Feedback talk:Joe Kimmes/Archive 2016

Wintersday ending early

Other than announced on the official website and on the wiki, Frozen Accessory Token can neither be acquired nor exchanged anymore. I really wanted to do these quests now that I got some shards from the finale. --numma_cway (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if there was a hotfix made for this already or if there was something funky going on at your end, but I was able to grab the quests normally just now. Jeree95 (talk) 13:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

I think they reappeared when the decoration was removed. Let's see how long the remaining collectors will last this time. Halloween 2015 collectors lasted until Wintersday started and one Mad King's Guard henchman even lasted until the end of it. --numma_cway (talk) 14:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

It seems that the NPCs involved with the hat tokens disappeared in older districts of their towns due to timing conflicts when the year changed over; I will investigate further. Thanks for the report! - Joe Kimmes 23:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Alt ganking in HoH still a problem

HoH is being dominated by teams that work together to farm fame for one team. When it's capture points one of the guys only goes after you and your points. When it's KotH or Relic Run one of the two teams just focuses you while the other is free to score points. It really takes the fun out of HA. --Ezalor (talk) 18:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

It's unlikely that there will be any changes to PvP formats; if you believe that players are breaking the game's rules, please contact Support and the community team. - Joe Kimmes 18:30, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

NPC

Is there any relationship between Symeon and the Symeon? Or merely coincidental? --Falconeye (talk) 18:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

It certainly seems possible, but I can't say for sure - I started at the company just after Factions shipped, and can't pinpoint which designer or writer named that particular NPC.

Other NPCs in Cavalon have a similar ring to their names though - often name references have happened in groups, so you might investigate to see if there's a trend going on there. - Joe Kimmes 19:49, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Evil PvP Bots

Hey there Joe,

I was over on Facebook and the boys on there are saying, there is a mess of Interrupt Bots messing with their PVP fun in Random Arenas. Sounds like a clever man, such as yourself, could get the ban bot working on terminating them. Personally I don't play PVP, I'm a RP and PVE player. However with the April 11th anniversary on its way it sure would be nice not to see bots and gold sellers in the game.

Thanks for all you and your team do.

Wendy Black 12:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Please report bots / gold sellers to Support or by contacting the community team. I'm not directly involved in that area of the game's support. - Joe Kimmes 19:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Community team? I am unaware of who or what that might be Joe. I am sorry but I am a bit confused on this issue, as I have reported both from in game chat and through tech support, the same gold seller for the last year. In fact, if you go to presearing Ascalon, right now, you can find a Elementalist by the name of Zeke T, standing there selling ectos. He has been there, and I do /report Zeke T and he remains. So who or what is this "community team" leader? Your help is appreciated. --Wendy Black 00:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Several members of the community team are listed here, along with external links to social media: ArenaNet#Player_feedback.

Thank you for reporting players who are violating the rules; unfortunately I cannot discuss actions taken on players' accounts. - Joe Kimmes 19:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Collector Edition Dances - Prophecies+Nightfall

Hey Joe, I was hoping this would not be a complex graphical fix and a simple coding fix. I don't know if you are aware how the collectors edition dances interact with each other, but I will briefly explain. The Factions dance when triggered with /dancenew will not trigger the divine aura from the Prophecies Collectors edition dance. However, if you hit /dance first to trigger the Divine Aura THEN hit /dancenew it will trigger the Divine Aura AND the Factions dance. My question is about the Nightfall dance. Regardless of what combination you use, /dancenew, /dancenew+/dance, or /dance+/dancenew - the Divine Aura+the Nightfall Collectors edition dance will not appear in the same action such as the factions. Is there a way to correct the coding in this? I assume it is not intended and I am hoping it could easily be fixed. Any insight would be great! Gladiator Motoko (talk) 00:49, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Interestingly, this does appear to be intended; the Nightfall Collector's Edition dance specifically prevents the Divine Aura effect from stacking with it. There may have been a design choice when Nightfall launched to prevent overlapping effects, or a code limitation on stacking certain types of emote effects. - Joe Kimmes 18:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Well that seems like poor design! It exists for the Factions CE dances, could you possibly correct it and make it work with the NF ones? I'd honestly invest time into a PvE Dervish and/or Paragon if the dance did work like everyone would like it to work. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 04:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Guild Wars ToolBox Third Party Software

Hey Joe, I was just wondering if ANet is aware of the programme Guild Wars Tool Box, and I was wondering if you would be able to give us information on ANets official stance on the programme. I've heard it uses consets for you, can use Shadow Form for you if you have to afk etc. I've been telling players who ask if it’s alright to use that they may possibly be banned for using it since its automating game play somewhat. Some players are telling others it’s ok to use and its harmless etc. Would you be able to clarify for us ANets official stance on this programme, is using it a ban able offense similar to running a bot? I realise all third party programmes are used at the players own risk, but ANet has not banned for the use of some such as TexMod. Some clarification would be helpful so that we can quote it when other players ask about the use of such programmes, especially for newer players who are joining the game and may not be aware of the rules around third party programmes. Lorenna De Vir (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

It is against the rules. Those who tell you that it is not are either lying or ignorant of the rules. TexMod changes the graphics of the game for you only and does not provide any competitive benefit over the other team. A program that uses skills while you are not even sitting at the computer for an advantage? Yeah, that one is common sense buddy. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 05:53, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Obviously it spells against the rules to anyone with half a brain and I wouldn't touch it with a 200 yard pole, but I'm not asking your opinion, am I? I'm asking for ANets official word so we can put it to rest with players saying ANet won't ban you for it. Lorenna De Vir (talk) 07:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Should we create an article listing stuff that bans you and those that won't (Textmod)? --Falconeye (talk) 07:46, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Honestly I'm not sure if that was a joke but something like this wouldn't be a ban idea. All im trying to do is hopefully preserve some of what remains of the community as there isnt many of us left. Now I wan't hardcore abusers of third party programmes gone as much as anyone else who follows the rules, however I'm hoping that if at least some people realise these programmes are not ok and ANet is still watching they may not start using them in the first place. People who are going to hardcore bot are going to anyway, but maybe we could make it clear for some of the more innocent offenders who are going on bad advice and may not have otherwise. Lorenna De Vir (talk) 08:05, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

The best information you'll get is here: Third-party program. Anet will not vet any third-party programs for very good reasons. G R E E N E R 08:09, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm aware of that and nobody is asking them to vet it. They have however given their stance on certain activities in the past. Lorenna De Vir (talk) 08:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

But you are asking them to do just that. If this program gives the player an advantage in any way over other players, or possibly breaks other portions of the EULA, that is for them to decide. Third-party programs are use-at-your-own-risk, and Anet will not say that Guild Wars Tool Box is allowed to be used. It is the action that you do with the program that is either good or bad.

If the action seems like it might not be fair, don't do it. That's what you should tell other players, old and new. G R E E N E R 15:26, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

If I wanted to give you my opinion, I would have. And trust me, it would involved a lot more profanity and questioning your intelligence. You are asking for an official response from Arena Net in which Greener has given you about as an official of a response you will get. I gave you the TL:DR summary of various posts by Gaile Gray and the like from the past 10 years of experience in this game. Do some research and you will arrive at the same summary as what we both have provided. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 16:56, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I believe there was a conversation with Gaile in this wiki about using third party software, and as far as I remember the consensus was that in PvP, absolutely no third party help is allowed. In PvE, however, using something that helps you pop consumables and time other things is allowed until we reach the point that the game is capable of doing it without help. At that point it's botting and strictly forbidden. As long as you yourself are the *main* input controlling the game, using a little outside help is "not forbidden" (not saying allowed directly). If you're using the toolbox to maintain shadow form and cons without even looking at the screen, that's crossing the line for botting.

Disclaimer: I would like to point out this is just my preception of how Gaile's stance was years back, and I could be completely wrong. Jeree95 (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I am not involved in the GM process, and therefore won't comment officially on what is and isn't against the rules. There are a few official stances referenced here; if those are not sufficient, I recommend contacting Community or Support. You might also look to the User Agreement as suggested above, which is pretty specific about automation of gameplay.

As an additional note, remember to be polite to each other, everyone. - Joe Kimmes 19:04, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

The Last Breath of Guild Wars

As you may know, the reddit page for Guild Wars is still very much active, refusing to die even after all those years. There is a community, new players buying and discovering the game, veterans returning, etc... It's actually incredibly hard for every new player to play the game like it was originally meant to be. In a way, they can enjoy it alone or in a guild, but they cannot group up with random strangers, going to the unknown, collaborating. What i remember brought the "lower-middle class" players together was "not too hard cooperative objectives".

Ultra-elite veterans (very few of them actually, maybe 50-100 players) are doing as we speak incredibly hard speed clears/farming, in areas like DoA or the UW. Participating in those activities was considered impossible for the average player at the time and it still is. The possibility of grouping with random strangers, without the need for cons/previous knowledge ("Come as you are" playstyle) and still doing something meaningful has disappeared (except on Saturday and Sunday evenings at Fort Aspenwood).

I felt, after 11+ years of playing the game, that what really destroyed this feeling of "I can go there, meeting with PUG's and having fun" is the back-to-back nerfs to Shadow Form, Obsidian Flesh, Spell Breaker and Holy Wrath, nerfs from February 2010 :

( http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback:Game_updates/20100225 )

Those four skills, before their nerf, allowed the casual gamers to have a variety of social interactions via the "pick-up groups" (PUG's), where eight players randomly met and went toward a goal, bringing with them laughter, communication, and a challenge. The skill threshold for those activites (Mount Qinkai, Morostav Trail, Kathandrax, Shards of Orr, etc...), made possible by the pre-nerf state of those skills was extremely low, which made them accessible to everyone. Those pick-up groups were what made Guild Wars alive. They were the very definition of Guild Wars, and many of us (veterans) have fond memories of those groups.

New and returning players need, if i may say so, to understand how glorious the possibility of randomly grouping was. Players are now lost souls, each one wandering alone without the possibility to participate in those activities, whose very existence brought people together toward a common goal. In 2016, where the justification for those nerfs is no longer relevant but their effect is still felt, it might be wise to let Guild Wars get a last breath of life by reverting those four nerfs, for the good of the community. This could be the very last update of Guild Wars. No harm will be done to anyone, it is an easy modification, and it should, for years to come, allow the possibility for new and returning players to experience how great Guild Wars was.

Yes, this is a plea. Please, at least, consider it with your heart. 86.237.193.116 19:44, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

I appreciate your fond memories of grouping; I think the community's enthusiasm for grouping up and teaching each other is a central part of Guild Wars.

However, let me say again that there are no easy or small changes to the game at this point. Skill balance carries a large number of side effects, dependencies and differing opinions. As the game is in a maintenance state, it is unlikely that any changes to skill balance will be made. - Joe Kimmes 18:54, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Will there

...ever be a quest or mini-mission title The Mad King's Nightmare Before Wintersday? ^_^ --Falconeye (talk) 22:39, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

I think the idea has come up when brainstorming Halloween and Wintersday content; the holidays are so close to overlapping anyway. It's unlikely that it would be added at this point, however. - Joe Kimmes 19:01, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

GvG Ladder killed by Anet

Remember this? http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback_talk:Joe_Kimmes/Archive_2011-2014#GvG_Rated_Automatic_Match_restrictions You said you couldn't change stuff, but then 2 days later Anet proceeded to change stuff and kill ladder for real teams with little impact to the syncers. Yes the ladder was dying, but the update made things worse. Targetdrone (talk) 10:02, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

It would be really nice if you provided a clarification of which things were made worse in your opinion, in which update and by what of its certain parts, since it's rather vague right now, even with the reference you presented. Dmitri Fatkin (talk) 01:37, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

There are restrictions to guilds playing vs the same guilds. I suggested that Anet change those restrictions. Anet didn't change those restrictions but instead added even more restrictions so that syncers would stop playing vs nonsync guilds. The result is the nonsync guilds can't ladder vs each other - two guilds can wait on ladder for hours and they won't match up. Previously they would match up vs sync guilds and after enough sync guilds, the restrictions would no longer take effect and they would be able to play a legit game with each other. See also: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback_talk:Joe_Kimmes/Archive_2011-2014#GvG_Ladder_Issues_-_Syncing.2FKilling_Ladder Despite what Motoko and others think it wasn't syncing that really killed ladder. Targetdrone (talk) 19:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

As I stated previously, I'm presently unable to change the matchmaking mechanics. If you believe they have been changed, I'm interested to know what update it was. - Joe Kimmes 17:17, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback:Game_updates/20140925 Targetdrone (talk) 20:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Are you saying that matchmaking mechanics changed in that update, or that the changes in that update to resign rules / dishonor affected your GvG experience? - Joe Kimmes 16:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

What is the Ashford Ghost

https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ashford_Abbey Please tell me why he trolling me for over 10 years ;-( Ty Justice (talk) 15:06, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps the abbey is haunted after all! I'm afraid that I don't know anything about that ghost, however. - Joe Kimmes 17:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Conspiracy I'm sure ! ;-( Justice (talk) 23:05, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Guild Wars Beyond: Elona lore

Hello Joe, I hope you're having a nice day. I've got a question: multiple sources say the story for the Guild Wars Beyond: Elona chapter, which won't be released anymore, was already written before the Live Team couldn't design and code the quests due to lack of resources. Now I'm wondering if there will ever be a time when we, as a wiki community, get to know the lore related to the cancelled questlines. Not sure if you're the right person to ask this, but if not, feel free to redirect the question!.SuperRobertWa (talk) 10:55, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

I am curious as well! --Falconeye (talk) 06:34, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

There was preliminary story written for Beyond: Elona, but I wouldn't be comfortable sharing the designers' early work; it was at a state before story review, plot checking, etcetera. I'll pass along your interest in the topic though! - Joe Kimmes 17:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

That would be lovely! Even some hope in eventually getting to know the lore is better than nothing, isn't it? SuperRobertWa (talk) 20:27, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

are Mantids....

insects or still their own creature type? --Falconeye (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

To contribute to the wiki's knowledge, I took a quick look at the creature files: every Mantid I found is in the Insect family. - Joe Kimmes 17:35, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

and Scarabs?

Scarab also? --Falconeye (talk) 20:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

This one is actually not consistent! There is a Scarab family that most 'scarab' monsters belong to; however, a few added to the game later are mislabeled as Insects in the creature files. I suppose I'll file a bug on that! - Joe Kimmes 17:15, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

GvG AT Abuse

Hey Joe, I know you are going to give that whole "game is in maintenance/report to support" thing you do - But let's be honest. That doesn't work. It hasn't worked for years. We are running into some game impacting/gvg experience issues. These are becoming major issues where one person is ruining the game for everyone. This seriously needs to be taken into consideration and escalated to someone who can take care of this. Let us do a quick overview:

1. http://gw2w.de:1337/ <- This is a player made working ladder. Notice the ability to "Show Unimportant Guilds". These "Unimportant" guilds are mainly syncers (and botters if I am not mistaken). Those who do not play this game but merely join gvg matches against each other to either have a high ranking/rated guild or to farm champ points.

2. http://i.imgur.com/ACeQFTn.jpg <- This is a daily AT played morning American/Afternoon Euro. These ATs are always either dead or 3 rounds consisting of 6-8 guilds. All of these extra guilds? Afk syncing guilds who have entered purely to afk and grief everyone else actually playing. Now, you might say "but you get to play 5 rounds!". Normally that would be really cool. But if 2-3 of our 5 matches are hitting join only to find out my opponent is 2 afk players + 4 henchmen having a powwow with the Guild Lord, well, 1-2 hours of everyone's day just got wasted sitting around.

3. The ladder. Let's be honest. The ladder has been dead. It has been dead since ANet made the mistake of freezing rating and then nerfing ladder rating. However - There is a huge problem with these syncers that there are a few who have bots set up to wait for matches all day long. Once the match is entering - they will purposely leave before the countdown timer is up so no match officially occurs. This happens over and over. It prevents any ladder matches from ever even occurring. No rating is gained or lost.

The point is... You guys have claimed to have Guild Wars in a state of maintenance. This is not maintenance. The kind of maintenance you guys are doing right now are what countries do to maintain their Olympic venues after their hosted games are over. It gets covered in rot and filth and eventually people stop visiting. There are a few things that could fix this issue just to give you some ideas: Remove the GvG countdown timer = no time for the syncers to leave prior to a match. Only allow guilds with 1010+ rating to enter ATs. (Prevents all the syncing tanking guilds who can't sustain a positive rating to play ATs). Ban the players/guilds performing these actions.

If none of the above problems and or solutions make sense, please let me know and I'll be more than happy to discuss these issues via phone, skype, or ts3. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 08:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

That feeling when one of the main abusers of match manipulations wants to get people to stop catching onto him rank wise 212.169.10.56 08:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

In addition to the already-said: if it's possible to adjust the code the way that the matches will still be counted as valid ones even if none of 8 players joined, there'll be no necessity in getting rid of match-entering countdown. Dmitri Fatkin (talk) 15:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to also add an automatic ladder reset 1 week after the mAT or the 1st of each month would wipe these syncing guilds out. Even if they do waste time farming rank it would be reset every month. 143.112.32.4 18:56, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

As mentioned before, your "solutions" aren't solutions. Getting rid of the syncers won't revive ladder as long as the ladder match-making restrictions remain as they are. Guilds would wait in ladder for hours and not get a match. Please actually think about how things work. Motoko is not interested in fixing ladder, he just wants to stop syncers. He's the one who said "The ladder is meaningless". So I would take any suggestions on "fixing ladder" from Motoko as suspect. If Anet is not going to actually fix the match-making stuff then forget it, Anet has already killed ladder (for guilds that actually want to play) with their PvP changes anyway, let the syncers have their fun. Targetdrone (talk) 15:39, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Your response is suspect. These "solutions" are the only "solutions" and the best "solutions". If you have an additional viable solution please provide it. The point of this discussion is not to revive the ladder. In fact a ladder revival has not been in discussion for years at this point. So before talking, "please actually think about how things work." Motoko wants to stop syncers from ruining what is left in PvP, as do the rest of the legitimate/competitive players left in this game. Match making is not the issue and has not been discussed for years. Anyone who suggests to "let syncers have their fun" should be considered suspect. 143.112.32.4 20:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The existing matchmaking system is, in fact, an issue, yet, from another perspective, it is simply insignificant in comparison to the whole Standard Ladder being inoperable, due to a lack of players and the absence of this. At the same time, it's not something which would have qualified as breaking news from the year past Guild Wars 2 launch. Dmitri Fatkin (talk) 21:43, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

1) If the point of the discussion is not to revive ladder then why even bother stopping the syncers? And why is it even in the title of this section? Oh do you mean the point of the discussion is to kill ladder completely even for the syncers? If so maybe you are that person who is trying to "ruin the game for everyone", e.g. the game is ruined and you don't want to fix it but now you want to ruin it for the syncers too. So who really is "ruining what is left in PvP"? If you are talking about AT how sure are you it's only the syncers who are fielding afk teams? Please use your brains a bit. Say you have two guilds who want an AT match, that's not enough for an AT right? So what do they do? They can give up and do something else, or they can add dummy teams. So voila there's an AT, but what happens if others decide to play too? There's a chance they face those dummy teams. So how do you propose to fix this without killing or hurting AT? Or is that the true goal of you bunch here? To kill AT off too, and not just kill ladder for the syncers?

2) "Match making is not the issue". Please, go test and find out why ladder is dead for the non-sync GvG guilds. You just need 2 guilds and 4 people/accounts, go wait in ladder till the 2 guilds match up, then see how long it takes till the 2 guilds can play vs each other again (don't do any AT with those guilds just to make sure). Then calculate how alive GvG ladder will be with the typical number of active guilds at various times (many guilds are only active at certain hours per day/week). If the "not enough guilds problem" is not going to change soon, and the match-making stuff isn't going to be changed, then ladder will stay dead even if you completely get rid of the syncers.

3) your proposed solution is stupid. How does it even ruin it for the syncers? a) Assuming syncers are only farming for rank, resetting hurts the ranks of legit guilds more since the syncers are the ones who can ladder and thus gain rank fast, the non-sync guilds hardly can ladder. AT matches = more points but look at the number of rated matches the syncers can play per day and how many the non-sync guilds play. b) If the syncers are farming for other stuff (e.g. chests), then your solution doesn't discourage them at all. You don't need much rating to get chests. Please think a bit harder before posting such stupid proposals, because judging from history there is a chance that Anet might implement them.

For example, tell me what good did the "can't resign before 5 minutes" thing achieve for GvG (or even RA)? Very soon after the 2014 changes I said that it would be even harder for non-sync GvG guilds to get real matches ( https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback_talk:Game_updates/20140925#Dishonor ). In fact even before those changes it was already known by a few others and not just me that the syncers actually helped keep ladder alive for the non-sync guilds (see 2) ). By forcing the syncers to either stop or change their methods, the fewer non-sync guilds ended up not being able to ladder (but the remaining sync guilds adapted and continued). Targetdrone (talk) 20:19, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

"You can't resign before the first 5 minutes of the match" was originally introduced as a counter-measure against lengthy queues of alts frozen on timer for the jumps into The Hall of Heroes, where they were leaving the matches on sight, which allowed them speeding up the syncing process in return. It did help to address the problem a little bit (but not entirely, since the removal of the 3rd team wasn't performed), however, I'm absolutely certain up to this day that this system shouldn't have been brought to Random Arenas, as it interferes with competitors' ability of trying their luck of obtaining desirable party formation, that is, the one with a healer. In the current situation, people are forced to keep playing matches which can hardly be won for a good point (and even if the group has managed to do so, it still has to break up due to the absence of Monk), precisely-speaking where one team contains a Monk and 3 damage dealers, and the other one consists of only damage dealers without a healer. Prior the autumn 2014 update, people simply re-entered the arena in such cases, contrary to nowadays situation, where they're obliged spending considerably more time until the desirable formation is achieved. So, to put it short - yes, the arguments within Targetdrone's 3rd point are very accurate. My excuses for a small off-topic. Dmitri Fatkin (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

You sound like a syncer Targetdrone. Sorry buddy. None of your arguments make sense. You clearly don't understand the problem right now. I am wasting my time trying to have a discussion with someone who probably has never experienced high end PvP let alone tasted competitiveness in Guild Wars. Your syncing guilds don't have a place in this game. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 06:16, 27 September 2016 (UTC) 06:15, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem http://literarydevices.net/ad-hominem/ Targetdrone (talk) 13:13, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

So... Targetdrone doesn't understand the issue being discussed -> Motoko points out this to Targetdrone -> Instead of accepting that Targetdrone is having a hard time grasping the English language Targetdrone decides to say Motoko is failing to argue when in fact Targetdrone can't even stay on subject and argue about the topic.

Let me try and make this has plain and simple for you as possible.

The problem being discussed is the effect of syncers on the current competitive scene. As everyone knows: The ladder is dead. The ladder has been dead for years. The ladder has been dead since it was frozen and rating was set at +/- 0. The ladder has been dead since ladder rank was no longer used to be a qualifier for tournaments. The ladder stayed dead with attempts by Anet to revive is via Zboxes and the guild emotes. The ladder is dead. The ladder will stay dead. No one in competitive GW PvP cares about the ladder. Do you understand that part? If you do proceed:

The problem is the effect that syncers have on the AT system. They cause ATs to be extensive and less enjoyable than they should be. If people need to sync the ladder to do whatever to get champ points - No one cares. If the rating resets every month and syncers still put in the effort to set up sync guilds every single month - No one cares. No one cares about ladder syncing. So please. Stop trying to make this an argument about something that it is not. "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." 143.112.32.4 20:36, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, the title of this section is "GvG Ladder/Rank Abuse". Not "Automated Tournament issues/abuse".

Secondly your claim that "No one cares. No one cares about ladder syncing" is false. Motoko cares (despite him saying "The ladder is meaningless" in https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Feedback_talk:Joe_Kimmes/Archive_2011-2014#GvG_Ladder_Issues_-_Syncing.2FKilling_Ladder ). After all his first item was "Those who do not play this game but merely join gvg matches against each other to either have a high ranking/rated guild or to farm champ points." and his third item mentioned "There is a huge problem with these syncers that there are a few who have bots set up to wait for matches all day long." and "It prevents any ladder matches from ever even occurring.". In short Motoko claims Anet has been dead for a long time due to Anets actions and yet complains that the syncers are a huge problem in ladder which is rather contradictory and illogical. If ladder is really long dead due to Anet's actions (and my proposals and Dmitri's proposals are pointless) then the syncers can't be hurting ladder. So Motoko has to be wrong with at least one of his claims. Targetdrone (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

So, you are a stalker who watches everything that Motoko says and references it? Unfortunately that link is not applicable to this argument. Situations changes. Circumstances change. The ladder was still trying to be revived back then. BACK THEN. Currently the ladder is not being revived and no one is trying to revive it. Sorry that you are wrong again. Please move on from the fact you are wrong on the internet about a video game. If you cannot do this, please log off for an indefinite period of time. 143.112.32.4 19:19, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

I renamed the article title. I concede it could have been worded better. But you really need to work on your argument style Targetdrone. You remind me of 10 year olds who kick and scream and argue with the wall even if they're wrong. Improve on it and your input would be more welcome and accepted. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 01:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Basically I was right and you were wrong, but you refused to admit it and changed the title instead! But at least you didn't remove/modify item 3 in your initial post, which is still about _ladder_ and not AT right? I'm really finding your move rather amusing. Thanks, it put a big smile on my face! And the 143.x person either can't understand or pretends not to understand the significance of your item 3 (it's about the _ladder_ and syncers causing problems with it, so his claim that nobody cares about ladder is disproven by your 3.) and _absurdity_ of its argument. :) Targetdrone (talk) 15:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

You must be a weird individual to have a big smile for being wrong. Its okay though, I know some people who enjoy feeling pain. Good luck with your syncing Targetdrone. Maybe one day you can move up to the big league players who actually understand what is being discussed here. 143.112.32.4 15:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Any update on this Joe? Gladiator Motoko (talk) 05:03, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

I passed this thread along internally before the discussion got messy. As usual though, I will refer you to the generic disclaimer at the top of the page; I can't give any timetables or specific promises of action at this point. - Joe Kimmes 17:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I swear you like toying with us Joe lol. I mean it is nice to know that this did get passed along. But not even an update as to no nothing is going to happen ever or we are working on something but you have to wait 12 months? :( - Support just basically told me to post on here and forums in regards to the situation to make you guys aware and that is all they could do for me. 143.112.32.4 17:28, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Quick admin jump-in

Growth works best with constructive criticism. We may not agree on solutions, we may not even agree that there's a problem, but we should have full respect for the fact that someone else sees a problem.

Additional reminder to keep the personal attacks to a minimum. It may be cliche to point out they simply weaken your own words, but it's true nonetheless. G R E E N E R 16:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Greener - I like to give suggestions some time before replying so that I don't interrupt open discussion, but it looks like things got heated in the interval.

I'll repeat for emphasis: please be polite to each other, everyone. - Joe Kimmes 17:06, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

I just figured you only check the page once every 2 months lol. It seems the above discussion really didn't go anywhere after I submitted my ideas. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 03:02, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

About giving out gold capes

Hi, so as you know not so long ago an admin account was taken over and a couple of gold capes were removed but were restored later on. However looks like anyone who asks for a gold cape can get one from CS even if they never had one before - could the guys in charge of this check before they are giving these out like candy? :P And could some of the free handouts be reverted? --DefinitelyNotHanz (talk) 19:28, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Please contact CS and provide them any information you have (guild names, etc) so that they can investigate. - Joe Kimmes 17:03, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, actually it got resolved before I could even report it. --DefinitelyNotHanz (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Observer mode broken as of 2016-10-18

Observer mode is broken. No matches appear. MAT matches are gone too. I did want to watch the MAT matches. Are there backups? Can matches be downloaded and replayed like in other games? Targetdrone (talk) 13:13, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Its been broken since 10/16. Matches aren't backed up and your only hope is that someone from the PvP community streamed them and or recorded them and commentated on them. Any patch put in the game that may or may not bring the matches back will most likely alter the match itself and give you an incorrect version of it. Gladiator Motoko (talk) 02:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Historically this has happened due to connectivity issues between our servers; I've forwarded this to the server team for investigation. For the future, please bring these issues to Customer Support and the community team; since I don't check this page every day, and occasionally take time off, they'll reach the team much faster. - Joe Kimmes 17:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Observer mode broken as of 2016-12-11

Observer mode is broken. No matches appear. Targetdrone (talk) 17:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

For the future, please bring these issues to Customer Support and the community team - he said it just above this section, this is not the place for reporting everything that goes wrong. --DefinitelyNotHanz (talk) 10:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

That the observer mode can keep breaking like that and not get resolved promptly (e.g. for days "nobody" notices to restart stuff etc) is a bug and something that the programmers should be fixing. Targetdrone (talk) 18:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

It might be better to follow what Joe said, instead of being persistent and not patient. They can check it as soon as they get to it. Note that the team is possibly checking other reports as well. Patience is a virtue. Rodan (talk) 15:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, support's advice to someone who contacted them about the issue was to try clearing his login credential cache for GW2. It certainly sounds like they know what's going on. --Lemming (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Dec 2016 MAT matches can't be observed as of 2016-12-21

Dec 2016 MAT matches are listed but can't be observed as of 2016-12-21. The MAT matches still show up in the obs list but they can't be observed (by me anyway), get stuck at the connecting stage. Obs mode works for other more recent matches. Does this happen because of changes for GW festivals e.g. Wintersday? Targetdrone (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Ignore list

Is there any chance you could increase the capacity of the ignore list to, say, 20 names, or are there some technical limitations to that? There are so many real world trading bots spamming the chat these days they literally don't fit on the iggy at the same time. It would be nice to get rid of the spam since banning them doesn't seem to be happening any time soon despite the numerous reports. Jeree95 (talk) 12:29, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

The capacity for the ignore and friend lists is outside of my domain; I will pass the request along though. It's unlikely that it can be changed however, since modifying account-level information can be very dangerous (risking corruption of data, etc). - Joe Kimmes 19:09, 3 January 2017 (UTC)