Ragebru.1397

That's crazy, sPvP players have been asking for action to be taken on win-traders, rage-quitters, AFKers, exploiters, and known trolls for like 10 years now. Nice to see we aren't the only corner of the game being neglected. Misery loves company.

I still think GW2 sPvP would do significantly better if they switched up the pip earnings. Flagged as AFK (no damage done to enemies in 1min, or capping/decapping) - zero pips. 3 pips for every "top" stat. 5 for win. 1 for loss. 3 for close. matches. Add a more detailed "top" stat pool. Top: condi physical healing cleansing kills defense offense least deaths most map objective completion (ie. skyhammer cap, cannon, etc) Implement a way that each player has to achieve certain milestones (ie. at least 10% of the teams total kill participation) to prevent bots from just running to home cap to get points. This is the least damning way to fix the horrendous AFK plague that affects the game mode.

This might be the best part about this entire concept. The fact that not only would they have to regrind across multiple accounts, but also across multiple classes. If anything it would more than likely deter that kind of behavior in the long run due to the fact that they would have to invest too much time (limited to by seasons) just to get one class at a desired rank.

Will gladly take a page from your notebook on that. What's disgusting is your would-be condescending nature and sense of superiority (knows better than all) that you so proudly display, when truth-be-told you are literally just another "forum user". As @shion.2084 said, and many others have stated- that @Trevor Boyer.6524 so blatantly disregards, those who are already abusing the system will abuse it no matter what. At least with @Maxwell.8564 suggestion the more casual players would be paired with suboptimal classes of generally higher tier players. At the end of the day, if a class is underperforming, it really doesn't matter who's playing it. A class based tier system would also help justify buffs and nerfs as it would provide an obvious and unconditional report. ie. 60% of rangers are gold or higher, while maybe 60% of mesmers are gold and lower. This would also thin out the majority of forum rants about nerf/buff this, and might lead to actual constructive posts with actual numbers behind them. An opinion is just an opinion, doesn't make it everyone else's reality. Saying the system is broken and let's leave it broken is by any way, shape, or form "smarter" how? You seem to be the only one here who is struggling to maintain a civil discussion.

You can already do this, so kind of a moot point. To be fair, any major redesign of the ranked structure would likely have to incur a fresh wipe of current ranking on all players (or as suggested in this thread, classes). The post does not say that each individual character would have its own rank, but that a class would be ranked. ie. You have 3 guardians on your account, they would all be the same rank. To state that a solution can't be made simply because the game's algorithm is wack, doesn't justify letting the game mode continue to stagnate. My best class has always been support tempest, which I hardly play anymore- so should it be fair to everyone else when I hop on my guardian who has only 150 games total? No ranked game mode in any game is void of trolling or smurfing. Players who want to waste their time smurfing to buff their ego will undoubtedly find a means to achieve their goal. They are outliers. Structure and design should not be based off of outliers. edit: even in League of Legends, more often than not when you get a smurf on the enemy team- you usually end up with one as well. Algorithms can always be adjusted/reworked to compensate the game mode. ie. if a player is consistently getting 3 or 4 top stats in every game compared to everyone else- they would be that outlier. I'm sure they can design some way to recognize this and make sure that both teams have that "mvp" available upon queue.

As a couple others have suggested, the concept would stick that you would not be able to swap characters/specs anymore. Think it was pretty obvious that OP was suggesting the same idea by stating that you would be tied to a rank based off your sole class.

Recently returned to the game after a yearish long absence. In my promo games, four out of the ten games had an afk player on my team. I have since then begun taking screenshots to post in a support ticket that I have open. The person who is working my ticket seems to have a genuine interest in this matter. As such, I would highly encourage everyone of you who want sPvP to thrive, to submit actual support tickets outside of the game and through your account online. Take screenshots of the players AFKing, and any screenshots of chat logs. Also, it seems to help if you can post a screenshot with a time stamp in the chat- so they can find the logs easier. It may take a few different tickets to find someone who genuinely is interested in resolving the issue, so I would suggest closing out tickets if the support personnel seem to not be interested in resolving the issue. Simply submit a new ticket till you find someone who is willing to do their job 🙂 I had one player in particular that was consistently AFKing, I have not seen him/her in my matches since my new ticket was open. Might just be a coincidence, but I'd like to think ANET still has some employees who value and respect their product consumer's time.

This is really the best thing that we can do for this game mode at this point. Rather, we beat the dead horse time after time, patch after patch. GW2 PvP will always be a great memory to me, but it got old. It got outdated. People stringing it along, rather than voicing their concerns and simply refusing to play- has led ANET to pretty much cease development into it. If players would just stop participating it would do this game mode a favor.

Both the EU and the interview with Texas Sen Ted Cruz, both stated that the development company owns those skins and just lease them to you. Which I believe is kind of the focal point for these arguments, is that cosmetics really aren't "yours". I won't pretend like I know the EU's law-making side, but I can assure you that at least the US has raised this alarm quite a lot recently- both on dem and rep side.

It's weird to say that because that is literally any PvP arena style game.. League, WoW, Smite, Valorant, GW1, literally anything- you have to know what your opponents could have, what they're guaranteed to have, and how to counter it. For the most part, there is a real simplicity to GW2 combat, more often than not, players fail to utilize their dodges and pop their defensives too early. I would recommend taking a quick screenshot of the death breakdown while you are waiting to respawn- review what killed you, and what did the most damage at the end of the game. As for the new game modes, I couldn't agree more. However, these threads pop up every few weeks, and the PvP population would probably gain significantly more momentum if we had one single thread that we kept up. After all, in this day and age, it's all about view numbers and posted comments. So please, let's make one mega post, and keep it afloat for the sake of being heard and acknowledged.

Oh wow, looks like the movement to end monetization of in game transactions gaining momentum in the US too. RIP black lion keys. Texas Senator Ted Cruz Wants to Talk to Asmongold About Diablo Immortal - YouTube He even mentions being able to boost your character (while he claims he's guilty of doing it), is something that he'd be willing to consider limiting access to. He basically says items that make the game more convenient can be manipulative and problematic.

18 European countries’ consumer groups have joined the fight against loot boxes | VGC (videogameschronicle.com) The general bill is to ban loot boxes, but just as any legislation- they are reaching out for micro transactions as well.

You know it's crazy to me that this company still hasn't piggybacked off of New Worlds failings. New World basically tried to make a better WvW and Stronghold system, and the concept drew nearly a million players on launch day. GW2 has the foundation to make the exact same system (but better), yet they've let it wither away.

which unfortunately ties into arguably the most fatal flaw for GW2. If the EU does in fact make it illegal for games to have cash shop transactions for skins, real world currency transactions into game currency (gems, gold, etc), and limits cash shops to only allow transactions for content updates and expansions- GW2 would pretty much die off. Unless they implement a subscription or start releasing an annual expansion. There really isn't that many skins in the game that are strictly farmable. A couple weeks and you could have most of the skins unlocked. edit: and unfortunately, there just isn't enough content in my opinion to pay a subscription for a game that doesn't even update its existing features. PvP and WvW really were just abandoned, which is sad because New World was able to attract nearly a million players for basically WvW and strongholds style content.

Don't know if it's been mentioned, but a lot of countries are starting to go after game monetization with in-game cash shops. ANET has chosen to heavily rely on cash shop transactions- where as other games have leaned towards more steady content releases. Five years for an expansion, 10 years with no PvP overhaul or major updates, raids with lower participation that WvW and sPvP, etc. etc. Maybe this will light a fire under them to focus on things that the player base has repeatedly asked for over the years, or it could also be a chance for ANET to cut ties and abandon ship. This will be a hard lesson for ANET to learn, but it might be just what this game desperately needs. Focus, modernization, and rounded content for both PvE and PvP alike. Games such as FF are an exception due to their frequent expansions and their subscription model. So as someone suggested earlier that GW2 would outlive FF is simply untrue.