SkyShroud.2865

Is this really a thing? Can anyone else varify this as the setup I was looking at is ryzen cpu + nvisia gfx... AMD users that complain FPS issue are using the old gen cpuThe amd old gen cpus are particularly bad when come to IPC performance Not applicable to Ryzen 2000 and upcoming Ryzen 3000Amd has been back in the game for CPU for awhile now, beating intel in sales

So far the poll says you either do it all or don't do it.

Wait for Ryzen 3000 and wait for benchmark. The cost performance, if demo presentation is true, should be better than intel while having on par performance. Gw2 need a really fast (single core) cpu, it doesn't need super good gpu but still need a decent one to push the cpu to its limit. I believe gtx 1060 is the minimum for that.

Becoz they spent part of those years working on another project which didn't work out in the end.

Up for the day PS: Drop me an ingame mail if I don't reply your whisper, sometimes too busy or afking or pc crashed.WvW PS: We are now one of the very few guilds in sea wvw that didn't stack or bandwagon server. Looking for even more wvwers to fight those stacked servers.

Had massive skill lag on T2 last reset while some enemy seemingly not having such lagT3 no such lag, don't know if is a tier thing.

The main bottleneck of the game is cpu.You can try d912pxy to reduce the overhead on cpu.

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. Imagine being as bad of a player now as you were in 2012. Just imagine. Imagine not able to accept objective opinions as you were 7 years ago, just imagine. He can't come up with a response so he just says "no u" Grow up. I was trying to be subtle but you can't get the hint, I was telling you to grow up. Almost every opinion, if not all the opinions you have is all about yourself. Oh yeah, I'm sure that I'm the only person in this entire game mode that likes fights. Everyone else likes sitting around waiting to pvd a door down and karma train, treating wvw like it's pve. Who do you think outnumbers who at this point in the game's lifespan? You're probably one of 5 people on your entire server who cares about the score at the end of the week and ties it to some harebrained idea of server pride. Winning the week doesn't make you good at the game dude, hate to break it to ya. Or did you spend 18 hours a day all 7 days of the week coordinating with literally everyone else on your server to win? No, it didn't happen. Match-ups are decided before they begin. No amount of individual effort makes a difference. This isn't 2013 anymore. There are no tournaments. Off hours coverage and population determine the score. A tower sitting T3 overnight won it for you, not you playing. It's pure delusion to think otherwise, which feeds into a hefty sense of ego. The game isn't just about you. If you really can't understand the 6 words, you really need work on it. I understand that there are people who play this gamemode "as originally intended" and want to win at the end of the week and have server pride. All that. I have made that clear that that is something that I understand. There are people who agree with you. There are people who agree with me. No one's right. No one's wrong. We can establish at least that. What you need to ponder is why you still hold onto it. The game has grown and evolved since its inception. It's made for the players. And players are responsible for "emergent gameplay". Is this style, this method of playing the game any less valid than yours because it doesn't hold fast and true to what was "originally intended"? Is it something that should be shunned? Looked down upon? Each side is always going to do that to the other. So that brings us back to why. Why do you still do what you do? How has it not grown old to you, how have you not burnt out? The gameplay as it's originally intended cannot fix the fact that individual effort has negligible, if that, impact on the score at the end of the week. No matter what you do, you can't change that by continuing to play that way. This is why people gave up playing that way. This is why many continue to play the way I play. I implore you to think long and hard about why you play a style that so many have left behind and the driving motivations for people like me to play the way I play. inb4 you don't read anything that I wrote you just repeat what you've said the last two times Then maybe you shouldn't have quote me. When you quote someone, you asking attention from that someone and that is what I did, I gave you my attention.When I made that post, I believe it is objective, suggesting people play their games differently, have their own perspectives of winning. However, the moment you quoted me and gave me your piece, you are screaming "I am more important". If you are trying to use my post as a reference to rant about things, you chose the wrong reference. I'm trying to get you to understand my perspective. I understand yours. Can you understand mine? My hope is that maybe we can learn more about differing perspectives. Will you do this with me?When I wrote that post, wasn't that perspective already included? Read it again, did it not mention that some people play for guilds or for that particular moment?Sure, I didn't explicitly wrote the type of playstyles but do I need to? When people play for guilds or particular moment, it can include fights, roaming, ppt and harassing, whatever. There are a lot of possibilities, they decide that. Do I need to write it explicitly clear for something with much possibilities?

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. Imagine being as bad of a player now as you were in 2012. Just imagine. Imagine not able to accept objective opinions as you were 7 years ago, just imagine. He can't come up with a response so he just says "no u" Grow up. I was trying to be subtle but you can't get the hint, I was telling you to grow up. Almost every opinion, if not all the opinions you have is all about yourself. Oh yeah, I'm sure that I'm the only person in this entire game mode that likes fights. Everyone else likes sitting around waiting to pvd a door down and karma train, treating wvw like it's pve. Who do you think outnumbers who at this point in the game's lifespan? You're probably one of 5 people on your entire server who cares about the score at the end of the week and ties it to some harebrained idea of server pride. Winning the week doesn't make you good at the game dude, hate to break it to ya. Or did you spend 18 hours a day all 7 days of the week coordinating with literally everyone else on your server to win? No, it didn't happen. Match-ups are decided before they begin. No amount of individual effort makes a difference. This isn't 2013 anymore. There are no tournaments. Off hours coverage and population determine the score. A tower sitting T3 overnight won it for you, not you playing. It's pure delusion to think otherwise, which feeds into a hefty sense of ego. The game isn't just about you. If you really can't understand the 6 words, you really need work on it. I understand that there are people who play this gamemode "as originally intended" and want to win at the end of the week and have server pride. All that. I have made that clear that that is something that I understand. There are people who agree with you. There are people who agree with me. No one's right. No one's wrong. We can establish at least that. What you need to ponder is why you still hold onto it. The game has grown and evolved since its inception. It's made for the players. And players are responsible for "emergent gameplay". Is this style, this method of playing the game any less valid than yours because it doesn't hold fast and true to what was "originally intended"? Is it something that should be shunned? Looked down upon? Each side is always going to do that to the other. So that brings us back to why. Why do you still do what you do? How has it not grown old to you, how have you not burnt out? The gameplay as it's originally intended cannot fix the fact that individual effort has negligible, if that, impact on the score at the end of the week. No matter what you do, you can't change that by continuing to play that way. This is why people gave up playing that way. This is why many continue to play the way I play. I implore you to think long and hard about why you play a style that so many have left behind and the driving motivations for people like me to play the way I play. inb4 you don't read anything that I wrote you just repeat what you've said the last two timesThen maybe you shouldn't have quote me. When you quote someone, you asking attention from that someone and that is what I did, I gave you my attention.When I made that post, I believe it is objective, suggesting people play their games differently, have their own perspectives of winning. However, the moment you quoted me and gave me your piece, you are screaming "I am more important". If you are trying to use my post as a reference to rant about things, you chose the wrong reference.

What? Of course not, that's what YOU said: You were saying that the drop in Raid numbers is not because people stop playing but because of the difficulty (which is a joke since W6 is easier than W5)And I said that if people don't stop Raids because they stopped playing the game completely, the same is true for the Episodes. Why wouldn't it be the same?Which led to my very simple question of how to explain the drop in LS numbers if it's not because players stop playing... is it because they are difficult? You understand, hopefully, that difficulty isn't why episode numbers are getting lower. But lower episode numbers mean lower raider numbers too. Someone that stopped playing the game (as shown by their participation in the episode) also stopped raiding. But I didn't say that for LS though? LS isn't raid though? All I am saying there is a steady decline, however, that isn't shown on raid. It is true overall lesser people led to lesser players in other mode. However, not to the extend you are describing and trying to reference with.When i say higher raid difficulty led to lesser raiders, that itself isn't without statistic to back it up since such statistic can be witnessed within first 4 wings. On topic on why W6 not having more people playing despite sightly easier. It actually has more people playing. When I said you trying to correlate raid participation against openworld is flawed is not without reason. I already mentioned earlier that difficulty deter players. If the difficulty for raids are consistent throughout, then maybe you can see a correlation with open world but the truth is, it isn't consistent throughout. More difficult raid deter players while less difficult raid attract players. W5 and W6 when compared to LS decline, it is shockingly low. What suggest is that there are actually more people (in proportion to overall pop) doing W6 than W5 despite the decline in population. However, the population did decline so the gain isn't much, just enough to not cause a big dip. Such statistic can be seen between W2 and W4 as well.

We know that participation rates go up over time: all the late adopters get added to the early adopters, pushing up the total count. So the question isn't: are participation rates for the most recent raid lower? The question is: are they lower by the same amount as other content that was released around the same time? The answer is: yes, raid participation rates are down, by about the same amounts as LS episode participation. That don't make sense either. Between W5 and W6, the first boss only has 1% or so disparity completion.Elsewhere, Ep1 and Ep5 has big disparity, even if you convert it to proportion, even if you use the full story completion as value of comparison.You simply can't have any logical link with participation rate. Also, I also compare on the context of difficulty such that higher difficulty lead to lesser participation rate. This much is shown on W2 and W4 and likewise, within the wing itself on different bosses. Therefore, using the drop between W4 and W5 as example that difficulty deter players, has little impact from the open world. Sure, open world does has impact since it attract people to the game but not on the level that is described towards raid.

Participation for the most recent raid is always lower. Wing 2 and Wing 4 aren't anything close to "the most recent." I could have phrased it more accurately by saying that participation always increases over time, from whatever it was at the time of launch. Some participation rates will increase more quickly, due to popularity. To see whether raids are becoming more or less popular, it is essential to look at the context: what are other participation rates like, are they increasing by the same amounts or more slowly, are there other mitigating or exacerbating factors? Since the thread isn't about statistical analysis, I used "participation for the most recent is always lower," as a shorthand. If you want to keep hanging your argument on taking that statement out of context, suit yourself. It won't change ANet's opinion, since they can see the actual data (instead of relying on proxies for the data) and the trends. It also doesn't change the facts:Raid participation relative to overall participation is largely the same since raids were released. It's not "dropping."That relative number is also fairly healthy, at around 15% using stats on GW2/E (with all the accompanying caveats). As you said there are magnitude of factors but if one try to make a correlation, that correlation need to have relative drop in activity. However, do you see such relative drop for W5 and W6 that validate that the LS decline can indeed be correlated to raid decline?

If it's biased to compare completions of raid wings with completions of episodes, then comparing EVERYONE (You said: "Finish and unable to access the contents are different things. ") with completion of Raids is also biased. And I'm telling you again, if you want to count everyone, then everyone is a raider as everyone can make a 10-man team (or even go solo) and bang their head against Soulless Horror or Conjured Amalgamate. They are still RAIDING at that point. Success is irrelevant, so 100% of those that bought POF is a raider, same way how you say they have access to it. It's funny how you continue to ignore the question about the insane difficulty of Jahai Bluffs which lead to such an insane drop there... Oh well, I will play along with you, since you still can't accept it.LS4 - Ep1: 57.021%LS4 - Ep2: 47.769%LS4 - Ep3: 48.487%LS4 - Ep4: 40.247%LS4 - Ep5: 35.793%LS4 - Ep6: 31.435% Other than Ep2 and Ep3, which is interesting to analyse why there is such odd increment.The LS has shown steady decline. Are you suggesting LS is getting difficult every new ep? Also, if you want to use POF value as part of the data analyse, you should also sort them according to maps like how LS is divided to maps. Edit: In case you didn't notice which I think you wouldn't notice. W5 is launch alongside with Ep1. Now, the closest correlation you did with W6 is Ep5. However, between Ep 1 and Ep 5, it has been declining. Such disparity is not seen between W5 and W6 as your earlier mentioned statistic, so how can you say LS can be used as accurate correlation with raid?

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. The OP asked a subjective question. Why are you getting personal when someone gives their opinion? There isn't a right or wrong answer, just individuals typing out their own perspectives. Now you're just turning the thread into some sort of back-n-forth. Yikes. :scream: He quoted me first? He want to be personal with me when I made a objective opinions that summarize to this game has many types of players? Maybe you should check the entire thread first? I did check the entire thread, multiple times. He gave an opinion first about the subject, not about you. Which then I gave my opinion on his opinion of his subject of choice. I mean, if you quote someone, are you not directing that opinion to that someone and (maybe) hoping that someone to reply you? If not, why would you quote them? If you see the responses from other people, they also gave their opinion on the OP's subject from their personal perspectives, using words like "I" and "my", yet you are not attacking them. Why? Did you not read what I wrote? Here, I write again.If you quote someone, are you not directing that opinion to that someone and (maybe) hoping that someone to reply you? If not, why would you quote them? Who here in this thread, other him and later you quote me? It is very simple logic, I can't explain it any simpler. I won't chase you down your rabbit hole. I said my piece from an outside third party perspective. What you do with that is up to you.I think you don't understand what I wrote, I think we are of complete different frequency, it is a pity.

You're comparing two different moments in time, because participation for the most recent raid is always going to be lower: the older raids have more time for people to attempt/succeed. That's why it's critical to compare them to something else to benchmark overall participation. For example, by comparing raid participation to the LS episode that released at the same time. When you do so, you'll see that relative participation is largely unchanged, whenever we look. On your argument that these raid exist longer therefore allow more people to do them.W2 statistic show lesser people completing than W4 as shown here and here. Would you still say that argument is sound? I'd say you're grasping at straws, again. To show whether time makes a difference, we'd look at participation levels for the same wing one month, 7 months, and 13 months after launch. All you've shown is that Wing 2 is less popular than Wing 4.Or am I? I wasn't the one that said participation for the most recent raid is always going to be lower. You did.I already proved that logic is wrong and any logic that you build on top of that logic is gonna be wrong as well.Now, after getting refuted, you tried to argument it with time length, in that case, shouldn't all the statistic analysis in this thread should be invalided since none can be compared in that aspect?

Your mistake is that you use completion data for Raids, but call the total as everyone that bought POF. This is were your entire argument becomes biased and completely off rails. What happened earlier in the thread was a comparison between completions, completion of Raid wings with completion of Episodes. Yet you failed to comprehend that. If you don't like to use completion rates for episodes, which you continue to ignore in your latest post, then why use completion rates for Raids? A team that forms as I type this and enters Hall of Chains to fight the Soulless Horror is actively participating in the activity called Raids. Success in the activity is not a requirement to be counted as participating. Since you want to compare Raids with everyone that bought POF, as seen here: Everyone is able to access and play Raids. Success isn't a requirement to Raid, therefore with this logic everyone is a raider unless you have some clear proof data proving otherwise. Every single person that bought POF is a raider, since they have access to Raids. As for the difficulty, you failed to address the actual question, the 50% drop in Jahai Bluffs. Was it so much more difficult than core POF? Nope, that comparison of comparing LS is started by you and I am telling such comparison is bias and with recent post, even cite why it is bias.You yet to make any argument to what I have cited and only asking for more, I don't think this is a fair argument.

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. The OP asked a subjective question. Why are you getting personal when someone gives their opinion? There isn't a right or wrong answer, just individuals typing out their own perspectives. Now you're just turning the thread into some sort of back-n-forth. Yikes. :scream: He quoted me first? He want to be personal with me when I made a objective opinions that summarize to this game has many types of players? Maybe you should check the entire thread first? I did check the entire thread, multiple times. He gave an opinion first about the subject, not about you. Which then I gave my opinion on his opinion of his subject of choice. I mean, if you quote someone, are you not directing that opinion to that someone and (maybe) hoping that someone to reply you? If not, why would you quote them? If you see the responses from other people, they also gave their opinion on the OP's subject from their personal perspectives, using words like "I" and "my", yet you are not attacking them. Why?Did you not read what I wrote? Here, I write again.If you quote someone, are you not directing that opinion to that someone and (maybe) hoping that someone to reply you? If not, why would you quote them? Who here in this thread, other him and later you quote me? It is very simple logic, I can't explain it any simpler.

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. The OP asked a subjective question. Why are you getting personal when someone gives their opinion? There isn't a right or wrong answer, just individuals typing out their own perspectives. Now you're just turning the thread into some sort of back-n-forth. Yikes. :scream: He quoted me first? He want to be personal with me when I made a objective opinions that summarize to this game has many types of players? Maybe you should check the entire thread first? I did check the entire thread, multiple times. He gave an opinion first about the subject, not about you.Which then I gave my opinion on his opinion of his subject of choice. I mean, if you quote someone, are you not directing that opinion to that someone and (maybe) hoping that someone to reply you? If not, why would you quote them?

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. The OP asked a subjective question. Why are you getting personal when someone gives their opinion? There isn't a right or wrong answer, just individuals typing out their own perspectives. Now you're just turning the thread into some sort of back-n-forth. Yikes. :scream: He quoted me first? He want to be personal with me when I made a objective opinions that summarize to this game has many types of players? Maybe you should check the entire thread first?

You're comparing two different moments in time, because participation for the most recent raid is always going to be lower: the older raids have more time for people to attempt/succeed. That's why it's critical to compare them to something else to benchmark overall participation. For example, by comparing raid participation to the LS episode that released at the same time. When you do so, you'll see that relative participation is largely unchanged, whenever we look. On your argument that these raid exist longer therefore allow more people to do them.W2 statistic show lesser people completing than W4 as shown here and here. Would you still say that argument is sound?

Read the data where you got them. They are for the final boss of a wing, not the first one, unless you mean those that are killing the Soulless Horror aren't raiding. Because they ARE raiding. I posted the correct data for you to use but you didn't use the correct ones for your own reasons. Would you not say you are biased here? Using the data you want to and not the correct ones? Also, those that are playing raids, fighting bosses but fail to kill them are ALSO RAIDING, meaning the actual raiding population is even higher. The part which you failed to respond to is that Raid activity dropped 15% (using the correct data not the biased ones) while open world activity dropped 50%, yet you are still talking about the drop in raid activity as if it's a big one. Btw, even using the final boss data, they show a 33% drop, while open world data suggest a 50% drop, still MUCH higher than the Raid drop. You failed to answer why the open world activity dropped by a whooping 50% (80% to 40%) if as you said players don't stop playing out of boredom and only stop due to difficulty. Try to answer the actual questions, try not to use biased data but proper ones and try not to talk about bias when you have no clue what bias is.Spoilers: did you know that you need a Jackal to finish the W6 Raid? 62% have the Jackal unlocked. Food for thought. Then the consistency of the argument need a correction then, since you want to use the first boss as deciding factor.W4:23.704%W5:9.728%W6:8.533% Would W4 to W5 not shown a 50% drop? On topic of the small drop between W5 and W6, wouldn't that support the argument of the decline of open world has little impact towards raid itself since yourself already stated the open world declined in a huge way yet on earlier argument, you correlate the decline with raid decline. On topic of difficultyW5 river has slightly higher % than W5 first boss as shown hereW6 you mentioned require jackal but it isn't completely necessary since it isn't a boss fight. This is the same reason why W5 river has more completion than W5 first boss.On further analyse on how much difficulty impact the amount of people doing raid. Take a look at w4 statistic. The first three bosses have tiny decrement while on the last boss, the decrement is a whole 33%.On further evidence on how difficulty deter people away on doing raid. We all know W3 escort is dirt easy but if you look at statistic. W3 2nd boss too experience a dip of 30ish % when the difficulty ramp up as shown here. Isn't that awfully similar to W4?

I play this game to beat the enemy players in combat that I can control. So what if I stay up 18 hours every day and the most interesting thing I did was press F on siege just to win the match-up. Does that make me a good player? Is that fun, or engaging to anyone at all who isn't the commander who must necessarily have a huge ego? What am I responsible for? 2 hours for raid nights 3 times a week minus reset. That's all I can control. The match-ups were decided years ago by off hours coverage and population. What's me taking my 7,459th tower? It's useless. I can fight and be a part of a team/guild. The whole chess match is so 2012, only played by egotistical commanders who let the game mode pass them by. Unfortunately, the game isn't just about you. Imagine being as bad of a player now as you were in 2012. Just imagine. Imagine not able to accept objective opinions as you were 7 years ago, just imagine. He can't come up with a response so he just says "no u" Grow up. I was trying to be subtle but you can't get the hint, I was telling you to grow up. Almost every opinion, if not all the opinions you have is all about yourself. Oh yeah, I'm sure that I'm the only person in this entire game mode that likes fights. Everyone else likes sitting around waiting to pvd a door down and karma train, treating wvw like it's pve. Who do you think outnumbers who at this point in the game's lifespan? You're probably one of 5 people on your entire server who cares about the score at the end of the week and ties it to some harebrained idea of server pride. Winning the week doesn't make you good at the game dude, hate to break it to ya. Or did you spend 18 hours a day all 7 days of the week coordinating with literally everyone else on your server to win? No, it didn't happen. Match-ups are decided before they begin. No amount of individual effort makes a difference. This isn't 2013 anymore. There are no tournaments. Off hours coverage and population determine the score. A tower sitting T3 overnight won it for you, not you playing. It's pure delusion to think otherwise, which feeds into a hefty sense of ego.The game isn't just about you. If you really can't understand the 6 words, you really need work on it.

OK let's try this again, one last time. Since you are talking about "activity", the relevant stats are: W5: 10%, W6: 8.5%, that's not a 33% decrease in activity, it's a 15% drop in activity.Let's say that you are correct and that 15% drop in Raid activity between W5 and W6 is not because people stop playing the game, but because of the increasing difficulty of the raids and the balance changes. Explain then how from 80% that bought POF only 40% went to Jahai Bluffs? That's a 50% reduction in player activity in the open world/story parts of the game. Is it because Jahai Bluffs is so much harder than the rest of POF? Raid activity decreased 15% and you make it a big deal. Open World/Story activity decreased by 50%, what does that mean? I don't know where you get the statistic again. I do however is referring to the one posted previously on this thread which wrote W4: 14% then W5:7% then W6:5%.I do refer to 14% to 7% as 50% drop.I do refer to 7% to 5% as 33% drop, though more accurately 30%. You have been bringing out statistic that favor your argument while me on the other hand, use a statistic that is posted here by other users. Would you not say that you are using bias correlation?

If the current difficulty encourage more people to do the wing, will you still say is a bad decision? Why not wait for a few months and check the gw2eff statistic?

I'm willing to bet the number of players who haven't even finished POF, yet Raid, is negligible, same with those that don't bother to finish the episode story. This is anecdotal, but every single raider I've met so far, not only has finished POF, but have played every single episode so far, being active and loyal players to the game. Imagine you have 10000 players playing and after a few months 9000 stop playing, so you are left with 1000 players. Then you release a Raid and get 100 players to play it. Is it a success or not? Compared to the original players, only 1% played it, so it's not successful. Compared to what you have, 10% played it, which makes it far better. Episode rates are the best way of filtering active players. Although you are right, they can be misleading, because they contain players that finish the story and then log out and wait for the next episode to be released, or go back to farming and not bother with the new content anymore. How many that finished the episode, simply did that? We don't know, but it's the data we have. Unfortunately, I don't bet, which is why I don't make that kind of assumptions and try to use the least bias correlation possible.