Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Erise.5614

Members
  • Posts

    706
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

657 profile views

Erise.5614's Achievements

  1. Out of curiosity. Which maps are more profitable than Kaineng in your experience? And what is the rough value you were talking about when calling EoD maps Because as far as I can tell. Kaineng really is struggling in multiple ways. Besides being long and with little rewards at the end I can not think of a good explanation why the statuette might be several times more valuable than any other.
  2. It was meant to be read as direct reply, picking up on the last words. So in response to "knowing how profitable EoD maps are". Considering you are coming from this perspective This statement really does not match up with my numbers or the numbers of others (e.g. fast farming community). While also clashing with the perception a lot of players have while playing (see this thread). The response "because I play OW and I just know" suggested to me that we probably didn't overlook anything. But that it is rather more likely you misjudged the profitability.
  3. ...I mean. Evidently you do not^^ I mostly play OW and do benchmark my own findings against fast farming and against each other. It usually is fairly close to the detailed results fast farming achieves (in terms of which items drop and in what amount, the values and durations can be off by a lot). Kaineng is bottom 5% of all OW metas. Echovald is the same but half as long. So it's just a bit below average. Seitung is about average for all metas (which isn't great considering HoT and most LW maps are above average). And Dragon's End is about fine if you spend ~1h or less for the entire process. This may change if they give writs or favor a different use in the future. So it may actually be fine in the long run. But as of today, EoD maps in general are not particularly appealing reward wise. And half of them are genuinely bad.
  4. FastFarming has a bug, overvaluing Imperial Favor. If you look at the context for the number you'll see that out of 17 gold it claims for a Kaineng Run, 14 gold are directly from imperial favor. It even recommends you to get Writ of Kaineng from the Hero's Choice chest because it thinks it's worth almost 3 gold. However, besides A.S.S. (1 per week), the only way to convert favor is through a vendor who sells stuff for Imperial Favor and Research Notes. FastFarming calculates with a Research Note value of 0. Aka, it assumes you got those for free. (Edit: Also, the value is driven by selling specific exotic armor on TP. If a lot of people would do it, the value would drop very quickly. Right now there's less than 20 trades per day of the most valuable piece of armor. To get the value assumed by FastFarming you'd need to sell more than 5 by yourself per run) Seitung is a little better. Especially because Ambergris. Making it worth about 6-7 gold for 30 minutes. So more gold in less time. But even Seitung is below several core tyria world bosses.
  5. DE is competitive if you succeed and get on a map as close to the event start as possible. But Keineng, for example, is ~4-5 gold for 40 minutes. Including all currencies and mats you earn turned into gold. That is below most base game world bosses and the value is even inflated currently because so few people are doing it. Meaning the statuette you get is over 4 times as valuable as any of the others. It would be appropriate it was ~10-15 minutes long from start to finish. Then it would be in line with other meta events. But as it stands, it really is a lot below other events.
  6. They were talking about GW2 Tactical Overlay (short, taco). It's technically not an addon but an independent application that just runs in the background. And when GW2 runs it will display an overlay above the game client. Usually just works after an ANet update.
  7. One quick clarification. When I was talking about failed experiments I was talking about open world events. Whether it be TT, the HoT metas before the rework or now Dragon's End. That difficulty in open world has failed to cause significant change again and again. Not instanced content. I actually think instanced content fulfills its purpose well. It's just not attractive to a lot of players. But that poses the question why? Is it really just unawareness? Or prejudice? Do most people who try instanced content really enjoy their time there? It feels like you skipped right over that question. Answering it for yourself as "these players just don't have contact with that kind of content and therefore they don't enjoy it". When there are a whole bunch of players who do know the content but don't enjoy it. The focus on solo content is interesting but is that really the way to go in open world? There could be 50 people helping with the solo challenge. Or no one. Not all classes have the same kind of access to skill effects. Defiance damage is reasonably well distributed but teaching the game this way gets real weird once you try to bring in alacrity, quickness, stability or, worst of all, DPS. Which is very dependent on a good synergy between traits, equipment and skill usage. So now you need one mob that is balanced around 27 elites and 9 base classes which teaches 3 entirely different things in one combat scenario. That is one hell of a challenge. I do agree that better education and information in game is extremely important. I just wonder whether the focus on simply forcing players into challenging content solves the problem. Or if that just causes more rifts, more prejudice while also having more players burn out. Which would be the case if your base assumption is wrong (that everyone will enjoy that style of content when they only start playing it).
  8. I can understand the perspective you are coming from. But the thing I don't understand is why the only way to "show [the fun of the system] to [players]" and "teach these players how to succeed in those formats and have fun with them" must mean "force them to play content they dislike and find frustrating". Everything you say here is perfectly sensible. But we know for a fact that implementing difficult content does not result in what you are promoting. It has not in the past, it has not this time. There are always some. And there's usually a small community or two who stick with the content. But nothing changes in the grand scheme of things. How is more of the same gonna improve things? Why is the only way to get people to have fun in the content to force them through frustration? And why isn't the problem with the fact that such frustration is necessary to get there?
  9. Would that really be the right way around though? In effect, that means they deliberately implement frustration to foster a desire for a way to overcome that frustration. And then eventually offering such a tool. To me it feels more like the reason it has a negative reception is because a lot of players aren't as interested in having to try hard. In my opinion, implementing difficulty in open world just deters those audiences. Which is a pattern we have seen play out a good handful of times by now. They don't convert. It's not building a desire to improve. They mostly just avoid it. My interpretation of that is, they leave it be because they fundamentally don't look for that kind of experience. Edit: In my humble opinion. The best way towards higher conversion rates is to teach in a low pressure environment that will always remain low pressure. With a clear path towards more challenging content that ramps up very gradually. Easy to judge from afar how difficult certain content is. Have an environment where it's easy to succeed with any build or setup. But introduce challenges that teach certain mechanics. And then testing them regularly as well. So people do train most relevant skills in a low pressure environment. Having a clear intended path for where they can go for smoothly increasing challenge when they feel ready for it.
  10. To be fair. For example, Seprents Ire has very low participation rates. Yet nothing happens. Something being unattractive doesn't necessarily mean ANet will change it. Sometimes the content isn't in a good state / isn't popular but they are fine with most players ignoring it.
  11. Please don't misunderstand me. The point I'm making is not about succeeding when you intentionally play terribly. The point is that despite trying a lot of players end up with setups that perform far below expectations you'd have in instanced content. Seriously trying is enough for (most of) OW though (shoutout to DE). You don't necessarily have to succeed at making a decent build in order to have any chance at succeeding at the content. The point is. Poor build choices don't make success impossible. Good choices just make it easier.
  12. Now I'm curious. For what content did you need a build dealing medium to high DPS in OW? This is an open question! I'm happy about anyone answering!
  13. I said "almost" thinking specifically about TT. I'm pretty sure it's not possible to beat it if all players have poorly preforming builds. Though that did not exist upon release. But good to know you can't think of any either!
  14. What OW content wasn't possible to do with any build back when the game released?
  15. Not always everywhere. But that is how it played out for story and almost all of OW. You can play in the way you want. Using any build and any trait setup. And you'd still have a good time. It is a quite small amount of players who want to have a completely different OW experience, which is indistinguishable from any other while being, necessarily, exclusionary to the people who enjoyed the above mentioned style of content and gameplay. You know. It might actually be different. Coming from programming optimizing means to improve performance. To improve an aspect of something. Though looking it up it is also defined as perfecting the use / perfecting the efficiency. When I say optimizing beyond the OW average I mean one has to make choices that are more optimal in regards to DPS output than most players end up making.
×
×
  • Create New...