Jump to content
  • Sign Up

subversiontwo.7501

Members
  • Content Count

    1,021
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It may have been me not expressing it very well, it's getting rather late here. I was mostly going for underlining that when the OP talks about things being unfair or imbalanced, those are one thing. When the OP refer to "WvW" or uses spawn camping as an example, those are something different. Ie., spawn camping is usually not malicious, it's usually rather casual out of boredom (for both sides) and it shouldn't envoke strong feelings either. In the realm of "WvW" (as intended, its design and content) it isn't necessarily a problem and it has "in-WvW" solutions and work arounds. Ap
  2. While you are getting alot of pushback in this thread, I think you are onto something with this ... you are just misdirecting your frustrations. It isn't WvW that causes these things. However, a developer that signals no interest in a mode and its players also signals to those players that they should not care. Once players no longer care they cease to be constructive and invested, possibly becomming destructive and aloof. I think that is a fair assumption for ingame content as well as discussion forums. Then of course that can spill over onto other players and make their day-to-day frust
  3. Answering your question is easy: The second you saw him attempt to dismount you and dismount behind you, you should have pivoted your camera behind you (and expected an LB2 burst, as that is the most common thing he'd do in that situation). If you had done that, all you'd have to do is jump once when the LB2 goes off and he would not even have been able to dismount you. Also, if you are new to the game mode, I strongly suggest putting some HP and tank on your character. I don't know if you are, but it is a common mistake for new players to come in with 12k hp / 2k armor and be surprised. Damag
  4. It feels like you guys are bringing back the discussion to the ridiculousness of a couple of pages prior now. Look, if you want to roam, knock yourself out. However, if you prefer to roam, there is still nothing stopping you from joining a guild or an alliance that roams or joining a guild or an alliance that appreciate players who roam. Do you have any such groups with you today who value you and what you do? Good, then that is not going to change after the systems change either. The same goes in the reverse. If you have groups today who "won't cooperate" with you, then why would
  5. Hm, interesting. I could have sworn I saw that 5 somewhere. It feels too specific for me to just pull out of thin air myself. However, it isn't impossible 🙂 . Whether to have a cap within the cap or not is also a pretty interesting discussion actually. I am expecting holding guilds in many cases anyway, because the mechanics of an alliance could actually be ineffective and far more difficult to organise with than simply using a guild structure to stand-in as an alliance with the whole repping thing.
  6. I haven't looked at the announcement post in a while now, but doesn't it say that there is a 500-player and 5-guild cap? As far as 500 man guilds go, and as a funny aside, those used to exist. My first guild at launch was a player capped PvX guild. That guild and other like it (or many in general) quit around the EotM times over WvW being so neglected while it at the same time was the only real reason to have a guild (ie., world bosses, guild missions were getting stale etc.). That's pretty much verbatim what the guild leader said when it left. He wanted to lead a guild and needed
  7. First up, it's nice to see people comming in with the right attitude, to approach the mode with creating content in mind. I think you've been given a good chunk of good explanations already, but I can give you some quick additional pointers. 1. Yes, it may be your server. Sizes, culture and health vary quite wildly. We can't know without knowing your server. At the same time, it doesn't have to be your server. There are plenty of more general things to consider. 2. Keep in mind that the mode is vast and varied: People throw up tags for everything. Other play
  8. I'd say it's the other way around. It is possible something has changed on the design side however it is more likely that nothing larger has changed on the design side. Why? Because we know what "wasn't working". We know Ray laid the groundwork connecting design and programming (forum post). We know he had it ready for bulk programming (forum post). We also know that Ray got pulled off the team (WvW stream). We also had that confirmed by Colin in the return article from the other week where he simply stated that WvW as a whole had resources pulled. As a funny aside, that is also wh
  9. Haha 😊. You raise something pertinent here though. Things do not have to be that exclusive. I think it is fair for there to be "fantasy fortnite" content. That is what roaming is, by and large. It is fine to not care about or partake in the strategic layer. However, it is then odd to be concerned about the strategic layer when it doesn't affect one or what one claims to do. That sort of ties back to the whole pickup, roaming or whatever else discussion. I think alot of these concerns and fears that take form in some sort of anti-alliance sentiments and threads has little to do with
  10. If you went back and read the post, maybe you would know 😊. Ps. What it is talking about is the Alliance system and whether or not it will ruin WvW. That is the topic of this thread.
  11. Actually, I think you should go back and read the post that you qouted again. I'm sure that if you take another look at it you can see that it in no way discusses roaming, clouding or anything else that you can do on your own irrelevant to the context of Alliances or whatever other definition of the word than its name 😅. There is something called projection. You may feel like "goal posts are being moved" or something "suddenly changed" or I "had no problem with it before". Before when? Go back to the post you qouted and you can see that it directly references pickup groups whereeve
  12. I am getting firmly reminded why I stopped logging in here. The word pug stands for pickup group. It doesn't stand for anything else. It is its name. It should be perfectly fair to use. Now, if you want to have your own definition of it, have at it. However, does it escape you how ridiculous it is when you dress my post in your definition and cry about it? You are getting yourself riled up over some perceived slight that was never there.
  13. Then you don't understand what a "pug" is and/or you misunderstand the context of the post you qouted.. It is literally someone who joins a commander's pickup group. By definition, you can not be a pug without a commander. You become a "pug" when you join the tag. Ed. Just to underline that: Since a pug doesn't exist without a tag it also creates no content without a tag. Players may create content in other ways than with pickup groups or in ways that require no commander, but that is not what the post you qouted was about. Ed2. If we do talk about players in general: The contex
  14. Well, this is exactly why systems like Alliances are good and why ArenaNet should explore more options to break open their systems and make them more flexible. If you look at your own post you'll realize that the real problem here is "limited spots". A developer should seek to avoid situations of limited spots as much as possible rather than strangling their own games to death. If systems can be built that open up "spots" in various ways then I'm sure guilds and players in them will be more accomodating to players on the outside. I think WvW as a game mode is a historical testament
×
×
  • Create New...