User talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Guild Wars 2 suggestions/March 2008 Page 1

Archives

Guild Wars 2 Suggestions Armor Character Communication Game Mechanics Guilds Interface Items Professions PvE PvP Races Skills Story Weapons World Ideas Archives by Month July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 - Page 1 January 2008 - Page 2 February 2008 - Page 1 February 2008 - Page 2 March 2008 - Page 1 March 2008 - Page 2 April 2008 - Page 1 April 2008 - Page 2

Skill bar/Skills.

Ok so I've had a few ideas about the skill bar for guildwars 2. It's nothing major. Generally i'd like to keep the 8 skills but maybe there should be a ninth slot to be used specifically for the race skills. For example, i'm playing as an asuran elemntalist. I have my full eight skills in my bar and have a good build running. I also have a ninth slot, in this slot I can choose to have either of my five race-specific skills. In this case, i've decided to take Summon Ruby Djin. This could be how they work, Norn's would have five race specific skills, Sylvari, Human and Asura oh which they may choose one to add to their skill bar. Race specific skills could be attained by completing certain quests, or completing the game - some special means.

Also, on skills line. I absaloutley LOVE the way we get elite skills on guildwars. In my own opinion... all skills should be gotten that way. But I doubt that'll happen. So I was was just thinking. Maybe in GW2, if there will be PVE skills, make them obtainable like elite skills in guilwars one, also - those skills should be Green moves, or rather, Boss moves. They would be a little weaker than elites but you could have more than one. They could have names like 'Galrath's Slash' too.

I had a little idea for the actual skillbar too. What if at the start of the game the very first quest you do is getting the bar itself. Like you complete a task for a person and he gives you a 'skills tablet' And once he gives it to you it sorta apear on your screen. The guy then tells you you can equip skills and signets to it for casting and gives you another quest for your first skills. It would kinda add some lore to it.. thought it may be cool.

Finally, I was thinking about the mantras. If the mesmer proffesion returns then i'd love to see their mantras return with them. But rather than being stances they should become the skill trype mantra themselves. Simply because I feel mantras are currently underpowered so if you could use more than at once (with some obvious skill balancing) Taunted Flail 19:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Love your skill tablet idea man. I do have my questions about the race-only skills, because if you look to ursan form it really outbalanced PvE IMO. So if there will be race-only skills please don't make the to powerfull make them skills like galrath's slash strong but not too strong ^^

I think the cap signet should be improved: (1) make it either cheaper than buying regular skills, (2) have one version that has a number of uses, but skills captured don't add to your bar right away, and (3) have it so you can capture from any profession, except perhaps that skills of other professions don't add to your bar. That way, there's an incentive to build your skill collection by using the signet, instead of just buying them. -- Alaris 17:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah definatly liking the signet of capture idea. I'd like to see more capturing being done than just buying skills.

Magic effects and group skills

Here's the only suggestions I'll give.

Magics effects

We should see the elementalist draw his power from the environnement. See his water balls form from rain drops. See the earth climb up on his skin. I know complete environnement interaction like that is almost impossible. Howerver, if the animations are made with this in mind, the illusion of drawing the power from the elements themself could be made. The feeling of controlling the elements themselves could be one of the most marvelous thing ever.

Group skills, formations and rituals

Group skills could be use as synergies between players. It would increase the depth of the game astronomicly. People using skills that would combine themself into powerful combos.

Wizards examples:

Mages could complete group incantations. Spells synergies like merging earth and fire spells to create lava or stuff like that. Wind could feed fire.. spreading it accross trees and burning thief encampment.

However, some even more powerful things could be done. In massive sieges or battle versus legendary monsters or undead army, wizards could use ritual to affect the world itself to help them. The cloud would form, swirling and getting darker and darker. The lighning could strike randomly in the area. The ritual could be really long. The ennemy (if in a PvP siege for example) could see the environnement change, thinking of a way to defend against the terror that would follow. At the end of the ritual, it could be a powerful lightning spirit comming the help the wizards, a huge concentration of lighning falling on a designated target, or maybe a rain of fire uppon the forteress. It could even be a huge meteor, after a millisecond of complete silence, piercing through the cloud at light spear then flashing up in a huge explosion. As you can see, I'm talking about POWERFUL magic. Things that could only be done by channeling incredible powers from forgotten artifact or triggered by the gods themselves. The rivals could have used an enermous shield that repel anything from rain (wich you see bouncing down), to catapult projectiles. The shield would have to be maintained by a group of wizards.. wizards that need concentration and protection. I'm talking of world changing things right now. Things that could change the face of the world itself. I know that a lot of the dev team play the game too. Would you imagine the feeling of just be there when it happened?

Warrior, rangers, spearman, horseman, wathever example:

Formations could be used to group them togheter in a powerful force. Knights keeping the shields togheter to block arrows and move to the ennemy in a turtle formation. The rangers could use stealth and camouflage to ambush renforcement on the way. Or archers could match their shots to create barrages of arrows in decided locations. The groups could be controlled by a selected lieutenant, however, each member would have to do his selected action in time for the attack to work (drill like.. )

Ok.. I know it seems out of Guild Wars scope.. I don't really know what you intend to do with the game. But if you intended of creating a revolutionizing game.. pushing the limits.. and not just doing another MMO that could be replaced by anything else, just think about it. There's no MMO that implemented real army battles, sieges or even group skills.

I know its not easy.. I'm a software engineer myself. But I know what the market needs right now and it's not another MMO like every others.

BoomWav 21:52, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I love your ideas that the elementalist draws his power of nature and combines different attribute skills. Though I don't like the idea that warriors can block arrows because you can give every character a shield and they can all block the arrows which would make the ranger useless(if it will appear in GW2). But I might misunderstood you; but anyway your ideas are awesome :D

I Agree, that would be such a pain in the ass to program, but SO amazing if even a less detailed version of what you were describing was impemented. I always thought there should be a block percentage if you equip a shield, and I love the idea of giant spells/rituals. Would totally eradicate any worries of a WoW clone =D-Warior kronos 05:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of formations, I mean, of course everybody can hold a shield, and may even block something with it, but only warriors, with their extensive training in combat strategy, could have the discipline and wherewithall to form together into a wall of shields, Roman army style. (Satanael 06:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC))

I love this idea! i know it would be shit hard to program it and everything...but it would revolutionalise rpgs and gaming itself :D there are a few minor problems that would need to be addressed (eg. maybe shields could block 60% of arrows when in formation so rangers would not be totally useless maybe?) but on the whole it is an awesome, though maybe to late for anet to program in now ^^ -- Grandma

I think the Mage rituals is an awesome idea. this could change gameplay really quickly from seiging the enemy to trying to defend from the incoming ritual magic and makes room for initiative and new strategies. The group skills are also a great idea, but you should get a bonus according to the amount of people in your formation. e.g. 0.2% chance to block arrows for each war in the formation, etc.ShadowStep 13:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

PvP new RA

Well i love the randomness of RA alrdy but heres an excellent idea i think would work great XD. Anyone with the game "Turok"(came out in febuary 08') knows what im tlaking bout for the pvp twist. I recommend doing the team vs. team vs. ai creatures. They(it) would spawn as a third computer controlled party every 1 minute in the match or a single creature every 30 seconds in the map. Example-2 teams load in RA, its a balanced match no kills yet-->30 secs into it a group of 3 Vermins spawn (adding a new challenge to both teams to control over powerful teams with 2 monks and 2 spikers vs 4 wammo way XD). And different monsters can spawn(lvl 20-28ish?) something like vermin to am fah to ferothrax and raptors or ruby dijins etc.It would truely rekindle RA and make it interesting :P. Also add CTF, ftw XD!!!!!!Snipey lizard 23:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea but I don't think this really suits RA, if there is any form of HA in GW2 it should be in there because in RA it's easier to kill and your morale changes faster then in HA if I'm right.

A goal system

so i was thinking that it would be cool if there was a goal system were if you wanted to get elite norn armor, it would tell you exactly what you needed to get/collect to get it and how far you would be from getting it.

intergated music

i would find it helpful and nice if gw2 could have integrated music controls and could play all sorts of file formats so you dont have to have itunes or winamp ruining in the background, all you would have to do is direct it to a library of music and it would be able to play from there.

I like the idea. Myself i enjoy the games original soundtrack and find other music tampers with the atmosphere of the game... but im sure there are a lot of people who'd want to listen to their own music so i second it! Taunted Flail 22:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Saving Replays for Observer Mode

Not sure if this has been suggested before (or even if observer mode will remain in GW2), but being able to save game replays (ala Starcraft) for games viewable in Observer Mode would be really nice for observer-mode-related things (learning from mistakes, watching what top teams are doing, saving memorable moments, etc) way after the game had elapsed. Plus, you can put the replays on servers as some sort of promotional item (e.g. games from past tournaments), and people who want to make movies don't always need to have fraps open all the time. D: - Oscidaes 04:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Customizable Race Specialization

(You can view, vote on, and discuss this article and related ones at NikiWiki by clikcking here)

This is a system whereby players would be able to choose from a list of various possible race-specific advantages which ones they want for their particular build. Each race, of course, would have their own unique system of customization with its own unique benefits and flaws, but this would hopefully prevent players from feeling limited by race specialization.

Naturally, a Norn warrior will still beat an Asuran elementalist in physical combat, hands down, but an Asuran warrior (one or two levels higher) who has properly customized his golem and equipped the right race-specific skills might even have a good chance against a Norn’s bear-form. Of course, he’d have a better chance if he were an elementalist as most of the Asuran advantages (around 5/6 of them) would be geared towards sorcerers, but you get the idea.

System Details

---

Each of the races will have advantages, around 5/6 of which will be geared towards a single theme as listed below:

1) Humans – Stealth and Finesse

2) Charr – Power and Speed

3) Norn – Strength and Endurance

4) Asura – Magic and Ingenuity

5) Sylvari – Healing and Support

Each race will have its own unique system which determines how advantages are acquired and limits the number that any single character can have (Sylvari might plant special seeds in themselves, Norn might carve totems, Asura might customize their Golems etc.).

Each race will also have a single race-specific attribute which will determine strength of each advantage which is equipped.

As with the old idea for “Powers of the Beast”, the advantages which you will be able to equip your characters with will be of two types: skills and semi-permanent buffs. In the end, each race will have around 15-20 semi-permanent buffs and 20-30 race-specific skills to choose from. However, each character would likely only be able to equip about 6 buffs and around 4 race-specific skills at a time due to the limitations, but, theoretically, you could sacrifice skills for more buffs or buffs for more skills if you like.

Also, each character would have a smaller skill bar exclusively for race-specific skills. You could equip up to around four skills to this bar, and, since these skills are enabled by race and are independent of profession, it makes sense for them to be available independent of your ordinary skill bar.

When combined with the professions, this system should allow players to “combine different advantages and dispositions to create characters of particular strength and uniqueness” what I said all race specialization should do in my previous article. Now, while this system would not be nearly as open as that one I previously proposed, the restrictions this system would place upon customizability would hopefully encourage creative thinking and variety in the builds, while its flexibility and variance would allow us to circumvent stereotyping and prevent players from feeling like they have to choose between appearance and functionality.

I know more open-endedness would seem like a good idea in general, but it gets very tedious and messy when you try to work out the details. This way, if you are, say, a Sylvari and want nothing to do with healing or support, there are still just enough skills and buffs to turn your character onto one badass warrior, but you'd have five times as many options if you wanted to include healing and support aspects as well or instead.

As I finish working out the details for each race, I’ll post an article proposing a system for each on my talk page and at NikiWiki. Thank you and have a great evening.--Shai Halud 16:43, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the general idea of customizing your advantages from a set. I think the real power of the idea is in finding ways to let people be effective with different professions and race combos, *at the same level*. So the Asura warrior won't have to be higher level than the Norn warrior to be as effective. They will play differently.

I think the themes should be centered around the race personas rather than around functions: Charr would have beasts, wilderness survival, and hunting. Sylvari would have communing with nature, plants and seeds (including poisons), and spirits. Norn would have of course beast forms, including some forms for spell-casting. Asura would have technology, summons, and Golems. So a Norn warrior in bear form against an Asuran warrior with a Pain Inverting shield and a Golem or a Sylvari warrior who uses stealth and traps and remedies and poisons... the fight would be fair, but different. -- Alaris 17:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

World Performance and map travel

I have a suggestion to compensate for casual gamers who want map travel and other players who want to travel by foot and socialise. I must admit i'm up for the traveling side since whats the point in world permanence if nobody travels and interacts but rather dissapear into thin air... Here's an example. I'm at location A and I want to get to location C. Theres not really anyone talking at my location but a few stray players 'poofing' away as they map travel. I open up my map, select location C and poof. I'm there. I didnt pass through location B which is mostly derelict of players except a few people training. Do you all see my point? I just dont think it would work if EVERY single town and outpost can be map traveled to. So I cam up with an idea to oppose it: You could have cities/towns/outposts with asuran gates near them for teleportation. Pretty much i'm at location A and want to get to C. So I head out into location B and head towards the gate, it isnt too far away and when I get there I can select my destination, Loacation C. This would still enable faster traveling and easier access for the casual gamer who doesnt want to run around for hours on end but still retains that idea of having a busy world where players are running around and interacting. As an expansion on that idea I came up with a few more thoughts. You could have diffferent types of asuran gates. I'll colour code them simply because it's easier to explain. Blue gates (Close travel) Purple gates (Ranged travel) and Gold gates (Distant travel) Blue gates will take a player to any other asuran gate within their current reigonal location as long as it is blue (For example i'm in the maguuma jungle and I step into a blue gate, so I may teleport to any other blue gate in the maguuma jungle) Purple gates will take a player to any purple or blue in their reigon or one reigon away (So i'm in istan and I may teleport to any purple/blue gate in Kourna AND any purple/blue gate in Istan) and Gold gates can take me to any asuran gate I want regardless of distance. The placement of the gates would be so that blue gates are easier to get to, purple slightly further away and harder, and gold much further away and more difficult. So say i'm in an outpost in the northern shiverpeaks and I want to get back to the crystall desert. I now have a few choices. I can either leave the outpost and travel into the more dangerous, further away areas - to reach the gold asuran gate and travel in one teleport. Or I can go the longer, safer, way by continuosly going to blue/purple gates and getting there chunk by chunk. Hopefully that isn't too complicated! But if you understand it it seems to be a great mix of giving the casual player what they want and at the same time the more hardcore gamer whilst encouraging healthy exploration in the world and promoting quicker map traveling. (Asuran gates would have to have been reached atleast once before you can teleport to them from another) (You could have 'Capital city' Asuran gates which can be used to connect all of the capital cities together (so you casn buy/sell stuff easily and people are encourage to populate the areas) but those gates can only be used to teleport to one another) If you're still with me after that, feedback would be nice! Taunted Flail 22:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Partying in the world. (Not missions)

This is my suggestion for partying in the permanent world. (i.e Not missions) As a single player you will AWAYS (after acquiring/training) have the option to bring a companion with you (buffed if you dont bring one). Companions are pretty much hero's but are simply extensions of your character who do not use up party slots. You can name the companions and personalise their apearances along with builds etc etc.

Together you and your companion would be able to traverse through the general framework of the game world, that means a player can get from one city to the next pretty easily as long as he follows the main road because fewer enemies will pop up there and they will be just about kill-able, the roads are 'safe areas'. This would resolve a few issues I have with the original guildwars which are that later on in the game you pretty much MUST bring a full team of eight people (and still maybe strugle in NF and factions) just to get from one place to the other... it didnt have that sense of freedom about it. Whereass this way you can feel like you could travel about without wasting too much time in outposts. However, if a player wishes to venture off the road, or 'safe area' (for a quest, or to train, earn money for example) they would find themselves amongst more enemies that are harder to kill. So they can party up. It would work like this, if a player is in a 'safe area' (towns, outposts, roads...) their maximum party size is two. Meaning that they can join up with one other player and the two of them (and possible companions) can explore together - sharing experiance and gold. When two a party is formed they recieve a buff which multiplies their experiance gained by a certain amount, the experiance is still shared but the party gets more of it. With their combined power the players should be able to get further away from the safer areas where enemies provide more valuable loot and therefore earn more gold and experience. As the team of two get further and further away from the 'safe areas' their party size would increase steadily depending on their distance from anywhere 'safe'. Soon their maximum party size would become 3 and they can join up with another player thus allowing them to travel further away whilst enemies become stronger (loot and exp becomes better etc etc). This would be beneficial in a few ways. Firstly: You can still casually walk from place to place whilst following the road on your own meaning you no longer HAVE to wait for teams or take ridiculous numbers of henchmen. Secondly: It encourages players to party up and interact as they get more exp and gold (quest completion and so on). Thirdly: You dont need as many players to team up for quests so you would'nt have to wait around for hours as you do in some places as guildwars is now. Obviously there is one problem with the idea and that is that as a party goes further away from 'safe' places, how does it know there will be another player to fill the new party space it just gained? For that players would have a 'potential party'. Having a potential party means that if the party is at full capacity but more players wish to join it those players are instead added to the team as 'potentials'. For example, i'm on a road and have my friend in a party. His friend wants to join, but our party maximum party size is too small at the moment - so he has joined as potential party member. These 'potential' players can still fight enemies, hear calls, heal allies, see other party members health and interact as though they were a part of the party - but are independant of it. So they do not count towards the experiance buffs or have a share in the gold. Once a party travels far enough out, the game will automaticly add in new players as there are spaces for them. And then they will get a share and benefit the teams. Taunted Flail 22:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Why limit someone's ability to party up? If a group of 8 people want to travel together in an easy area let them do it. I personally disliked PreSear's 2 party limit, because I tend to play with friends... If there's three of us, one of us isn't playing together. Already gold and Exp is scaled due to party size in GW1. If I go out solo in an 8 person area, I get all the gold and a good number of Exp. If I go with another, gold is split and our exp is reduced. Shen 17:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry maybe I didnt explain it right, this system still allows people party up in the easy areas - they just wouldnt get the buffs that they would if they were in more difficult areas. Taunted Flail

Partying in missions.

I'd like to see partying up for missions be like this in guildwars 2. The outposts for missions are instanced areas, and as are the missions inside them. Earlier missions in the game have a maximum party ssize of two and this will gradually increase as the missions become more difficult. I dont want to see the max size going almost straight to eight like on factions and nightfall it should be slower and more progressive. Also with the inclusion of companions the party sizes will be able to remain lower for longer and so people wont have to wait around for a long time. Party's wont be able to change during the missions bnor will they gain new members. However if another human party is in the mission (Like in the foreign quater mission) they should become a part of the extended team similar to that of an potential party i explained on my other idea. I'd like to see mission cinematics adressing all people in the party and not just the party leader. Everything else is pretty much how it was in the original guildwars if you ask me... I liked that system. Taunted Flail 22:10, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Character zoom

Just a quick one. In guildwars one when you have the camera as far away from the player as possible the game seems less.... 'grand' you can't really apreiciate the detail on monsters or how big they are, letalone apreciate the shire size a beaty that could have been the echovald forest. So for guildwars2 PLEASE update the first person view, give it a kind of hud where you see your weapon nearby. Maybe it would encourage gamers to see things close up and apreciate stuff better. Taunted Flail 22:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Make it feel like you're hitting something.

I find it's always an anti climax when playing as a meele character and hitting an enemy. The blades always seem to 'go through' the enemies wih a cheesy red flash lighting them up. I apreciate that you cant make realistic swings and hits, but I hope guildwars2 makes the fighting feel more like fighting. Taunted Flail 22:28, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Instead of gameplay, I suggest something for the comfyness

Seeing I'm not gonna read trough 103 to check if this has been suggested already, I suggest the following:

New emotes! Everyone in my guild and friends list have longed for a new emote. A few examples are:

• Cry
• "Facepalm" (as in shame)
• Objection! (my own)
• Casting (the casting animation as an emote, could be cool)
• Jackpot (The most fitting expression when saying "HELL YEAH!")

-Yikey, 22:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The Jackpot idea rocks! :P

What about /ragequit and /rant? It might help defuse some tension during otherwise difficult situations... -- Alaris 19:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Similar to my suggestion above to allow for RP channels. Yes, more emotes -or socials- would be welcome. Shen 17:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yay for RP channels. I prefer RP channels than RP characters. -- Alaris 19:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep way more emotes needed and keep adding them too.

Another cool emote would be Backflip. User:MoasRule

Interactive gameplay and strategy.

Something that I have always loved about guildwars is what makes a person 'good' at the game. With pretty much every other MMORPG it's the player who has spent most time on the game, gotten to a higher level and consequently got the better stats. Being better is about grind. But guildwars is different, the 'better' player is all about strategy (i mean in pvp mostly here), the way the player moves - knowing when to make the right decision and use the correct skill. It's because of this guildwars can be played at a proffesional level, using strategys and being ahead of the game to work the best builds. This I like about it, and I think it would be a great shame for guildwars2 to take a step away from that and become more like the other MMORPGS out there. Instead, I have a few suggestion to help guildwars take that one step further! I think that by making the game more involving in terms of the way it is player would be a great start. Removing point to click was a brilliant move if you ask me, players will now be much more in touch with the game and feel a part of it - movement should play a much bigger role in PVP now. But how about adding to it? Add in the function to walk by holding space, Make jumping an active part of battling, allowing players to use it to reduce damage from projectlies or reduce damage taken from earth attacks. It's not just with the keyboard you can increase the dicersity of player skill but by promoting stategy too. Have it so meelee attacks and offensive skills do more damage - I noticed a suggestion about combining elemnts for extra damage (i.e casting a water spell then a lightning.)

BUT!!!!!

The crucial thing I have to say is - implement these things but make the extra damage caused by hits to the back, or damage reduced by jumping, as MARGINAL as possible, so that only people who are realy determined and tactical enough to win would exploit them. I don't feel that these things should become major parts of PVP (or even PVE) fighting - because otherwise they would just become standard for players to do and that WOULDNT alllow for a more diverse skill range between players. Introducing these things would make pvp a much more diverse thing and further seperate guildwars from the boring other MMORPGS with the person playing most winning most. Taunted Flail 22:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I do totalally agree. And please Anet, make PvP better and even more intresting and not more simple^^ 87.123.6.149 09:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Passive Buff Attribute System

If a system utilizing primary and secondary professions is going to be used, I'd like to suggest that attributes you aren't using skills from nor have points invested in, will toggle a passive buff associated with that attribute. Just another nuance for players to consider when build making, even if they are only using their primary professions skills.

As an example, a Ranger who doesn't use their secondary profession, may want to choose a Necromancer secondary because if no points are invested in blood magic and no blood magic skills used, blood magic will provide them with a passive buff to shorten poison's duration on themself.

This way a player has more potential in how their role can be made effective without total reliance on what skills they bring to the match. If a player's primary/secondary choice gives them access to 8 attributes, yet they make a build only using 2 of those attributes, they can have 6 passive buffs to augment them in some way to suit a particular role. --Redfeather 07:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Why should an attribute give you a buff for not investing in it? Why not just give characters a number of passive buff slots which they can use to equip profession-specific unlinked buffs (as well as profession-specific linked buffs and common unlinked buffs)? -- Gordon Ecker 08:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that the idea is that in the original guildwars a player cant take advantage of most of their secondary profesion, a lot of the attributes go wasted. So like if you're playing as a WoH monk you would most likely be a secondary mesmer and have a few points invested in inspiration magic - but nothing else, so domination and illusion arnt doing anything for the player. But this way they would be doing something.

Myself, i'm not liking it because someone could potentially have a hell of a lot of buffs, so to compensate for that they would all have to be seriously nerfed and become pretty much pointless as a result. Taunted Flail 10:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

How about just having a passive buff for each secondary profession, so an effect is felt regardless of how attributes points are invested in the secondary profession's attributes (for instance, secondary necros could be have a natural resistance to poison, rangers a resistance to crippled etc). Alternatively (or in addition), have every attribute give a slight buff and possibly debuff proportional to the number of attribute points invested. For instance, in addition to its effects on fire skills, investing attribute points in fire magic increases your resistance (armor) to fire damage but decrease your resistance (armor) to water magic. Investing in swordsmanship improves your armor against finesse weapons (such as daggers and swords) but makes you slightly more vulnerable to brute force weapons (hammers and axes). This encourages using intuitive counters to enemies - use fire against a water mage (and water magic against a water mage) etc. Jbuk 17:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This was originally an idea I had for a system in which there were no professions. It's not going to work as intended with GW's type of gameplay now that I think about it. --Redfeather 08:22, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

More skill tiers

The limit of 3 PvE skills per bar introduced in Eye of the North got me thinking about skill tiers. I think that adding more skill tiers would improve both balance and build diversity. Here's an example of a four-tier skill system with a 10 to 12 slot skill bar.

1. Ancillary (gray border). This is the lowest tier of skills, covering narrowly applicable, long-recharging or otherwise limited skills that generally wouldn't be worth taking if they had to compete with better or more broadly applicable skills. The only cap on ancillary skills is skill bar size. Examples from GW1: "Brace Yourself!", "Can't Touch This!", "None Shall Pass!", Dulled Weapon, Glyph of Essence, Lacerating Chop, Revive Animal, Otyugh's Cry, Steelfang Slash, Swirling Aura, Vocal Minority, weak Lead Attacks, Signet of Capture, temporary mission-specific skills (Disarm Trap, Vial of Purified Water). In addition to "fringe" skills, some "mandatory" support and utility skills such as resurrection skills and attunements could also be placed onto this tier to prevent them from constraining skill selection.
2. Standard / basic (white border). These are "baseline" skills. You can only have ~8 standard or better skills on your bar. Examples from GW1: Most skills.
3. Superior (silver border). This is the second highest tier of skills. These skills have better power, utility or efficiency than standard skills. You can only have ~3 superior or better skills on your bar. Examples from GW1: Powerful "staple" skills such as Protective Spirit and Ancestors' Rage, narrow or weak elites (Archer's Signet, Blessed Light, Boon Signet, Defender's Zeal, Expert's Dexterity, Extend Conditions, Mirror of Ice, Peace and Harmony, Ray of Judgment, Scribe's Insight, Simple Thievery, Stone Sheath, Symbols of Inspiration, Xinrae's Weapon etc.), most PvE skills.
4. Elite (gold border). This is the highest tier of skills, only one skill of this type is allowed per bar. Skills in this tier have unrivaled power, utility or efficiency. Example: Most GW1 elites.

With the above example, a build would typically have 1 elite skill, 2 superior skills, 5 basic skills and (depending on the bar size) 2 to 4 ancillary skills. -- Gordon Ecker 09:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

While This is a well thought out system I'd prefer taht either

A) All skills are made playable to some extent B) All the useless crap never made in the first place. But you are right, we don't need 1300+ skills with only 100ish playbable ones. Nukleaer VII File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 09:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the system, to the extent that it is meant to be balanced as the current one. Right now, we have elites, PvE-only, and regular. The regular skills are still very useful, and often, depending on the build, you'd rather take a regular skill instead of a PvE-skill. You'd always rather want an elite than a regular skill though, if you had the elite. I'd be up for the extra slots only if the extra skills are really not a factor in balance, or if they included race-specific passive buffs for example. -- Alaris 21:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

i think this is a good idea but i also agree with what nuclear said. i also think this would help with the building of builds for new comers as it is right now its hard for most n00bs to come up with good bars.75.165.122.205 01:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Solutions for farmer bots and economy

Many players depend on farming as one of their main sources of income. It is safe, reliable and easy to do. Those three reasons spawned farming bots. My proposed suggestions (together) are my thoughts on how to make bots useless and give more balance to the in game economy:
Note: These are only the summary of my suggestions. Please go here to understand, clearly, what I am talking about (Make sure you are awake).

• Make easy-to-farm monsters (e.g. Imps, Scale, Minotaur, etc) drop only common, low-level materials and collectables. Yes, no gold and no equip-able items.

• Provide Quest-Reward that can be done repetitively to earn gold (real gold) and calculates your reward depending on your effectiveness and efficiency. An example would be to escort a trade carriage > important person, protect a place of significance > raid on bandits’ HQ, or deliver a bag of mail > secret message.

• Provide JOBS. Let people have a craft they can earn a living out of. Something to do with materials and collectables. Something you can do when you’re not in the mood for hack, slash and burn. Integrate a mini game that requires a tiny bit of skill so you may have a scale for payment.Eleventh Panda 20:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for better quests, but no minigmes. Lag already sucks as it is, and we know from WoW that jobs are a pain. File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpgnuke7File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 14:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's a few actual jobs in GW1 that I also expect to see in GW2: (1) trading, (2) running people to other cities, (3) farming hero armor upgrades, (4) farming elite tomes and unique items for re-sale, (5) running people through missions, (6) HFFF, (7) selling lockpicks bought from discount merchants, (8) selling consumables to players that can't access those areas. With respect to #2 and #5, I would like to see the trade window improved to support these roles (i.e. Pay when reaching 'X', or Pay when achieving 'X'). -- Alaris 19:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I doubt running will be here, because if you were level 19, 20 and wanted to go to Drok's for new armor, the monsters outside of Droks were equal to your power, assuming you were going to Drok's for armor upgrades like you should have. So let's say there's a level 30 town, but you're only level 25, and can't fight your way out, literally. Of course there would be some sort of flight path, but why run there anyway? Vael Victus 23:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ive played WoW and Runescape before Guild Wars and neither of them had bot issues. I'm not totally sure how they did it on WoW. But I do know that in runescape probably 1 or 2 times a hour unless you were doing a quest or something it would spawn a rock golem next to you or some other thing or teleport you somewhre and make you figure out a riddle. While a actual person sitting at the computer would be able to quickly react to the golem and stop mining and instead proceed to kick the golems ass and then return to work, a bot would just sit there and keep on doing whatever it was doing and would get killed. Same thing with the riddle or puzzle game because a person would quickly figure it out and be teleported back to whereever he was but a bot would just sit there in limbo for hours on end, not being able to do anything. I think this might effective in GW2, I mean it won't affect people who sit at there computers all day farming stuff and selling the gold on the web but it won't allow for people to program bots to farm or do w/e they want them to do while they are at school or at work.

yeah, If you want to stop botting, questions (math ones, really simple 2+2 questions) are the way to go. Naturally disable them in pvp. File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpgnuke7File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 14:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Why would you need a flight path when you have map travel? -- Gordon Ecker 11:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Farmer Bots serve to make money while you're afk. Now either your job lets me earn more money than I could make by botting - then this means that I can't make more money playing the game than not playing it -, or it doesn't, and then botting still carries a reward. This dilemma is hard to solve. (mendel 84.128.232.147 02:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC))

Training Squads

It occurs to me that each of the new races seem to have thier own social groups. The Asura have krewes, Charr have warbands, Humans had guilds and vanguards, Sylvari might have "broods" or "phyllums" and the Norn have thier heroes. Perhaps, to simulate this, each as each player comes into the game, they are assigned to thier own group and are given means of contacting everyone in this group, like a list of guild members. There would be about 20 members per group and they could all have randomly assigned names. As one group fills up, a new one begins to form. If a character is destriyed and leaves an empty space in thwe group, then when the current group is finnished forming, the next few characters to be formed will be assigned to groups thatr have lost members.

It could also work numerous other ways but you get the general idea. Only Norn would be different. They might gain reputastion among thier people and be assigned a changing list of contacts for other characters with simmilar reputation levels. This would encourage social play as well as offer a more realistic structure to each race's society. Every character would be loyal both to thier guild and thier comrads in the training group.--Shai Halud 20:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

nice idea but if all your other training members stop playing your stuck in an inactive group untill you destroy your charachter Vinesy 10:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Book Of Progress

This is probably a dumb idea but...in GW1 lots of ppl used wiki to discover boss locations and drop loactions. I was thinking that maybe in GW2, players could have a book that, every time you discovered a new monster, its details (drops, level, skills, locations etc.) would be automatically added to this book so players could easily check where a certan monster could be found. I have used monsters here as one of many examples such as: if you discovered a new outpost, details of the NPCs that are found in that outpost and wat they provide are added to ur book. Anyways, this is just a suggestion that will probably be useless due to GW Wiki having everything players need to know and that in would be a lot of programming for anet ^^ -- Grandma

Actually it'd be really neat. Unfortunately, a bestiary is incredibly time-consuming to program. (but this, for outposts and stuff, would be awesome sauce) Vael Victus 23:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

On my own suggestion page I wanted a 'Personal Log' which the player could use to make notes. It would open like a book and you'd be able to type in it (function like a basic text edit program), the information would be saved when you closed it. This could help players keep track of quests or missions they've completed (there's many times I've noted down on a piece of paper where I was, then days later when I get back online there's a little bit of confusion because I couldn't find my note and it takes a little while to work out what I'm up to again. House Of Furyan 23:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I LOVE my minipet collection, but...

I doubt they're going to do me well in Guild Wars 2. Why? Because this is ANet, no offense. I think you are going to let us literally transfer over the minipets with *maybe* new models, and then we'll just have a big stockpile of all the minipets we collected. I love them more than that. I'd like *some* form of accomplishment from collecting these guys; gaile, you as a collector too should agree. I'm assuming GW2 will be having rewarding gameplay, so maybe some form of points or whatever you're doing, would be nice for how many we collected, or hell you know what would be EVEN better? A point system for them. One point for each common minipet you have, 2 for green, 3 for purple and how about an astounding 5 for gold? That'd be so awesome sauce I'd make you a cake for it. :D But you wouldn't accept it for obvious reasons, so I wouldn't bake it. I'd just eat it myself. ... ... ok bai Vael Victus 23:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

But green miniatures are rarer than purple or gold ones. -- Gordon Ecker 09:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

i would love it if you were able to summon the minipets you collected and have them fight with you. Chaos Beserker 12:58, 15 march 2008 (GMT)

mounts

i cant belive no ones commented on this i mean who dosent like galloping around full speed into a group of monsters.Also i dont think they should differ by how much they cost or where you bought them but by how long youve had them they should get better as you use them also you could have race specific mounts or those that tailor to your alinement124.149.60.74 04:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe you couldn't find the large number of sections on mounts in the archives. I personally don't like to gallop at full speed into a group of monsters. -- ab.er.rant 04:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Me neither haha..Seriously tho, there have been like 5 million posts about this. Personally I'm kinda against it, I thought it was stupid in WoW, and I feel it would be stupid in GW2. I kind of agree tho about your point about tailoring pets (you said mounts, but switching in the idea in relation to pets), to your own needs, would've loved a bit more depth with the pet system in GW1...-Warior kronos 04:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm indifferent. It's nice to have them, but I'd rather they spend the time coding something else. I'd much rather have fast-travel like we do now, or at least an ACTUALLY fast travel, unlike SOME games. Vael Victus 20:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

They have come out and stated as a fact Guildwars 2 will have fast travel no reason why they cant have both mounts and fast travel.

i know there havent been any main statements about it but they have been mentioned so i thought id bring it up also this would be a great thing for runners as they could just ride past enemys and i like your idea about the pets as mentioned above you could mount them buy them seperate armour and the like even have them as god like or an evil entity if they include good and evil choices220.235.111.251 06:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of running in + if u just want to get an area where some of your friends havnt but u and its a long walk a mount would be very helpful.--King dude 21:53, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

It's probably already been suggested, but how about the ability to ride your mount until you want to go into battle. Neither you nor the mount can attack with you on it's back. If you are on the mount you move faster but with the penalty of .. you can't attack and the mount can't attack. Varuuth 00:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of mounts and think it would be cool to be out killing and have 5 people mounted just go past in a hurry to get somewhere to kill themselves. People should have a choice that if they want or don't want to have a mount. Just take a look at Oblivion that itself has mounts and instant map travel and works fine and no-one has a problem with it and that is the way mounts should be that you get a choice. (I find myself using mounts in oblivion more than map travel even if its a extra 30 mins or so game playing) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:122.109.43.82 (talk).

Maybe u could like summon a mount if u are far away from it. -- MoasRule --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.72.222.3 (talk).

I did Post a topic about this earlier in the Suggestions Archives

"My Suggestions Area I went in deeper on If you can raise a pet, Like a dragon from birth soon u can also ride your pet as a mount also then just going to a local ranch and get what you want as a mount. --Mithos Agar 13:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Siege of Orr

I was fighting the Great Destroyer in HM on a secondary character today, and I found myself thinking, "I hope GW2 doesn't handle 'legendary' boss battles like this. It seems silly that a group of eight people can overcome gods, demons, and lichs relatively easily." Then it hit me. What if GW2 handled boss battles like AB? This would work especially well with the undead dragon in Orr. Orr is a whole kingdom under the dragon's control, and from the looks of the article, it seems as though he has a pretty sizeable army at his disposable. What if players in many groups of four or more sieged the kingdom bit by bit, working their way up from the beachs of Orr to the inner reaches of Arah, where the actual dragon is located? Once players capture the beachhead of Orr, players can map travel to that city and access explorable areas there or continue the fight against the dragon's army. Eventually, the players will gain control of all of Orr except for the dragon's actual lair, which should be an elite mission all of its own or an Alliance Battle-like map that is very tough. If players manage to defeat the undead dragon, then all players in explorable areas anywhere get a +2% Morale Boost and as is the case with HoH, the team that defeats the dragon gets their names displayed in green text in global chat. Of course, there will also be unique rewards for those in the party and those who participate in the siege. For those confused or desiring details about the AB-ish system for the 'Siege of Orr', the exact mechanics are discussed below.

There will be a Krytan Army Recruiter in Divinity's Reach that directs players to a non-map travel accesible battle front, which works in much the same way as the AB outposts. Players organize into groups of four and eight of these groups are sent out onto the battlefield in the same manner they are in AB and PvP. There will be no enemy players on the battlefield, just enemy NPCs. (Lots of them.) After 3 successive wins in the beachhead territory, players gain control of the Orrian Beachhead outpost, which also allows access to the Raleza Beach explorable area. After players have 3 successive wins in the countryside territory, players gain control of the Orrian Estate (can't think of a good alternative name) outpost, which also allows access to the Dular Fields explorable area. After players have 5 successive wins in the city territory, players gain control of the City of Arah town, which also allows access to the Lair of the Lich Dragon elite mission and the Streets of Arah explorable area. The Lair of the Lich Dragon is extremely hard, and plus there will be only a three-hour window to enter the mission and complete buisness in Arah before the dragon's army retakes the city and pushes the Krytan army back. If players manage to complete the elite mission, Arah is reopened and players get total access to the city and the elite mission for a full three days before the Siege of Orr 'resets'. When players complete the elite mission, all players in GW2 get a 2% Morale Boost. The names of the players involved in the completion of the elite mission are displayed in green text in global chat, and there is a special chest reserved for those players that contains unique weapons. There could also be a title involved with completion of this mission.

Feel free to drop comments or suggestions about this suggested feature on this page or on my talk page, if you want to have a discussion about ideas of this sort.

-AyaStowar

I was thinking the same thing, only in PvP though. Renin 05:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

When I first started reading this, it sounded pretty similar to something I suggested above here[1], but the main difference is that it seems like this is entirely pve, instead of the mixture of pve and pvp I proposed above. This kind of thing sounds great to me, apart from a few minor tweaks that could be worked out (a 2% morale boost for everyone in GW2 might be a bit much, but I like the basic principle that everyone should get some sort of reward for the death of the big bad guy). Although, in order for this to work and remain relevant, ANet would have to monitor it pretty closely and make some occassional changes to the ai and skill sets, to make sure it didn't get too easy. I mean, when SF and Tombs first came out, they were next to impossible (I still remember going into tombs with 5 echo nukers because that was "the only way to do it"), but now poeople have kinda figured them out and they're pretty easy. This wouldn't be a problem except that your idea has to remain relevant for people, like HoH, otherwise it's no longer an accomplishment and just becomes a place to farm (like SF and Tombs), an example of this is the link between maxing a title and Favor of the Gods. Back when it was linked to HoH and there weren't any scrolls, Favor mattered, a lot, and people really cared about what happened in HoH. Now, I think last I saw there was 28,000 minutes of favor left, and even if there isn't any favor, you just buy a scroll and head out any time, anywhere.

A possibility is to blend a few ideas I've seen out there with this one. Some people wanted the ability to choose to play for the bad guys. Maybe at some point we can choose to fight on the side of the Lich Dragon, and that makes the situation you provide us above like real AB, only maybe ANet could stack the odds a little so that a winner can actually happen (instead of the heartbeat effect we see in AB now), maybe like a "momentum" buff or something. Like if one side makes some gains, then they have the "momentum" that will give them extra health/energy/speed/damage/whatever that gives them a slight advantage. (Satanael 08:14, 4 March 2008 (UTC))

Sounds like a great idea man. It reminds me a lot of opening the gates to Ahn Quiraj in World of Warcraft which was this like hidden city that had been holding one of the evil old gods prisoner. You had literally the whole world working together because there was a certain quota of supplies that had to be donated, people that had to be killed, and special items that had to be brought together to create the scepter to open the city. You had everyone working together and all the top guilds in the game would coordinate to take down the major bosses needed to make the scepter. I could see the same kind of thing here with everyone working together to take back Orr, which the major alliances and the major guilds all coordinating together for some big final assault. GW2 should definately introduce some form of raiding. 40 man raids were a bit much in WoW, to hard to organize, but with their expansion pack they reduced all new raids to 25 people and I could see that work effectively and make it more realistic. While having 8 heroes take down some ancient all powerful dragon might seem kinda retarded. A group of 25 highly skilled players in elite armour taking down the threat to the world is much more convincing

Do you know how long it takes to get a function 8 man group working for high level areas (I dont mean ursanway...)? Getting a 25 man group would be too much for all but a very small fraction of players. If it gets to the point that the only way to make a decent amount of money if to go on huge raids *cough*WoW*cough*, then a lot of more casual players would probably leave. Ashes Of Doom 17:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Good point. What if it works like AB, 5 groups of 5? -- Alaris 17:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess I didn't make this clear..I meant 5 groups of 5; one large group of 25 players would be too hard to get together. -AyaStowar

I'd like to see a few "raids" in Guild Wars 2, but I don't want them to be the entire endgame like they are in World of Warcraft. -- Gordon Ecker 02:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Fishing feature, Crouch and no gold drop

Fishing: Adding fishing feature to the game for casual gamers like me.

Crouch: Since Anet anounced that they will be removing the click and go feature, so that will make the game more like first-person or third person shooter like gameplay. Why not add crouch then.

No gold drop: For realism purposes.--Topedo 16:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, you spelled "Torpedo" wrong ;-) (Satanael 03:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC))

I didn't spell it to be Torpedo. It's really Topedo with out an R.--Topedo 14:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I know, it was a dumb joke, I apologize for wasting people's time reading my useless chatter. (Satanael 09:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC))

How would eliminating gold drops be realistic? Bandits, pirates and other outlaws have no reason not to carry cash, wurms can swallow people whole, smaller carnivorous monsters can accidentally swallow gold jewelry, some real-world animals such as goats and sharks are notorious for eating virtually anything and golems and earth elementals could contain precious metals, although in the latter case gems seem more likely. -- Gordon Ecker 03:42, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

There's only so far you can add realism... why not add physical and mental fatigue more into the game, wear and tear on weapons and armour, weather, or more realistic armour. How about character models of different shapes and sizes within species instead of the 'one size for all but you have to scale it up or down to make it seems different than anyone else' system we have in Guild Wars at the moment. House Of Furyan 07:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ty for giving me an idea!!User:MoasRule

Not a knockoff

I don't want to see GW2 copying WOW. Right now I am trying wow out, and while it does have some neat features (which GW2 should include) it also has alot of drawbacks, and faults, things GW has overcome. Everyone seems to be posting suggestions just copying other games, but I do hope that others aren't copied, maybe included some of the best features of others, but I want to see things that we haven't seen before (like GW when released)

Things in wow that are disappointing map travel,graphics, grinding, time consuming, no story line, monthly fees, waiting on other parties killing the enemies you need to complete a quest too many skills available while in the play field (no skill nor combinations)

Things in GW that are disappointing no auction house, no in game mail or voice system, no professions (side income from a job/profession),no open play field where you can run into others (all instanced),limited character customization Med Luvin 16:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

WoW:

Agreed, agreed, no, not as much as GW, play the quests for the storyline (or do you just skip the text?), agreed, AGREED, and I'd like to add that both games do suffer from waiting for groups.

GW:

Agreed, agreed, agreed, agreed. Vael Victus 20:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

All instanced is an awesome idea, it really stops lag to a degree, and considering Anet's limited budget that is the way it will be. oh, and jobs/profs lead to grinding, as evidenced in any MMORPG. File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpgnuke7File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 20:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, all instanced is not how it will be, ANet has already said they're going to go with a combination of instanced and persistent, some special areas, like epic battles, dungeons, etc. will be instanced so there's no line to go kill Primordius, while a lot of the explorable areas will be persistent so we can find people and not feel so alone while we explore. (Satanael 03:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC))

PvE persistent areas concern me personally, how they work that is one of the concerns that will make or break my decision to invest more time and money into Anet. House Of Furyan 07:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

IMO, I think there should be maybe an option to play instanced or persistant for most areas, because while persistant is really lots of fun in some places, I tried playing some other MMORPGs at one point where you get frustrated to the point that you basically wish you could attack other people due to all the kill/loot/xp stealing etc. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:219.77.161.104 (talk).

Are you kidding me? WoW no storyline? They have massive amounts of lore available. That's something I'd really want to see in GW2. More lore available, more background on the key people, more info on the locations, more thoughts on how it all adds up, etc. The Movement of the World is a great start, keep that up and I'm happy. — Galil 06:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

sell back price for armour

im sure no high lvl players really care about this but for lower lvls it gets frustraiting you buy a pice of armour for 1k for instance and only get 100g back or if its a 10 k piece(i know newbies wont have it its an example) you only get 200g back and including the material cost it can really break your bank so im just sugessting mabye a 50% pay back(not including material cost) for your armour

Why would you want to sell it? Armour isn't just for Christmas, you know. --Mme. Donelle 16:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you've had it for a long time and it's just clogging up your storage space. ~ Firoas. 12:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Castles and Siege Weapons

I've seen a few people lately talk about how it just didn't really seam right that 8 people can kill a God. This is sort of an interesting question, people like the idea of being intricately involved in some kind of epic struggle, but as soon as we become one of those chosen few who do something that immense, we start to lose our suspension of disbelief. How do we fix that?

I think one way to do this is to create battles in which the battle itself has epic meaning, but we as players are just the principle movers/stoppers of an otherwise unstoppable force. What this requires is a lot of NPC soldiers to fight against and/or alongside us, which is the immediate difficulty from a programming perspective. Nonetheless, I think there should be a situation in which we are required to, for example, defend the capital of Kryta from an attack by a large army. This army should use siege weapons and towers, and we should have the choice of defending the wall or heading out into the battlefield.

What I mean is, I think this should be different than our efforts at taking on an army that we saw in GW1. In GW1 we took on, say, the Charr army just like 3-10 guys at a time, even when we were supposed to be defending Fort Ranik or retaking Rin. In GW2, there should be a massive group of maybe 100 bad guys fighting 100 good guys, and we should be able to run into the middle of it and attack whoever we want, and get attacked by whoever. If we are on the wall defending a Krytan castle, then we should be using siege weapons or boiling oil to thin the numbers of the attackers on the ground, until their siege towers get close, then we can try and destroy the siege towers or concentrate on killing the guys that do make it onto the wall. Or if we are on the ground in front of the castle, then we draw their forces within range of the archers, and in the mean time defend the gate against their attempts to break it down.

There's a few things that will have to be added to the game in order to make this work, one is something that I have wanted for a while now, the ability to quickly target whoever is attacking you. I think an easy way to do this is to have the situation we have in GW1 now where it lists along the left side what attack just hit us, and if we click on that attack it automatically targets whoever that was.

The next thing will be slightly more difficult, but I think could make the game really freakin' cool. We would need the "bodies" in the game to interact more physically. What I mean is, if a giant comes charging into a formation of humans, he should plow through a few of them before getting tripped up, and people should really be able to push into others and drive guys back physically. These would have to make sense, too, a puny little Mesmer should not be able to drive back a badass Warrior, etc. Maybe this could even tie into the combo strategies someone suggested earlier, where like warriors could form together into interlocking body-blockers that will take less damage and be less easily pushed back. This could be achieved through a simple stance that, when another warrior activates it next to you, the two of you become interlocked. And this should be able to be done as easily with NPCs as with other player warriors. Furthermore, maybe a simple "push" command could be introduced, which would allow players to not only push people and things out of the way, but if to people are pushing each other, then a friend could come up behind one of them and help out with the push. That way, when you've got 10 warriors in a row set up to block, your could have 10 guys behind them pushing them forward so that they could literally push an army back away from its castle.

This whole thing would be hard to do, I know, but I think it would be really cool and could be done so well it would be hard for people not to just fall in love with it. (Satanael 07:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC))

Epics battles would be good, but then again there are so many technical issues that arise from that that I would think Anet would stick away from epicly epic fights, although, if these Dragons in Guild Wars 2 are supposed to be as big and bad as is made out I would expect these 'dragon events' would allow for a larger number of players than the standard 8 we have currently. A lot of what you're asking for is what larger pc games are struggling with, I don't think Anet has the time, money or experience to pull such a thing off, but more players and opponents (whether AI or other players) sure, I can see a simple version of that happening House Of Furyan 07:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

i love the idea but it may be just a bit to high tech for anet to produce at the moment mabye in future games this would be possible cause it sounds like fun beating down 100 baddies with a sword or a hammer or any thing else that hurtsVinesy 10:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe when can expect it on... Drum roll please... GUILD WARS 3! *listens to the gasp from people* Renin 17:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Play the Battle of Jahai, if you haven't already. That's a fair step along the way. Making enormous battles may require creative thinking, but I'm suspecting things can be pushed a lot further than might seem the case. At the very least ~100 characters on screen doesn't seem unreasonable, even in GW1. -- Sirius (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Hm...I like alot of the ideas you've suggested, however, right off the bat I see a few technical problems. One, though 100 vs. 100 battles are quite epic, to have all the interaction going on would cause quite a bit of lag. To actually go out in the battlefield like you suggest would make this even worse. About your realistic reaction to damage section, you're essentially suggesting that Guild Wars 2 incorporate a Havoc engine. While this idea is cool, it would be a pain to code for npcs, and murder for actual controllable characters. Coding aside this would also break away from the combat system in GW1 (But that might be changed in GW2, if so ignore this point haha), and enforce more of an action combat system as opposed to a traditional MMORPG combat system. All in all, great ideas, but realistically undoable =( -Warior kronos 01:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

hunger and thirst

ill probably get flammed for this but i think for more realisism they could add hunger and thirst where for instace if your char hasent eaten in days he gets a certain disadvantages this is if they include day and night and for players who dont play alot it doesent kill them just feed them when you get back and thetll be right as for thirst any time your over a body of water make an emote like refill or somthing feel free to coment on how i could improve thisVinesy 06:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I think having hunder and thirst change on how long you play during the day. Like after a hard mission your character will feel weakended and tired. This will greatly help, as well....people shouldn't be able to play for 2+ and not get any disadvantages...68.151.27.108 06:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

/FLAME :) Your welcome, anyways down to business, im not sure i like the idea, i know i wouldnt like to have to stop after a massive mission to eat because i am getting minus attribute points (or what ever the system) i would rather just keep playing, i dont mind the realism getting dialed down a notch if it means a more consistent and fun game, :) my thoughts anyway, Crazy 07:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Crazy (wow, that kinda sounds weird ;-)), the problem with this idea is that you then have to worry about how and when people are required to get food/water, and pretty soon it becomes like all the armor fatigue and repair suggestions: it just adds grind to the game, requiring people to do things in the game that they just don't want to do or don't have fun doing. I'm all for a little realism, but at the end of the day gameplay takes priority over realism. (Satanael 08:16, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

If this game were hardcore roleplaying, it might make sense to factor stuff like that in. But truth be told GW isn't about that, it's about the battles - and little accounting stuff like that would mostly just get in the way. -- Sirius (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Eating and drinking are fun things to do for RP reasons, but not something that I'd make manditory. I'd make 2 emotes for consumables (drinking & eating), and add really cheap foods & drinks that confer no gameplay advantage to the already existing candy canes & alcoholic beverages. -- Alaris 19:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

While this doesn't apply completely, many MUDs required regular intervals of eating and drinking if you wanted your HP to regen over time. Oftentimes, this just got to be extremely boring and annoying, and many, especially if we weren't there to mob-kill, just disabled the messages that kept popping up. I'd say no to the eating or drinking, or at least make it something like a low-cost bread item that gives +1 pip of natural health regen (i.e. while not in battle) for something like 10 minutes or so... Shen 01:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Being forced to do things like that gets tedious. Like feeding your pet in WoW. But if it's for titles that don't alter gameplay, or just for RP purposes, then yes! -- Alaris 03:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Same issue with weapons breaking. Unnecessary and tedious. -Warior kronos 01:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I will only agree to this under 1 condition that its like bonus xp or health/mana regen (only) that eating or drinking will take you from being normal to being a rested status and that if you don't eat/drink you will only stay at normal status unless logging out in a town or inn. And that there is no lower level than Normal status meaning minus effects.

barber (haircutter)

i noticed that you can only make the choice of your hairstyle at the beginning of creating a character, i made my monk bald and i regret it, therefore i would like a barber in GW2. Maybe in the capital citys and you could change your hair there (for a fee). -- assy monkey(my ign) 87.212.163.46 14:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I like the idea of a barber and maby a plastuc surgent also...(YES THERE WERE PLASTIC SURGENTS IN THESE TIMES)But 1 thing if your bald the barberer can't really change your hear ^^

^ above un-named poster makes a good point.. Wig Maker anyone ? :P Crazy 02:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I herd Sweeney Todd was gud, no really!--74.61.209.219 02:42, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I think having a barber/hairdresser (depending on gender) would be something interesting to have ... HOWEVER, It would be interesting for, oh, Assassins ... get haircut of their victim's class to fit in better? 66.44.216.34 17:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

How about a gender changer while we're at it? :D No, seriously! I can't believe how many times I made a male, and after a while I see the female version of that class's armor and lose my mind and re-create my char a female haha. Oh! And we could possibly add to this subject a WARDROBE! A place to store complete armor sets! PLEASE! My inventory is dying! xD Eleventh Panda 08:48, 8 March 2008

Well ofcource I don't know how full your storage is but IMO a storage can be seen as a wardrobe. And for the sex-change-operation I think it's a party of plastic surgery =)

Yea i agree with the sexchange thing. It would be nice to be able to change the sex of your char but don't know if it would ruin GW or not. Anyway instead of having a wardrobe(which is a pretty good idea) why doesn't Anet increase our Storage ammount. I mean 4 slots at max is just not enough. Especially since your talking 8-12 slots of 3-4 armor sets each with. Then you have to think of the scolls, tomes and other useful stuff you mightr want to keep in storage. Their is just not enough room!--Soccom 22:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

hey i have created an account now :) , btw bald should get some sort of hair growing potion or something like that,but you would have to for example a quest or give 10plat for it, and it would be cool if your hair would actually grow! Like a 1 month old char started with short hair would get middle hair, and after 2 months long hair, you can go to a barber to let it get changed/cutted. Bald people who drink the hair growing potion wont get immidiate long hair , but then it starts growing like the example above,so someone who is bald and drinks the potion will get short hair after a mont ( someting like that, could make it a week too) Assy Night 11:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Saving intefaces/commands

It must be easy for a game developer, and could really helps when switching profession.

Race based skills rather then boosts

Rather then race based buffs I'd think it would be better for races to be different by certain skills they equip, This way if each Race has spells and skills that are useful for any class there wouldn't be a prefered race-class combo that if your not using you won't get accepted into parties.

The skills themselves would be based around the Lore of the races and their fighting style(on all levels not just Asura=lots of race spells)

Here would be some examples:

Asura

Mind over matter: skill, 10e,1/4c,30r: for 20 seconds you have +200 hp and the maximun amount of degeneration you can recieve is reduced to -4 when this skill ends your adrenaline is halved and you lose 10 energy.

Speedy Thoughts:stance 5e,15r: for 5 seconds you move 33% faster and your skills activate 25% faster.

Norn

Raven's wisdom: enchantment 25e,3c,30r: for 10 seconds your spells do 30% more damage but cast and recharge 25% slower this spell causes exhaustion

Reckless rampage: stance 25e,1/4c,30r  : for 10 seconds you move and attack 25% faster when this skill ends you suffer from weakness,bleeding and are crippled for 10 seconds.

Charr

Gloat: skill 5e,1/4c,10r: If target foe is below 50% health you heal 80 health and 10 energy if they are above 50% health you heal 40 health.

"For the Legion": Shout 10e,20r: For each ally within earshot you have 3 seconds of 25% faster skill casting and +20 armour if this effects more then 5 allies this skill is disabled for an addtional 10 seconds.

There would be skills from each race which could work for each class(a maximun of 2 racial skills may be needed) but non of the races should have skills that outdo others(e.g. Norn getting better melee skills then sylvari) though I think the high values I've put(skills which I thought out of the top of my head) are likely to be too strong compared to normal skills I don't think any of them favour one class over another.(Marsc 00:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC))

You seem to be achieving the exact opposite effect of what you said you wanted to. --71.229 00:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I said the numbers were wrong(I typed up the skills in a few minutes so they are bound to be imbalnced) I was typing ideas for skills which each race can get which cater for different classes for example the ravens wisdom skill means the norn will see use as spellcasters(the skills similar to intensity) and the Asura will see use as melee classes via the Mind of over matter skill which similar(I know mind over matter is too strong) to endure pain. What I really mean is the classes should get skills like these but more balanced if they want race diversity and at the same time no prefered race-class combo which is needed or you won't get in a party.(Marsc 14:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC))

Unless you have the skills have the exact same function for every race, then there's bound to be at least one race whose skills have superior functions to those of other races. Sora267 22:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats the point of it to make diversity between races, sure some of them will have a slightly better skill for elementalists/warriors/mesmer ect. then another race does, but since it requires a skill slot and would be limited it makes less of a difference then a standard race specific buff(like +60 health or permament +1 health regen). Like I mentioned the skills I made up are too strong they'd(in my eyes) would probably be reduced to smaller amounts like move and attack 5% faster.(Marsc 01:04, 15 March 2008 (UTC))

Area Flags

I think it would be a great idea to implement "Area Flags". You could place a flag on your mini map, much like hero flags, and when you cast an "AOE" skill, it will fall in that location if you are in range. Blackie ewilson92 21:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I think so too because if you are in an area and go somewhere but find out you cant go til you finish a certain quest you could flag it so you dont forget where it is and it would appear as a small flag on the map, that would be really helpful. User:MoasRule

Friends Status

Add when your friend was last on (the guild version), more statuses, the guild he/she is in. It would be much more helpful ;) 68.151.27.108 23:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i think that is a good idea. Because not all my freinds are in my guild and it would be nice to know how long they've been offline. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Soccom (talk).

Enemies Having Random Skill Bars

I thing one think that would mix the game up a bit is to have it that the AI enemies/allies of the game have a chance to use one of a random set of skill bar whenever they spawn; so they're not using the same skill bar throughout the whole game. You could have several variations so it makes it interesting, takes you a while before you know just what exactly is coming for you. Yes, its a bit more work but I'd think it would be nice. Could also slow the use of bots when it comes to farming (if such is possible in GW2) as the unpredictable nature of the skillbars could make it hard to use bots House Of Furyan 09:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I like this idea of making play a little more random, so you are reacting more to the current situation rather than constantly using a single build and tactic. Another way of mixing things up would be to have constantly changing environment buffs/debuffs that modify the effectiveness of skills. For example, weather effects: Rain would dampen fire damage but enhance lightning damage, wind would reduce effectiveness of projectiles etc. Also celestial/spiritual effects: Grenth/undead dragon's influence is particularly strong, boost hexes and impair enchantments etc. These effects should be regularly changing in presence and potency, making it difficult if not impossible to have a small set of 'perfect builds' for a particular area. Care would need to be taken to ensure the effects (whilst noticable and sufficient to discourage attempts at elitist play) would not completely disable an unfortunate party, rather just force a change of tactics. Having such skill modifiers as part of a constant game mechanic might also serve to desensitize players to their skill effectiveness being changed - they might then whine less when a skill balance update takes place. Jbuk 11:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Large Trade Town

I got this idea from another game...have a large trade town where everyone could trade weapons and collectable items, and crafting materials for a reasonable price. It would help rather than going farming for all of this stuff. What I mean is something like the Grand Exchange in the MMORPG game Runescape.

-Character name: Lu Sen --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Jayman698 (talk).

Linking party search for the five capitals would also work. -- Gordon Ecker 00:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

On a smaller scale would it be possible to have a Guild Member chest of some sort in the guild hall where guild members can leave stuff for other members free of charge or find out a way to get money to a character. Anyway this only comes up because my boyfriend and I have 1 computer and 2 accounts and we need a go between person to transer stuff we find.--EvilRedStapler 03:51, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Weather

I got another one...have weather in the game. it would make the game more interesting (i.e snowing, rain, thunderstorms). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Jayman698 (talk).

There's already rain, snow and fog in GW1, but I'd like to see more weather. -- Gordon Ecker 00:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Periodic seasonal weather patterns would be nice. Easily scriptable. House Of Furyan 05:12, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea I always thought it would be a good idea to inlclude weather in a game. At random times it could rain and your char could get wet. Or somedays it would be cloudy the next sunny. That would be a awesome experience and make the game more alive! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Soccom (talk).

It would be cool, if some skills would work differently depending on weather. For example you had skill "flash" in air magic. In foggy valley "flash" would increase sight. And rain could boost water magic skills, snow could increase effectiveness of ice skills...and so on. Maybe not all skills would vary greatly depending on weather, so casual players didnt have it too difficult. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:82.215.239.148 (talk).

Wouldn't having seasonal weather be odd for people playing in different parts of the world?Compelled Orphan 05:27, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Weather-require skills could be the new PvE Only Skills. House Of Furyan 19:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

You could have different weather pattern for each place on Earth. User:MoasRule

That's what I want... I want to evade the bad wintery weather outside, so I log in... just to find even more snow! I like the general idea, but as long as it changes regularly. Just like the day/night cycle in Diablo 2 was about 30 mins. -- Alaris 01:59, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that weather would be best if it was as lengthy as in real life, i.e the first six hours of the day the weather could be kinda overcast but eventually brightening up towards the end of the day. And weather would be the same in kryta and in ascalon (that includes the areas north of thopse places) but more hot in the deserrt and obviously snowy in the shiverpeaks. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Taunted Flail (talk). What if weather affected (stated skills) also enemy's meaning certain ones come out only in rain or the dry and npc's that in the wet they all go inside instead of standing out in the rain in there dry spawns.

And I know this won't happen but I'm listing it here as reference a global game weather server which would generate real time weather patterns for the entire game world with moving clouds all over the game and there would be a game connection also where say if allot of fire e.g a fire ele convention that would change the weather patterns just like fire does to the weather in the real world, Or ice mages or logging etc.

Guild Wars 1 doesnt really have that. Look at this When it is Wintersday in Lions Arch its all covered in snow right. Walk out side the city and I is suddenly All sunny and hot. Doesn't make any bleeping sense if u ask me. The Weather in Guild Wars is fixed. I even asked Gaile Grey to add it to Guild Wars 1 but she said it would interfere with alot of things in game like the skills then the environmental effects and etc. I posed a topic about weather on here earlier so I am up for it in GW 2 --Mithos Agar 13:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Encounter list

The original idea is from Vanguard, but still I find it quite useful: The enemies which are active part of the current encounter are shown in an encounter window, which is quite like the one used for displaying the party in GW. It makes targetting easier and can help to overview conditions. Obviously the current target would still be displayed as it is now. (VagabondEx 16:48, 26 March 2008 (UTC))

Archive

I think it is about time - WARNING: This page is 409 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.

--File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg nuke7 File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 08:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

We're nearing the middle of March now, it should have been done way earlier House Of Furyan 23:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Buildings

Just one more comment from me. I was just sitting around when something popped in my head for GW2, Buildings! Sure we have buildings in GW1 but you can't walk inside. All the merchants and traders are standing outside. It would be neat to have Blacksmith shops, Merchant shops, Bars and so on inside the buildings. Even be able to have 2 stories so you could walk up steirs. Have clerks sit behind the counter or even walk around! It is more realistic but I never thought of it as over going. That subject even brought me up to having houses in the game. This will probally be a disapproval but having a certain area where you can talk to a guy and enter a lot number and appear at it. You can also build your own house and have 2-4 stories. You can even have your own key to lock the door to keep others out! And just incase you forgot yoru lot number you can just put your mouse over the key and it would say "Key for lot ____". The best part is you can purchase furniture. Its almost like the GH accept instead of doing it for your Guild your doing it for your own account! Just a thought!P.S. I didn't want Storage and merchants inside house because that would totally defeat the purpose of a GH!--Soccom 22:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

coughRUNESCAPEcough 84.95.94.214 15:08, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

ok well not the house thing. But i mean going into buildings would be much better. In usally Canthan cities you see buildings all the time, but can never walk inside them. And if we have weather put into GW2 then whats the point of having merchants and traders standing outside? So going inside buildings would just be more fun and realistic. Right?--Soccom 22:31, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, failing that (and I don't really like the idea of zoning every time you enter a building in town, it's slow when you're doing a shopping round) there could just be an interior to the buildings, and when you walk inside it shows a cutaway view of the interior. This could probably be done in GW1, actually, but it would be a nice thing to see in some places. -- Sirius (talk) 23:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

No, I never meant the whole zoning in a building. Since your already inside the town you can just walk right inside the door way, just like walking right up the steirs. In Kaeing you never zone going to the 2nd story, this is basically the same thing, you don't zone you just walk inside. Their inside can be tables, chairs, bookshelves, bar table and the trader can be standing behind a desk. --Soccom 00:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

GW2 guilds Roster

Ok I must ask this question, does anyone know how the roster is going to work on Guild Rosters for GW2. They say your going to start with a frest start and you can use the names all over again. How is this going to effect the Guild Rosters? Like we probally all are in Guilds right now, and I am hoping the guilds can transfer into GW2, but if they do how is this whole roster thing going to work? Am I making sense? Soccom--Soccom 01:24, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

New sections to the bottom and don't need to indent the first paragraph.

It's probably nice to transfer every one over to the new guild but that would mean adding code that's going to be relatively useless. Much better for players to create the guild and re-invite his/her guildies in GW2 rather than asking the developers to code in an automated mechanism that's more trouble than it's worth. To support this, they'd need to first create links between GW guild and GW2 guilds. Then they need to take into consideration that not all guildies will move on to GW2 and that not all guildies will want to join the same guild. It's nice to have, but probably too much trouble for its worth. -- ab.er.rant 02:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I and many Guilds like LaZy would love to see expanded roster features where you can divide up ranks and subteams etc and have permissions on absolutely everything being, who can promote at each, rank who can they kick / recruit, who can send announcements, who can add to guild bank, who can take from guild bank for each subteam and section etc so like a tree and everyone has individual permissions on everything that has a value.

More mixed species groups

In the original Guild Wars, monster groups are generally made up of a since species / family, although there are some exceptions. I'd like to see more multi-species groups in Guild Wars 2. For example the Mordent Crescent might fight alongside Palawa Joko's undead troops, Charr shamans might start worshipping Dhuum, Menzies or the Mursaat and working alongside their other followers and Charr and Norn could join the Corsairs. -- Gordon Ecker 06:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No offense but the Charr and Norn working together with the Corasair is a bit corky. But i understand where your going with it. =D --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Soccom (talk).

Well there were viking pirates, as for the Charr, and IMo Charr values and Corsair values seem quite compatible, but I think that the Corsairs should remain a primarily human organization. -- Gordon Ecker 02:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

If you pay attention to your enemies you see this has already been done in prophecies....White mantel+mursaat. And also in Factions, NF, EotN but if you would like to make this generally I am fully against it!! you can't just mix up charr with humans >.> that's what you just said corsairs with the charrs..THEY HATE EACHOTHER!!...and this is whit alot of species.

I thought instead of ,if your a norn that wants to play with an asura, you cant. It would be a lot more simple for all races to just be playing under one banner. User:MoasRule

OpenGL Support

Right now the gospel about GW2 is that it will support Dx10 but not require it. It is an indication for me that in order to get the full visual fidelity of GW2, people have to buy Microsoft Vista. For many players that means GW2 will have additional attached costs to the original purchase, the costs of buying Vista. Although I own the DX10 gear and the games (Crysis, UT3), I have not moved to Vista and will not move to Vista simply due to its incompatibilities with parts of my equipement. Creating Dx10 only features for GW2 will not help sell Arenanet's product, it will help Microsoft sell Vista. MS is counting on game developers to do the dirty work of enticing their OS to gamers.

I suggest Arenanet rather used OpenGL. It can do anything DX can do while not being tied to a specific platform, or ask the user to buy certain Microsoft products. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:4thVariety (talk).

Unfortunately switching to OpenGL would be fairly costly considering the engine (or at least the main part of it) is already built. Anyway, if you're the sort of gamer that HAS to get all the prettiest stuff, you'll already have Vista since you'd want DX10 anyway. -- Sirius (talk) 10:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Bleh, don't wanna upgrade to Vista. But then again, I'm not one to fall for the latest graphic fads. IMO, games are starting to reach an upper limit in terms of graphic quality, beyond which it's mostly artwork and originality that makes a difference. -- Alaris 13:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

So far, Guild Wars is working on Linux through Cedega, and it would be great if that could continue to be the case. (mendel 84.128.205.35 16:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC))

Friend Find

A cool thing to add would be next to a friend's name, it could include their district that they're playing in, the campaign they're playing in, and if they are in your campaign, their location. -Lu Sen

I'd suggest this would work only if both people had each other in their friends list, that would prevent players from being found by random people --Torins 21:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

New Towns and fighting for towns

My first suggestion is new towns in gw1 u would always see the same old town. But i was thinking they should maybe make little changes here and there because maybe a town didnt have a merchant would eventually visit and maybe leave acouple days later. Also new towns like new settlements and they grow over time into big cities. Because to me in would make sense for a area with no towns to eventually have a town there while you are playing the game.

My next suggestion is fighting for towns. I dont know if anyone has said anything about this. It would be cool to be able to fight for towns more realistly then gw1 with the alliance battle. For example maybe the charr are invading lions arch and the humans would actually fight the charr inside and outside the town and if the charr capture it eventually charr npcs begin to move in and new charr buildings until the humans recapture it.--King dude 22:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea it seems like a good idea. But what would the reward be and would the reward be good enough to have people fight for the towns? I mean when people AB for their guild their doing it to raise their Factions and if they get to a certain amount then their alliance leaders guild is advertised when traveling to that town. What fame would you get fighting for control for the cities?--Soccom 00:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well know that i think of it maybe u gain like faction points when u kill an enemy for your race to maybe buy better armor skills or weapons.--King dude 01:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

What about gaining faction with other races for killing their enemies? -- Gordon Ecker 07:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

For the fighting for towns thing, you should look at the discussion above in "Humans vs. Charr", it's a little bit more fleshed out there. But the new town thing kinda gave me a good idea to go in line with this, so I thank King dude in advance for what I am going to post below. (Satanael 10:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC))

A More Living World

Okay, most of this is just kinda expanding upon what King dude said above, and but I hope I provide some greater detail on it and maybe some clearer description of it. Anyway, I think it would be really cool if the small towns around the world had a greater role and relevance than just being kind of cool to find. For example, let's say we are wandering around the countryside of Kryta and we come upon some tiny little town out in the middle of nowhere with a few NPCs and maybe a merchant or something. If we happen to be there at the right time, we suddenly witness a Charr raiding party come charging into the town and attacking everything. We then have the choice to kill the charr and save the town, or not. If we do, the town elder gives you some cool reward and maybe you get some Kryta faction points or something. However, if you choose not to save the town, then not only do the Charr kill the NPCs, but they actually burn the town to the ground, and that specific town can no longer be found. And it should be set up so that this charr raid happens at a particular time in the world, rather than being triggered by a player's presence (i.e., a time trigger rather than a proximity trigger). To help people know, maybe some scouts report to the Krytan capital if they see a raiding party cross the border, and you'll have to kinda guess where the raiding party is headed.

To keep this repeatable, maybe if a town is destroyed, some NPCs leave the capital to go make a new town in a new location. In this case, it would be really freakin' cool if we could actually watch these NPCs build the town (e.g., clear the trees and underbrush, build the town buildings, plant crops in the fields, etc.). And to make sure things don't get out of hand, these guys would only go start a new town if one was just destroyed, that way there are always the same number of towns around the country.

To keep these towns relevant, I think it could be cool for there to be like some traveling merchants/traders/crafters that wander from town to town. And you could even trade with them if you run into them on the path. And in that way even the smallest towns can have traders or whatever that will kind of hang around there for a couple of days before they move on to the next town.

It might also be cool to let the towns kinda grow a little if you are able to save it a certain number of times. Maybe some new buildings pop up, the town gets permanent merchants, traders, crafters, etc. and the townspeople upgrade their existing buildings and in turn upgrade the town's defences. And as the town grows, the more often and ferociously they are attacked. (Satanael 11:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC))

Just had another thought, it would be pretty cool if the raiding parties actually come from somewhere specific. Like a charr raiding party would form up in CoF or wherever, and then it would march through Charr territory until it crossed the border, and then marched straight to the town it is planning on raiding. That way, it could be programmed that a raiding party would be formed in a random charr town, and randomly select a human city to raid, that way their marching does not follow the same path every time.

Also, it should work both ways, maybe once a town gets big enough a human raiding party forms to go attack some charr town, and then the guys in the charr territory can defend the charr towns. (Satanael 11:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC))

I don't like the idea that new towns can be build I think towns should have a stable position. They can be captured in ways like Kurzick/Luxon did. And there is another reason why this CAN'T be done in towns, in towns we can't fight so the idea of killing the invaders would be lost aswell..anyway I still think the idea isn't total crap so you should do this in exploreble areas; because it was stated that they wanted to let the world of tyria look more alive.

Maybe not with towns in the GW1 sense, but something more like Nebo Village or ascalon settlement for example? They are not mappable, but they have merchants and other npc's. Having the charr attack them or something similar might work. And the reason for having separate instances for towns is lost anyway if you don't have instanced areas. Hmmm... just realized, did anything interesting happen with the ascalon settlement in the years before GW2? I don't recall. If that became a sucessful town it would be cool. Or did it merge with that place on divinity coast? Ashes Of Doom 18:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I like it except id like to see charr take over that territory and humans try to recatpure other then that I like it. :)--King dude 00:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree on the watching a npc build a town a bridge etc thats something thats missing from allot of games real time persistence. All we seem to get is respawns after respawns no how creature is born takes the place of another creature eg a fly --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:122.109.43.82 (talk).

teamspeak support via guildwars

it would be handy to (for example if u go FoW with a party) to simply get an server for live chatting by a simple press on the button, hosted by gw. Sort of instanced team speaking services, when a party is created they get their own server, and to connect to it u will have to press a button (something like the hard/normal mode button) on the party menu. This way you dont have peope (for example in GvG) who are "oh srry i dont have teamspeak" or "i dont want to take 2 mins to download it" and others who are not that smart to get how it works. And once your party is disabandoned (1 human player left) there wont be an option to go teamspeak , becouse its not really necessary to chat with urself via GW chat servers. Assy Night 11:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I second the motion for Integrated Voice chat in Guild Wars 2, i really hope this becomes an option :) TY Crazy 12:22, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea but what if people don't have a mic? Also it costs monthly to pay for Ventrilo/Teamspeak so that might also be a problem.

Judging from the fact it costs a fee to use TS as it is, it would also cost ArenaNet more if they put it into their service. They're only a small company with a no-fee MMO, it might sound nice to have a built in TS within their servers but you've got to take ArenaNet's position into consideration. House Of Furyan 19:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

They can have their own voice chat, as long as I'm concerned, it doesn't have to be TS or vent. I know that VoIP is a working system over many multiplayer RTS servers, so it really should not be difficult, no? (Plus, It's a great thing to brag about over WoW) File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg nuke7 File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 20:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

They could have it, an in-game voice chat system, yet the costs at their end would increase. Would be nice but Guild Wars 2 is planned to be free (bar purchasing of the product) so keeping costs down will still be important for Guild Wars 2. House Of Furyan 01:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

but sorry i dont understand, why cant they? think about all those games that do it w/o a recurring a fee.. i believe (and dont quote me on this as i could be wrong) C&C3 had in game voice comms. Call of Duty 4 has in built voice comms, alot of games now do have it, even ones without recurring fees, although i do see your point as these are mostly larger companys with HUGE financial backing, but i reckon the geniuses at Anet can think up something:) Crazy 03:00, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

ArenaNet is a wholly-owned subsidiary of NCSoft, so you never know, ArenaNet might be able to pull some sort of in-game voice system off, as long as its pitched to NCsoft (who has massive resources) in the most cost effect uber cool way. Either that or I'm thinking about this the wrong way, eh I'm tired :P House Of Furyan 06:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, It's called Voice over IP. I really don't know how that system works, but I do know that it doesn't cost a recurring fee for the user. And I also think they can just dedicate this one serve for voice, really, it should not be that big a deal. But I lack technical expertise, so I IDK. Oh, and using TS for non commercial purposes is free, but you need to provide a server or you buy one, so that costs money.File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg nuke7 File:Nuclear7 sig image2.jpg 10:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)