Zephyr.8015

Apparently you don't get the actual item in subsequent skin collections. Got it during my first one but not the second. The collection can still be completed. It was a tad confusing but no actual bug.

I'm working on my second Mordremoth skin. I got to the step of completing the Octovine meta for the Lingering Mordrem Aether. I got the achievement progression for the item, but its entirely missing from my account. I tried interacting with the different crystals in the egg chamber in Tarir. I reattempted the meta event, and still nothing. I tried a different character, same result. Also there's an issue with the support website and its constantly redirecting me to a new page after logging in when trying to submit a ticket. Otherwise I wouldn't be making a post.

Hello, I'd really appreciate an addition of an account wide "tacklebox" or something that allows players to store bait and lures to be able to use across multiple characters. I'd like to be able to fish on more than one character without having to move over every type of bait and lures I'm carrying around. I'd also happily pay for this service.

I left the game for a few months and came back. The game only used to lag for me in massive 3 server fights with 50+ blobs on every side. I have experienced that same lag with just 2 servers with full squads going at it. The latency is getting more than just ridiculous at this point. Please do something!

I want Caithe's crystalized aurene effect as either an outfit or as options for new Sylvari looks. Will pay gems for said things! Also I would still love to see Guild slot expansion(s).

Guild Slot Expansions, I know of several players will full guild slots that would purchase this item to be able to join more than 5 guilds. Put them in for 800gems. Also I'd really love to see Caithe's new look from when she gets all crystallized from Aurene be introduced either as an outfit or for sylvari to use, it was so pretty.

They saved all other specs now firebrand renegade can shine No they didn't. I am fine with each spec bringing something to the table. Here's what a lot of people from the posts I am reading aren't considering. Okay so you've killed boonshare chrono, now the others have to pick up the slack. Which means less optimal dps classes, less optimal boonshare classes. Diversity does not make things shine, it brings out niche builds for certain scenarios, which makes it harder on the community. Because now your rotations have less slack, have less room for error, which makes it HARDER on everyone. By all means I'd love to have Diviner's from Spvp into PvE. But it doesn't change the fact that you need classes like chrono to carry weight. I will use the example of Druid, there are better healers in game. The reason why Druid get's the preference is because they bring, boons, unique buffs, and heals. They had already nerfed SoI in a previous patch, and now a class that thrived on its boonshare ability in two gamemodes has been beaten into the center of the earth. ALL of this to answer ONE game mode, I will emphasize that ONE. And because Anet wont make a PTR for its player base to actually test things before release to actually see HOW incoming changes affect the game; instead they do crap like this.

New stat combos won't fix that fact you killed an elite spec.

Guild Slot Expansion. Can be a BLTC item, gives you 4 more guild slots for like 800 gems. So you can be in up to 9 guilds. I know of people at least in the WvW scene who want to be in more guilds than they have slots for atm.

It took support 11 days to get me a response. 11 days I was so frustrated by the lack of communication and overall poor support I closed my ticket without it being resolved.

I have updated it several times with more information, and times etc. The last activity on the ticket was a day after I put it in, and then nothing. Basically someone looked at it and then didn't bother to do anything with it. Or, the agent wasn't able to do anything. Or, he/she needed to speak with a supervisor or a higher-up to get advice. Or the ticket was reviewed in an automated system to verify it had not been closed by the player. (I don't know there is such a system check, but it's possible.) Dreggon.6598 -- It's just been three days. It's premature to worry about this one. hailtonothing.5283 -- I see you were helped several times today, and I'm glad it all worked out for you. Woody.1976 -- Your friend has been helped and is back on their account. Levikilla.3076 -- I don't know that the team is able to reverse such an error. The player chose that game world, and doing a reversal may not be within normal services. Your friend needs to wait to hear back. Alternately, the wait-time has expired and they can purchase a new transfer. Zephyr.8015 -- I don't see any activity except your updates. SOULFLY.7942 -- I also do not see activity on this one. I can't escalate or "jump the queue" on any tickets, as I'm sure you can appreciate. (I mean, that would just be inappropriate and unfair to do, right?) However, because the last two are so far outside of what I was told were the norms, I will ask about them and if I have any information to share, will post it later.Even so, they could have said we are escalating your ticket to a higher individual, that would have been a response I would have been happy to hear. Just looking at it, and doing what could be viewed as nothing is not good in a support system imo.

I have updated it several times with more information, and times etc. The last activity on the ticket was a day after I put it in, and then nothing. Basically someone looked at it and then didn't bother to do anything with it.

It's been over a week since I put in a ticket, waiting for a response. Has anyone else had long ticket wait times? Anet what's the average response time we can expect for a ticket?

Legit question Anet, it was brought up in one of your live streams that the Alliance system is a long way out. Why even bother approaching the community until you had it at least at a 6 month release? I feel a good portion of the community thought that this was going to be released by summer 2018. Can you give us any more information on when you are expecting to have this rolled out, testing days etc? Anything at all really, you've kept us effectively in the dark for 2 months going into a 3rd. Has there been any progress made?

So you're are saying that BG has the most WvW hours played, you are not saying that BG has the most players. Played hours does NOT equal population. It is unfair to say that in general. Like tonight we have scouts, commanders, and players in general that spend hours or most of their day in WvW. BG players have stated numerous times that we have dedicated players and guilds who care about our standing in WvW. I'd love to see a statistic for average played hours per person/per server in WvW. You are correct play hours is not the same as unique player population. We have found that it more accurately represents the ability of a world to "hold it's own" in WvW. That being said your position on that chart does not change compared to the other NA servers if we use unique player population. When average play hours on BG are 30% higher than the average play hours of host worlds and double the average of all worlds, yea, those play hours are going to come from having more people, not fewer people who play longer hours. A host world would go Full status long before it was able to achieve parity with BG. Given what currently seems to constitute the line between Very High and Full, I'd anticipate that the new worlds after restructuring will roughly be the side of a current T2 linked server.They are not double average of all worlds, please go read that post again with the chart. It is double the average NA, and 30% larger than NA host + Link. I know plenty of players who put in 4+ hour commanding sessions, same with scouting, also lots of guilds who are in WvW probably 40hrs a week or more. If you want to continue to make the assumption BG has a larger unique player population when an Anet Dev has already stated WvW play hours are not indicative of population by all means I wont stop you.

Can there be a poll or something per server for title options that the players would like if you're doing something like this before closing server WvWing?

Alright so BG had a scout last night put in 20hrs, 1 person putting in 20hrs of WvW game play time. Player play time may be the only metric they use to determine population but as I have stated its easily skew-able in either direction and is not entirely accurate that more play time is equal to more population. We have servers like JQ who intentionally did a black out to tank to T4 to attempt to get their server opened. Once again tanking out of a tier is not an accurate representation of their population. I will also mention Maguuma who has solid numbers in T2, but as soon as they come into T1 they go away and are at the bottom. So if Anet is only using played WvW hours to determine if a server is "stacked" or "dead" I feel that it is unfair to both parties. If you have a player base that cares you will have more play time, its as simple as that. I will agree with Anet saying Blackgate has the most played WvW hours, being a BG player and being an active WvW'er I see this, but I will not agree with the assumption that is being made that BG has the most players in comparison to other servers. We have dead zones just like everyone else weather others choose to believe it or not.

So you're are saying that BG has the most WvW hours played, you are not saying that BG has the most players. Played hours does NOT equal population. It is unfair to say that in general. Like tonight we have scouts, commanders, and players in general that spend hours or most of their day in WvW. BG players have stated numerous times that we have dedicated players and guilds who care about our standing in WvW. Server status and WvW population takes into account play time hours. This is showing playtime hours. which depicts your WvW population. Its perfectly fair to make this assessment and its accurate. This is why in Tier 1 to compete you need a link and the server trapped below BG have enough to be locked but not enough to compete. It literally explains everything we've been experiencing and the reasons as to why Tier 1 is avoided. Because giving servers a link to compete against something that's taken the last 5 years to organize in a 2 month time frame is damaging to those around it. The linked pairs are servers that can equal or even out pace BG in terms of player activity but not the ability to organize and coordinate given the time frame. There is never an even playing field and thus the sense of competitiveness breaks down completely. BG should not take this as an attack and Arena Net does not intend it to be that. BG is the product of a system design that's no longer present and a system that was indeed flawed. Servers like BG are the last of its kind when the game has broken down and many have left. Alright, so 5 BG players play for 2hrs each totaling 10hrs of play time, while on another server lets say for example's sake JQ has 10 players play for 1hr each. Its the same amount of play time just spread differently. While another server has twice the amount of players in the same playtime. This is why I said playtime does not equal players aka population. You can have extremes on both sides, players going into WvW for 10mins to do a daily vet slayer, to Commanders doing a 4hr raid. What I am saying is very plausible that BG has players playing longer hours than other servers. There is also a plausible thing to say that other servers may have players that care less about WvW. This is why I am stating, played hours does not equal players on a server. The chart linked shows total played hours in WvW, Anet saying BG has the most WvW played hours. If you have servers that don't care about WvW as a game type then yes they will have low hours. This chart depending on the players and how much they play is easily skew-able, and is not a good representation of the amount of players. Also a good example is Maguuma, I've watched their population changes from Tier 2, to T1. They go from high positions in all timeslots, to complete opposite when they come up to Tier 1. There is no system anet can put in place to force a server or an alliance to play a game type; that desire has to come from the players want and striving to do better. I am stating that there is a lot more information that goes into a chart like that, and it is not objective or accurate to think that just because BG has the most played hours in WvW that it must equal that we have the most players. Read carefully. Not only did arena net said BGs NUMBERS doubles that of an average server but they're 30% bigger in active population. Not only does BG outnumber everyone drastically but they also are 30% more active by player hours. To directly copy what the GM said: There has been some talk about using Blackgate as an example in the post. Blackgate has been at the top of player activity hours in WvW for a very long time in NA. BG's numbers are twice as big as the average world on NA (without world linking) and 30% larger then the average NA host world. I'm not saying Blackgate hasn't suffered losses of players and coverage but BG is still on top for activity. IT'S NOT JUST BLACKGATE though.Here are all the worlds in NA and EU ordered by size names have been omitted to protect the innocent: his/her entire post is about WvW ACTIVITY. Blackgate has been at the top of of PLAYER ACTIVITY HOURS. Those numbers aka hours are twice as big as the average NA world, and 30% larger than a NA+Link. So that's what I am reading. So I stand by my point that activity hours in a game type does not equal player population on a server.

So you're are saying that BG has the most WvW hours played, you are not saying that BG has the most players. Played hours does NOT equal population. It is unfair to say that in general. Like tonight we have scouts, commanders, and players in general that spend hours or most of their day in WvW. BG players have stated numerous times that we have dedicated players and guilds who care about our standing in WvW. Server status and WvW population takes into account play time hours. This is showing playtime hours. which depicts your WvW population. Its perfectly fair to make this assessment and its accurate. This is why in Tier 1 to compete you need a link and the server trapped below BG have enough to be locked but not enough to compete. It literally explains everything we've been experiencing and the reasons as to why Tier 1 is avoided. Because giving servers a link to compete against something that's taken the last 5 years to organize in a 2 month time frame is damaging to those around it. The linked pairs are servers that can equal or even out pace BG in terms of player activity but not the ability to organize and coordinate given the time frame. There is never an even playing field and thus the sense of competitiveness breaks down completely. BG should not take this as an attack and Arena Net does not intend it to be that. BG is the product of a system design that's no longer present and a system that was indeed flawed. Servers like BG are the last of its kind when the game has broken down and many have left.Alright, so 5 BG players play for 2hrs each totaling 10hrs of play time, while on another server lets say for example's sake JQ has 10 players play for 1hr each. Its the same amount of play time just spread differently. While another server has twice the amount of players in the same playtime. This is why I said playtime does not equal players aka population. You can have extremes on both sides, players going into WvW for 10mins to do a daily vet slayer, to Commanders doing a 4hr raid. What I am saying is very plausible that BG has players playing longer hours than other servers. There is also a plausible thing to say that other servers may have players that care less about WvW. This is why I am stating, played hours does not equal players on a server. The chart linked shows total played hours in WvW, Anet saying BG has the most WvW played hours. If you have servers that don't care about WvW as a game type then yes they will have low hours. This chart depending on the players and how much they play is easily skew-able, and is not a good representation of the amount of players. Also a good example is Maguuma, I've watched their population changes from Tier 2, to T1. They go from high positions in all timeslots, to complete opposite when they come up to Tier 1. There is no system anet can put in place to force a server or an alliance to play a game type; that desire has to come from the players want and striving to do better. I am stating that there is a lot more information that goes into a chart like that, and it is not objective or accurate to think that just because BG has the most played hours in WvW that it must equal that we have the most players.

So you're are saying that BG has the most WvW hours played, you are not saying that BG has the most players. Played hours does NOT equal population. It is unfair to say that in general. Like tonight we have scouts, commanders, and players in general that spend hours or most of their day in WvW. BG players have stated numerous times that we have dedicated players and guilds who care about our standing in WvW. I'd love to see a statistic for average played hours per person/per server in WvW.

It seems like you didn't understand the meat of the example in the dev's post. SoS is only "putting in work" because they have a link that helps them achieve that: Borlis Pass. The dev said it is difficult for them to create teams that have the coverage profile of BG because the world linking system is not granular enough. So for example CD has the population but not the coverage. Anet was able to seemingly do it with the SoS and BP link, but their real goal is to be able to do that for all teams. The proposed system would create the granularity needed to achieve that goal. So TBT, Gal, TSYM, Rx, Doc, Caos are all on BP? The only two guilds I know on BP are Joy and CL both of which are former BG guilds. Talking about population and coverage here, not guilds! You have to look at the entire forest, not just specific trees.Yes and you've had 50 man blobs at 4am EST, while BG is dead. Continue talking about coverage please.

It seems like you didn't understand the meat of the example in the dev's post. SoS is only "putting in work" because they have a link that helps them achieve that: Borlis Pass. The dev said it is difficult for them to create teams that have the coverage profile of BG because the world linking system is not granular enough. So for example CD has the population but not the coverage. Anet was able to seemingly do it with the SoS and BP link, but their real goal is to be able to do that for all teams. The proposed system would create the granularity needed to achieve that goal. So TBT, Gal, TSYM, Rx, Doc, Caos are all on BP? The only two guilds I know on BP are Joy and CL both of which are former BG guilds.

Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.