User talk:Andrew Patrick/archive 2

Additional hotkeys please

A request to the developers, please add additional hotkeys.

I cannot stress enough how the following two changes would improve hero control and game types like Hero Battles: 1) Ability to hotkey hero skills (e.g. CTRL-1 for hero 1, skill 1 or ALT-3 for hero 2, skill 3, etc.) 2) Ability to queue hero skills in the same manner as a player's skillbar 3) Ability to have a hero weapon switch

There are several other long standing omissions relating to targetting which are somewhat cumbersome to work around and hotkeys would help a great deal: 1) Target enemy party member #1, #2, etc. (more accurately, for multiple enemy teams or in PvE, it's actually: target enemy party 1, 1st member or enemy party 2, 3rd member, etc.) 2) Target ally #1's current target, ally #2's current target, (e.g. make my target whatever ally #1's target is) 3) Cycle allied spirits, cycle enemy spirits 4) Cycle allied minions, cycle enemy minions

The benefits of these additional hotkeys should be self evident, but in particular I would contend that heroes and Hero Battles specifically suffer from the poor ability to control heroes. While improved AI seems to be a recurring feature request, I believe simply allowing the player to have more precise control of their heroes circumvents the problem of continually adding to AI which can never reasonably be expected to run every conceivable build properly. Instead, give control to the player who can then create and run whatever build their creativity and skill for executing will allow.

In a large sense, I don't understand how hero controls have languished this long since the idea of sequentially executing skills is so pervasive and fundamental to the design of the game that an entire class was even designed around chaining attack skills together, let alone the numerous other examples in other classes of: apply a condition/hex/state->use another skill dependent on that condition/hex/state. Currently, clicking on hero skillbars to do this is a very hit-or-miss affair, hoping the hero doesn't start executing another skill between the time you click on the first and the second, thereby wasting energy and time or missing out on windows of opportunity like doing something which requires knockdown, or making sure a cover hex is applied immediately after the first hex, etc. There are many, many, other reasons why my first two requests (hero hotkeys, skill queueing) would be a good thing, and I hope the developers take the time to implement it.

The non-hero related hotkeys are ones which would do much to alleviate the clumsiness of very standard usage patterns like hex/blind/whatever one guy, then go back to attacking/damaging another guy. Currently, and really for the entire release of the game, you just end up spending a lot of time tabbing and CTRL-tabbing to reacquire the target you just had before you had to switch off to do something else. Having one called target doesn't address the issue completely since the target caller can't switch targets himself without losing the called target for the entire party. Using the mouse to click targets is again a clumsy task especially when there are lots of other things on the screen like minions, spirits, pets, etc. It's a game of holding down CTRL and madly trying to click on the little text names before they reshuffle over each other.

I think these additions (outside of perhaps queueing hero skills) would be relatively straightforward to implement and only require a relatively small amount of developer time. Please consider implementing them for us, ArenaNet. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:70.184.215.40 .

While I agree with most of what you said I do not believe that queueing hero skills can circumvent the flaws the AI has when it comes to using certain skills. For example the assassin AI is so horrible at chaining skills that there are basically no working builds for them. Even when it would be possible for us to queue these skills it's unreasonable to demand that the player constantly executes the combo manually while he's also controlling his own character, two other heroes and watching the map at the same time. Being able to hotkey hero skills sounds good but also makes it even easier for people to use macro's to execute a spike more easily. In my opinion they first have to solve the delay between clicking a skill and the hero using it (this can be up to 3 seconds, not exactly fun when trying to counter assassin spikes), and then fix the problems with tons of AI skills (these have never been updated at all, the only ever specific AI skill update we got was, ironically, a nerf to Death Nova). Then they have to solve the problem with being unable to select heroes who are out of range (in other words the health bar is grayed out so you can't select them, which means you're unable to tell another hero to use a skill on them). After that they can look at hero hotkeys, skill queueing and hero weapon switching but I don't think those are essential. The improvements to targeting would also be a nice addition, especially the ability to cycle between spirits. --Draikin 13:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I have an a lot easier solution. Remove HB from the game. Sorry, I know this sounds like trolling or whining, and i know that won't happen, just please don't add an HB in gw2. In my opinion, AI does not belong to pvp, no matter how well you design it, there will be always flaws, or an extremely hard to manage system that will promoted macros. That's all i wanted to state. Coran Ironclaw 20:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I asked a couple people about this and couldn't get a precise answer, but I have included it in our Community Summary to see if this may be an option. --Andrew Patrick 17:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Report System Badly Needed Again

When the Dishonour system was introduced, leeching in Fort Aspenwood had gone from around 70-90% to almost 0, people who did leech were "reported" and then received "Dishonour" and couldn't enter, when they leeched again, the penalty accumulated and thus their "ban" increased keeping them out of the arena further, which meant even with leechers, all of them spent more time on the sidelines than in the game, making them hardly noticeable, if at all.

With the removal of the report system, the leeching has returned and it has gotten far worse than before, because players are now no longer able to leave a match with 4+ leechers without a penalty. Leave two times and you get a "ban", so if you are in two teams with a combination of 4+ leechers or leavers, which IS the current norm common in Aspenwood, you will either sit there for 15-20 minutes (usually how long it takes for a Kurzick team to win as none of them ever run amber, even with no opposition) or leave and suffer the consequences. The problem is the arena is simply not enjoyable, and in fact is an incredibly frustrating experience - certainly not what you should experience from a game, with 4 or less people against a full team of 8, and the current system more than ever supports this scenario occurring. With penalties for leaving in the event of leechers, this situation has gone from bad to this arena being a place you have to avoid when there are a lot of leechers on. I know this sounds a lot like a complaint, and in many ways it is, but I post this here because I wanted to point out how essential the report system is, especially with the punishing of leaving. I have no problem with playing with a losing team, losing can still be fun. Playing 4 vs 8 every game is something I don't find enjoyable. I know the report system is under review and I think Gaile mentioned it will return, whether it be for more testing or for good, I just wanted to say how important it is for this kind of arena and the added damage contributed by leaving dishonour. Dancing Gnome 21:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it is the dumbest thing ever. So is dishonor. gfg. Readem 21:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm also really looking forward to the return of the dishonor system, in some form or other. Cloud 21:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, the leecher system is still in place, and that only the /report system is down for evaluation. - Drago 21:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Disable Aspenwood Gates from Closing While it's Guards are Inside the Gate

The suggestion is simple. The gates can be closed while a guard runs inside away from AoE or to attack a player. This prevents them from being hit by melee, harder for casters, and the bonder can easily bond the gate guard while out of spell range from people on the other side of the gate. This is essentially GG due to an exploit or cheat and should be changed. Dancing Gnome 23:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Dishonor and grouping in AB

I'd like to see the grouping in AB work the same as it does in TA and did in the beta, where you can enter with any sized group 1-4 and it builds 4 man teams out of the smaller groups. I believe the main reason this functionality was removed was because of problems with leechers and leavers, but with the introduction of dishonor perhaps it could be reinstated? Cloud 21:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know of any plans to change the party formation process in AB. There is also already a discussion about AB grouping here: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_talk:Andrew_Patrick#AB If they are looking to change AB, I will let them know about this suggestion, but at this time I have heard no such plans. --Andrew Patrick 22:40, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Two Things, the state of GvG and two warrior skills

Well having just watched this match on observe i felt compelled to talk about it and the issues it raises for Guild Battles. I was just observing a match in the Top GvG Tourney battles #50 (Clan Union) vs #151 (Err... I forgot). It was being played out on Imperial Isle and immediately this is what struck me. They were playing EXACTLY the same builds. Alright there were a few changes but EVERY primary proffession had a counterpart of the opposing team and every secondary except ONE had a counterpart (One monk was Mo/Me Hex Breaker and not Mo/E GoLE!). Both had one Shock Axe Warrior, one Rending Touch Warrior, one Gank Ranger, One E-Surge Mesmer, One B Surge Ele, One RC Monk, One Sig of Mystic Speed Mo/D flagger and One other monk who was slightly different (#151 was prot, #50 was heal), for the record #151 won. But I think you all get what i'm saying... Everyone plays meta and if you don't, you pretty much lose, so you play meta. Skills can be balanced as much as you like but there's ALWAYS the "best" build to bring and it's just boring. I'd just like to see if thats other people's concensus aswell really?

Secondly the increase in activation time of Agonizing and Critical Chop. I understand why there were increased but now it really begs the question, what is the point of these skills having an interrupt on them? If they take one second to activate you can hardly use them as a pin-point interupt. I was mainly just thinking... If you want to stop them from being used as spike skills why not reduce their additional damage as interrupt skills with 1 second activations seem pointless.137.222.211.141 01:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason balanced is popular with good teams is because those are the builds that allow the actual player skill to make the biggest difference. So if they are good it shines through! That build is what guild wars SHOULD BE! It shouldnt be 3 RaO's amd 5 Necros, or whatever gimmick you decide to look at. --ChronicinabilitY 03:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes but that effectively says it's fine to just remove around 800 skills when considering what to put into your latest team build. I can see why gimmicks are looked down on, and it's why I don't HA much, but at the end of the day the objective is to kill the Guild Lord. It doesn't say, oh and you can only play balanced while doing so or else everyone will look down on you. Part of the fun is in creating a good build. It's a shame you know everything you create is instantly inferior to the meta.137.222.211.141 10:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

So go run hexes on jade. -Auron 19:18, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The thing is, balanced is the most effective build type in most situations when the game is balanced. So, most matches when GW is well balanced, balanced will be the best build choice for a skilled guild. This becomes less true in a tournament setting where you often know your opponent and map beforehand and can thus build more for the specific situation, but it still holds true to some extent. --Edru viransu 22:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think two teams using balanced in the same match means something needs to be nerfed per se. As you said, there is variation in these builds. Using 2 or 3 monks, 2 frontliners, and a midline made up of a combination of different mid-liner classes isn't the "same build." It's just based around the same philosophy. Not to mention, not everyone is even using balanced. Whether or not that is a good thing depends on who you ask. --Andrew Patrick 22:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Gladiator Title Emote

I strongly push for the Gladiator Title Emote, but im not too sure where and who to talk to, and I was repeatedly told to talk to "Andrew". So is there any information about any proposals for this Title Emote?

I have expressed the desire for a Gladiator Title emote to the designers. I have not heard any plans to add one, but they are aware that a lot of players would appreciate one. It would very likely drive more players to the Arenas, which is always nice. --Andrew Patrick 18:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey Andrew. I have been thinking that AB ranks should have emotes too. They do salute and specific army-like rank insignia will appear, so you can taunt at enemy luxon/kurzick with your high rank, when you kill him/her. Every title has own insignia. Sounds good? Also Allegiance rank harder to rise up, of course, so you can really deserve it. ;) ~Chilos

Even more methods to 'Rank' a player, and then have swearing back? I really don't think an Alliance Battle emote would really work.

Umm last i checked AB isnt PvP... 24.141.45.72 19:12, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you kidding AB not PvP You do fight another team players vs your own player which would be :::PvP(Player vs Player).--70.156.152.137 20:48, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

AB is for people who cant fight in GvG's or HA or TA. Therfore its not PvP 24.141.45.72 23:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Dishonor for Reporting Leechers

I have now actually received the Dishonorable Hex in Fort Aspenwood for reporting people who ARE LEECHERS. Because many people don't report leechers, or perhaps don't know they are leeching because often the arena takes you away from the starting point most people won't report, even when you ask them to. This is horribly unfair to me, while I am trying to stop people who are consistent leechers for the entire existance of this arena who continue to leech because they continue to get away with it. Now not only do they get away with it but I am receiving bans for reporting them. EDIT: To clarify, if less than 1/3 of my party doesn't report them, I get two dishonour points, which punished me for the apathy of others.Dancing Gnome 10:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I guess that's a hint to stop being ULGG? -Auron 10:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

How long into the match are you waiting to mark someone as dishonorable? Are you sure they are leeching, and not just having lag or other issues? --Andrew Patrick 22:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I've waited until the timer reached halfway, which is a lot longer than lag etc. I havn't been "banned" recently though, I'm not sure if this is because other people have been reporting or because in some matches I am unable to report - so my earlier concern is less concerning now. On another note, sometimes it (the leecher box) appears as a grey box which I can't select. I assume this has something to do with dishonour points my character received from a false report (not that common imho but it happens sometimes if you lag like you said), or possibly a bug. Is this something intentional I missed or just undocumented? Dancing Gnome 13:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I have repeatedly had games where I had the same THREE leechers and I was the only one who reported them. Even after requesting others to report them I was the only one. After three games of reporting them I was banned from the arena because no-one else did it. This is a really annoying flaw in the system - not only do I have the same three leechers OVER AND OVER but when I try to use the system against them I get dishonour instead. This is ridiculous. When I asked why no-one reported them, they said "Because someone has reported them already" or they didn't reply. Some people are just lazy but I think most don't understand I get punished if they don't report also. The dishonour should be removed (From people who report with less than 1/3, players just aren't aware enough to do it and their knowledge of this system is not increasing over time). 122.104.227.192

Disable Leecher Reporting for 5 Minutes into Match

Reflecting on my previous posts maybe if it is impossible to report someone for the first five minutes of a match this would be more fair to slow loaders. I'm not sure how likely people are to "check" after 5 minutes if someone is leeching though. This would only apply to Alliance Battles and Competitive Missions, because of the fast paced nature of RA. The current system isn't so bad as is, some people get one or two reports unjustly though, not a huge impact but it does build up. Dancing Gnome 13:48, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

That does seem to make a lot of sense. I'll see if that is something we want to consider. --Andrew Patrick 20:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps make it at least 2 minutes into a match. To give players some form of time. But not too much, as 5 minutes would totally undermine the entire point of the system. Most matches in RA don't last 5 minutes. Two minutes, or even a minute and a half would be ideal, because even the worst connection will resolve after at least 2 minutes, or they'll d/c. Drago 20:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't seem necessary. Reporting people means they will be observed by admins to see if a ban is necessary, isn't that how it works? If someone is loading slow it has their name greyed out anyway and you can't report them. I don't understand the point to this at all. If someone's character is standing there not doing anything, that means they are either afk/leeching/minimized/lagging, all of which things should be very rare for any considerate player. --TimeToGetIntense 01:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

District system bug

There is a dist system bug: i get teleported in english dist after every pvp match even if i start in italian dist , it's very frustrating please fix it.Ainvar 07:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)07:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I think u can set home district. 24.141.45.72 00:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Alliance Battles

I am an officer in one of the most well known Faction guilds there is Reign Of Shadows and over the last 12 months that I have been taking part in Alliance Battles I have seen various flaws in the battles. Some of my ideas have been forgotten and some the improvements to AB that have been included were also things on my list of AB problems - they are sorted now. Something needs to be done to get AB more popular. The waiting times during the day for us in Europe can be up to 15 minutes or even longer! If a good change is made to AB, the battles will become more popular therefore waiting times will drop. In hero battles and in the Halloween Costume Brawling the morale system is very good. If something like this could be implemented into AB it would make the game much more entertaining, more people would take part giving a better atmosphere, and waiting times would drop to a more pleasing level. Thanks, FirstSunspear 14:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

68.2.190.15 20:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)Alliance Battles: For the past several weeks, I have noticed that the AB map spends considerably more time in the Kurzick area than it does in the Luxon area. To me, this is unfair. The map should be in each area an equal amount of time. For example, today the map was in Grenz then moved to Saltspray Beach then moved back into Grenz. It should have rotated to Enteran Keys. This bias seems to happen on a regular basis. I enjoy ABing in the Keys and at Kanaai Canyon on the Luxon side. But the map seems to usually favor the Kurzick areas. Any chance of making the AB map more equal? Say,rotate every 24 or 36 hours so both sides have the same amount of time on their turf. Just a thought.68.2.190.15 20:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The battlefronts move according to the battles played. If the Kurzicks win the line is pushed in the Luxon areas and vice versa. -- (gem / talk) 22:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I understand the logic of the current system: the more wins one side makes the more advantaged the map become for the opposition. This seems to be to prevent one side which is playing a lot better from rolling the other side in every match, but also lorewise because that is how the line moves in the PvE world and when you advance on a defending nation, their defenses become stronger and they are more advantaged. I wonder if this would work better if for a set time, say 30 minutes, it stays on one map and then rotates to the next as it ping pongs back and forth. This is 100% balanced as both sides have equal times on each map, of course it ignores the PvE world and the whole "defending = advantage" concept. I do support the shrines having an effect like the Costume Brawl however, it did have an interesting effect. I would be concerned about one shrine giving a huge buff to so many people instead of 5 like the Costume Brawl does though as the advantage is more intense. The best shrine to come from is the one which gives the Battlecry because it is the only tangible bonus after you leave the shrine. Dancing Gnome 06:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Report function

→ moved from Main Page/editcopy message

Hi. I have a few suggestions (mainly PvP & /report emote). Please find a way to cut the abuse off of /report. It's an automated system and so players seem to abuse it every time. Perfect example: I enter RA and we have 3 monks. I type /resign and just target a foe and hit the space bar (other team has balanced group with high dps). A monk decides to report me for leeching... But I know that I'm not leeching (because I know it's a lost cause to try out of abundant "experience")and I already have everything unlocked from Balth. by way of PvE/PvP combined anyways, so...

Also, the Dishonorable Hex forces us to stay in RA whether we like it or not and creates unwanted tension and oppression in the community. I've also seen some of my own friends give up on RAing completely and see them online alot less frequent now. I've also visited forums on guru and seen people open up new threads, flaming on that subject alot. My question: Why oppress players with this new system? Why steal the joy of RAing when we do not want to be forced to sync in TA for wins? Why now? Why after 2 years do we feel like we've been squeezed down like an ant by a giants' thumb? The thought of leaving Guild Wars has crossed my mind a whole lot (and I've been around since Prophecies after 1 month of being released).

I personally experience oppression every time that I enter RA because I fear a /report-fest and Dishonorable and wasted time dying over and over and over again with 3 monks, no monks or greivers that enter with completely futile builds. I think that if the automated "Dishonorable Hex" is reverted for a period of time, people will start to love RA once more and I assure you that it's a whole lot easier just leaving and re-rolling if any of the above scenarios are encountered. It's alot better than forced time-wastings and will probably reduce the number of /reports very significantly. I'd hate to have my love for guild wars diminish because of the current automated hex.

On that note, if ya'll do decide to remove dishonorable hex, you can also prevent other abuse by allowing players a time (after matches are over) to /report someone legitimately. What I mean is give players about 1 minute after a match over to /report somebody and then make that window of opportunity close for that exiting team. You'd have to allow /report'ing players "outside of district" for that. I hope things get better, because it affect my (as well as all gwars veteran's) thoughts on purchasing Guild Wars 2 greatly. I'm human, and I will react accordingly. I want to be able to play a game free of oppression and abuse...

I don't want to buy GW2 if it comes with similar oppressions... I want the same fun that I had for over 2 years (before Sept 27th). Thanks for reading this comment. These words come purely from the heart! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:76.123.103.67 .

I agree, the report function should only give 1 dishonorable point for each report, and players should be limited to awarding 10 dishonor points per battle. The problem is that the dishonor/report system treats everyone equally, and 90% of "everyone" on Guild Wars appears to be clueless idiots "Monk attacking? Monks never attack! Monksy only heal! REPORT!!11!1!". Basically the reporting system is uncontrolled oppression of whatever is unpopular.... if people don't like you, they will just all report you and say goodbye to your rewards. The only solution to this problem is to get rid of the team aspect of Guild Wars entirely. Make it solo based with no chance of teaming with other players. However this would not diminish it's MMO aspect as people could still fight each other in PvP. Team dependence is a big problem for several reasons:It makes griefing/leeching/leaving effective(1 man short = disadvantage), it causes elitism, is slow and inefficient (can you say "Mesmer LFG" for 30 minutes?), and causes stress (because if you don't do "well enough", you will get kicked out). IMO, Guild Wars would have been much better offline.

That would be great... other than the fact that Guild Wars is not an offline game. Perhaps a slightly less radical solution might be considered first ;) Ale_Jrb (talk) 21:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Introduction of New Maps to TA and not RA

Why are they not added to RA? I play in RA sometimes but almost never in TA and wouldn't mind these arenas added there as well - it worked really well at the costume brawl - split tactics allowed for a lot more creative game play than the standard spam and kill. Also I wanted to enquire about the Deldrimor Arena. I don't believe it is in the RA rotation at the moment and wanted to know why and if it could be added? Dancing Gnome 06:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The maps have been added to RA. In my opinion this new maps are too big for Arenas. I had the chance to try them yesterday and from the tradicional "Kill-Kill" (which i like), every time we played HB maps, people seemed more worry with capping. That takes all the fun from this place. So, overall smaller maps and without capping are more fitting for Arenas. But I liked the add of new maps. New Stuff = New fun. (I'll keep dreaming with the day that glad titles will have emotes. :) - Kiji 14:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

We are going to be gathering feedback on these maps, and we will make changes if we feel they are necessary. The more detailed your feedback the better! :) --Andrew Patrick 19:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The only change I want to see is to have the maps removed. If you want to make changes to them, listen to what the HvH community has been complaining about for months, update the maps in Hero Battles instead and only then consider adding them to TA again. I have no idea what Anet is trying to achieve by doing this, other than making things complicated since now they have to work on fixing the maps not only for Hero Battles but for Team Arena as well. Since Anet has failed to balance the maps for HB even though they have been around for more than a year, I don't see how they're suddenly going to solve all the problems in a single week. --Draikin 21:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm gonna try to sound as positive as possible...unfortunately I don't think I can...I, and like many other people, hate HB and/or AB and the whole point of capture points so I tend to avoid HB and AB cause it's...for lack of a better word, retarded. Running around for 10 minutes is retarded and not fun; it's why I choose to RA and not HB or any capture point crap. I used to love HB, I love making up team builds but then the spirit campers ruined my fun and we have the current "run-around-like-retards" HB objective. So for a while now, all I've been doing is RA because right now HA is even more pathetic than this update and I just quit on high level PvP because I'm always busy. So I play casually in RA but now, I have no other way of playing PvP because my only way of having fun in GW just disappointed me. If I seriously wanted to run around like a headless chicken I'd go to AB or HB...but I don't...and seriously, everytime I go to an RA match with an HB objective map, I leave. If I get the dishonorable, I log off. So yeah, that's my rant. "Oh well", right? Who cares about the vocal minority anyways? And yeah, it seems like a shallow reason to quit GW, but RA was the only way for me to have fun, why play a game when it's not fun? So I'm just waiting for the reverting of the update or I'm just back to something else to pass my time. --67.184.146.234 00:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I fail at using wiki, but I'd like to point out this thread http://www.teamquitter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3415&start=0 for a different point of view, and I hope you pass that feedback along as well as all the negative stuff on guru etc.

I thought the shrine capping was fun in the Costume Brawl and there is a place for them with small teams (not like AB or HB). But I agree: I go to RA for the quick straightforward battles that force you to confront your opponent. — Cameronl (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, its nice to have a change of maps but, for me the Hero Battle maps although slightly fun (although i think they will get old quickly) just took to much time in comparison to other RA matches, i love Quick Fast Fun, But Thankyou for trying to keep the Arenas Fresh and exciting :D Crazy 01:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I've calmed down, so maybe I can give a more positive feedback this time. :P When I first wrote that thing I was steamed up because I really couldn't stand RA...I still can't :P However that same day, my guildies and I played in TA and all I have to say is that was the most fun thing I've done in a while. With an organized team and vent, HB in TA is really REALLY fun, I really couldn't believe how much fun I had with that and I had a change of heart for the HB maps. I still can't stand HB in RA however, it's long and boring with people you don't know and builds that are just...ugh...I know the update notes didn't say RA had the maps and I hope that it's just a bug that it's in RA. In my opinion it'd be best to keep the HB maps in TA only but remove it from RA. It's just terrible in RA. --67.184.146.234 16:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I love them! In costume brawl I think people found them easier to tolerate because that was the entire arena, and RA was separate so people who didn't want to do it and wanted to kill had RA to go to. Variety is nice and these arenas are fun because you have more of a chance to solo and cap than you do solo in normal kill battles. Instead of just kill, I can cap and run away and pick off stragglers; it's a little more strategic than your standard kill fest. I hate hero battles because controlling hero AI is REALLY annoying and like many people said, shadowstepping is completely broken there. The really big ones suck A LOT though. You spend more time running than you do anything else. I don't even know how people play them in HB with all the walls and crap. Dancing Gnome 07:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I think the biggest problem with these maps is you have to run soo much which is completely out of sync with the rest of RA/TA. In the costume brawl everyone had a running skill so it was ok. Another problem, which is basically the first one, is the obstacles. The whole place is one giant nightmare to navigate, especially if you aren't familiar with them. In HB I'm pretty sure the meta is Assassin so players take advantage of the nightmarish bridges and valleys etc but in RA all it does is lead to painful disorganised splits where most people can't get to where they were going because they went the wrong path and spent 5 mins running around in circles trying to find their way up/down/over/inside/through the bloody obstacles. Dancing Gnome 09:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do not for the love of god put these maps in. If you wanted to add or change RA or even TA, ask first ask the pvp community before and get some feedback. Many people from TA guilds that I know absolutly hate this, and not that at all it just influces more people to run gimmick builds(SP sins, pack hunters, recall monks). I do not know why on earth that you guys keep on insisting to destroy PvP.

I'm sorry if this isn't the right place for this, but I just wanted to give some feedback on the addition of HB maps to RA and TA. I personally don't think that these arenas are the place for maps demanding such strategy and cohesiveness, especially RA. Most other players, (those I've talked to ingame,) don't like it either. RA and TA were/are a place for straight up PvP competition, and the HB maps detract from that feel. It also makes it difficult to test out new builds, as anything without running skills or complete self-reliability is doomed. Once again, I'm sorry if this isn't the correct place, I just wanted to share my opinion. Thanks. Pianoman4590 21:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC) pianoman4590

It really does seem different with the maps coming in after the fun we've had during the Halloween celebration, but for the most part it isn't working on the same level that we're used to for RA and TA. I know others would like to see these removed, but they have their place and rather then put them in hero battles, why not create a new area that will have teams focus on territory? Also I think it would be a good idea in expanding the number of players from 4 to possibly 6 or 8. -Headlesshobbs-

I find that the HB maps add a level of complexity and team work that I enjoy in TA but in RA with no voice communication it takes away from the fun. You can't effectively work out a strategy on these maps in such sort time. I find that they fit in nicely in TA and force teams to come up with better team builds to be able to fight effectively on these maps. The normal spike teams just don't get it done. This allows for more fun for those of us who choose not to play gimmicked builds. I hope ANet removes these from RA and keeps them in TA. Xitium 17:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Andrew I, along with many others think HB maps should be removed from RA/TA. I have noticed the leavers have increased 20 Fold when these maps pop up (my figue is an understatement) If Anet is not going listen to the community and keep the maps regardless here is what i propose.

Limit the maps to 8min. Make the points required to win a match 10 instead of 20

This will make it a quick match instead of a bore. --58.107.47.95 05:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I like the new maps. However 58.107.47.95 is right about the timing: Beating a very bad team simply takes too long. Introduce a victory conditions like "win by holding all shrines for 60 seconds" or maybe "win by having a 10 point lead" to make matches shorter. --Xeeron 10:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Do not like these maps, for RA. They make sense for TA, but in RA, they encourage less experienced players to play badly. They're slow, and in RA, trying to get a given team to work as a 4 man team is hard enough without people running off to capture various shrines. Craw 20:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that these maps would be fine for TA, since you have your group ahead of time and could at least explain it first and confirm that people have a clue. With RA, you'll end up with people who have absolutely no clue and continue insisting that it's an elimination match. People will learn, eventually, so I guess that it wouldn't hurt to leave it in. I suppose that having a PvP primer article on it again might be worthwhile, though many don't seem to know about the GW website either (as seen with events and updates). ~ | Pae - Talk | 22:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Improved Targeting

Hello Andrew, I've kinda kept this to myself for a while, untill recently when I asked a bunch of of guildies about it. The response was over-whelming in favor of what my suggestion was, so here goes. I love gw pvp, I think it is so balanced and much better then any other mmog. The one problem I have with it is targeting enemies sometimes. It's not a problem in ta/ra. But once you get to gvg or ha it can be a problem. With 50 spirits and 10 pets 16 players, and many other distractions it can be hard to find the person you want at the right time. My suggestion is to make a way to target enemy players faster. I know some people like using the numbers 1-8 for their skills, so bere with me on my example. But lets say, we have an option on changing the numbers 1-8 to co-incide with the enemy player numbers. So if you wanted to target player #7, you could just hit 7 on your keyboard and you would target them. Or if you wanted to target enemy player #3, you just hit 3 on your keyboard and WHAM! there he is. I know there is a way to kinda do this: I.E. I call a target, someone else calls a target, and if I want my target back I click on the T next to my name. However, this only lasts about 30 seconds it seems, and after that the target I called disappears for some reason, and I have to re-call the target I want. Now I have already heard from guildies that this would be a problem in HA where you have teams of 8vs8vs8. However what if we used the same numbers, and say if you hit #5 one time, you would get the blue enemy labeled 5, and if you hit the #5 twice, you would get the yellow enemy 5. And be able to switch back and forth between colors by just hitting the number over and over. Now I know this is a problem with AB, I haven't figured out a suggestion for that yet, but maybe someone else could help? Or maybe this targeting could be disabled for AB? I just feel this would help counter many of the SWAY builds that just work for all the wrong reasons (I.E. targeting) and just the annoying fact of every player hits tab 500 times each match. I know this will easily improve newbish spikes, and easily improve mez's or blidnbots ability to find their target, so will this ruin the game? I personally dont think so. It really doesnt change anything already in the game now, that a "really determined player" (I.E. everyone in my guild) already deals with by the targeting system (letter T) next to your name that I already mentioned above, but my opinion is only one. I personally wouldnt mind if everyone could do this, b/c it would save us just an annoying issue we deal with grudeingly. How do you feel about this Andrew? I know you monk alot, as do I (actually its my core position), so us of all people might be against this. But I just feel this kind of targeting really should have been somewhere in the game already.

I kind of like your idea.--58.107.47.95 01:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't really say I like this, simply because it makes the game more mindless. (Aiiane - talk - contribs) 02:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The difficulty of targeting enemy players when your screen is full of Pets, Minions and Spirits is a big reason Oliasway and spiritway worked for so long. A "Target next/previous enemy player" hotkey would be great. --Tankity Tank 21:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The last time I asked, there were no plans to add or change the hotkey options. I can see the value in your suggestion, and it is one that has been brought up in the past, but as Aiiane said, it could also reduce the fun-factor. Part of the challenge of playing, for example, Mesmer is being able to switch through targets quickly and efficiently to shut down more than one player at once. If all players had to do was press a button, place hexes, press the next button, wash and repeat that position could go from challenging to just tedious. When I play those types of positions, I usually just use my mouse to manually click on the target I need rather than cycling, but I suppose that could just be a matter of personal preference. --Andrew Patrick 21:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Out of interest, if your core position is monk, does it affect you that much what keys you press to target the enemy? :P Ale_Jrb (talk) 23:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

LOL good question. The reason is quite stupid, but i'll tell you. As I mentioned above everyone in my guild uses the "T" next to your name to hold a target that you can switch back to really quick. So when we are gvging or HAing I have to listen to the stupid PING sound about 3000 times each match, since everyone has to keep calling their own target every 20 seconds or so. It has just gotten to me after so many years. Anyway back to the subject, I do understand what you are all saying about taking the challenge away. I suppose you're right. I do kinda like Tankity's idea about having a way to just scroll through enemy players instead of all enemies. Its kind of like a compromise. Just one more question Andrew, is there anyway to convince you to keep the "T" marker i keep talking about to stay there and not disappear after 30 seconds? I dont think it would be hard to implement with the coding. Pressing T on your keyboard would still target the most recent thing called. And clicking on the "T" next to your name would still bring you back to the last target you specificlly called, but it just wouldnt go away after 30 seconds.

If the user interface being difficult for a player is the way you add "skill" or "challenge" or gameplayer being less "mindless" to the game then you are doing something wrong. The suggestion was good, skill isn't being able to work around a difficult interface, that's stupid logic. 58.110.141.210 14:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

So if the user interface in a first person shooter doesn't automatically target your enemy's head for an insta-kill, they are doing something wrong? Target cycling is a lot like aiming in that sort of game IMO, and I personally feel that, yes, making it that much easier would lower the fun-factor or many professions. That's my personal opinion though, and you are free to disagree. --Andrew Patrick 22:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure everyone is free to their opinion. I would think the head shot example is to emulate the real world skill of targeting strategic locations. It doesn't make much sense for someone who can physically see someone and wants to taget them but they can't because of a see of minions, that seems pretty different from first person shooters. GW isn't a first person shooter, I personally would like GW 2 to have a better targeting system, especially for issues like minions or spirits which don't use skill to beat the opponent, but take advantage of difficult targeting interface, which was likely not the intent behind them. 58.110.137.152 16:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how the targeting system will differ in GW2, but I do know more enemy selection keys are a common request, and the designers are aware of that as well. And for the record, I do feel it would be harder to hit a single target surrounded by dozens of other enemies swarming around him. Unless you have a grenade! :) --Andrew Patrick 18:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

In case it was being considered, please not future scifi tech grenades in GW2 :p. Anon 14:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

In your shooter analogy, you might miss on your first few shots, but not on 5-10 due to the movement of the enemies - like what usually happens in GW. I agree that a single button click function would make it too easy though. What about adding either a checkbox in the options menu or a hotkey to hold down that will make tab skip minions/pets/spirits. It would aid both PvE and PvP, since those type of things usually aren't the main target in either. It would still take a certain amount of skill, but not to the point that the game's skill is based on the difficulty of the UI. (Whoops, forgot to sign) --Supertrek32 07:00, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I like that idea Supertrek. Also a way to filter a single team (like red team or blue team) in the even of a multiplayer HA map. With lots of people running around it makes targeting difficult - especially with both teams packing spirits/pets/minions. Expanding on the "T" for target idea that is alrady in game, It would also be very useful to have a Self target that you can ping, then switch back to when you need to with the click of a hotkey. "T" for party target, "Y" for Personal target. And maybe even have an icon indicating whether your personal target is currently using a skill or not. That extra icon may make interupting a little too easy. but then so does the Target skill warmup indicator. (Generic 09:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)).

Hold ctrl, and click on names, or an idea would be prioritze targets. Players before spirits b4 pets 24.141.45.72 00:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

HB maps in RA and TA

Hey, I just wanted to give you some feedback on the new HB maps in RA and TA. Personally, I despise these maps in RA. They require a level of strategy that just isn't there in a randomly assembled team of 4 people. Also, these maps render many builds obselete, detracting from the overall variety of PvP. However, I think they could be very entertaining if made into their own arena, as long as some tweaks are made so the same generic 2 R/P, 1 A, 1 Mo isn't the only viable team build.

So overall, I think the HB maps in a seperate TA setting could add something to the game. However, they should be taken out of RA and the original TA, in order to ensure some variety for those of us who enjoy straight up PvP. Thanks! Pianoman4590 01:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I on the other hand really liked them. KILL THE OTHER TEAM gets boring after a while, this keeps it fresh and actually rewards positioning instead of blindly killing. Please, keep those maps. Nicky Silverstar 15:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

There is another discussion on this topic a bit higher on the page. I'm waiting to hear word from the designers on what their verdict is on these maps, but rest assured they we are all closely monitoring the feedback and in-game data regarding RA and TA with this change in place. --Andrew Patrick 18:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

New At Formats

Hey, I was just listening to an old weapon of choice episode in which Izzy was answering questions about the game. One of the questions was whether you could limit the number of classes in an 8 person build to 3 max. In Izzy's response he mentioned the possibility of new formats given the new AT system once it got going. Well, the AT system has been out for a long time now and we haven't seen any new formats, are there any plans for this in the future. Though the class cap seems less pressing now other ideas like limited formats might be fun ( proph/core/nightfall/factions skills only for example). Any thoughts on this for the future?

I will bring it up next time we are discussing the ATS. I'm not sure if any changes or additions are planned, but I can follow up on that. --Andrew Patrick 18:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Another Use for Balthazar Faction

I figure the reason we can't trade it for armour/weapon skins for PvP chars is because you guys want a "strong incentive" for us to play in the tournaments but a lot of people don't want to. Even people who do have large numbers of Tournament Tokens coming out of their ears because they have unlocked everything and Balth faction accumulates quickly. I would love to see some kind of faction sink added to the game which has some kind of use. Maybe a trader who gives ale for 5,000 balthazar faction? This would give players something to trade their faction for when they have completed everything, atm it sits on our accounts doing nothing but fill up storage with tokens we dont use. This also preserves the incentive to play in tournaments for the armour, but deals with the problem of a balth faction sink. 58.110.137.152 16:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

This has come up a great deal, recently, in various areas of community discussion. It is not hard to unlock everything, especially for those who mix PvP play with a variety of PvE characters. After that, the PvP reward system really falls short. A great many people (myself included) cannot participate in ATS, and others have no interest in either the system or the gameplay types. Halfway through writing this response, I went to cite some sources, but it seems Gaile has archived it with promises to mention the issue. I respond here because in the end, it most likely falls under Andrew Patrick's domain in terms of if, how and what is implemented.

So, in that interest, I'd like to clarify my general interests/priorities. The first thing I'd like to see is linking casual play with the tournament reward points, giving more casual players the ability to work towards a long term goal. Beyond that, a sink for balthazar faction in terms of ale, red bean cakes, fireworks, DP removal items, lockpicks and/or flames of balthazar would be terific. Craw 17:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

The designers are aware that players would like more uses for Balthazar Faction. This is a topic that frequently is brought up, but I don't have any new information to share at this time. That may change soon though, you never know... --Andrew Patrick 18:51, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have information now. :D The designers are indeed working on a new use for Balthazar Faction, but we do not have an ETA at this time. We should have more information in the near future. --Andrew Patrick 20:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

YES!! please. -- Silverleaf

How about an option to convert Balthazar faction to Luxon/Kurzick faction? Robert Batchelor 19:20, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

its the Chest that was added and removed a few days ago in the isle of the nameless? --Cursed Angel 00:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Related to this is LB/SS points I have maxed both of them but they still continue to go up. Would be good to be able to trade points for something like salvage kits etc.Like 5k ss for a sup salvage kit or lockpick.Or maybe could trade for gems or a faction exchange where people could sell any faction like a foreign exchange. Thats maybe the hardest to implement but something to use the excess faction would be useful.--Dan Mocha 12:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

ATS: Team Arena's

I just don't get it... why is there no ATS for TeamArena's? Personally, I suck at HeroBattles, I copy the top players builds and all... but I still fail when it comes to tactics! I just cant control 4 people at once! Micro-managing is not my thing.

GvG, yea there fun... but its way too time consuming and discriminating. If your guild has a rating of lets say 1004 and your against a guild with the rating of 1279 (true story) what ended up happening was a huge flame fest and tons of discrimination by the opposing team saying "COMON NOOBS JUST RESIGN!!! U SUCK!!!!!" and the whole thing was a wait-out and about 500 /ranks to our team while we shivvered in our base and waited until VoD where we could possibbly have a slight small bit of chance at maybe just maybe getting their GL down.

I really think teamarena would be great, you and three friends... it'd all be great!

This is a suggestion that has come up in the past, but I have not heard any plans to expand the ATS to include Team Arenas. And thus far, both formats that are included in the ATS have ladders and rankings associated with them, so adding the ATS to Team Arenas could potentially put you in the same situation as in GvG. But I would like to mention that you shouldn't dismiss your chances of victory just because of a teams rank. My guild is constantly achieving "upset victories" against guilds much higher ranked than we are, so don't let your opponents rank discourage you from pwning them. --Andrew Patrick 18:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

hmmm, hope i did this right. just registered on the wiki, anyway the real reason i want the ATS is for reward points for armor and such. i'd love to be able to get it, so far ive only gotten a couple from gvg mostly from Byes and Forfeits (lol).

You should check out the Xunlai Tournament House if you're after reward points. You can make predictions for the monthly tournaments and if you guess correctly, you receive reward points as a prize. --Andrew Patrick 22:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

While I like the Tournament House and how it tries to encourage people to get more involved in PvP it is not unreasonable for someone who is not competing in the tournaments to have no clue about who to "predict" to win. This still effectively limits the tournament rewards to the small few PvP elite who compete and get the tokens, or those who are familiar or lucky and predict well. The rest of us have to wait 30 days to take another blind stab in the dark. Anon 14:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Well don't prizes and rewards lose their value if they don't take work to earn them? Anyone can watch observer mode to familiarize themselves with the competing teams. Anyone can practice up in GvG and be on one of those competing teams, for that matter. I know a lot of people who have never GvGed before who rack up a lot of points using the Tournament House. It really isn't limited to a PvP elite, it's limited to the people who complete the prerequisites for the reward, and anyone can make the choice to do that. It takes research and some work, which is why it rewards those who choose to do it. :) And I can also understand why Tournament Reward Points would be limited to those who are, indeed, using the tournament system in some way be it competing or predicting the outcome. In that regard, it may always seem limited to PvP players to you, but then again, it is a PvP reward. --Andrew Patrick 19:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

If you watch observer mode, which isn't even playing the game, enough to learn the good teams or you pvp and become a good team, you aren't really a casual player anymore, your moving into the indoctrinated pvp crowd. PvP isn't limited to tournaments, GvG, HA or HB, there are the CM, AB and RA & TA. All of those are more friendly to a truly casual PvP style, many GvGers complain getting a group together takes a long time. HA is one of the most exclusive arenas in the game, if you don't have a rank that is. Tournaments also require you to be available at certain times, again not casual. I'm not saying make them free, but there are other ways to earn them, like Balth faction, which we already have and need a sink for. Tournament rewards aren't limited to PvP players, I PvP a lot, just not in organised guilds or tournaments and so I don't get tournament rewards. 58.110.136.235 19:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

It can also be luck or you can ask others their opinion. I got about 100 reward points through lucky guesses, and I pvp very little. I think that pvp would be more enjoyable if everyone didn't flame everyone else. Pvp is where i have the least fun in the game, because people constantly insult others. So in pvp I tend to turn off all the chats except maybe team chat and turn my headphones way down so I can hear vent just enough for targets and instructions. Pvp would be more enjoyable and desirable to me and many of my friends if people had some sort of good sportsmanship. Anyway my point was that it is not very difficult to look at the current guild standings and guess the tournament results.

People insulting other people is not something that is bound to happen because you're doing GW PvP. It's the interwebs. Live with it or d/c. But, other than that, AT's for Team Arenas is a nice idea yes. BlazeRick 14:03, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

zZz mATs

See my user page. --Readem 08:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC) wow that was the most retarded comment ever Get rid of these trash daily tournaments, they're worthless. revert back to the old points/rating system, wipe the ladder, and re-introduce the seasons. You say many top guilds would quit if this were to happen, but let me tell you, it sure is fun creating a new guild that wants to be competitive, only to find we need to grind 4,000,000 rating just to hit top 100. The old Guild Wars was much better than this crap.

hb capway

godammit, git rid of fucking capway in HB. It is boring shit and a waste of time. You run around doing nuthing for 10 minutes to win or lose by like 10-9 or 11-8 or some dumb shit like that. Its godamn gay. Lose shadow-steps in HB (SP, SHADOW MELD (yes CAPS lock)) and do something about this fucking capway, boring shit. 24.141.45.72 04:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that kind of post is going to make any difference. Then again, posts with constructive criticism on the problems in HB haven't made any difference either... --Draikin 20:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Gaile's Evil Hamster

Kyra -- If I didn't have at least one Ranger, Gaile would sick her evil hamster on me. Do you mean to imply Guildia II is an evil Hamster? What happened to Guildia I? or II? Did they break free? Should we be afraid? Anon

we should be very afraid, duck and cover lol --Cursed Angel 14:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I must say, that hamster is the devil... --Andrew Patrick 21:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

is it "Gaile would stick her evil"? 68.151.27.108 01:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Jade Quarry - Still Empty

What if JQ had unique rewards, like maybe if you win x matches there you get access to a Jade Weapons trader (or amber if you are Kurzick). The trader would sell blue max inscribable... (or maybe 15^50 seeing as no inscriptions in factions) Category:Jade weapons to people who had won "x" matches there. The counter would reset after a purchase was made. Anon

Well I had another though, many of the suggestions made to Gaile involve the need for an artist etc and this idea would probably involve some programming as it is. Maybe if winning would give you one jade token. This jade token could use the same icon as a green version of something else. There could be a collector which takes 5 jade/amber tokens for a blue Jade/Amber weapon, with either 15^50 like other weapons, or an inscribable weapon which already has 15^50 in it like the destroyer weapons. Anon

I am asking about improved rewards for competitive missions in this week's community summary. I don't know if there will be anything new to share, but I am looking into it. :) --Andrew Patrick 21:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Jade and Stone/Petrified/Amber Wine would be cool! Bottled in a rice wine contiainer with a slightly redone graphic to make it look different. It can be assigned to the victorious team, kinda like the chest which gives dwarven ale. Sometimes you get Jade Wine, sometimes you get Aged Jade Wine. It would be the coolest PvP arena - everyone would be drunk! 122.104.228.3 07:51, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Jade Quarry is empty because Jade Quarry is still boring. It would be like CSpan offering all its viewers a hundred dollars if they just watch 12 straight hours of their programming. Sure, a lot of people want that $100, but it's still not worth watching for entertainment. (Not unless you really enjoy politics, which I do from time to time, but Jade Quarry has no redeeming qualities, unlike CSpan.) --Reklaw 15:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it sounds fun, but for most of us, we can't even try it because of low population. I'd say increase the faction gain (Balt & Lux/Kurz) until people flock back. Keep the faction so that people populate that about equally as FA. Most do FA because it's the fastest faction farm anyway, regardless of fun factor, so that'll tip them over. And have a JQ weekend to start it off on the right foot. -- Alaris 16:59, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I enjoy JQ much much more than fort aspenwood, for the most part because it gives both teams the same opportunity. it's not attack attack attack! or defend defend defend! constantly. it's a mix of capping, attacking, and defending. Over all it's much more challenging than simply bonding a gate at aspenwood and waiting the timer out. --Lou-Saydus 23:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Exploit/Griefing in Arenas

I, and I'm sure others, have been reluctant to post this, because it's bound to catch on if people are made aware of it. People are playing matches in RA, then after a match is concluded, they leave at the last possible second. The result is that their team starts the next round without them - or anyone to fill the spot. The person who left will appear on the party list, grayed out, and (for obvious reasons) won't ever load. You can't report them for anything because they're not on your team. Craw 16:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

/report (name goes here) imo. --71.229.204.25 05:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Tolkano Bug

After last night's update, you can no longer purchase PvP skins from Tolkano via reward points. I'm not sure if this is the right place to put this so sorry if it's in the wrong page. 67.184.146.234 21:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Gaile has been made aware of this and said the fix is coming soon, if not already. 122.104.228.3 06:55, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Reward points proposal

I have an idea for reward points that i think could help the player that doesn't HB or GvG. How about an item that gives you reward points is added to the HoH chest or Zaishen Chest, so that people don't have to always do hardcore GvG or HB to get the PvP rewards. If the item is added, you could always increase the reward point requirement for item, or make the item rarely drop, just something to give players a chance of getting 'free' reward points. I know this idea sounds silly, but just think about it please =]--Insane Maestro 22:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Guees ya ignored this =/ oh well.--Insane Maestro 20:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Well that sounds good, but most people play GvG and HB to get away from the 'free' rewards... 68.151.27.108 01:53, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Healing Breeze

Is awful. Hi Frosty. :D Drago 05:43, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Dude, it's Mending X3 for 15 seconds. How 1337 is that? -Andrew Patrick 18:40, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

<3 Frosty. but don't get me started about that skill. Have you heard about the echo mending joke? :p (Generic 07:42, 1 January 2008 (UTC))

5 Tokens for 1 Key

It's so obviously a "wtf, of course!" moment that I'd like to hear the twisted reason that a single option was too much effort to add to Tolkano.72.145.141.215 00:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't be added. In my opinion that would be unfair. Coran Ironclaw 04:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

How exactly would it be unfair? --ChronicinabilitY 05:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Because there are tons of tokens already in game, some people kept them, but some didn't because there was no point in kept them. No new use was ever promised for tokens. I say that even when i was one who kept them. Coran Ironclaw 06:49, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

How exactly would it be unfair? --Lou-Saydus 18:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Izzy says there are no plans to let you use tokens for keys. I know it may be a disappointment if you spent your faction on tokens and you wish you had saved it for keys, but that is not the intended use of tournament tokens. --Andrew Patrick 18:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

The fact that it wasnt the intended use for tokens isn't really the point. The point is that people bought tokens as they were the only possible way to 'save' their faction. It wouldn't be unfair because no-body would be getting keys for free, as effectively 5 tokens = 5k faction. For that matter make it 10 tokens per key if you have to, just something to do with all these tokens everyone saved! I understand what tokens were and are intended for, it's just what they became was so much more than just a way to enter tournaments, they basically became stored faction. --ChronicinabilitY 04:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

And using tokens to store additional faction was not, and is not the intended use of them. ;) I can relate to you guys. I spent all my faction on tokens too. I wish I hadn't, but I also wish I hadn't bought a ton of movies on DVD now that Blueray came out haha. Hindsight is 20-20, but you bought something that was available at the time and just because something you like better comes out later doesn't mean a "trade in" feature is necessary. I did ask about it, but the designers told me they had no plans to allow tokens to be traded for keys. --Andrew Patrick 19:34, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm ok fair enough point....but your comparison has a huge flaw....there isnt a limit to how much money you can keep. so if you hadn't bought your dvd's you would still have the money. None of us WANTED to buy the tokens, it was forced upon us because it was either buy the tokens, or lose faction. I'm not trying to argue to make you change your mind, because i can see thats getting nowhere and i dont like to argue. I'm simply stating the facts so you can see them. I guarantee if there was no faction cap that there wouldn't be people with stacks of tokens in storage. You say you wish you'd rather saved it than spent it on tokens....but the fact is there was no such way to 'save it' --ChronicinabilitY 01:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, fair enough, you pwnt my comparison haha. But the fact remains that there is a limit on faction for a reason, so the designers do not want people working around that with tokens. That's at least what I gathered from their response when I asked about it. --Andrew Patrick 02:38, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Making pvp easier to access

Hey Andrew. I'm primarily a pve player. I'm in a pve guild and we rarely ever pvp at all but there's still plenty of members that enjoy it. One type that some of us like very much is GvG. But, it's very hard to start a GvG in just about every non-pvp guild. It's always a hassle to start because it's not always easy finding enough people to join, and even then there's still the required officers/guild leader that need to be present, making it too much to be worth it sometimes....again, this is describing many pve guilds. I've encountered this problem many times, in many guilds. What I was hoping anet would someday do was making certain PvP types easier to access. I've met tons of pve players that have interest in things like GvG/HA, but as mentioned it's not always easy starting one. AB became extremely popular among pve'ers because it's something everyone can access, and start within seconds - No hassle, no pressure, no risk or ratings to worry about. GvG is an extremely fun gametype to many....basic 8v8 that involves heavy stragety...i think it'd be very interesting if there was some area where everyone can access and join within seconds much like AB. Perhaps an RA/TA'ish setup where players can choose whether to click and wait to enter, or form your own team, while still leaving an option for experienced gvg'ers to form up normally and join from their guild hall. It'd be nice if an RA/TA type system was adding to all pvp (AB, Aspenwood, HA, etc), but specifically GvG because the requirements to start one can be tedious depending on the type of guild you're in. P A R A S I T I C 04:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The random nature of party selection you seem to be suggesting would pose serious issues in a GvG environment. GvG builds are very specialized, and synergy between all the members on the team is necessary to be competitive. Throwing randomly formed teams against guilds would likely end up being a slaughter, potentially causing serious issues on the ladder. After all, these random teams could not rightly appear on the guild ladder since they would not be actual guilds, but their loss (or win) would be another teams (potentially an actual guilds) win (or loss). So while these random teams would have no rating, they would impact the rating of the guilds competing which would open up a serious can of worms.

I know a lot of people who do pug GvG's. A lot of guilds go to the Great Temple of Balthazar when they are short people and need a guest. I know I have guested for guilds that way in the past. But an actual function to make random teams for GvG has too many flaws. You could not have rating, your teams would not be balanced, you would have no voice com, GvG matches last up to 20 min and people quitting or going AFK would be a serious issue, what guild hall would you have, etc etc. I just don't think the GvG format is set up in a way that would accommodate random teams.

What I meant was creating another area where anyone can form up a GvG match without having any effect on ratings/ladder/etc, much like AB/CM matches that have no effect on anything besides the border on the map (but that's hardly anything important). While there is AB and CM's, those are abit different. AB is more like hero battles because of the shrines....you can almost get away with avoinding every fight but still manage to win by using some mindless pve'ish fire build, because of how bad npc's bunch up at shrines. I find CM's abit more interesting because the goals are more specific. Players in Fort aspenwood can fill different roles on the team such as snaring amber runners, defending the mines/base/turtle, healing key npcs, etc. But even FA is similar to AB, where aoe-heavy builds can often be the game winners (especially on the luxon side), although im sure some people enjoy that. When the gametype is more about focusing on npcs that are easily killed by aoe-heavy builds, it feels less like true pvp. Can't say much about Jade quarry since it's dead half the time...the only times I've entered were just to help people map. I think part of the reason AB/Aspenwood became popular is because they're quick to join, and when the match ends you can go for another round within seconds without having to worry about taking a while to find more people. P A R A S I T I C 23:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Now, access to PvP is something that we are working on improving for Guild Wars 2. The "World PvP" is planned to be a casual format where you can join with friends, or by yourself. And in GW1, there is already RA, TA, CM, and AB for people who cannot form complete GvG teams. If GvG is what you're after, though, I would suggest you check out GToB to either get guests so you can form a full team, or join another team as a guest. Also, joining a PvX guild or alliance would better your chances of fielding 8 players.

--Andrew Patrick 22:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)