titles in lfg

[Solitude.2097]

39 minutes ago, mythical.6315 said:

Why add an additional system when anyone can simply create a LFG stating everyone welcome?

Why not create this extra  system also ?

Arenanet can create special rules for that .  like Final Fantasy .

And its up to the community to choose the strict-auto LFG version vs the open-current one .

Even WoW use this model .

Or we can go in the other route they , if you haven't  linked your account to an Authentication  , you cant' type custom messages . In our case they won't be able to see also custom made Groups .

Or if you try to type any message , than the default/dropdown menu , then you can see other peoples customs Groups , without forcing me to waste time to open the LFG and then put commands so i wont be able to see those groups  and then  find my group that i want

Edited November 14, 2021 by Solitude.2097

[Gregg.3970]

@TigerZord.7931 at one time many moons ago I used to think like you but then I wised up and thought people play Gw2 for all different reasons, we're all different, have different strengths, weaknesses, ability.

 

Some people play for very loose, casual, socialising while others play based on fully mini-maxing their abilities, game skill, theory crafting optimum builds for any given situation call it perfectionism, elitism, professionalism or what you will.  Whether you fall into one of these groups or anywhere in between it really doesn't matter but chances are you will seek like minded gamers who enjoy gw2 the way you enjoy playing it. 

 

That is all I see when I see LFG kp, li, titles requests just merely gamers whom have attained a certain level and want to game with like minded people, which I have totally no issue with as that's the beauty of ppl we're not all the same. 

 

If you want more chill runs just select a group that says chill ppl only, bring cookies, anyone welcome etc. 

 

Remember: There is no right or wrong way to play Gw2. Play what works for you, and enjoy the game your way, and equally let others do the same 🙂

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Gregg.3970

[ASP.8093]

On 11/13/2021 at 1:46 AM, TigerZord.7931 said:

titles being asked for in lfg for group content needs to be abolished.  titles are not meant to be tickets to access content, they are achievements.   to require a title for any content is toxic af.  i know this thinking has been in the game for awhile, but it needs to end.  there are other ways to ask for exp in content.. or better yet, give players a chance, were all equal,. no one is above the other, so eberyone should be given a chance 1st. if they dont know what they are doing it will be apparent pretty quick. i am so sick of this toxic thinking.  if it doesnt improve, i would suggest anet step and implement a fix. either removing titles for certain endgame content so that cant be used as a bar to entry (looking at you fractals), or make asking for titles a bannable offense, or something i havent thought of.  enough is enough 

I'm going to teach you a trick that will make the game a lot easier for you so you no longer have to go and post things like this.

 

Start your own party.

Put the word "Chill" in the description, alongside a short and accurate description of what you're doing.

Your party will fill up quickly. Talk to people as they join. Don't hyper-focus on filling specific roles, just say stuff like "I've got reflects for We Bleed Fire" or "Do we need a healer?" Don't stress about building the perfect meta comp, the Chill party life isn't about that; you'll do great as long as everyone understands how their classes fit together. (Plenty of people will already be playing builds that provide standard desirable stuff like Quickness/Alac just because they like those builds anyway.)

More importantly, that brief bit of chit-chat establishes a rapport. It gets everyone in the mindset of working together and communicating instead of just staring stone-faced at the screen and expecting their fellows to be perfect little bots. People will play better and they won't just quit out the moment something goes wrong one time.

It's great. You'll do great.

 

Here's the catch, though: you actually have to be chill yourself. Friendly, easy-going, open. Set aside the kind of status anxiety and talk-to-your-manager impulse that might lead you to make posts like this. This is about projecting a good vibe, not someone else *over there* having a bad vibe.

[mythical.6315]

1 hour ago, Solitude.2097 said:

Why not create this extra  system also ?

Arenanet can create special rules for that .  like Final Fantasy .

And its up to the community to choose the strict-auto LFG version vs the open-current one .

Even WoW use this model .

Or we can go in the other route they , if you haven't  linked your account to an Authentication  , you cant' type custom messages . In our case they won't be able to see also custom made Groups .

Or if you try to type any message , than the default/dropdown menu , then you can see other peoples customs Groups , without forcing me to waste time to open the LFG and then put commands so i wont be able to see those groups  and then  find my group that i want

Because it’s a system which will likely not be used enough to be worth implementing or be practical to use. 

Games like FF14 are different as instanced group content are a large part of the game so there’s a large population that would use it. 

Edited November 14, 2021 by mythical.6315

[Solitude.2097]

1 hour ago, mythical.6315 said:

Because it’s a system which will likely not be used enough to be worth implementing or be practical to use. 

Games like FF14 are different as instanced group content are a large part of the game so there’s a large population that would use it. 

Lets create the system and then we can decide if it worth it or not .

If it succeed like FF14 , then instance groups might flourish .

If not , people can still gravitate to the old one , or drop entirely ,  even from Strikes

Edited November 14, 2021 by Solitude.2097

[mythical.6315]

29 minutes ago, Solitude.2097 said:

Lets create the system and then we can decide if it worth it or not .

If it succeed like FF14 , then instance groups might flourish .

If not , people can still gravitate to the old one , or drop entirely ,  even from Strikes

You do realize that it’ll take resources to create such a system. You don’t just create a system and then determine after as to whether it’ll work. 

FF14 is a very different game than GW2. You really cannot compare them. Or at least with a group finder.   The populations are also vastly different as a group finder makes more sense with larger games where you have a lot of people queuing for specific pieces of content  

What benefit would a group finder provide over simply creating a LFG that states everyone welcome?

Edited November 14, 2021 by mythical.6315

[Linken.6345]

38 minutes ago, Solitude.2097 said:

Lets create the system and then we can decide if it worth it or not .

If it succeed like FF14 , then instance groups might flourish .

If not , people can still gravitate to the old one , or drop entirely ,  even from Strikes

Its already created go do a public strike and see how well this system of yours would work mate.

[Solitude.2097]

40 minutes ago, mythical.6315 said:

You do realize that it’ll take resources to create such a system. You don’t just create a system and then determine after as to whether it’ll work. 

FF14 is a very different game than GW2. You really cannot compare them. Or at least with a group finder.   The populations are also vastly different as a group finder makes more sense with larger games where you have a lot of people queuing for specific pieces of content  

What benefit would a group finder provide over simply creating a LFG that states everyone welcome?

Yeah they might need 2 people , one front-end guy to create the UI- things we interact and the other guy that feed the hamster(code) + 2 months (1 fore testing)  , aka 3200 euros (if each get 800 euros per month) .

 

If people want more Instance groups ,

and other games , use tools like those successfully for a long time , what is exactly the problem ?

Maybe those tools , increased the Instance population ?

 

By creating and testing this system , we remove 1x "theoretical"  problem from the equalization .

If we keep copying the mechanics from others games and still wont "succeed"  , then we make the conclusion that people in GW2 don't like Instance Content

Edited November 14, 2021 by Solitude.2097

[miraude.2107]

On 11/13/2021 at 4:12 AM, Superkai.4692 said:

I agree with op. I never experienced gatekeeping that strong in other mmorpgs. If you want to gatekeep do it in your guild. The gatekeeping started back then with achievements points. 

 

If you want to be elitist dont do it in public lfg. This gatekeeping is one of the reasons why end game content loses players.

Someone has never played World of Warcraft. I still remember the dread of having my gearscore checked in a public lfg. Or anytime I pugged a raid of waiting for a kick every time someone said BRB after a loot roll because I was certain they were checking the armory to look at my gear.

When I came to Gw2, I avoided fractals because my gear wasn't ascended and figured I'd be kicked for not having all ascended gear. I told the first guild I joined that I wouldn't be able to do their runs for a while because I was a new player and didn't have the required gear. To find out the truth was refreshing.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

3 hours ago, Solitude.2097 said:

Why not create this extra  system also ?

Arenanet can create special rules for that .  like Final Fantasy .

And its up to the community to choose the strict-auto LFG version vs the open-current one .

There are multiple arguments against a second system.

 

1) Players who don't bother reading (there's lots of those) will use the system that doesn't match what they want.  This will generate complaints which ANet will have to read -- probably as many as there are complaints about exclusion now.

2) It would be dev time spent on fixing a presented problem for which there already exists a player-side solution, when there are tons of other things the devs could be working on that would benefit the entire player-base rather than a subset whose size we don't know.  I'd much rather the devs spent their time on anything but trying to fix something for people who refuse to help themselves.

3) It would not solve the problem with the current system in many, if not most, cases.  Who would use auto-grouping?  It won't be the players currently setting requirements, I can tell you that.  These players know the content, know how to play their profession and have expectations of playing with others like themselves.  That leaves players who don't have one or more of those expectations.  What are the odds that the players who would use it will go back to trying to get into required groups under the old system after a few wipes.  That's basic human nature.  That's what people mean when they say an auto-group finder is likely to be underused.

[MarshallLaw.9260]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:46 AM, TigerZord.7931 said:

titles being asked for in lfg for group content needs to be abolished.  titles are not meant to be tickets to access content, they are achievements.   to require a title for any content is toxic af.  i know this thinking has been in the game for awhile, but it needs to end.  there are other ways to ask for exp in content.. or better yet, give players a chance, were all equal,. no one is above the other, so eberyone should be given a chance 1st. if they dont know what they are doing it will be apparent pretty quick. i am so sick of this toxic thinking.  if it doesnt improve, i would suggest anet step and implement a fix. either removing titles for certain endgame content so that cant be used as a bar to entry (looking at you fractals), or make asking for titles a bannable offense, or something i havent thought of.  enough is enough 

This post is toxic af because I don't like the way you're talking. 

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

3 hours ago, Solitude.2097 said:

Yeah they might need 2 people , one front-end guy to create the UI- things we interact and the other guy that feed the hamster(code) + 2 months (1 fore testing)  , aka 3200 euros (if each get 800 euros per month) .

 

If people want more Instance groups ,

and other games , use tools like those successfully for a long time , what is exactly the problem ?

Maybe those tools , increased the Instance population ?

 

By creating and testing this system , we remove 1x "theoretical"  problem from the equalization .

If we keep copying the mechanics from others games and still wont "succeed"  , then we make the conclusion that people in GW2 don't like Instance Content

I'm sure ArenaNet would be pleased to accept your 3200 Euro as well as your suggestion.  Though, I'm not sure any Devs really want to work for 800 Euro a month.  🤷‍♂️

[Luci.7018]

Crazy idea , what about creating 3 channels of the LFG tab and acts  as  a progressive system ? Each channel offer more loot , and tier 3 becomes the one with the best loot and has all the Selling Runs and the one that pro start (combination of Wing 4 second boss killed + EoD 5min Strike Boss , place them there) ? They can join lower Tier start groups as "Mentors" , or join them for extra gold (max 2 pros per group)  , but with some backfire ?

People who started GW2 and haven't unlocked a "hidden" EoD achivement and reported as afk , get a "flux bomb each time(faster)  and error 404 dc" . And that error prevents them from Joining Tier1 and move them to 1 tier   above , but without allowing to loot chest for 15days ?

 

[ASP.8093]

16 hours ago, Luci.7018 said:

Crazy idea , what about creating 3 channels of the LFG tab and acts  as  a progressive system ? Each channel offer more loot , and tier 3 becomes the one with the best loot and has all the Selling Runs and the one that pro start (combination of Wing 4 second boss killed + EoD 5min Strike Boss , place them there) ? They can join lower Tier start groups as "Mentors" , or join them for extra gold (max 2 pros per group)  , but with some backfire ?

People who started GW2 and haven't unlocked a "hidden" EoD achivement and reported as afk , get a "flux bomb each time(faster)  and error 404 dc" . And that error prevents them from Joining Tier1 and move them to 1 tier   above , but without allowing to loot chest for 15days ?

 

Why, though.

[Cyninja.2954]

On 11/14/2021 at 2:51 PM, Hashberry.4510 said:

Just add an auto group finder. Players can auto join any old group if they like while others can still make their own groups. Everybody wins. 

Honest question: how often have you used the strike auto grouping tool?

We have an auto grouping system in this game. Players make no use of it. Why would another auto grouping system fare better?

Edited November 15, 2021 by Cyninja.2954

[Solitude.2097]

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Honest question: how often have you used the strike auto grouping tool?

We have an auto grouping system in this game. Players make no use of it. Why would another auto grouping system fare better?

The new LFG wont have 2 hour cd ?

 

[Cyninja.2954]

4 minutes ago, Solitude.2097 said:

The new LFG wont have 2 hour cd ?

 

Strikes have 2 hour cooldowns?

I'm talking about the regular strikes which players create manual LFGs all the time for (Shiverpeaks, Voice, Fraenir, WoJ and Boneskinner). They all have auto grouping options called: Public Squad, which see no use what so ever last I checked. Meanwhile the LFG is being used even for the easiest strikes like Shiverpeaks Pass all the time.

Edited November 15, 2021 by Cyninja.2954

[Solitude.2097]

Just now, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

Strikes have 2 hour cooldowns?

 

I'm talking about the regular strikes which players create manual LFGs all the time for. They all have auto grouping options called: Public Squad, which see no use what so ever last I checked.

What is the problem then creating an auto LFG ?

Other games have it , and they are succeful

[Cyninja.2954]

3 minutes ago, Solitude.2097 said:

What is the problem then creating an auto LFG ?

Other games have it , and they are succeful

I'm asking: if players are NOT using them, what makes you believe that a new implementation will be different?

You need to provide CONVINCING arguments why doing the same thing again, aka implementing an auto grouping possibility AGAIN, will not result in the same non use we have had in the past.

Other games can be other games. They have gear grinds and other incentives. What makes you believe that implementing something AGAIN, would result in a different result than we have seen so far?

Edited November 15, 2021 by Cyninja.2954

[Solitude.2097]

Just now, Cyninja.2954 said:

I'm asking: if players are NOT using them, what makes you believe that a new implementation will be different?

You need to provide CONVINCING arguments why doing the same thing again, aka implementing an auto grouping possibility, will not result in the same non use we have had in the past.

Other games can be other games. They have gear grinds and other incentives. What makes you believe that implementing something AGAIN, would result in a different result than we have seen so far?

If people are not joining Raids  , then we create another format , with different name .

Re-branding

If they don't use the Public opTion we create the same thing called auto-LFG

Edited November 15, 2021 by Solitude.2097

[Sobx.1758]

5 minutes ago, Solitude.2097 said:

What is the problem then creating an auto LFG ?

Other games have it , and they are succeful

What is the problem with you creating your party/squad with no requirements? Make an automated one and people will still want to play with players that have similar goals/standards. All you'll get there is people going in and out of instances instead of going in and out of the party/squad through lfg.

Edited November 15, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Cyninja.2954]

Just now, Solitude.2097 said:

If people are not joining Raids  , then we create another format , with different name .

Re-branding

 

You are sidestepping the question though.

 

This is a genuine question:

There IS auto-grouping in this game. It is NOT being used, pretty much at all in PvE. People who are advocating for more auto-grouping need to explain how and why they believe this would be successful in the future or at the very least what would need to be changed in order for it to be made successful.

 

Again: We HAVE auto-grouping. It is useless.

[Solitude.2097]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

What is the problem with you creating your party/squad with no requirements? Make an automated one and people will still want to play with players that have similar goals/standards. All you get now is people going in and out of instances instead of going in and out of the party/squad through lfg.

You can play with people with similars goals .

You want a more relaxed => join auto LFG

You want to succeed ? => show your KP

[Solitude.2097]

Just now, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

You are sidestepping the question though.

 

This is a genuine question:

There IS auto-grouping in this game. It is NOT being used, pretty much at all in PvE. People who are advocating for more auto-grouping need to explain how and why they believe this would be successful in the future or at the very least what would need to be changed in order for it to be made successful.

 

Again: We HAVE auto-grouping. It is useless.

So lets stop creating Strikes then ?

People won't do Raids not HoT strikes .

Why bother ?

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, Solitude.2097 said:

You can play with people with similars goals .

You want a more relaxed => join auto LFG

You want to succeed ? => show your KP

Or, using current system:

You want more relaxed => join or create a group with no/low req

You want to succeed? => join or create a group with reqs you want