So we all like to discuss why PvE is dead...

Very well said sir. That is precisely the way it should be.

The problem with that quote is that games like WoW and Left 4 Dead completely contradict that statement. The best rewards are given to those completing the hardest settings. But how much do most players really care about that? Maybe they just want to play in a comfortable difficulty setting and enjoy the game. If you just have one set difficulty then that has the potential to shut out both ends of the player spectrum, hardcore and casual.

Again, this is what difficulty settings are for: providing for different skill levels. Could you imagine someone on the L4D forums complaining about how hard Expert is? Everyone would just tell him to not play expert. That's what should happen in Guild Wars but apparently everybody should be given access to the hardest setting. Makes no sense.

I suppose it's a bit different in GW since harder settings get you more loot, but this is when you take into account that after you reach max armor or weapons there isn't a single thing you need for the game. It's all vanity and prettying up yourself. If someone is that desperate to look different then they might need a bit of help.

Might as well...

12. Add an 'ecto' button to your inventory screen, everytime you press it 1-10 ectos are added to your inventory.

13. Add a 'win' button to your skill bar, when pressed all foes with in Radar range die, instantly.

14. Add a /title command, that can max any title at will... /title 'Sunspear' woot, grind be gone.

I hope you were being sarcastic, I sure as RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO was....

As opposed to synchers, Heroway, cookiecutter team builds that the PvP community just seem to love? How can you tell that the post was representative of the PvE community and not PvPers as well? Oh, of course, because it didn't involve endless ranting, abuse, obscenities and calling everyone with a differing opinion a "scrub", yes, you're right...

Of course it came from the PvE community. The PvE community in general doesn't give a shit about game balance, and that guys post clearly reeks of not caring.

Oh, everyone should have access. But if they can't hack the difficulty, they should fail. I support the freedom to fail. If they water the challenge down to suit every shmoe who just wants to "blow stuff up" without bothering to put any thought or effort into playing, GW will end up as engaging Minesweeper.

Being able to play a developer version of a MMO, be it Guild Wars, WoW, or anything else, where you can just type in a command and give yourself all the best gear and skills, is a huge reality check.

If you can type in those commands and still want to play the game for many hours, you've found a good game. But if you type in those commands then just stare at your character...well, congratulations, you've found yourself a low paying job with no prestige.

(This is why game balance is important. Players looking for things other than loot require it for a rewarding game play experience, and while your power loot farmers scream endlessly for the developers to give them more carrots, the longevity of the game to them is 100% stick.)

Since when do PvPers want a god-mode button? We want a fair and balanced game where the person who performs the best wins. The person who is better at the game gets the rewards while the person who lacks in skill gets nothing. That is the opposite of a god mode button. We don't want everyone to succeed. We want the best to be the best and the worst to be the worst. The worst players do not deserve the same rewards as those who are better than them. That is the PvP world.

While I agree on what you say about the "top PvP world" (which is made mostly of the best players in the game and many have tons of patience and knowledge to share with those around them), it's certainly not true of the whole PvP world. It's been shown many times that some PvPers want titles, RPs, and even money by providing services for lazzy or unskilled players. Many PvPers are "unfair" in a completely different sense of the word, with bashig, insulting, irrespect, etc. Some people even enjoy pushing others so that they fail, indeed this is not "wanting everyone to succeed".

If PvPers want to embrace a new generation of players, they should stop trying to make people think that it's so clear cut. You're good or not, you perform or not, you have skill or not, you're IN or OUT. I know very well that a match is WIN or LOOSE, but what needs to be emphasized is not your guild rating, Balths amount or rewards. There is much fun to be had in PvP even if you don't win, it's called becoming better.

This is also why the GW PvP community won't grow, whereas the PvE community gets new players (and also looses tons, but it's also the nature of GW).

If I judged PvE players by the lowest quality part of their playerbase, I'd just pre-delete every post you made. You have to be fair when using that kind of logic. There's trash in every group.

What I do agree with is that there's not really much of an area for casual competitive play. The guild ladder just throws everyone together, which is particularly cut-throat.

I guess I'll chime in. The problem here is that too many types of players have too many types of suggestions.

1) Many PvPers believe that the answer is to remove PvE-only skills as well as try to balance PvE as much as possible. This is partialy because they want to get more PvEers into PvP - which others have claimed in recent threads is a very small community right now, and partially because of another reason I will mention below.

2) Farmers will farm in PvE regardless, many for the sake of farming because that's what they like to do - this means 'overpowered' builds are usually good to them if they can use them. Many farmers are also probably at least partially in group 3.

3) The virtual barbie doll collectors want to slow down the farmers and their overpowered builds so they can make enough in-game cash off their loot to buy the pretty things they want (many of us are at least partially in this category if not completely). Whereas farmers can spend most of their time farming, this category of players need time outside of farming to show off the goods to others.

4) The rpg players (not to be confused with roleplayers) want to play through new stuff and are usually not as biased one way or the other about whether skills are good or bad. They will however get really pissed off if they have to take time away from enjoying the game, scenery, story, etc to learn how to play differently because of a skill balance. They will either play with friends, play solo, or possibly play with pugs until they've tolerated enough of the so-called jerks of the virtual world to revert back to friends/solo.

so.. how can you 'fix' GW?
Group 1 - Well, I don't think this group will ever get the in-flux of pvpers from pve they want. PvP in Guild Wars is the equivalent to top raiding guilds in WoW. They are what some people like to hear about, sometimes watch, the ones the company likes to show off and promote, but ultimately the minority of the playerbase. Even though skill balances will help them enjoy the other part of the game, it'll still be sub-par to PvP.

there is no fix here...

Group 2 - We're not talking professionals here as they're a whole different category that most of us don't care about. Well these folks are always going to find something to farm, either due to a demand, or in many cases because the behavior they are exhibiting is the type of behavior they enjoy or feel most comfortable with. No matter what changes are made to the game they will find a way to farm or else if farming has become too cumbersome they will leave the game.

There's no need for a fix, but in many cases there's no breaking it either because they will always find a way to farm (even though they will complain when their most recent farm is nerfed) - or they'll find another game to farm if it happens too much..

Group 3 - This group is probably the most like group 1 because they, like group 1, usually enjoy the admiration, respect, awe, etc of their peers/other players more than anything else. Balancing is good in so much as it puts them on a more level playing field with group 2, just as balancing puts group 1 on a more level playing field with others from group 1.

In this case, balancing PvE can provide a short-term fix, but due to the nature of people obtaining resource from an unlimited source it can never be fixed in the long run with balances or anything else short of new content.

Group 4 - No amount of skill balancing will be able to fix the game for them if they see it as broken/dead. Both MMORPGs and non-MMORPGs have had this problem since they came into existence. Without new content, there is no fix.. period.. Many old MUDs, BBS Doors, etc introduced new content by changing the world either by making it randomly generated or making different maps for players to play throughout.

Balancing skills to fix this group's problem is like taking Fallout 1 or Fallout 2 and continuously changing the skills around. It will not cause people to play the game more than they normally would, with the replay in future years for a fling from the past. No matter how the skills are balanced, it doesn't change the fact that there is no content. Fallout 3 life is extended via DLC. Obsidian via DLC and user-generated content. WoW lives on due to new content. Runes of Magic - new content even as young as it is. Every form of RPG (maybe I'm missing a few) either lives or dies through new content. Even one of the oldest MMOs out there -> Ultima Online still lives because of new content.

There is no fix for this group once they have played through the game a few times without new content. Many of the suggestions here are leaning towards the WoW/treadmill types of longevity. Balancing the game will extend the game by making it take longer for new players to go through the content. Basically you're not extending the game by giving it more replay value, rather you're literally just making it take longer to go through the same amount of content. That's exactly what other MMOs do to keep people subscribing - find ways to slow them down.

The biggest problems seem to be with reconciling groups 1 and 4. I mentioned during the group 1 quip that there was another reason balance would be welcome in PvE to this group. This group, even while playing PvE will not think like those in group 4. Here's the reason.

Group 1 players are perfectly content with playing the same content over and over because they know the actions of the other players (their opponents/their environment) are unpredictable. They have that mentality. They are accustomed to it - same scenery, same arenas, different actions. This will not happen in PvE in the foreseeable future. Mobs just aren't that smart. They're scripted to a certain point and predictable. Changing skills doesn't make them less predictable, it just makes the actions different for a short time.

Group 4 plays the other direction. They play a lot in the beginning because they know everything is going to be new. They'll play through a few times until that newness completely wears off and then they'll move on or possibly change groups. No amount of skill balancing will change the fact that the PvE content is old. Mobs always act certain ways. The locations are always the same as they saw them before.

Now I imagine running is foreign to many of you, but there's a good comparison of these two groups to running. Some people have no problem doing all of their running by going to an outdoor or indoor track and circling the track day in and day out (or on a treadmill) till they've hit their mark for the run (improving their speed, for example). Other people need to run outside along varying paths or scenery in order to have a change of scenery when they run. I am one of those people. I had no problem running 10-12 miles consistently so long as I could vary up my paths, but I had a serious problem even running a few miles if it was on a treadmill or track.

For group 1, changing skills is good enough for their PvE experience because they think like that when they PvP - skills are different, the way you play is more important than where you play. Group 4 will have a problem because no matter how different the skills are, they are playing in places they have played over and over so skill balancing won't help group 4. It will only prolong the play of new group 4 members in the same sense that subscription MMOs try every trick in the book to extend play of their subscribers. In the end, they are going to play through X amount of content. It won't force them to learn to like their neighbors. They will still play their way, either with others or without others. DnD Online is a good example of a game that tried to force players to adventure in parties with other players.

So, to summarize
Group 1 - Skill balancing will make PvE more like PvP, but it will always be sub-par to PvP. It will not help them whatsoever in funneling PvEers into PvP en masse, which at this point in the game is a pipe dream.

Group 2 - Skill balancing hurts their way of play so long as they are capable of using the current overpowered builds. If they aren't capable of using/figureing out builds then skill balancing levels the playing field.

Group 3 - Skill balancing helps them to compete with group 2, but only until they have all of the items they are seeking. Eventually nothing can fix it in the long run save new content.

Group 4 - Once they've played through the game a few times, nothing can save the game for them except new content or friends they like to play with. They may continue to play, but it will still not be as good as it was when they first went through it.

So you wanna fix PvE (if its broken) without resorting to typical MMO methods of slowing the player down just to make the content seem longer? There's only one real answer - new content in some form or fashion, pure and simple.

This post isn't really meant to convince everyone. Someone really into the group 1 mindset will never understand the concept of group 4 just like someone really into the group 4 mindset will never understand the mindset of group 1.

I hope they figure something out in Guild Wars 2 because nothing they do will ever be able to reconcile group 1 and 4. I don't believe any MMO or RPG has ever been able to do that. MMOs actually have other groups such as hardcore raiders (kind of a combination of group 1 and 3), but they have their own ways of trying to reconcile the differences. New content seems to be the key in most cases.

ArenaNet has done well with content over the life of Guild Wars, and I imagine they still have plans for some new content here and there.

How have some others reconciled?
WoW - skill balancing since PvE and PvP aren't split, BUT by distracting PvEers by constantly providing new content. Also, the professional PvP play on WoW is handled separately from the regular gameplay - 20 dollars to joing the arena server where you have access to all gear available
War - by declaring from the get-go that Group 1 is their audience
Fallout 3 - DLC (new content)
Oblivion - DLC/user-generated content (new content)
Fury - Group 1 only - still an epic fail
UO - new content
RoM - new content in the form of Item Shop as well as upcoming xpac

As you'll notice, no two of those games are alike just as none of them are just like Guild Wars. I can't really think of many RPGs that still have a thriving player base without new content in the form of official content, user-generated mods/content, or randomly generated content in the first place. PvP stand-alone games can go on forever (see starcraft, chess) without any new content. While people will go back to a PvE game for the occasional flashback, they don't go on like pvp games without content, regardless of balances.

EDIT: One the same note, un-nerfing skills, allowing 7 heroes, etc etc will not save PvE either. It may provide some extended play, but is ultimately the same as finding other ways to extend the same amount of content. The only true way to save PvE is new content. Nothing else can really substitute for that.

To be fair to the post that suggested un-nerfing Ursan and other extreme changes, the last time my alliance actually functioned and had fun as a group was using Ursan in the elite areas. DoA, FoW, UW, etc. After the Ursan nerf people were on less, we never did things as much, and now I've basically lost contact with all but a few members of the alliance.

I'm not saying that the Ursan nerf caused the game to lose fun value, but it did, in a way, ruin what little our alliance had left in terms of being able to easily get people together to have a fun time. While the runs were about making money, of course, there was also the sense of enjoyment that came with it. That simplicity and joy is likely the reason most people trailed off, seeing as in the post-Ursan world only one or two of the alliance members moved onto Shadow Form speed clears, the rest just disappeared.

At any rate, though it was inevitable, I guess I should have specified that I didn't want this to turn into a PvE v. PvP war that was all about skill balance. I suppose by bringing life back into PvE I really meant encouraging group play, as opposed to resolving elite area balance issues. Personally, I haven't done any farming since the Ursan nerf, so the overpowered nature that exists in the areas doesn't really affect or bother me. In fact, it's nice knowing that should I ever dedicate myself to getting another set of obsidian armor, I might just have an efficient way of doing it.

That said, I've read through most of this topic, and I get the feeling that when I made my original post I was sort of viewing the game through nostalgia goggles. I always seem to be re-making characters, and I enjoy going through the "noob" areas of the game, like Shing Jea Island. I like when the game gives you skills, and when you only have a limited access to "noob" skills and have to make due. I guess this is a reflection of how what I really wanted was a way to revitalize that sense of discovery we all had when we first played through the game. Hell, I did it today, I felt like playing my assassin because I remembered a time back when I only had Prophecies and thought how cool it was when I saw an assassin shadow stepping.

So maybe this topic was in vain, maybe I was just trying to cover for some fond memories, hoping to get them back. At the very least we've established some good discussion. Maybe this topic will help Anet reflect on some changes they should make regarding PvE, and maybe we will get some revitalization. Doubtful, but hopeful. Keep up the good discussion.

and I'd like to agree with Ensign up there a bit - cmon, you didn't think I'd disagree with him did you? I don't believe skill balance is an all or nothing thing like some people do. Games need some semblance of skill balance so they don't press I WIN because they does somehow lessen the game. I just believe the level of skill balance (and frequency) required for a PvP game is different than that required for a PvE experience. When the two sides were tied together, PvE was really balanced more than it needed to be. It really comes down to that. Don't do more than you need to keep the game fun. If a balance is required to keep it fun, fine. If a balance does not make the game more fun (in one aspect, not both), then its not balance - its micromanaging skills. Governments try to do that all the time. Keep it simple.

I'd give an example that fixing a skill that lets someone run through UW invincible, very quickly, very easily, then that requires some kind of balance, since its an event that affects other groups of people indirectly and heavily. If a skill makes a mob invincible or extremely difficult beyond what it should be - balance it or nerf it, whatever. If a skill is being changed in PvE because it affects PvP, well that has no place in PvE, and vice versa.

EDIT: In that sense, ArenaNet splitting the PvE skills from PvP was a good thing. At this point, there's not a reasonable expectation for masses of PvEers to all of a sudden learn about PvP. By splitting the two, I think it will affect at least an order of magnitude of people than others think. Does it inconvenience some people? The few PvPers that PvE (from what I saw in the other forums the PvP community in this game is very small) as well as the very few people that may all of a sudden discover PvP from PvE. It's a small sacrifice to inconvenience those two groups in order to not inconvenience the larger group of people that just play PvE. I suppose only ArenaNet can really give accurate numbers, so as far as any of us know there could be many times more PvPers than PvEers... It's hard for me to believe people here in the forums get confused when using pvp/pve split skills. Maybe I think too highly of some of the people here. I certainly haven't had any problems. A couple of times I built a skillbar only to change it once I went to a PvP outpost and realized it was a bit different, but I was lost.

I guess Guild Wars is a good game then, because I'd love to give myself a ton of ecto and buy some obsidian armor and what have you. Even once I had that I'd find plenty of enjoyment in the game. PvE gets tiresome, but new experiences help revitalize it, even if all the new experience is is the same mission with different armor on your character.

So why aren't you judging PvErs by the highest quality part of their playerbase? Because you think Guru is representative maybe? I don't even think you're a good judge of what is said on this forum, yet I'll respect all your posts because I trust you know more than I do on certain topics. You admitted being arrogant, this casts doubts on your ability to moderate fairly. But let's stop here.

Indeed there's trash in very group. And as I said the best PvPers are better than the best PvErs at mastering the game mechanics. I disagree on them being "better at the game", because GW is more than button smashing and "I win" binary mentality. And if you want fairness, you should talk more about the trash part of PvP community rather than bashing PvErs day in, day out.

There's probably like 2 PvPers who actually bash lower level players. Those people are probably retarded anyway, and your retard detection should pretty much set him/her to ignore.

99.9% of PvPers welcome new players to PvP because nobody plays PvP anymore. Any new blood is always highly welcome by the PvP community so we can actually get matches at night.

Unlike PvE, PvP requires you to be nice to everyone because if everyone leaves because you're a fag, you can't play the game anymore.

With the exception of bilateral hostile relationships amongst decently well known PvPers, that probably are just for shits and giggles, most PvPers are nice to everybody. I don't understand where you're getting this "fag PvPer" preconception from.

I understand what you were trying to say :-)

As far as trying to encourage group play. That's pretty complex. For example, in most games outside the online world (soccer, football, baseball, volleyball, monopoly, settlers of catan, etc) there are really two types of group play. One is the PvP aspect - opponents paying against each other, even if it is a free for all. The second form involves teams, whether team vs team or team vs some accomplishment. I'm guessing you're not talking about the first form in PvE :-)

So, that leaves us with the second form. The second form is very much alive and well in Guild Wars. They are the people in guilds and alliances. They are the people that you know, whether before the game or met during the game. There aren't a whole lot of games out there that involve group random people up to play together. I can't really think of any off the top of my head. Even playing soccer with friends and switching up teams means you are playing with people that you know usually. Playing competitive sports means you join a team, get to know them, and then play with them.

The idea of playing games cooperatively with strangers is something kinda unique to MMOs and it comes down to - why is this desired? I mean the idea here is people want to pug then go their ways. I never saw why that was desired. If people want to pug to meet new people that they plan on becoming friends with or joining in guilds, etc then that's reasonable - just like any other social behavior. I brought some friends into GW and they specifically made it clear they don't really care to play solely with strangers and will either solo when friends aren't online or just not play altogether. In this case, we all met new people and became friends with some when we occasionally filled out our group.

There are online games that force people to play with strangers if you don't have friends/guild mates. Dungeons and Dragons Online was one (may have changed). Raiding in most other games usually requires you to be in a guild - you can pug as long as you understand there can be a lot f grief involved.

If you think of it this way - a typical response on the forums to people wanting to bring back groups is to join a guild or play with friends. A lot of time those people will respond by saying they don't have any friends in-game, they don't want to make friends in-game, or they don't feel they need to join a guild to play in a group. Well, why would anyone want to play with a person like that? The exception being the people in guilds or having friends in-game but having none of them online. If someone doesn't want to make friends online or doesn't want to join a guild to make friends, why would anyone really want to party up with that person?

A lot of games throw in features or have players desiring features because its the norm without ever thinking about why we want that. I don't want to play with people that feel they are being forced to party. I don't want to party up with people that would otherwise choose not to party up with other people if they didn't have to (the current situation). I think trying to find ways to make people party up is a bad way of going forward. Most of those same people wouldn't walk up to someone on the street and say 'hey, want to go to the mall with me for a while'.. The reality is people can turn into real assholes in online games. People can be real assholes in real life. If they don't want to guild up and don't have anyone to play with in-game, chances are they are one of those assholes and I for one don't want to be forced to party up with them.

I think lutz has hit the point head on here, which a lot of other people don't realize. In fact, I'm pretty sure of it from the PvP I've played lately (took a break from the game for a short time to play some other games). I have had very few bad experiences in the PvP I've played lately - not GvG. There are a few, but nothing like the early days. I think the early PvP environment scarred a lot of people that tried it out. Just like in PvE there were a shitload of visible assholes in PvP (not talking GvG, which is usually people you already know). For exactly the reason that lutz mentioned this drove a lot of people away from PvP (you couldn't pvp by yourself to avoid many of those assholes), whereas in PvE you could just avoid them.

PvP does seem a lot nicer nowadays. The PvP community really shot itself in the foot early on in that sense and is suffering now. I don't think GvG ever had that problem, but Team, Random, and HA had that problem a lot. Back then players could be really picky since there were so many, which in turn ruffled a lot of feathers. Now, that has come back to haunt the non-GvG side of PvP because now you are really stuck with whoever's around.

Even random has been pleasurable for the most part.. Every now and then you get an ass, but nothing like it used to be.

Honestly, when I started out there were quite a bit of players in the lower end of GvG who were extremely cocky, ignorant, and rude to everyone else. However I started out 3 years ago so the playerbase was larger.

Even though I haven't played in about 2 months I still remember some of the lower ranked guilds being pretty full of themselves and trash talking no matter what. If they lose they call bullshit because they think they are amazing and you got lucky and if they win they like to rub it in because they probably don't win that often.

That attitude doesn't bother me because I have pretty thick skin and have actually played at a competitive level, but I can see where it would effect a newcomer into PvP. While most players from your play level and mine (which was the level right under yours when I still played) are generally nice and see the advantages of new players and welcome them, the players they have to face most often when starting out are pretty rude.

Now by all means, I'm not saying all of them are like that, but you would be surprised just how many there are considering your use of the number 2 as to the amount of people who are dicks.

I'm talking about generally the top 400 and 500 guilds (probably even top 700 and 800), not the random people you see at rank 2,000. I mean, of course those people at rank 2,000 matter, but they aren't looked upon as the real essence of the PvP community. Plus, most of the time getting matches with them are worse than sitting in the guild hall waiting for a match, since they consist of: 0:30 - wipe their team, 1:20-2:00 - wipe lord pit, 2:00 - wipe team again, 2:45 - win game.

If you wanted to start PvP, it's probably suggested you take good friends that are willing and you're already familiar with - even if they're from PvE. A player willing to learn is always better than a decent player who thinks they already know everything. Sure, you might get shittalked by rank 3000 guilds, but really, once you get a little bit higher, all of that goes away. Those rank 3000 guilds don't really have a significant impact on the PvP community. Obviously there's an entry level where all the arrogant 13 year olds stay at, but once you get a little past that, it's pretty clear from there.

If you have questions about breaking into PvP/GvG, I'm sure most PvPers would be willing to spend a little bit of time helping you with builds and very basic strategy. They're just glad you're playing, and they actually get matches when they click the "Enter Guild Battle" button.

I wish 99.9% of PvPers would welcome me to PvP with them at HA. Too bad its all "LF rank 6++". I'm not saying PvPers are jerks, but they do want to separate themselves from PvE players who are just starting to PvP. Therefore it is difficult to get started PvPing, because your generally with a group of "newbies" at PvP.

I personally don't have a problem with Speed clears or dungeon running. In fact it makes the items I want more affordable. It also allows me a chance to actually be in a group with REAL people. The rewards are still high, an eternal sword or BDS would really make my day (or even month).

I would like to see more content, skins, items, consumables.

Tombs is a terrible place to play Guild Wars. It is the ultimate shithole of players. I'm not saying everyone there is a jerk, but a large percentage of really bad (and I mean just unteachable bad) and arrogant players, far larger than anywhere else in PvP, reside there.

If you want to play HA, get a group of friends you already know, and maybe pug 1 or 2 nice people.
Generally, I'd suggest syncing in RA first, and moving on to TA, then to GvG.
Syncing in RA is pretty easy, as long as you move to the asian districts.

Why Pve is dying? I do not think it's SF's fault. SF is just what is keeping people playing GW honestly. I think pve is dying because of the lack of new content, general bad design of areas, layout of high end dungeons pomoting gimmick styles rather than balanced parties. Some classes who are clearly subpar, and for last, the lack of a reward.


If I do bogroot in 40 minutes with a balanced build (for example) and end chest drops me nothing I'd be more oriented toward replaying that dungeon with a gimmick because in 40 minutes I'd be able to do the same area 3 times and get a much better reward while still having fun.


PVP died because of Anet's choices regarding NF, and also the fact they stopped supporting events and competitive play apart fromt he fact that GW pvp community ain't that friendly or open to newcomers (plus the learning curve).

Most Gvgers are friendly and will share suggestions but entering a gvg guild and climbing the ladder is hard. On the other hand most HAers are assholes, while HA is way easier than GvG the unfriendly factor makes it a frustating experience (lol R10 Iways).

I knew you were referring to the part of the pvp community that actually matters to guys like us because when I speak about the PvP community I usually do so with only the competitive guilds in mind also. But the problem is the fact that usually newer players first impression of the PvP world isn't with guys like me or you. They aren't going up against a GeAr, yumy, or uP. They are facing those rank 2000-3000 scrubs as we like to call them. So you and I both know that goes away once you actually start improving, but they don't.

Most of the newer players interested in PvP are leaving behind their PvE guild and alliance that they had been in for years and everyone was really friendly and nice to them. They wanted a new challenge and PvP sounded like fun. They tried getting into a guild but kept being told they weren't experienced enough so started to get a little frustrated. Finally they find a guild but it is filled with players just like them, so they obviously aren't going to win a lot. Couple all the losses with a lot of their opponents being rude toward them, and they really start to miss their PvE guild and think PvP is filled with elitist a-holes.

I'm glad you pointed out that if they just take the time to ask a high end player for a few tips, he is more than likely going to indulge them as long as he isn't in a GvG atm. A lot of people don't know that and for whatever reason, are afraid of bothering the top players. Hell the majority of players would guest for lower guilds if they weren't busy. People just seem to be too afraid to ask.

Honestly I just think there is a huge image problem and we are portrayed as ignorant elitists because when they are trying to enter into PvP they get made fun of by those rank 2000 scrubs, and end up losing the motivation needed to get past that level of play.

Pretty much everyone in HA thinks they are gods gift to Guild Wars and the GvG community pretty much dismisses them as a part of us. However, if you are new to PvP, you can't expect an experienced group to just add you. They want to win and farm fame. They don't want to teach you how to play. Fame is a good indicator of how experienced you are at HA. It doesn't show skill, but it shows you have played it enough to have a certain level of understanding. I don't suggest anyone play HA exclusively. I suggest people learn the game from GvG and then if you want a bambi go with your GvG guild once GvG activity hits a low and you cant get a match.

If I have to choose between finishing all things I want to do with the profession I like and it is my main character and discarding everything I've made with that character and switch to another, playing with a boring build I don't like because it's the only one people want in some places.

When we are getting all assassin parties, to make entire dungeons, and people only ask for that and tell you "If you don't like it, make an assassin", there is something worn.
If any group prefer an assassin over an elementalist, there is something VERY wrong.
If any profession, any of the 10, can't join groups and successfully complete any task in the game in any area because people only go for the 'optimal' combination of professions and skills, that's something to fix.

One time having people people asking for permasin assassins and only permasin assassins to make shards of Orr, is one time too much.

Yeah, I can do that, I have the skills, the items, the skill and the build. But it's useless to me unless it's the character I want to be, not the character others want me to be.

All the more reason to bring Ursan back. But the majority of what is left of the community seems to want every class to equally suck.

Why do you all think GW really started going downhill after the Ursan Nerf? The one thing that was promoting group play and actually allowing people that were not one of the 4 main professions to get into groups, which was one of the main issues in GW before EOTN. Now that everything remotely fun has been repeatedly nerfed, it is back to 3-4 professions or GTFO and now everyone wants to nerf even more.

That's rather subjective.


How do you fix that, short of bringing back something like Ursan, but revamped so that literally every aspect of every class is the same (energy regen, armor, attack speed, etc...)? Otherwise, it's overly idealistic.

Paragons are always going to be weaker in the first 3/4 of prophesies because of the smaller party size, for example. When cry gets hit with the nerf-stick again (and we all know it will...) then mesmers are going to be back in the perma-H/H boat. Assassins, unable to perma any more, will likely again be disregarded as narutards who invite fail into the team.

You really can't have a game with seperate classes with any real overlap in which all classes are as good in the general case as all others. Even in single-player games that's the case (Who *really* uses the Blue Mage in Final Fantasy, for example, other than completionists who want to cap every monster skill? )

New content would be fun for maybe two months at best. Adding a whole new campaign could keep the casual players entertained for longer, but I'm not so sure about that either.

People will start leaving after they have played through the new campaign though, so this will not fix anything.

Likewise, adding new realms (like FoW and the UW) will not do anything. No one will return, because it's just one thing in a large game. You do this realm once, and after that it's just repetition, and repeating things is not fun at all.


Removing the PvE skills will not do anything at this point in time, except make more players leave than return. The players who return will find that it's still the same old game, with the same old content, with the only difference being that there are no longer any PvE skills.

This may make PvE a little more challenging, but face it: the majority of players playing PvE do not want it to be challenging. They want shiny stuff.

This is also the case with consumables and other PvE exclusive items.

(the majority of PvE players are not the ones posting on forums; they are the ones quietly playing the game, not caring about the drama that's happening on the forums)

While this is a good solution, you will still have players crying because Guild Wars has become more challenging. The number of players leaving because of this will be a lot smaller than the number of players leaving when you take out PvE skills/consumables, I think, but I am not so sure if this will cause people to return and actually stay. After all, they have already beaten the game so they have no reason to play through it again.

The solution that will probably cause the largest number of players to return and the fewest number of players to leave is a combination of solution 1 (new content) combined with solution 3 (updated AI/randomizing skill bars).





PS: lutz and StillNumberOne, keep in mind that this discussion is about PvE, not PvP.

Ursan can be pretty much summed up like this:
"Doctor, my leg hurts"
"Alright, we'll just chop it off!"
It was the completely wrong way to solve the problem.

I don't bash PvE because of arrogance or disrespect.

I bash it because I've PvE'd quite a lot and have a fair idea of the player requirements compared to PvP.

Those were some pretty good articles you wrote. I realized something important while reading them. You and Fril should just agree to disagree. You two will never see eye to eye and will never understand each other (assuming Fril is more of a group 4 person).

I imagine he's someone from what I described as Group 4 in an earlier post. You, by every one of those articles are a shining example of Group 1. There's no doubt in my mind at this point. I think you probably understand PvE builds more than most people in the game. I also realized by those articles you that are a group 1 player that plays PvE (group 1) and by no means Group 4. Everything in those articles was basically about power/stat gaming. There's nothing wrong with that, but you and he will never see eye to eye. I don't think the two groups ever can. There are groups in games like DnD as well (traditional) where its all about min/maxing the builds/stats and everything else comes second. The PvE content (story, quests, scenery) is nice to group 1 but will always be second to stats.

Again, there's nothing wrong with that. All groups of people have a stake in the game. You were just a good example of someone from a particular group I mentioned. Someone from group 4 may enjoy games such as White Wolf's storyteller games or games where numbers/challenge aren't quite as important as the play/story. DnD was a good mix of the different types of play. There was room for monty-haulers, min/maxers, roleplayers, even rules lawyers.

I'm not sure if you play FPS games or not (one of the types of PvP games I play along with many hard strategy games), but I used to play with some pretty hard core group 1 people that would turn the graphics settings all the way down on the FPS games they played because that wasn't as important as the actual activities within the game (finding the perfect strategy, taking the perfect action in response to another action). I think you may have a bit of group 2 in you since you seem to be good a solo farming builds, but I think that's a smaller part. A buddy of mine was pretty hardcore group 1 and group 2 where he would go through the same routine over and over for hours to find the perfect combination of weapon/mods/skills even though it wouldn't increase his farming runs noticable just because the biggest thrill to him were the numbers. As far as quests he would just click through them and follow the stars because lore was second to the perfect build and farming. He would also skip cinematics because they didn't matter, a very good example of group1/2 mix.

Now if we can just find some other perfect examples maybe people will start understanding that there's no solution to make everyone happy. There's too much difference in the types of players that Guild Wars caters too.

I'm also curious. I described Group 1 in terms of being a PvPer because that's the type of person that normally comprises that group, but in the exampe I gave you I realized a person could not ever play PvP and still be totally group 1. I think it probably has more to do with numbers/stats and tactics than anything else, which again is why it fits in PvP more than PvE. I suppose that a pure PvEer could be group 1 as well but its only a coincidence since a person in group 1, concerning themselves mainly with builds and stats, would have a lot of what comprises PvE (the environment) wasted on them. If you don't PvP then I think you'd be a good example of a non-pvp group 1 player, but I suspect you primarily PvP and as such in your PvE time its still more about numbers than actual content. Again, nothing wrong with that - that's what makes online games great..

Have you ever stood on Anvil Rock and looked out over the zone? I used to give tours to people to check out all the scenic locations most people had never heard of in the game while I was running em somewhere :-) I don't quite understand the hardcore group 4's myself. I've never been able to understand some of the LARP groups I've seen that literally ad lib everything and play without set rules. It seems more like acting to me. However, back in the day we did actually try a role playing game where there were no rules - everything was interpreted by the GM.

BTW: I do PvP (don't think I'm primarily a group 1 since I was never able to get into FPS games by turning the graphics all the way down to squeeze the last frame out of it) and if anyone is heading up to QuakeCon next month maybe we can hook up and game together. I've tried a lot of RPG PvP, just never really got into it as much other other types. I either go all out twitch (usually FPSers nowadays - not a lot of flyers I like anymore), hard strategy (usually turn based), or realtime strategy. I prefer team based PvP most of the time. I see RPG PvP as a team based combination of real time strategy and light twitch (especially when concerning kiting). Being a Marine Corps veteran probably influences my tendencies towards small fast paced squad based tactics - is makes it surprising I don't do team based RPG PvP so much (GvG I mean since I play the rest).

EDIT: btw, don't read any of that as an anti-you message or anything like that. It thrilled me a bit to find a shining example of one of the groups I was talking about... I think that's pretty cool.

Your posts in this thread are a great read and an excellent analysis of the situation. But ultimately both PvP and PvE are about numbers, but in a totally different form: PvP considers the whole range of numbers, from damage/healing under all their forms (regen, degen, prot, direct bonus, weapon spell, spirits, IAS) down to the numerical advantages given by IMS (getting out of the way of damage or inside heal zones, splitting as in "coverage of the map"), kd (time is a resource in PvP) and the map (obstacle, height, shrines, positioning). It's a totally different ballgame, but PvE considers a small (sometimes tiny) part of the exact same equation.

Of course you're right to say that people from different groups will play the "number game" in opposing ways, from the PvPer who carefully chains skills depending on precisely what's happening and where, down to the RPer who wants to play a story and enjoy imagining a fantasy world. But there's a range of gameplay where all the subtlety of GW mechanics (well, if it was to work as stated) is used, not just PvP. HM PvE played without the OP has a lot of the ingredients to make a good basis for PvP, with a different mindset.

Last, but not least, the top-end PvP world has a different kind of perspective on identity, where they strongly encourage players to be recognised, both for everyone to know where you come from and from promoting a "model of excellence". This mentality is alien to PvE, where at beast some big guilds are recognised plus a few players organising events for example. In PvE people are no ones and don't want to become a someone, anonymous fun if you will.

(ok so in your own terms, I'm saying that there are probably levels between groups 1, 3 and 4; furthermore, we don't have to belong to one group in particular, I bet a good number of people play a bit of everything without a significant dedication to one)

yeah, both (in fact all) involve numbers, but for many people ,such as the last group, the numbers are a means to an end - to play through the content. In the case of some other people, the numbers ARE the end and the means. I think in group 1 they can either be the end and the means (in the case of people trying t find the perfect build for the purpose of having the perfect build and for others the numbers and tactics are just as much the end as using those numbers and tactics to win..

I think that's the biggest difference. For farmers, the numbers are just a means to find the optimal end (most farmed).

Take non-computer RPGs - everyone relies on numbers in most of them. For many types of players those numbers are just part of the game that that revolves around the adventures/content - which is the purpose of the game to them. Others in the min/maxing category find numbers to the be primary focus of the game with the rest of the content being there to test out their theories/builds.

You're absolutely right that in most cases numbers are important, just for different reasons. People that don't care anything about how the game works still need to know enough about tactics/builds/etc to be able to see the different areas. If they don't know anything or don't have any idea how it works, all they'll see if pre-searing.. :-)

The typical content-lover will not go through the content to see how their numbers work, rather they'll figure out how the numbers work to see the content. A min/maxer is just the other way around. A min/maxer will use the content to make sure their numbers (and remember, I actually mean other stuff too like tactics, I'm just not repeating all of them) work optimally in all cases. At least that's how traditional RPG (tabletop) players split up, and at least some people in game I've seen - and read about. That's the biggest difference. One is a test of the mind while the other is the indulgence of the imagination :-) That's only two types and not even considering any combination of the groups.

Again, don't take this as anything other than just a layman's observation. I'm not a psychologist. I develop and reverse engineer software for a living, and before that my job was to kill people (a different kind of PvP)...

I played enough RPG to know that . But I always was a big fan of number-less RPGs like Over The Edge or Amber where ambiance and RP are central.

There's another key issue. You greatly enjoyed games that suited your playstyle.

Guild Wars is a group 1 game. There's no other way to really put it. Yes, the graphics are nice, but the storyline is shallow, and pretty much 100% of the gameplay is about hack-and-slash leading up to competitive play.

Why then, should it be suspect that the measure of skill and ability in Guild Wars is about how proficient you are at the above tasks?

I told Avarre I would reply to the in-topic things in here so this is more of a for the group type of thing.

As far as Guild Wars being a group 1 favored game - I believe, just my opinion/interpretation of their interviews, that they were originally thinking of that kind of player when they made the game. After all, that's the primary Magic: TCG player - remember you don't have to be a Magic:TCG player to be a collector. I used to play Magic extensively and can see that.

However, I don't think they ever had a single vision of the game all the way through. I think they flip-flopped over the years and finally realized what had happened - hence the reboot with GW2. From a business standpoint, they could have left out the PvE player base, and it would have probably succeeded at some level - NOT the level it actually reached by including both sides.

The scenery and extensive areas you can explore were definitely created for the other groups of players. Whether this was a business decision to bring in as many players as possible or because they didn't feel like making an RPG with only PvP (which Fury later attempted somewhat) without the traditional PvE aspect, I don't know.

Elite areas I think were good group 1, 2, and 3 areas since they were meant to be repeatable and somewhat difficult. Even group 4 folks would enjoy it a few times, though as with any content it would get old faster for group 4 folks I think than anyone else.

They flipped back and forth when they introduced PvE-only skills. At that point in time they decided they do want the group 4 folks around because PvE-only skills don't really do anything for group 1 because then it becomes less about the skill/numbers/tactics and more about what you can go see. I don't think many people argued they made the game easier for people that used them, and I think that was their purpose - group 4 folks don't need the game to be too challenging to enjoy the game, though I think making the game too easy can reduce the overall enjoyment, but that's a personal opinion like everything else here.

Titles - well pvp titles (or title) were always around if I recall.. namely rank. New pvp titles were invented for group 1 folks that wanted to show stuff off, and PvE titles were created. Titles, initially, I think were purely for anyone that at least partially fell into group 3. In the beginning it was all about showing off that you were either 1) a good pvper, 2) a good farmer, or 3) seen all the content.

The next type of titles were a different story. They really were about prolonging the game. While they could benefit the group 3 part of people, the6y were designed so that the real benefactors (groups 2 and 4) had to spend quite a bit of time to reap the benefits - namely powerful pve-only skills that either made it easier to farm or easier to go see everything, even things they couldn't see before - such as Domain of Anguish. While they had perceived benefits to various players, I think they were game extenders.

The PvE/PvP split was obviously (in my opinion) a decision to make the game appeal to all of the groups and not one particular group. The people that have the most problem are people either in multiple groups or people in group 1 that actually spend time in the PvE world because then you basically have to keep up with two sets of rules. It would be like Magic:TCG with different sets of errata for Type 1, 1.5, and 2 along with the restricted/banned lists. The gamble I think they made is that this constitutes the minority of the players, which is probably true.

So, I'd say GW started out mainly group 1 in mind vision-wise but with group 4 in mind business-wise. Over the years all kinds of patches have been slapped on it to make it what it is now, which really isn't a group 1, 2, 3, or 4 game. I don't think it actually has a central vision anymore concerning GW, hence the reboot with GW2.

They definitely marketed both groups. After all, there weren't a whole shitload of arena pvp-only games out there that required subscriptions at the time - hence the "No Fees" marketing was definitely towards MMRPG players, probably the other groups.

With GW2, if they removed arena PvP (pvp-only play) then they have less headache balancing play while having reasonable expectations business-wise, requiring a periodic influx of new content. If they dropped PvE and made it PvP-only (ala Fury without the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOups), they would maintain what I think was their original vision and have a steady, but probably very small, player base - no expectations of extensive content like PvE, but continuous skill balances without the added worry of pissing of the other half of their player base. We know they're doing both from what they've said, so don't expect GW2 to be specifically tailored to any particular group of GW1 players.

The original game, I think, was made for people like Avarre, while many features of the game were added specifically for people like Fril while the vision was always towards people like those we see in the GvG tourneys.

sorry, just generalizations about their purpose I realize many people, in reality saw it as:
1) knows iway, 2) knows how to use the latest forum build, 3) well, guess that was pretty much seen all the content, whether ran or not..

EDIT: and btw, someone on these forums came up with a nice mathematical fix for the pve/pvp split that could be implemented in Guild Wars 2. I wish I could remember who it is so I could give credit. If skills are powered based on a curve then arena pvp could be handled by down leveling participants to level X with is considerably below level Y. Warhammer RvR actually does the opposite. In each zone all characters will be temporarily leveled up to a particular level to make the fighting a bit more fair (example a lvl 15 char will temporarily become lvl 18 with everyone else).

By down leveling characters in PvP (arena pvp, not world pvp) an example here would be:

maximum level being 100, PvP level being 50
changes needed to balance PvP would be near negligible to the characters at level 100. In this case you can balance the numbers around all you want for PvP and in most cases it will not have a noticeable effect on those characters closer to the maximum level. When they go play PvP, they are brought back down to level 50.

I dunno who it was that came up with it, but I think it would help the balancing issue pissing off non-pvpers. Builds would be different anyhow, but PvE and PvP builds have usually always been different from each other.

dunno, sounds interesting - at least for someone to think on it more.

Basically the way I see it is, who cares?

The game is dying. Enough said. Not PvE is dying, the GAME is dying. Anet has already released everything they want to release for GW1. All they are doing now is nerf, nerf, and more nerfing. The more the community abuses something, the sooner it will be nerfed. And we have no right to complain, cause it's our faults that these skills are nerfed. Just face it. The game is dying. Just like AoC and WoW. AoC died fast. WoW died after WotLK. It is just GW's time.

Yeah you love the game, then play it. Stop complaining and whining about how you know what needs to be fixed and how you know everything about what is wrong with this game and only your OPINION is correct. Who cares? Anet sure doesn't. The game has come to it's finest point, and nothing more. Anet is already working on GW2, so don't expect changes or new content. Why would they implement stuff into an old game, when they can add it to the new one? The point is, nothing is going to happen to make this game "Revive" itself. No matter how much you whine and carry on, nothing will happen. All you will get is more nerfs, and maybe, just maybe, more buffs if you are good.

All their work and efforts are going into GW2. Yeah, playerbase is going to die down within two years of no new content or changes, but oh well. It happens. Do they care? Not really. They are working on a new game that probably most of you will come back if you left, just to try it out. I know I will. If I leave this game before it comes out, it doesn't mean that I won't be back for the sequel. Sure this game will die before it comes out, but there is new players almost every day that will keep it going and still enjoy what we have already been through. Just learn to move on and play something else.

Remember, it's just a game. Just like any other game, it won't last forever. Sure you had an amazing time playing your first time and even after a few years, still have fun playing. But over time, it is just natural for a game to become boring. That is when you take responsibility for yourself, and play another game for awhile. Or heck, I don't know, go out and do something else besides criticizing video games on a forum all day, acting like you know everything. IT'S A GAME, NOT A LIFE DECISION. Move on and wait for the sequel.

They can also make the monsters easyer wile nerfing SF. I wouldn't mind too much since i don't get any respect from the pvp side anyway.

Most places of the game are perfectly doable on HM with rag tag pugs. I know because i do almost all the Zquests. Exept the elite areas wich no one ever seems to do without broken builds. So for all i care they can tone them down. If you make the damage output of enemies so high they vaporize anything not under SF or PS in one hit, you pretty much ask for gimmicky builds.

Tone down those elite areas, Anet. People who claim they are easy only use SF anyway.

Because deep down Anet/NCsoft want GW to die as it will mean more purchases for GW2 when it comes out. Of course that is hypothetically speakings, but, it is also a market strategy that has proven to work. Create things in the new and give inklings about the new while the old wears itself down and out.

Oh sure there will be diehards that won't leave GW for anything, but, eventually when the crowds are gone so to will be the players. People are like mice really or lemmings and will follow the crowd to the next thing of interest. Anet/NCsoft are the pied pipers and will drive the excitement from GW to GW2 as time progresses. Once you get a demo taste of GW2 most of you will probably be ready and will move on. Once GW is dead enough or not worth it to keep supporting the costs they will pull the plug like they did on AUTO ASSAULT and TABULA RASA. I can't believe some people would be so naive to think NCsoft wouldn't pull the plug on GW when it is no longer cost effective.

Thats completely wrong. Everyquest is still played, Diablo 1 is still played, warcraft 3 reign of chaos is still played, Dawn of war is still played, winter assault is still played, dark crusade is still played, metal gear solid 3 subsistance is still played, mortal kombat deception is still played, call of duty 4 modern warfare is still played. All those games and more are still played by many even though newer releases have come out.

As for Auto Assault and Tabula Rasa, neither of those games are guildwars. You ever hear, "Three times the charm"? If Ncsoft has anything to do with another game being shut down after they have milked players for their money, then players will understand guildwars 2 and Aion and everything else attached to NCsoft is headed for the exact same route and people won't spent their money on anything connected with NCsoft. NCsoft will vanish.

I know plenty of AA and TR fans who said RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO NCsoft and started playing games with no connection to that company. They will never give NCsoft a chance again for any reason. If guildwars is shut down like those other games, then expect to see games tied to NCsoft taking massive hits. This is one reason why Guildwars isn't played by more people. They expect GW to die and become unplayable.

That being said, if GW gets taken off life support and people keep on buying products with the NCsoft brand name, then they deserve what they get. But I believe for the most part, guildwar players will learn not to trust the company ever again and instead choose to play something else.