechanic is transparent and works 100% of the time. Be in the darned capture area when it completes. The defending mechanic is arbitrarily assigned. With towers and keeps, there was a way to get it that was not arbitrary. Now, there isn't.

If they're going to keep the "no credit for repair" on defend events, ANet really needs to fix defend via kills. My guild group just defended our home camp (alpine BL) from a group of enemy. Going into the defense, I had 23 weekly kills. Coming out, I had 36. Others had similar numbers of kills. All of the fighting we took part in took place inside the camp's capture circle. A couple of us got "Objective Defender" credit. Most of us did not. Fix your kitten game ANet.