Dawdler.8521 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 1 hour ago, Chaba.5410 said: If it weren't for megaserver, some servers would never be able to complete all map metas this game requires for making certain end-game gear.... Yeah I remember when the servers where about to die. Maps empty, meta events dead. And just like WR, people complained so much that megaservers would destroy "their" world and for WvW in particular that people couldnt go into LA and request reinforcement, it would be the death of the "community" and the end of roleplaying. But it basicly saved the game from being yet another MMO failure within a year or so of release. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shacka Hacka.7068 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 On 1/13/2024 at 2:08 PM, Dawdler.8521 said: Ok so you are saying Anet should ignore the forum and steam ahead with whatever they want. Which would be WR. Hm. Ok then. Do you work for Anet? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 1 hour ago, Shacka Hacka.7068 said: Do you work for Anet? Or do they work for me? DUN-DUN-DUUUUNNN 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skoobydoo.9246 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 3 hours ago, Shacka Hacka.7068 said: Do you work for Anet? The guy have 11,6k posts.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 15 Share Posted January 15 34 minutes ago, skoobydoo.9246 said: The guy have 11,6k posts.... Dang! I got a ways to go before catching up then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arya Whitefire.8423 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 On 1/14/2024 at 10:12 AM, Dawdler.8521 said: And by that very first sentence you declared it is in fact, not EoTM. Because that lasting history would be an "alliance" (ie community guild of different smaller guilds) or just a plain guild. Have you even looked at what EoTM is? There's no such thing as a "community guild", all guilds, by design are dictatorships. Some few will have long term competent leadership, that can also play wvw (semi-)competitively. The vast majority will not. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 5 hours ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said: There's no such thing as a "community guild", all guilds, by design are dictatorships. Some few will have long term competent leadership, that can also play wvw (semi-)competitively. The vast majority will not. Dictatorships assume control of its people by force if necessary. If you are in a guild you can, you know, just leave. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One more for the road.8950 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 7 hours ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said: There's no such thing as a "community guild", all guilds, by design are dictatorships. Some few will have long term competent leadership, that can also play wvw (semi-)competitively. The vast majority will not. You know there's plenty of smaller WvW guilds out there which are basically just a "gathering guild" for roamers etc that met and played together on a server so they can talk and play together when around, but has no schedule and no obligations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arya Whitefire.8423 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 9 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said: Dictatorships assume control of its people by force if necessary. If you are in a guild you can, you know, just leave. Of course you can leave, but when you do, you don't just leave the guild leader, you also leave everyone else. In most cases this evolves into a case of how much of the bad sides can I stomach to benefit from the good sides. But obviously you lucked into one of the better ones, and thus you favor a system that works for the ~5% of the wvw population that is in a guild with leadership that is: 1. good 2. long-term focused 3. not having health issues 4. at least semi-competent at playing wvw. I'm in a few of the better ones too, but I also play on servers where there aren't any better ones, and thus when I do play with the better ones I know how abnormal that situation is. And I know WR is going to make things even more lopsided between the few good guilds and the gen pop, and is thus not a well baked idea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 39 minutes ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said: Of course you can leave, but when you do, you don't just leave the guild leader, you also leave everyone else. In most cases this evolves into a case of how much of the bad sides can I stomach to benefit from the good sides. But obviously you lucked into one of the better ones, and thus you favor a system that works for the ~5% of the wvw population that is in a guild with leadership that is: 1. good 2. long-term focused 3. not having health issues 4. at least semi-competent at playing wvw. I'm in a few of the better ones too, but I also play on servers where there aren't any better ones, and thus when I do play with the better ones I know how abnormal that situation is. And I know WR is going to make things even more lopsided between the few good guilds and the gen pop, and is thus not a well baked idea. And if people dont like the guild leader, many will leave and sometimes create their own guild. I've been in guilds that fallen apart just because say a popular commander decided he wanted to form a hardcore fight guild instead. Not all agree with that of course - not all are "good" enough for that. Guilds change all the time. We move on. We join and leave new guilds. Maybe people just havent lucked out... yet. Much of the point with WR is to encourage the formation of guilds. But people seem to be afraid of this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 4 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said: Guilds change all the time. That's why you can't build a stable game mode around them. Worlds have been and are superior. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 2 hours ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: That's why you can't build a stable game mode around them. Worlds have been and are superior. They're not building a game mode around guilds. No one has to join a guild to play the game mode. 1 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 16 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said: They're not building a game mode around guilds. No one has to join a guild to play the game mode. How do I move back to Jade Quarry which has now been over labeled with "Stonefall"??? Oh I can't.... Then there's no way to play the game mode where I want to play. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 6 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: How do I move back to Jade Quarry which has now been over labeled with "Stonefall"??? Oh I can't.... Then there's no way to play the game mode where I want to play. Who is the guild leader of this "Stonefall"? Oh, it's not a guild that the game mode was built around, you say? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Just now, Chaba.5410 said: Who is the guild leader of this "Stonefall"? Oh, it's not a guild that the game mode was built around, you say? Again.... how do I play where I want to play? You can't answer that because the developers took that away from us. So now we the players are fighting the Developers. Guess how long that's going to last? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) 10 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: Again.... how do I play where I want to play? Yea, that's right. The developers took that choice away from all of us because a stable game mode cannot be built around that choice when we have years and years to show for how the playerbase gamed that system. Now you can only select WHO you want to play with. Other players are not NPCs there just to fill your chat box with familiar names. The game mode is still built around Worlds, not guilds. Refusing to pick a guild still does not prevent you from playing the game mode. Edited January 17 by Chaba.5410 1 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 So the Developers took away our freedom, our choice to play on a World with the people we want to play with, and expect us to pay them for this???? 🤣 Sorry, that kind of authoritarianism doesn't fly. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 16 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: So the Developers took away our freedom, our choice to play on a World with the people we want to play with, and expect us to pay them for this???? 🤣 Sorry, that kind of authoritarianism doesn't fly. If you see a 10vs30 is your first thought "I'm joining the 30 because they look like my kind of dudes, I like winning!" or "hm this fight would probably be better if we could make it 20 vs 20"? Just wondering. While you do not have the power to change the second thing, you have the total freedom to do the first thing. So would you? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 1 hour ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: So the Developers took away our freedom, our choice to play on a World with the people we want to play with, and expect us to pay them for this???? 🤣 Sorry, that kind of authoritarianism doesn't fly. Did you ask those people if they want to play with you first before you picked where? Did those people invite you to their guild but you turned it down? Today I learned some wonderful new terminology invented by a German sociologist to more accurately describe the difference in the social relationship we're discussing here: Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft. The sociologist was using them to describe the difference between being a member of a larger state with being a member of a family or a local village. When a lot of you players that talk about community but refuse to join up with any guild, what you're talking about is Gesellschaft, which gets translated into English as "society". When I and some others talk about community and recognize that community is having active relationships with other players, we're talking Gemeinschaft. This gets translated usually to "community". - Gemeinschaft is what you do when you mutually agree to something like membership in a guild. You have shared interests like playstyles and there's more personal direct interaction. - Gesellschaft is where the only thing players have in common is an identity like a server name. You have indirect interactions and impersonal roles. Hopefully these new terms help inform this discussion. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) If worlds are made up of roughly 2500 players, it's impossible to expect that everyone's social network is going to overlap with each other to the extent that 2500 people can all pick a single guild and call it a day. A server name is not a community. It's an illusion of community. Your social network is a community and not everyone on your server is in your social network. You have players closer to you in your network and further away from you in your network. No one is taking away your freedom to pick which of those players in your social network you want to play with. The WvW playerbase is Gesellschaft, sharing a game mode. Edited January 17 by Chaba.5410 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 2 hours ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: Sorry, that kind of authoritarianism doesn't fly. Is that really authoritarianism? Come on. It's like reducing a discussion to Godwin's Law. Trivializing authoritarianism by comparing it to a change in team formation in a video game... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harken Vell.9624 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Quite frankly this is the most poorly thought out and executed Beta I've ever come across in GW2(been here since GW1). Levels of toxicity never before seen in the game, nasty messaging and long-term supporters are talking about fully abandoning if it ever comes to pass. I understand the talent pool is shrinking but this is pathetic. There's zero decent algos deployed to decide this week's match-up. Just smells of a senior-level Anet vanity project that should be abandoned. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 10 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said: Is that really authoritarianism? Come on. It's like reducing a discussion to Godwin's Law. Trivializing authoritarianism by comparing it to a change in team formation in a video game... Yes it's authoritarianism as the developers expect us to obey them and just play where ever they place us. On the other topic, what you're really talking about is self interest or the interest of a social clique versus the common or greater good. People who World Build view as the common good. What the Dev's are catering to now are small social cliques at the expense of the greater good and the individual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 19 minutes ago, DeWolfe.2174 said: what you're really talking about is self interest or the interest of a social clique versus the common or greater good. People who World Build view as the common good. What the Dev's are catering to now are small social cliques at the expense of the greater good and the individual. Here's some links that go into more detail about these concepts: " Gemeinshaft (community) is characterized by: Emphasis on the togetherness of the group The group being more important than the members Strong communal relations Shared moral values and beliefs Weaker division of labor (less specialization) Examples of gemeinshaft social groups include rural neighborhoods, families, tribes, garage bands, sports teams. Gesellschaft (society) is characterized by: Individualism overriding community Contractual relationships over covenental Stronger division of labor (more specialization) Diverse social mores Examples of gesellschaft social groups include corporations, diverse countries, social clubs, universities." https://medium.com/@marksweep/gemeinschaft-and-gesellschaft-in-social-networks-ef4805fd2bc0 https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Sociology/Introduction_to_Sociology/Sociology_(Boundless)/06%3A_Social_Groups_and_Organization/6.03%3A_Large_Social_Groups/6.3C%3A_Gemeinschaft_and_Gesellschaft 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeWolfe.2174 Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 (edited) Now we're getting to the core of it. People who support "Guilds" want individualism and no community relationships or responsibilities. People who support "Worlds" want to continue building the community and greater good of the mode. Both are ok and I'd say essential to GW2. The problem is, the Beta destroys "Worlds" and minimizes those with that PoV. Edited January 17 by DeWolfe.2174 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now