MuscleBobBuffPants.1406

I think you misunderstand how positive and negative activity can cancel each other out to create "stability". It means people leaving due to not being satisfied with the system or being replaced with people going in there due to Woad armor. Or people leaving WvW but then get a surge influx due to a new system being put in place like WR. But again thats even believing your original claims which is becoming increasingly clear you have no objective data to back them up. "None of this points to a mass exodus or player dissatisfaction as you claim it to be the case and it is a deviation from the years of decline WvW was on a trajectory on previously." Which I just explained to you above as well. So yes the decline of WvW has been happening for a long time now. It deviates because of a surge of new activity that creates your "stability", but then eventually goes back even further to decline and maybe even faster now due to the bad WR system. So again your "stability" is not really stable, just a surge counteracting a decline, fluctuating, temporarily at best until further decline. "I never made that claim" Of course you have made that claim several times now. You claimed activity was connected with happiness/satisfaction and then tried to claim it wasn't connected with outside events until I pointed that out to you. Now you are admitting it is connected to it. "the new system would be able to deal with this. " The system can flex downward until you just have one group of people playing against themselves? I mean yeah no you need people participating I don't care how "flexible" your system. "You haven’t provided any objective data and it's amusing to see you try to make the words I used fit your narrative, but sure, let's wait and see" Yeah I provided you objective data of events happening such as Woad armor and other changes. It was YOU that made the claim of using numbers and data, and then now you can't provide them. I provided a graphic below for you to help explain. \ (Decline) \ \ \ \ \ ________("stability" - testing new WR system and Woad armor)____ \ (Decline) \ \ \ \

Woad armor has been out for a month and WR has been out for several months. Of course activity would be "stable" as you claim at the minimum because of people going into WvW. I have given you two objective reasons why activity would be affected by outside events and not connected with player happiness or satisfaction. But thats ok, well put your theory to the test as time goes on when people stop participating in WR because it is a bad system (which they are) and people stop participating because of Woad armor because they have it already. We'll check in more over time to test your idea! Feel free to keep better track of your data as well, I would like to see your numbers to prove stability and growth. As you point out, you want to think the surge in activity compared to the declining activity of the past is not connected with any outside actions such as Woad armor. It seems you aren't interested in facts or reasons which is fine, I can understand it wouldn't fit your subjective opinion conclusion. But I would encourage you to include those objective pieces of data. But feel free to keep believing that players are happy with the WR system and that activity is somehow not connected with outside events.

I am providing you an objective data/reason why activity is increased because Woad armor is locked behind it. So include that in your subjective conclusion. "The developers listened to player feedback and reacted, just not in the way some players might have wanted." Yes Cy that is what you call listening feedback. Listening to what the players want, the overwhelming vast majority that wanted a PvE option and still don't have one. "In this case the part of the feedback which was congruent with the design idea was listend to." Again Cy, listening to feedback that only fits your initial idea is not listening to feedback. It is an echo chamber. Echo chambers =/= listening to feedback.

They don't. They don't listen to balance feedback either. They don't need to listen to me at all, just the players in general. "Given these 2 stats products of active player interaction, we can assume that more means more players activity and less means less." Again you purposefully ignore the reason, because you want to use a subjective reason yourself instead of an objective reason. Did you miss the posts on reddit and the official forums about players asking why Woad armor was locked behind WvW? Did you miss tons of people saying they had to do WvW to get the Woad armor? Why would ArenaNet put Woad armor in WvW? There have been tons of posts asking for them to put a PvE option to obtain the armor. Why even do that for expansion armor? I wonder....

Did you even the first post? Do me a favor go read the first post I made and get back to me why activity might be "stable".

Looking forward to it! Let's see who is correct about the feelings of WvW players!

No problem, let's take a game wide poll mate! I don't think you are confident in your position.

Ah roger, definitely ignore those people. Those aren't the majority. I am very interested in feedback and democracy. I feel confident in my position. Are you confident in yours?

I feel confident in my position. Let's take a game wide poll, I believe in feedback and democracy. I wonder how confident you are in your position?

Uh yeah the reaction I expect is "Hmm majority of players aren't interested in this new system, we won't implement it". Instead of continually trying to implement something people don't want. That is my general expectation of how feedback should work.

By listening to their feedback and not implementing it? Feedback requires actually RESPONDING and REACTING to it. Telling me you are taking in feedback but then not doing anything about it, is not really feedback is it?

First they try to put an expansion armor in WvW to get players in there, then a WvW rush. No, your company made a huge change to WvW without consulting with the players or getting their feedback, and now WvW is being abandoned. None of those things are going to bring players back.

ArenaNet needs to implement a better system of gathering and integrating feedback. There should be a more organized system other than 50+ pages of posts with no developer involvement. How do they even organize or integrate the feedback? They should have feedback sections for more widespread philosophy as well as more nuanced ways of providing specific feedback on specific abilities. This would allow them to integrate this feedback from a bottom up approach. But yeah we need to address the overall philosophy of their balance decisions not just the nuanced ability changes. The celestial change for example is a big one, why was it done? How does it connect with their overall goals? Is their philosophy a good one? Is there direction/goal a good one? Their feedback system is not very organized or clear.

>>>>Long term content drought >>>>Some new content >>>>Initial excitement >>>>Realization that it wasn't really much content, excitement quickly fades (YOU ARE HERE) >>>>Wait for new content to release a few months later >>>>Realize that new content a few months later isn't much either It was the same cycle last time with SoTo as well. It is strange when people mention too that "Well you are only paying $25", but GW2 makes money on an agreement between the company and players. That if we keep buying gems, cosmetics etc., they will keep producing content for us. And then we will also keep buying their expansions to add on a boost of new content that was meant to be done in between living worlds (which was also content). Now you have no living world content to hold you over between expansions and the expansions you are getting aren't much either, so whats the point in buying gems and cosmetics? So yeah the $25 isn't much, but what is the point of continually "buying into" the game if its clear the agreement between the company and players isn't being honored? Why spend time/money investing into the game if the company itself isn't investing into it? We should get a much clearer picture of the community writ large when the financials release later this year for Q3 and Q4. I think people are learning from the SoTo experience that ArenaNet's priority isn't with this game. It is somewhere else.

"Our goal for the Push prototype is to get early feedback on the mechanics of the mode to see if it’s something that players want before committing to the iteration and polish that will really bring it to life." "We will be gathering feedback to help gauge how the Push mode fits not only our goals, but also player experience and expectation. We’ve created a thread in this subforum for feedback from this beta event. After you’ve had a chance to play, we’d like to hear what you think—what you enjoyed, what you think could be improved, and what you liked or disliked about the beta." That kind of philosophy is good to hear. Whether it turns out to be true is another thing.