[Poll] Hardcore Servers

[Nothing.8564]

I'm sure there is a cost for Arenanet spending time developing HC servers, but with how popular the idea has become in the MMO community with streamers/content creators uploading videos, it'd put GW2 on the map for a lot of new players. As someone with 9,755 hours on the game, I'd like to see this game continue to thrive.

Add a new realm location for fresh start:
Hardcore North America
Hardcore Europe

Two features disabled and HC exists.
Disable waypoints(make them all contested)
Disable reviving dead corpses


Personally, the open world feel the game would have with waypoints disabled, and PvE content having risk would be fun for me, especially with a community behind it.


To those that read this post, please post your thoughts on the topic.
 

[Danikat.8537]

Are those the only rules? No waypoints and no reviving? So no fast travel (except asura gates) and permadeath, but no other changes from the base game?

I've been playing characters like that on and off for a few years, although usually with some additional rules like no mounts or gliding, no boosters, no help from my other characters and no items above white rarity. Based on that I don't think I'd be interested in a dedicated server for it. It's something I do occasionally when I'm in the mood but not very often and a lot of the restrictions I put in place could be more easily enforced by using a free account but I don't do that because I know if I had to go through the hassle of switching (and didn't see the character on the select screen to remind me) I'd play them even more rarely than I already do.

[Farohna.6247]

I'd prefer the devoted resources elsewhere.  But then I prefer the warm fuzzies of not losing all my gear, progress, character that I created, etc. that usually go along with perma death games.

 

[Randulf.7614]

A game that thrives on healthy map population, I'm not sure splitting up people is a good idea. How would you maintain populations in the current servers to ensure content doesn't suffer?

[Omega.6801]

I'd rather have resources spent on something else.

If you want to play hardcore, play hardcore. Make your own rules and follow them on your own. No need to put resources into something every player can do on their own.

Edited May 4, 2023 by Omega.6801

[Linken.6345]

6 minutes ago, Omega.6801 said:

I'd rather have resources spent on something else.

If you want to play hardcore, play hardcore. Make your own rules and follow them on your own. No need to put resources into something every player can do on their own.

I second this poster.

[Nothing.8564]

10 minutes ago, Randulf.7614 said:

A game that thrives on healthy map population, I'm not sure splitting up people is a good idea. How would you maintain populations in the current servers to ensure content doesn't suffer?

Generally HC servers have tight communities, I imagine Guilds would have a lot more significance. IE: Leveling guilds, bounty guilds, ect.

[Heibi.4251]

2 minutes ago, Nothing.8564 said:

Generally HC servers have tight communities, I imagine Guilds would have a lot more significance. IE: Leveling guilds, bounty guilds, ect.

I see them more to be elitists. The we're better than you attitudes. Infighting would occur and it would be one of the most toxic places to play ever in the game. PVP is a big example.

Edited May 4, 2023 by Heibi.4251

[Randulf.7614]

11 minutes ago, Nothing.8564 said:

Generally HC servers have tight communities, I imagine Guilds would have a lot more significance. IE: Leveling guilds, bounty guilds, ect.

I'm not doubting that. What about the servers they leave behind?

[Crystal Paladin.3871]

3 hours ago, Nothing.8564 said:

I'm sure there is a cost for Arenanet spending time developing HC servers, but with how popular the idea has become in the MMO community with streamers/content creators uploading videos, it'd put GW2 on the map for a lot of new players. As someone with 9,755 hours on the game, I'd like to see this game continue to thrive.

Add a new realm location for fresh start:
Hardcore North America
Hardcore Europe

Two features disabled and HC exists.
Disable waypoints(make them all contested)
Disable reviving dead corpses


Personally, the open world feel the game would have with waypoints disabled, and PvE content having risk would be fun for me, especially with a community behind it.


To those that read this post, please post your thoughts on the topic.
 

Will world boss portal device work? If waypoints and world boss portals won't work, then it's kinda stupid to play on such server coz , world boss meta events happen across maps u can't be everywhere ontime without waypoints.... Unless u have some sort of solution u want implemented especially for this

Also... Keep in mind, we still don't have portal devices for PoF maps... 

And if u play fractals, players expect u to gg most of the times for skips and resetting cooldowns else they get annoyed

Edited May 5, 2023 by Crystal Paladin.3871

[Nothing.8564]

2 hours ago, Farohna.6247 said:

I'd prefer the devoted resources elsewhere.  But then I prefer the warm fuzzies of not losing all my gear, progress, character that I created, etc. that usually go along with perma death games.

 

One of the nice things about GW2 over other MMOs is its wardrobe system. All cosmetic unlocks, mounts, and Legendary crafted armor/weps/accessories/ect would all be retained after death. Legendary items having an even more rewarding element seems like a nice balance for those pushing end-game content. Deaths would still result in a lot of loss, but that's the appeal of high risk vs rewards gameplay. Account progression taking place despite deaths makes for a nice balance in an MMO like GW2 that has a lot to offer.


 

33 minutes ago, Crystal Paladin.3871 said:

Will world boss portal device work? If waypoints and world boss portals won't work, then it's kinda stupid to play on such server coz , world boss meta events happen across maps u can't be everywhere ontime without waypoints.... Unless u have some sort of solution u want implemented especially for this

Also... Keep in mind, we still don't have portal devices for PoF maps... 

And if u play fractals, players expect u to gg most of the times for skips and resetting cooldowns else they get annoyed

Ideally all gem store items would work with the exception of revive orbs and instant level-ups. GW2 has the only respectable monetization platform of any game out there, especially with the conversion of gold to gems. Shared Inventory slots to prevent some item losses also seems like a nice way to protect certain items.

And the gg skips you mention is one of many reasons why I personally dislike the PvE community in this game, having a game mode where PvE is treated as a cautious adventure instead of a dps speedrun seems more appealing. Back when I played in vanilla GW2 thats what it felt like before DPS meters were allowed.

[Solvar.7953]

I suspect lack of waypoints would quickly be bypassed with Teleport to a Friend devices (probably people would have to advertise outside the game - want to come to Orr?  I have a character their, just add me to your group and come over).

Not sure how this would all play with all the LWS maps where you can get scrolls/books to get to them.  And for some maps, location of guild halls becomes more valuable.

Though honestly, it doesn't seem as much hard core, as just annoying.  I was going to say I would be for a hardcore world, just to shut up everyone who wants the game more hardcore - go there, be happy.  By I suspect the proposal as it won't satisfy them (not hardcore in the way they want hardcore), so wouldn't make much difference.

 

[Obfuscate.6430]

Some content is just not designed to live through - your character dying is an actual part of the story. 

So how would you work this out? 
Would it just be the core game ? 
Would it be to a certain level? Would it only be certain content?
What kind of rewards would this include.

I would scrap  that no waypoint idea. That would just add artificial difficulty on top of an already difficult challenge. 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Obfuscate.6430

[Heibi.4251]

Seriously, if you really want to be so exclusive, go play WoW. Then you can be as elitist as you want, kick players you believe aren't up to "your" standard.

 

GW2 is about inclusiveness. This idea is the opposite of the concept ANET has.

[Nothing.8564]

15 minutes ago, Heibi.4251 said:

Seriously, if you really want to be so exclusive, go play WoW. Then you can be as elitist as you want, kick players you believe aren't up to "your" standard.

 

GW2 is about inclusiveness. This idea is the opposite of the concept ANET has.

Not sure who this comment is aimed at, but generally yes there will be elitists in every game mode. However, high risk co-op games often form communities the exact opposite of elitism due to the necessity of cooperation and teamwork and trust. The high end of end-game-content most likely would be elitist but that's no different than how it currently is. Throughout my years of gaming, the best communities I've ever been in were games that were high risk high reward as it bring out a sense of comradery. Small interactions go a long way, familiarity is formed as you begin to rely on an individual, and you gain confidence in what you're capable of doing together.

The rare times I play PvE I play Elementalist where I have two builds, DPS and Healer. No one wants the healer build when I ask, but then after the group wipes a few times I swap to it and we clear the content easily. This is obviously 100% anecdotal but the idea of reverting to the trinity system where people welcome pure healers is something I see happening if an HC mode were implemented. I think inclusiveness would increase especially as the world is massively expanded if waypoints were disabled. 

[Heibi.4251]

14 minutes ago, Nothing.8564 said:

Not sure who this comment is aimed at, but generally yes there will be elitists in every game mode. However, high risk co-op games often form communities the exact opposite of elitism due to the necessity of cooperation and teamwork and trust. The high end of end-game-content most likely would be elitist but that's no different than how it currently is. Throughout my years of gaming, the best communities I've ever been in were games that were high risk high reward as it bring out a sense of comradery. Small interactions go a long way, familiarity is formed as you begin to rely on an individual, and you gain confidence in what you're capable of doing together.

The rare times I play PvE I play Elementalist where I have two builds, DPS and Healer. No one wants the healer build when I ask, but then after the group wipes a few times I swap to it and we clear the content easily. This is obviously 100% anecdotal but the idea of reverting to the trinity system where people welcome pure healers is something I see happening if an HC mode were implemented. I think inclusiveness would increase especially as the world is massively expanded if waypoints were disabled. 

Don't need an HC server. CMs already exist for hard core players wanting a challenge. Creating a server would be a waste of resources and time on ANET's part. We already see disabling of waypoints on certain maps where we must advance to open them. And if control is lost we lose the waypoint. All this without excluding any players.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Heibi.4251

[Eekasqueak.7850]

Not worth the resources it would take to implement imo

[Andur.9275]

I wouldn't enjoy harcore servers. I don't die often and wouldn't mind a challenge even in open world, but the whole combat system is lacking too many important mechanics to be fair enough to justify things like perma death, imo. Additionally at least 50% of the reasons I was defeated were bad telegraphing of dangerous attacks, or rather the visual noise covering the telegraph.

But maybe thats just me. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Zephire.8049]

I'd much rather the resources go elsewhere. They stopped developing raids because only a fraction of the community did them and people who are interested in a hardcore server would be far smaller than the raiding community. You can already not use waypoints and imitate perma-death, anyway, same with not using mounts/leveling manually/using white gear/etc. All without the game engine having to be touched and this last Tuesday showed just how bad things can get if they accidentally touch too much code at once, and you're asking for more than surface-level changes.

[knives.6345]

No waypoint. 

Me, going to Orr from Ascalon = Frodo feels. 😐

Maybe instead, just add survival mechanics, like where you need to eat food and drink water else a debuff that increases periodically will be cast on your character.

 

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

What would be the 'high rewards' associated with this?  Something like Legendary Armor, so a portion of the playerbase would be dissatisfied, yet again?

[Danikat.8537]

8 hours ago, Randulf.7614 said:

I'm not doubting that. What about the servers they leave behind?

I doubt that would ever be a problem. Even in games where things like this are well established it's something only a minority of players ever do. I don't think it would ever take enough people away from the 'main' servers to make a noticeable difference to the population there.

Especially since I think it's unlikely anyone would choose to play just on the 'hardcore' servers. As I mentioned I've done this before, and I know other people have as well but I don't know of anyone who plays this way exclusively (and not just because it's not officially supported). It's a fun novelty for a bit, but not practical to do all the time.

I suspect the most Anet would do to support it is add a title, like they did with Survivor in GW1, which was added after players started doing the challenge. (Then they made it easier to get by resetting progress instead of locking it if the character died.)
 

7 hours ago, Crystal Paladin.3871 said:

And if u play fractals, players expect u to gg most of the times for skips and resetting cooldowns else they get annoyed

I think that's part of the reason for wanting a dedicated server. If everyone was playing under the same specialist rules they'd have to change tactics to fit it.

I don't do group content on my perma-death character, because it's not fair to expect a group to follow my rules or work around them. I could explain the challenge to my guild and ask them to help, and I think they would, but then it'd be like helping someone get an achievement - they'd go out of their way to protect my character at all costs and it'd feel a bit like cheating on my challenge.

If everyone is playing by the same rules and taking the same risks it's different, it's not one person being carried, the whole group has to adapt to what works.

(Full disclosure: the other reason I don't do group content on that character is I haven't yet gotten one to level 80 without dying, partially because I don't play them much. My current objectives are just to get to level 80, then complete the personal story, then maybe get 100% map completion, after that I'll think about where I want to go next.)

 

4 hours ago, Obfuscate.6430 said:

Some content is just not designed to live through - your character dying is an actual part of the story. 

I would scrap  that no waypoint idea. That would just add artificial difficulty on top of an already difficult challenge. 

I don't know how the OP imagined it working but in GW1 scripted deaths don't affect the survivor achievement, I assume something similar could be done here so doing story steps where your character dies wouldn't count.

Also I think it would actually make sense to disable waypoints. When I'm doing this challenge myself that's one rule I use because otherwise it's too easy to avoid a lot of combat by waypointing as close to my destination as possible. It does get tedious sometimes (especially the level 30 storyline where you're constantly going between a city and a level 15-25 map) but it also means getting to your destination is always part of the challenge.
 

5 hours ago, Solvar.7953 said:

Though honestly, it doesn't seem as much hard core, as just annoying.  I was going to say I would be for a hardcore world, just to shut up everyone who wants the game more hardcore - go there, be happy.  By I suspect the proposal as it won't satisfy them (not hardcore in the way they want hardcore), so wouldn't make much difference.

I agree. I was surprised those were the only changes mentioned, not just because it's something anyone can do now if they want to, but because it's not much for a hardcore game mode. I'd expect that to include enemies with more health and I'd hope for better tactics or AI, but wouldn't expect it because relatively few games do that.

Kind of like hard more in GW1, where enemies are higher levels and have more health but they also have more skills (and better combinations of skills), are more likely to kite and move out of AoEs and sometimes have better group composition. Some of the enemy builds were actually based on popular player or hero builds, so Anet was using our own tactics against us.

[The Boz.2038]

I would prefer if resources were spent specifically doing the opposite of whatever this is.

[Nothing.8564]

51 minutes ago, Danikat.8537 said:

...
I agree. I was surprised those were the only changes mentioned, not just because it's something anyone can do now if they want to, but because it's not much for a hardcore game mode. I'd expect that to include enemies with more health and I'd hope for better tactics or AI, but wouldn't expect it because relatively few games do that.
...

Honestly converting all normal mobs to elite or w/e higher tier is called is something that I'd want to see, but I figured for a forum post i'd start light with the idea since its already going to appeal to a minority of players.

[Parasite.5389]

it's not worth the resources for 2 new servers with so many features removed.

you've said that the only restrictions are waypoints and reviving, but you're completely forgetting about WvW/PvP, Living world content from Season 3 onwards and PoF as there is no way to leave Elona once you get there.

what you're essentially proposing is just the core game with zero progress, you might as well just make a character and say "if they die, i delete them"