Dayra.7405

I wonder if we will get a Lvl 90 scroll at 9th Birthday :)

More serious: Earning something makes you happy not buying something.

You really discuss "realism" of range, without questioning, auto-aim and auto-hit?

I agree, the best way to make gold is to avoid wasting it :)Example: buy a precursor, make a legendary out of it. Now you can choose: Make a profit of 500g by selling it, or a loss of 1500g by using it ;)That of course doesn't mean you should never spend gold, but if you choose wisely, you will have much less demand.

You want to put all 3 Borderlands into ONE map? That's either skill-lag from Hell, or a reduction of capacity (from 4 maps to 2 maps) by 50%.

Hm, I have different "mains" for different purpose (and every class at lvl 80 at least once, to change "mains" from time to time). PvP it doesn't matter, a fresh created Lvl 1 is as strong as any long played char.OpenWorld PvE, I love my Ranger (quite often you're solo, so builds for Fractal-/Raid-Team Cooperation aren't the best)High-lvl Fractals and Raids you need a char accepted by current Meta (which changes from time to time after ANets skill-rebalance) and fits the role you have to play in the team. (having more than one to choose from helps to fill that role)WvW has usually different Metas, e.g. more survivability

That's in development at ANet under the name "Alliance System" since nearly 2 years, and will likely be released in sometimes. ;) This poll is more about some quick fixes before (and a reminder to not leave the same holes in the alliance-system).

not a counter point :pWell its is that simple. If it gets love, it might get more popular. If it gets more popular, WvW has less players. Ergo it does not need any love.A bit myopic. And very egoistic. I don't play more WvW since EotM is dead, just less GW2. Also there was a not small amount of starters that feared to enter WvW, before they learned the basics in EotM and made some ranks to skill the basics (like nowadays gliding and mounts, without you cannot follow in WvW). The correct way to populate WvW is to reduce Tiers, not to kill EotM or keep it dead.

I don't feel like quitting, more like mostly pausing. (only played 2 weeks this year)

A "is stronger as" relation is usually not transitive, just remember the old stone-paper-scissors example, and therefore nothing you can use to order them linearly nor to determine a strongest/weakest. Additionally "won against once" is not really "is stronger as" as Balthasar vs hero shows, i.e. it involves luck, circumstances, companions, ...

There must (and will) be no old Server afterwards.

I would say: pipspipsdecouple color-binding with WvW (you enter on weakest color)The 3. point means: a single server can play against itself in EotM, e.g. when it want to strike in WvW (play less WvW = lower pop = more likely linked), or is bored in WvW (as the enemy is in strike)

1 reward track ~ 8 times all wvw-dailies, with some patience it isn't really difficult.

I don't see this probability. 3 EU worlds must be without link as long as we have 5 tiers. And Piken belongs to the 3 with highest population currently.

Unlikely, Alliances will replace WvW, if Alliance in general will cost, then this would reduce existing players possibilities, that was never ANets strategy. But, there are other possibilities, e.g.: Founding an Alliance may cost Gems joining an Alliance with a guild may cost Gems, ... As the alliance system will work (even better balanced) without any player founded alliance (everyone is linked individually) you can play as „random“ if you don‘t pay, but if you want to make sure that you are together with selected others you have to pay

ANets fault is to design 24/7 matches and denying to accept that this is a fault.There were tons of good proposals to fix that in the forum, time-sliced matches and participation weighted scoring where my favored.And: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Proposal-for-a-new-competive-WvW

I always liked my Ranger (Power-oriented, first core, now SB) with Long bow and Great-Sword (2h Katana) played all Open-World/Story/Dungeoneer PvE with it, without ever being in trouble. I always hated on warrior 1000 blades that you cannot move during it, so my warrior never used GS (except as 3rd weapon for mobility in pre-mount times). Only problem: humans walking with GS looks stupid, Asura look better.

You mean: Form squad, turn off lamp, rejoin it (without turning on again)?Disadvantage is your squad doesn't see a tag as well. No. It involves the Catmander tag. So squad commands are available and tag appears to squad.The catmander-switch explanation in https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/72625/commander-tag-optionsays no commander-tag is visible to anyone, but you can mark yourself with some other commander marks. Disadvantge over a real solution of course is: You need 2 people that bought commander and 1 that bought catmander, and once you bough catmander you cannot be the hidden commander

You mean: Form squad, turn off lamp, rejoin it (without turning on again)?Never tried, but: let your colleague form a squad, he marks you with some commander ability, let your colleague leave and rejoin.

Hm, still a secret to me what tag you could mean.Ah you mean the hidden commander? Long wished, probably good that commander that do not want to attract people, are now able to avoid it. Should take some salt out of communication.

How about "weak friendly fire" for AoE in the sense of: it doesn't damage your friends, but your friends count towards AoE-Limit, i.e. if you put your AoE in a area with 5+ friends no enemy inside is damaged.

it hasnt even happened yet. and in t4 not much really happens here.3 tiers or less. You should add NA or EU, if your talking about tiers as they are different.EU-T5 is clearly superfluous. 4 tiers for EU would be enough, but 3 probably to much queue without EotM with Pips.I've no idea for NAmmm no clue about eu now too. =/ but so far cd and yb probably are tanking yes, we're tanking to t5. If you loose NA-T4 you come to EU-T5? :) I must have missed that in the release Notes :)

ANet never revealed the thresholds for the server--pop-states. But from oberservation I would say the medium range is much larger than the others. Maybe something like:Medium = 0 to 50%High = 50% to 75%Very High = 75% to 99% (except Baruch, which never get full)Full = 100% and anything above If this is true a link of Very High + Medium can be up to 149% of a single Full server.

Hm, did you already had Addition at school? If server A has 90% of "Full" and Server B has 40% of "Full", they have as link together 130% of "Full".So yes, linked together they have 30% more than Server C which has 100% "Full", still both alone have less than server C, and both are below the threshold of "Full".

^^ ;) Ah, conspiracy theories, wait, I get my pop-corn