T G.7496
-
Posts
554 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by T G.7496
-
-
-
30 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:
So here's the thing. Thieves and mesmers have invisibility...I mean stealth. So when defending a camp against a couple of enemies with stealth, there is no resolution of combat when you can hold them off. And what they'll do is just take off (stealth out and hide somewhere a bit further away). Now you have a choice as a defender. You know they're out there somewhere and they'll take the camp as soon as you leave it or a little bit after.
In the meantime your participation counter keeps going and you'll have to leave to get it up again.
This is why defending an objective, especially camps, is totally thankless and not worth doing. Take out stealth and this problem would be solved, but as long as stealth exists in this game (which is always), I disagree with you because not every combat gets resolved as you suggest. Instead it gets broken off when they can't win and they'll hide or go do something else in the meantime...but you as a defender won't know which.
I feel your pain.
But this is an edge case, ideally fixed by deleting thief for example 😜... except their smoke field is actually super useful now since gyro was sold off for parts.
My point still stands though. When you can't stand the boredom any longer you can just die to the thief / mesmer and get Participation. See?
-
I wasn't aware of the PvE raid reward thing.
My view is simply predicated on how Participation is defined, and its purpose.
To me it seems like its purpose, at core, is not really to reward success in any way but is simply a means to try and discourage non-participation (e.g. afking at spawn). There are other rewards that more clearly make the distinction between success vs. failure and, as we all know, none of the rewards in WvW are particularly great compared to other modes (correctly so, in my view).
If the purpose of Participation, as a mechanic, is to discourage non-participation by rewarding active participation, then for me there is no compelling reason whatsoever to reward only the killer and not the killed - since the dynamics and momentum of the game mode is entirely dependent on the active participation of both.
-
4
-
-
Back to the end of the queue is far from being an edge case.
I too experienced it last week, and so did at least 6 other friends I play with.
It remains a common, repeating issue.
-
They're decoration, aren't they?
-
I don't think you should earn, or pause the decline of Participation from just being in combat.
It should be earned from the resolution of combat, i.e. winning or losing, killing or dying.
And it should be rewarded to both participants in that exchange - albeit in different amounts - because the winner cannot win without also the participation of the loser.
-
1
-
-
Eventually you'll have nothing left to spend them on.
People complain about that, too.
Just relax and enjoy the journey.
-
1
-
-
The award of Participation to the individual confers no competitive advantage.
Being killed in an adversarial game mode requires participating. It should be rewarded as such. Perhaps not by as much, but the victor of a fight cannot win without also the participation of the loser.
Yes, I'm aware of potential 'abuse' of this, but see my first comment. And getting killed while afk or otherwise not engaging can only happen away from spawn, and you have to participate at minimum to leave spawn for that to happen. The idea of abuse of that is trivial.
-
4
-
-
These are not Alliance betas.
They are World Restructuring betas.
The distinction might seem unimportant, but I'm not sure that there is much effort in balancing the teams going on in these betas. Certainly in the way it's intended to work eventually for Alliances. It's just a mashup rn.
Even so, my own experience of the betas so far has actually been pretty fun.
kitten, it feels awkward going in to bat for Anet like that. I need a shower now.
-
2
-
-
Usually all that's necessary in this game is a quick roll of the face over keyboard.
But thanks for reminding me that I can click skills.
To return the favour, holding both mouse buttons to run makes it easier to drink your coffee.
-
3
-
1
-
-
On 8/18/2022 at 3:36 AM, Knighthonor.4061 said:
because that means everybody has to throw away their own guilds that they currently are in and run with
Nope.
It just requires people, for whom a legacy of server identity is important, to organise the creation of an Alliance between guilds that maintains those bonds.
For some people, that might mean joining a new guild that is a part of such an initiative (or has been specifically created for the purpose).
However, once you have selected the guild you want to 'go with', for each Alliance period, you can rep whichever guild you like.
Many people are already doing this for the World Restructuring betas.
For example, the long established WSR community guild has been lovingly repurposed as a vehicle for many of the smaller guilds and roamers on WSR to ensure they get to experience the current beta together. It has worked very well. Each guild can still rep themselves, since the WSR guild is purely a vehicle for them all to travel to the beta together.
This is a prototype for an Alliance structure whose very purpose would be to maintain a legacy of server identity.
Any server can start such an initiative. This may very well be the test of whether any server really does have a strong enough community identity, and any appetite to preserve that.
-
3
-
-
This is not an Alliances beta event.
It is a World Restructuring beta.
It pains me to sound defensive of Anet.
-
Yes, it's boring.
But if you don't like a fight, don't take it.
-
Let it go.
Your life will be much better when you exclude certain people from it.
I'm a bloke, and more than half of my characters' preferred pronouns are she/her.
-
1
-
-
This is perhaps the least grindy MMO I have ever played.
Way too often people seem to confuse - or at least conflate - the pejorative notion of 'grinding' with the simple act of playing.
-
4
-
-
On 9/3/2022 at 12:44 AM, Endilbiach.4132 said:
They're a little ridiculous. Assuming perfect weeks every week it takes 22 weeks to get the set of legendary armor that looks the same as the precursor, 29 weeks to get the fully blinged out version.
Compare that to raid armor, and it takes 6 perfect weeks (less now actually) for the first set of legendary armor and 12 perfect weeks (again, less now) for the next sets. That's 28 weeks of clearing every raid wing to get every suit of legendary armor, vs 22 to 29 weeks to get a SINGLE suit of wvw legendary armor.
And the Raid armor is supposed to look way cooler and be the 'be all and end all' of armor. There are plenty of players who want legendary armor but can't do raids, can't drop thousands upon thousands of Mystic coins or whatever they're trading for that now for the credit for the raids, and look at the wvw requirements and realize that it's never happening. Case in point, the last person I spoke to about this? Their first suit of leggie armor was from wvw, it took them 18 months.Literally all I'm asking for here is that we roll back how many skirmish tickets it takes, the current amounts are patently absurd.
You're not meant to enjoy the rewards of WvW, you're meant to enjoy the process.
There are of course many people who seem to enjoy neither.
There are other game modes.
-
2
-
1
-
-
It's fine as it is.
I often use those minutes to usefully question my life choices and to enjoy a warm beverage.
-
1
-
-
On 9/10/2022 at 3:05 PM, VooDoo.9014 said:
Think of the gear as a set of legos or building blocks. The fun is in putting them together to see what new things you can make that no one has ever thought of or seen before. The busy work in between is mindnumbing to me. But I don't fault any one else for enjoying said things.
I think this is the version of the game you're looking for.
http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/
For the record, I love spending time with this tool, so there's no trace of sarcasm to my suggestion - especially if you're not particularly enjoying playing the actual game modes.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, DarcShriek.5829 said:
It's a free gift. It's not healthy to waste time being upset about such a thing.
Oh, I'm not upset.
I just don't think it's very creative.
I suppose it's marginally more creative than reusing an existing title, which was the previous title.
But they may as well have called it, "I've Played for Nine Years."
-
14
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
Skyscale is GREAT.
I was sceptical for such a long time, but in the end I got it.
And it really does open up old maps and old content in fun (and more convenient) ways for older players.
-
It's ugly.
But it's not illegal.
It has no material effect on the game economy.
And there are no victims associated with it.
There are only fools; those that waste their time doing it, and those that waste their time worrying about it.
-
2
-
-
It's always somebody else's fault.
That's the first rule of WvW.
-
8 hours ago, BlueJin.4127 said:
Considering that a common argument is that newer players are at a disadvantage without mounts, adding more road blocks like this would really only hurt newer players more.
Being a new player is a temporary condition, it soon wears off.
-
5
-
-
3 minutes ago, Jaffa.1845 said:
It is a distinct unfair advantage.
I just never understand this mentality.
First of all, it's not unfair at all when you can also choose to do exactly the same thing. I presume you choose not to because you prefer to play the game in other ways, as do 99.9% of players.
Secondly, I really struggle with the notion of 'advantage'. Really, what are we talking about here, some gold? Whoopie doo. Fill yer boots. I tell you, I would much, much, much rather Anet spent time dealing with bots and hackers in actual competitive game modes.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
4
-
3
-
When the Participation System Punishes Participation
in World vs. World
Posted
Right now, yes.
But the suggestion of this thread is to change that.