Cyninja.2954

Glad you managed to turn your behavior around. Those temporary bans tend to get longer with each following offense and they do turn permanent at some point. It be a shame to lose such a valued player like yourself. Then again, that too does solve the problem of profanity in chat for other players. 🤷‍♀️

Gear is not the issue of players doing 5k or less dps with full boons. Celestial alone is more than capable of outputting 4 times that amount on a proper build.

Okay let's figure some terminology out: servers/shards Servers are not existant any longer. In their stead we have shards. Shards get created new EVERY reset compromised of many guilds and individual players. Alliances for all intents and purposes as far as functionality goes there are no alliances. There are alliance guilds which serve as quasi alliances by having every player join that guild. They still remains regular guilds. Guilds the same as before only that now sometimes get referred to as alliance (short for alliance guild). Same limitations apply as before, most notably a limit of 500 player members. Relink Relinks are a thing of the past and functionally replaced by resets except that 2 servers aren't joined but instead all guilds and players are completely reshuffled --------- Now in order to be placed on the same SHARD as select other players you need to be in the same GUILD (notice that an ALLIANCE GUILD is still only a GUILD) and select this guild as your primary WvW GUILD before the cut off time. Being then placed on the same SHARD as other players does not place you in their ALLIANCE. It places you on the same SHARD together with your other GUILD members (which might be called an ALLIANCE GUILD, but remains a regular guild for all its in game functions). ALLIANCE =/= SHARD. It's really not that hard.

This. The entire idea falls appart the moment one realizes that almost all dungeons almost all fractals (aven in T4 or CM) and some strikes (as well as raids) can be soloed. It just takes very long or is difficult or both. TC, you are talking about sizes of groups in regard to naming both based on player ability (at which number of players can content be technically be completed, how fast does it get completed) as well as instance player cap (because your naming ideas then revert to looking at what maximum amount of players can enter the content). That won't work. The same goes for length, Temple of Febe for example can be a "short" fight, unless it's CM. Forging steel is a strike escort mission which can have up to 10 players, yet is easily soloed thanks to good scaling. The proposed naming conventions also completely miss the mark on considering the differences in content. A dungeon plays very differently than a fractal. Most raid encounters play differently to strikes. The simplest idea to communicate to players what type of instanced content it is would be to introduce categories which tie some of these instances together: - 5 player instances, no matter if beat-able solo, are party content - 10 player instances are squad content - 50 player instances are convergences and that's where we are at right now.

The current price for Gen2 legendaries is not even at the historic peak which they were at during HoT and PoF days. Now add in the fact that it has been made significantly easier to farm gold and materials, thus making this already lower price in reality even cheaper, the answer is: no.

They did. There was literally players complaining that they could not transfer their entire community with the WR system. Meanwhile you are assuming that every guild is 500 players big. 500 players is the cap, a cap which did not exist before. The vast majority of guilds are smaller.

but that is the issue, literally. Minimum effort players. As success rates drop, more invested players will move to private squads, which makes success rates drop even more, which.... you get the point. What's the difference in private squads? First off it's already more effort to join, minimal but more investment. Second is the ability to actually kick low performing players. Doesn't happen often because usually the performance will be okay-ish or passable as long as there are enough decent-good players to cover the slack. Third is more organization from the get go. Commanders might setup subgroups, split players to different islands, ask for specific boon supports, etc. Simply put, the 3 main reasons why public convergences fail are: 1- insufficient boon supports to cover enough players. Lacking boons is a HUGE loss to squad dps. 2. bad game play, slow reactions, poor personal builds, low amount of utility (lumping all of this together because it all means the same thing: unprepared players) 3. afk players So considering points 1 and 2, this leads to a lot of "5k Andys" in publics, unless they are afk which puts them at 0k dps.

Have you made a single EoD legendary (not to mention any variations)? Most of the materials needed are EoD specific. To untangle those and offer another means to create these legendarys not only undermines the integrity of the EoD expansion, it;s also pointless additional work. Literally additional work to make customers spend LESS money on the product. The same goes for SotO. Have you crafted a single open world legendary piece yet? The entire Obsidian Armor is heavily tied to SotO masteries, currencies and the necessity to own SotO to be able to craft this armor. Raid armor is tied to wings 1-4. You HAVE to own HoT to be able to craft it. You HAVE to own HoT to be able to complete the achievements for it. I am unsure what you mean with "you can get from different expansion raids". Or to be more precise, I know what you mean, that being that LI are available from Wings.5-7, but given you seem to have forgotten about the raid armor achievements, your assumption is plain incorrect. There won't be any re-release of legenadries. The developers have their hands full with creating sufficient NEW content that one of the last things on their mind would be to untie specific rewards from their content. The developers WANT these rewards behind specific content as to encourage players to buy that content, no matter if bundled or not. The design of unusual/ancient coins and green/blue prophet shards is specifically to make this new content/loot last as long as possible.

Green and blue shards are related to strike missions. There most recent design change was to remove red, make older strike rewards cost blue shards and make the newest strikes of the recent expansion reward green shards. The thought process is simple: reset progress on strike content with new expansion releases so veterans are not able to immediately afford all new rewards (and tie certain rewards behind this resource like Mystic Clovers). Unusual Coins and Ancient Coins are designed in the same way, likely to encourage interacting with certain game elements in the most recent expansion, while not allowing resource stacking in advance. Your idea has nothing in common with this design decision. Not going to say it's not going to happen, but if you don't even try to base your suggestions around WHY something is designed the way it is, your ideas become progressively more unlikely. I'm ignoring your jab at raids because it's not relevant to this point and meaningless to bring up.

Chances are high that both the chests and the requirements will adapt to Ancient Coins. What you can do to be safe is to buy as many Gifts of Persistence as you can pre patch. Shouldn't make a difference to you since after all, you would have used this resource anyway. My guess is the only reason for something to change here is if the developers forget about updating one or the other. The imo more interesting aspect here is how will green and blue prophet shards be handled, given we haven't been told about any new strikes.

Liked the interview, good to hear they are live looking at things. Sort of backed up the suspicion that they are now gathering data on player behavior and likely data to feed the algorithm better. Just going to touch on the 50% VS 10% repair changes (paired with the invulnerability tactic changes because some elements go hand in hand). For this it is important to look at how player behavior changes between a wall/gate being open and closed. The established approach in the past has always been: 1. clear the siege (and it is important to note, this can be done with a force significantly smaller defending force) 2. repair the wall/gate if it is in the defending interest to keep stragglers out 3. prevent stragglers from building new siege What is important here to note is: this can be done relatively quickly. It is close to 100% effective in keeping stragglers and back-up out. It requires minimal supplies. Another thing to note here is: the average WvW player does not carry siege with them, or not every one is willing to drop siege blueprints. Not every player will be carrying significant supply to build new siege. The larger a structure, the easier it is to close by defenders and harder to keep open by attackers. All of these aspects allow defenders to mitigate number disadvantages to some extent. Meanwhile it provides "content" to smaller amounts of players while they feel "useful" when say: your main defending blob will try to pressure the attackers while smaller number of players can approach defending the objective as described. All of this does not work at 50%. A similar thought process can be applied to the previous invulnerability tactic. This one is indeed very un-fun to encounter as attacker, but it also provided a great way to actually allow players to gather and face each other. One has to way the benefit here of actually allowing scouting and defenders to react versus being "trolled/delayed" by 1 minute because 1 defender got in (which by the way also made for content because attackers were encouraged to keep an empty objective empty). The changes lately have been very focused on speeding up sieges and structure flips which if players had immediate movement or reaction to attackers would make sense, but in reality just shifts the priority away from defending. I believe some adjustments here would be in order. The most important ideas here would be: how do we allow players to actually gather and react to things happening. For example: the recent emergency way-point change to have multiple available is great in allowing defenders to actually gather. Final though, here is one possible tactic to consider:instead of giving defenders a invulnerability tactic which makes walls/gates immune, why not turn this into one which makes the structure lord immune (and give him a damage buff). This would have a similar effect in that it would allow defenders to gather/react, attackers are now forced into action (stay on the lord and heal through if possible, leave the lord room and engage defenders). Or it could lead to defenders using this buff to improve their next attack on saving the lord (think similar to air support in stonemist castle).

I made a claim about my experience with the game. I provided some data to back up that claim. That's what I've been taught to do when making claims. I get this might not be the usual way to approach "proof" on the internet but I tried. Funny you should mention paying customers, from that KP.ME account you can tell I have payed for all expansions so far. Do we know you have done the same? For all intents and purposes you could be whining about things from a core account without having touched the game in years. Funny how that works when not providing any proof.

Would be impressive if that had any value. I'm in the top 1% and I haven't been running fractals seriously or regularly in over 5 years but you are correct, I did say you can check pristine fractal relics, so you have run a decent amount of fractals compared to the entire player base of gw2efficiency. I went over your logs on wingman again, your groups clear times are consistently below the median value on every single fight by around 30% in time (Aka on Arkk you need on average 3 minutes, median is 2m25, on Kanaxai you need around 7-8m [your best was 6:30], median is 6m. I stopped after 6 daily runs because there was 0 improvement or deviation. You are consistent in clearing in below median time. This applies to every single CM). I hope you can understand 30% slower than median performance on every single fight. I'm done indulging your ego. There are players that are amazing and performance wise in the top 1%, and they at least occasionally have performance to show for it.

Ah I missed that the item is not salvage-able, yes some items (especially leveling rewards pr WvW items) can not be salvaged. Short note: unless you are slotting runes/sigils into legendary items, 1 rune/sigil can only go in 1 item, so unsure what you might mean with using the Rune on many characters.

Lots of excuses as to why the performance is not reflected in any actual performance displaying metrics. Lots of assumptions to cope with the fact that others are unable to show performance in said metrics. You are the stereotype of person who finds excuses as to justify WHY they are amazing even if having nothing to show for it. I really don't care, what ever you need to keep your ego going. If you ever decide to actually improve, you'll eventually have to confront your mediocrity but that is a you problem, not mine.