Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Add optional servers


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, lezbefriends.7516 said:

You guys are hopeless. If you don't like those options, SIMPLY DO NOT JOIN THOSE SERVERS.

I mean... If you want to pay x amount of money every month SIMPLY PAY X AMOUNT OF MONEY EVERY MONTH.

5 hours ago, lezbefriends.7516 said:

As for the tired old "pay for gems every month", you're paying for the people who aren't paying as well. The price is higher. With a sub, you'd get more for your $15 than if you bought gems. You cannot unlock every outfit and free barber and so on with $15 a month right now. Jesus.

Ah, so you think they'll just open another server for you and then the price will go down for you  because you're only paying for yourself while on a lower population server and that... makes sense how exactly? 😄 

Edited by Sobx.1758
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sahne.6950 said:

i would actually love Openworld PvP 😅

 

*hides under his desk because he already sees the hatetrain coming his way*

 

Edit: So it begins... people spamming confused because i said i like pvp.....

Allisvain.

 

No need to be over dramatic. Confused for most = disagree. And it is perfectly normal and fair for ppls to be able to express their opinions, just as you are expressing yours. The thing that is not normal are ppls that let this silly emotes get to their heads.

As for the idea itself, I bet no one would be against new maps. Even if it would be redesigned OW maps to fit WvW structure. Tho personally I would love to see a new one.

The thing that is wrong in this idea are additional servers that would seperate the playerbase. After all A-net had reason to make megaserver. Why would they undo megaserver and split playerbase for the sake of copying a thing that can be fitted into WvW.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Biziut.3594 said:

No need to be over dramatic. Confused for most = disagree. And it is perfectly normal and fair for ppls to be able to express their opinions, just as you are expressing yours. The thing that is not normal are ppls that let this silly emotes get to their heads.

As for the idea itself, I bet no one would be against new maps. Even if it would be redesigned OW maps to fit WvW structure. Tho personally I would love to see a new one.

The thing that is wrong in this idea are additional servers that would seperate the playerbase. After all A-net had reason to make megaserver. Why would they undo megaserver and split playerbase for the sake of copying a thing that can be fitted into WvW.

 

I just said: "i would love open world pvp" and then i hid under my table because i knew that those mean mean "confused emojis" were coming my way, for openly admitting i enjoy pvp, outside of the pvp forums.

 

Edited by Sahne.6950
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Sahne.6950 said:

 

How can you disagree with some, saying that HE, personally, would like something.   Theres nothing to disagree with if someone says, "i like it". I didnt even say that i like the idea of new servers or anything. I just said: "i would love open world pvp" and then i hid under my table because i knew that those mean mean "confused emojis" were coming my way, for openly admitting i enjoy pvp, outside of the pvp forums.

i actually think its funny how unwelcoming the whole of PvE community is towards those few people left in the game that actually enjoy pvp.

Well, can you tell me what would I want for dinner, since apperently you can read ppls minds. Like why the hell someone would give you confused emoji only becouse you like PvP.

Think about it is not hard. What is more likely? That ppls use disagreeing emote under your post to show thay are disagreeing with the idea you support or (for some reason unknown) to somehow stalk and grief you for liking certain game mode.

Also really? Emotes on some forum make you feel opressed. I don't mean to be rude but you might want to speak with some doctor about it. It is not healthy to be that oversensitive. I know it from my own expirience so again, I do not mean to be rude.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lezbefriends.7516 said:

You guys are hopeless. If you don't like those options, SIMPLY DO NOT JOIN THOSE SERVERS.

 

As for the tired old "pay for gems every month", you're paying for the people who aren't paying as well. The price is higher. With a sub, you'd get more for your $15 than if you bought gems. You cannot unlock every outfit and free barber and so on with $15 a month right now. Jesus.

It's worth discussing who would choose not to join these servers because if that's the vast majority of people it's likely it's not worth setting them up because no one will use them. It's basically free market research for Anet, saving them putting time and effort into an idea that wouldn't catch on.
 

26 minutes ago, Sahne.6950 said:

I just said: "i would love open world pvp" and then i hid under my table because i knew that those mean mean "confused emojis" were coming my way, for openly admitting i enjoy pvp, outside of the pvp forums.

 

Enjoying the possibility of other players literally attacking you when you're not expecting it, but wanting to hide under the table if they might give you a negative emoji is an interesting combination. Maybe not exactly opposites but it seems a bit contradictory.

More seriously though it's not like there's an absolute split between PvE players who never touch PvP and PvPers who never touch PvE, there are many, many people who do both and it's unlikely anyone would have said anything about it if you hadn't pre-emptively complained about the possibility of anyone disagreeing. That's why so many people in this topic have been suggesting WvW - they know how it works because they play it and it works well as a substitute for a PvP server.

I've never seen a PvP-enabled PvE server which was actually popular if there was an alternative. PvP is more fun when you can quickly find and identify people who actually want to fight and PvE is more fun when you're not wasting your time with gankers. The people who enjoy PvP in PvE maps tend to be the gankers - the ones who can't handle actual PvP and need to look for players who can't or won't fight back because they'd never get kills any other way, and even they don't provide any fun for the actual PvPers because they'll run away if anyone does try to fight back.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 3:28 AM, lezbefriends.7516 said:

Special servers are all the rage now. Add in other server options. Here are 2 types I could think of right now.

 

1. PvP server, where you can fight, gank and grief other players in the open world. Maybe if we stop being so nice in-game, we can let out our true emotions in Tyria instead of being toxic on the forums.

 

2. Sub-fee server. If you roll a character here, all outfits are available, bank space maxed out, free barber, etc. with a sub fee. 

We have open world pvp servers - it's an entire game mode called World vs. World. We even have a bank lobby specifically for people who exclusively pvp so they never have to actually leave the pvp servers if they don't want to. 


A sub-fee is problematic because one of the advertising points for Guild Wars 2 is that it would never have a subscription fee. In it's current iteration, people can spend $10-20 in the Gemstore a month to achieve the same effect you want but they would have the option of stopping and not getting penalized. Why would you want it any other way? What benefit would it provide that isn't already being provided by the game in it's current state? 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

The subscription option would never work unless ArenaNet re-programmed the game.  Skins unlocked on accounts can not be 'locked' again, so every player would only need to 'subscribe' one month to have everything unlocked forever. 

They old ggs could programm an extra Wardrope UI ,copy-paste of current one that checks if you paid money , otherwise its locked. .

 

 

  • Confused 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Killthehealersffs.8940 said:

It means for next years , when people ask for hardcore OW-events , i will not be the one to find the "middle ground" and tell them to go in instances

Again: what does "they old ggs" mean exactly?

Edited by Sobx.1758
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to think sharded servers are boring, the rule sets are never that interesting. However…
 

Server shard with perma-death and  lose all items on death.  Aka if you die you roll a new character and start at level 1 again with nothing  

PvP shard where you lose an item when an opponent successfully finishes you, and the opponent gains that item.

Shard where Ascended and Legendary gear has Exotic stats (but keep the slots).  Pull back the power creep!!

 

There are loads of interesting rule sets that could be applied but, the issue is who is actually going to play alternate rule sets in the long term???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

I tend to think sharded servers are boring, the rule sets are never that interesting. However…
 

Server shard with perma-death and  lose all items on death.  Aka if you die you roll a new character and start at level 1 again with nothing  

PvP shard where you lose an item when an opponent successfully finishes you, and the opponent gains that item.

Shard where Ascended and Legendary gear has Exotic stats (but keep the slots).  Pull back the power creep!!

 

There are loads of interesting rule sets that could be applied but, the issue is who is actually going to play alternate rule sets in the long term???

 

I've been playing perma-death characters on and off for a few years, but not frequently. Even when I don't mess up and die I tend to go for long periods without playing them, just because I don't feel like doing that.

Also I think I prefer the unofficial version because then I can set the rules. I tweak them a bit each time, for example changing what equipment I'm allowed to use. If it was officially run I'd be more limited on that, or tempted to only use those limits - my GW1 survivor character was fully kitted out with everything I could get to keep her safe. Of course she also finished all 3 campaigns, in GW2 I've never gotten a perma-death character past level 50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

So for the ow pvp needs, does wvw somehow not work for you?

do you realize there is a big difference, between a instanced World VS World VS World, and being able to pvp anywhere around the gw2 maps?

Its about being able to play other maps with pvp enabled, because the pvp community is stuck with the same lame maps for almost a decade right now. Its getting really really really repetetive over here.

 

Edited by Sahne.6950
  • Confused 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/22/2022 at 7:22 AM, lezbefriends.7516 said:

You guys are hopeless. If you don't like those options, SIMPLY DO NOT JOIN THOSE SERVERS.

 

Ye, it is really mature to call those who disagree with you hopeless - facepalm-

As for a serious reaction. It is not so simple. Arenanet doesnt have unlimited resources. Even if these servers would be generating enough revenue to pay for those resource (and as you you can see here, it does not), there aren't enough devs anyways. So in any cause, doing this means they can't work on other projects. It is not like a button they can flip to make this happen. I rather have them work on other things that is more demand for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sahne.6950 said:

do you realize there is a big difference, between a instanced World VS World VS World, and being able to pvp anywhere around the gw2 maps?

Its about being able to play other maps with pvp enabled, because the pvp community is stuck with the same lame maps for almost a decade right now. Its getting really really really repetetive over here.

 

Maybe because the business model doesn't support pvp as much as pve?  I mean, with the resources being allocated in the way that they have been for the last 8 or so years, I'd think that this would be obvious.  Anet makes more money from pve and, imo, are unlikely to implement OWPvP that might very well chase away that portion of the playerbase that brings in the most money.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 6:37 AM, Cyninja.2954 said:

I am sure the mods will pass on this idea strait away to the developers, right after they check on who it comes from.

 

Thus I am confident it will get the attention it deserves. 👍

RIGHT??
 

Its an attempt at a QOL suggestion, but they left it in general….  I guess they DO look at the QOL thread…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/21/2022 at 9:28 AM, lezbefriends.7516 said:

1. PvP server, where you can fight, gank and grief other players in the open world. Maybe if we stop being so nice in-game, we can let out our true emotions in Tyria instead of being toxic on the forums.

Wouldn't work. It'll go the same way as SWTOR. First there's PvP servers then there's PvP shards that nobody uses. Even PvP'ers get sick of being ganked.

On 11/21/2022 at 9:28 AM, lezbefriends.7516 said:

2. Sub-fee server. If you roll a character here, all outfits are available, bank space maxed out, free barber, etc. with a sub fee. 

This would go against the core business model of GW2, so this won't happen either.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Maybe because the business model doesn't support pvp as much as pve?  I mean, with the resources being allocated in the way that they have been for the last 8 or so years, I'd think that this would be obvious.  Anet makes more money from pve and, imo, are unlikely to implement OWPvP that might very well chase away that portion of the playerbase that brings in the most money.

100% agree on this.

 

if i am talking about openworld pvp. i am not talking about forcing it on everyone.   There should be distinct instances of maps where pvp is enabled.    Not everyone like pvp.. the majority actually doesnt like it. so it would be dumb to force it on those people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Sahne.6950 said:

100% agree on this.

 

if i am talking about openworld pvp. i am not talking about forcing it on everyone.   There should be distinct instances of maps where pvp is enabled.    Not everyone like pvp.. the majority actually doesnt like it. so it would be dumb to force it on those people. 

Sounds like the equivalent of just making new wvw maps then.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Sahne.6950 said:

Not everyone like pvp.. the majority actually doesnt like it.

I suspect it's more like the "overwhelmingly vast majority". I don't have figures to back that up, but the level of complaint about having to do 10 PvP matches for the Decade collection was notable. Despite being something of a completionist, I've ignored that step.
And if it's really a tiny minority, then there's no incentive for aNet to create new servers or maps to cater to those players.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Sounds like the equivalent of just making new wvw maps then.

They can use the existing maps , and implant captured  building there .

Fast -easy and thy wont need 1 year to create a new map , where people might again don't like it  .

 

They will pure all the resources in Open Wolrd maps , and some assets can be used to Instance Content and others for WvW (both seperated from the OW players) .

Leaving the company time to create the new expansion + other game + faster updates for the community

edit: in the future replace any existing WvW map with the most community liked OW variation

Edited by Killthehealersffs.8940
  • Confused 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...