Currently they are Kamadan, Kaineng Center and Lion's Arch / Boreal Station.
Problem is in Kamadan you can only have 4 players in the party, while in Kaineng you can have 8 and LA 6. Mapping with heroes is slightly annoying, because you need to reform your party after every pivot. I realize one can always pivot via Embark Beach, but travelling directly is just faster. I don't usually pivot via Boreal Station either because I want to stop by Lion's Arch and see who's buying and selling there.
Suggestion: change pivot points Lion's Arch -> Droknar's Forge and Kamadan -> Sunspear Sanctuary (or Kodash Bazaar, or similar). You can find the Rune Traders and Material traders there too, so no harm done.
Change pivot points between campaigns
Jeydra
FoxBat
The existing points can't be changed because it would mess up port access for new players. E.G. new prophecies toon just reaches lion's arch and travels to kaineng, how are they going to travel back to droknar's forge?
Embark beach shows they can clearly add NEW points however, and there's plenty of space there in that list for expansions that are never coming out. One 8-player point for tyria and elona would be welcome. I also hit the battle isles enough that boreal station would be nice. Still this is unlikely to change the trade hubs which are established partly due to early access, you're going to have to lose those heroes to trade in LA and kamadan.
Embark beach shows they can clearly add NEW points however, and there's plenty of space there in that list for expansions that are never coming out. One 8-player point for tyria and elona would be welcome. I also hit the battle isles enough that boreal station would be nice. Still this is unlikely to change the trade hubs which are established partly due to early access, you're going to have to lose those heroes to trade in LA and kamadan.
Del
Seriously? You want this changed because you're too lazy to add heroes over again?
/notsigned
/notsigned
Shayne Hawke
As explained above, it's unlikely that the points could be changed, but I wouldn't object to adding a new station for Tyria and Elona that each allow for eight player parties.
Instead of Droknar's Forge, I would suggest using Temple of the Ages, for its popularity and proximity to Lion's Arch. Sunspear Sanctuary for Elona is fine.
Instead of Droknar's Forge, I would suggest using Temple of the Ages, for its popularity and proximity to Lion's Arch. Sunspear Sanctuary for Elona is fine.
cosyfiep
would have been nice to have the points at the same 'points' in the chapters, but its kinda too late now to fix (they ditched the whole thing when they made kamadan the hub...)
KotCR
Yeah, this annoys me too, but as mentioned it's probably too late to change it now. Would just add alot of confusion and the tradeoff wouldn't be worth it.
It's only moving to Nightfall that's the problem really anyway though, seems you can just move on over to Boreal Station for any location in Tyria.
It's just a pity that the Nightfall pivot happens to be the one with the smallest party size, too...
It's only moving to Nightfall that's the problem really anyway though, seems you can just move on over to Boreal Station for any location in Tyria.
It's just a pity that the Nightfall pivot happens to be the one with the smallest party size, too...
Kook~NBK~
/not signed. Re-forming a party isn't that hard to do.
epervier
I'm against any idea to change the ports of call (Lion's Arch, Kaineng Center, Kamadan) as they are now.
I could like this idea if we add Eye of the North outpost to the list. That way any character is just a step away from their hall of monuments.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke
As explained above, it's unlikely that the points could be changed, but I wouldn't object to adding a new station for Tyria and Elona that each allow for eight player parties.
Instead of Droknar's Forge, I would suggest using Temple of the Ages, for its popularity and proximity to Lion's Arch. Sunspear Sanctuary for Elona is fine. |
the one you love to hate
/not signed... adding a larger party area to tyria would only mess with the natural flow of the game. it would ruin the vanquish difficulties. i am not for making the game any easier. it is already a push-over. i do think that elona could be changed though, as kamadan is such an early acquisition. both lion's arch and kaining center take a good portion of quests and missions to progress to naturally. so in essence if they were to stick to this method in elona we would get around sunspear sanctuary.
caballo_oscuro
Erm... Embark beach....... now go away
Lupu
It annoys me a little to have to add back heros when I'm playing alone, but not as much as having to add back my hubby hehe. We like to take 3 heros each and sometimes one will get left behind when mapping around like you usually do when solo :P It's no big deal but rather funny sometimes.
"Where did you go?"
"What do you mean where did I go? Where did you go?"
"I'm still here?"
"Oh..."
It would be nice to be able to choose your own ports after completing the required quests to travel to other continents. I'd prefer Maatu Keep over Kaineng actually because it's smaller... but it's not a harbor.
Also what I really want is huge picture buttons of the travel citys when you click on the boat. I'm clumsy and mis click quite often
"Where did you go?"
"What do you mean where did I go? Where did you go?"
"I'm still here?"
"Oh..."
It would be nice to be able to choose your own ports after completing the required quests to travel to other continents. I'd prefer Maatu Keep over Kaineng actually because it's smaller... but it's not a harbor.
Also what I really want is huge picture buttons of the travel citys when you click on the boat. I'm clumsy and mis click quite often
Rushin Roulette
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by the one you love to hate
/not signed... adding a larger party area to tyria would only mess with the natural flow of the game. it would ruin the vanquish difficulties. i am not for making the game any easier. it is already a push-over. i do think that elona could be changed though, as kamadan is such an early acquisition. both lion's arch and kaining center take a good portion of quests and missions to progress to naturally. so in essence if they were to stick to this method in elona we would get around sunspear sanctuary.
|
Apart from that your point has absolutely nothing to do with what the OP has posted. You might want to read threads before you post in them.
Back OT:
I dont agree with the points. It is a one button press to remove any Heroes in your party. Once you get to the new area, you can add the correct heroes you need / want (not every area needs the same heroes to complete, so chances are that you have teh wrong heroes anyways if you keep the old ones in your party)
Dewshine Wildclaw
Aside from telling you that you are lazy and all that the others already said... theres a reason it is is ship thats the icon... what kaineng, kamadan and la got in common is they all have harbors (granted droks actually is somewhat close to water also) so to change them to anything inland would need a new explanation on how the traveling between continents are done (new travel icon and moving it?)
But back to calling you lazy (sorry I do kinda understand that this anoys you a little, but it really isn't that big a deal) and saying theres not really a good reason to implement this idea and lastly /notsigned
But back to calling you lazy (sorry I do kinda understand that this anoys you a little, but it really isn't that big a deal) and saying theres not really a good reason to implement this idea and lastly /notsigned
Xiner
I find it rather annoying too.. Everytime I travel from Cantha to Tyria or Kamadan a few heroes are kicked. This has nothing to do with being lazy, it's just annoying.
IMO it would be wrong to change the cities etc, so to that point I wont agree. But I believe it's possible to fix the heroes being kicked. Maybe a saved hero template, just like skills? So you instantly add the right heroes to your choice. And if there is no place for 7 heroes, the ones below are kicked. Please don't come rage at me that I'm lazy or have the most stupid idea ever, it's just a suggestion.
IMO it would be wrong to change the cities etc, so to that point I wont agree. But I believe it's possible to fix the heroes being kicked. Maybe a saved hero template, just like skills? So you instantly add the right heroes to your choice. And if there is no place for 7 heroes, the ones below are kicked. Please don't come rage at me that I'm lazy or have the most stupid idea ever, it's just a suggestion.
Urcscumug
You wouldn't get to use the alternative port until you reach it at least once on that character, or until you have completed a certain quest. Pretty much the way it works for the current ports. Once you've done that, the outpost starts appearing in the boat list. Not before! It sounds pretty simple and I'd like it a lot if they did this.
In picking new ports some requirements should be considered:
* party size 8
* fairly large grounds, if they're going to become a hub of activity
* unlocked easily immediately after a character gains access to the original port for the campaign
* [optional] full range of NPC services (not many outposts have that)
* [optional] access to the sea (it will look really silly, arriving to a landlocked outpost by "boat")
If the last two requirements are ignored then ToA, Sunspear Sanctuary and EotN are indeed the most appropriate choices.
@Rushin Roulette: I can give you another scenario where this would be useful. You're in GH, you plan a FoW/UW run, and when you're ready to go you remember that the party leader doesn't have Zin Ku Corridor. You're either forced to go Kaineng Center -> Boreal Station -> ToA or you have to make everybody travel on their own and re-make the party in ToA or Chantry.
It's nothing major, but it sure is annoying. Small things like this add up. Why not fix them if it's possible?
/signed
PS: I've always wondered, does ANet really look at these threads or we're just talking amongst ourselves? Has anything proposed here ever been implemented?
In picking new ports some requirements should be considered:
* party size 8
* fairly large grounds, if they're going to become a hub of activity
* unlocked easily immediately after a character gains access to the original port for the campaign
* [optional] full range of NPC services (not many outposts have that)
* [optional] access to the sea (it will look really silly, arriving to a landlocked outpost by "boat")
If the last two requirements are ignored then ToA, Sunspear Sanctuary and EotN are indeed the most appropriate choices.
@Rushin Roulette: I can give you another scenario where this would be useful. You're in GH, you plan a FoW/UW run, and when you're ready to go you remember that the party leader doesn't have Zin Ku Corridor. You're either forced to go Kaineng Center -> Boreal Station -> ToA or you have to make everybody travel on their own and re-make the party in ToA or Chantry.
It's nothing major, but it sure is annoying. Small things like this add up. Why not fix them if it's possible?
/signed
PS: I've always wondered, does ANet really look at these threads or we're just talking amongst ourselves? Has anything proposed here ever been implemented?
Dewshine Wildclaw
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Xiner
I find it rather annoying too.. Everytime I travel from Cantha to Tyria or Kamadan a few heroes are kicked. This has nothing to do with being lazy, it's just annoying.
IMO it would be wrong to change the cities etc, so to that point I wont agree. But I believe it's possible to fix the heroes being kicked. Maybe a saved hero template, just like skills? So you instantly add the right heroes to your choice. And if there is no place for 7 heroes, the ones below are kicked. Please don't come rage at me that I'm lazy or have the most stupid idea ever, it's just a suggestion. |
And I appologize for using the lazy comment, it was pure lack of better way to say why I was against the ops idea.
Having a hero template saved or something like it would actually be nice. Not a stupid idea at all imo
the one you love to hate
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rushin Roulette
Apart from that your point has absolutely nothing to do with what the OP has posted. You might want to read threads before you post in them. |
you might wanna not be such a troll and start reading all the replies in the thread before you just go off at the mouth.
Kanyatta
Embark Beach with all of the Traveler NPC's solves this problem.
Besides, if this were implemented, it would really piss me off personally. I like being able to create PvE NF characters and within an hour of playtime have all 3 continents unlocked so I can get right to skill capping to get characters PvP-ready.
Besides, if this were implemented, it would really piss me off personally. I like being able to create PvE NF characters and within an hour of playtime have all 3 continents unlocked so I can get right to skill capping to get characters PvP-ready.
MithranArkanere
I'd rather see the party sizes increased than the town ports moved forward, at least for Lion's Arch
I always though that level 20 and parties of 8 should have started from Lion's Arch Onward.
For anything else, there's Embark Beach.
I always though that level 20 and parties of 8 should have started from Lion's Arch Onward.
For anything else, there's Embark Beach.
jazilla
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MithranArkanere
I'd rather see the party sizes increased than the town ports moved forward, at least for Lion's Arch
I always though that level 20 and parties of 8 should have started from Lion's Arch Onward. For anything else, there's Embark Beach. |
Steps_Descending
personally, /signed
I like the idea of having ports added. My favorite bets being droks and Kodash/SS Sanctuary
Droks makes sense I think, the dwarves have ice-boats and in doubt, there's port sledge!
Kodash doesn't make much and is hard to get to, too bad.
That or allow a lv20 to have a party size of 8 in town, BUT when you leave the last 2-4 party members (human or heroes) get kicked or enter a different instance. I like that option too, but I prefer adding Kodash/droks as new arbors in addition to LA/kamadan.
Unfortunately, I think Embark fills the role easily and it will not be implemented (can you travel from Embark->ToA?)
I like the idea of having ports added. My favorite bets being droks and Kodash/SS Sanctuary
Droks makes sense I think, the dwarves have ice-boats and in doubt, there's port sledge!
Kodash doesn't make much and is hard to get to, too bad.
That or allow a lv20 to have a party size of 8 in town, BUT when you leave the last 2-4 party members (human or heroes) get kicked or enter a different instance. I like that option too, but I prefer adding Kodash/droks as new arbors in addition to LA/kamadan.
Unfortunately, I think Embark fills the role easily and it will not be implemented (can you travel from Embark->ToA?)
Jeydra
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by the one you love to hate
actually everything i say has to do with the OP. he is complaining about party size and talking about remapping the towns used to harbor the different campains... um i think i hit it right on...
you might wanna not be such a troll and start reading all the replies in the thread before you just go off at the mouth. |
One thing that's definitely lost by changing the Tyrian pivot point though is you can't talk to Salma and pick up the day's WiK quest as easily anymore
I suppose another way to fix the problem is to allow 8-man parties (with 7 heroes) in all these areas, but if you step out of the pivot point you bring with you only the first four / six players in the team. May be hard to implement however.
Regarding Embark Beach, I hate the area because of how difficult it is to map around. The area's simply just too big. You spend more time walking to whichever NPC you want to bring you around and then clicking through your destination points than you do pressing M -> travel. It's also text-based as opposed to graphics-based, and finally it doesn't go through any of the trade hubs (last I checked Embark Beach was pretty dead for trading). So no I don't like travelling via Embark Beach.
epervier
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Steps_Descending
personally, /signed
I like the idea of having ports added. My favorite bets being droks and Kodash/SS Sanctuary Droks makes sense I think, the dwarves have ice-boats and in doubt, there's port sledge! Kodash doesn't make much and is hard to get to, too bad. That or allow a lv20 to have a party size of 8 in town, BUT when you leave the last 2-4 party members (human or heroes) get kicked or enter a different instance. I like that option too, but I prefer adding Kodash/droks as new arbors in addition to LA/kamadan. Unfortunately, I think Embark fills the role easily and it will not be implemented (can you travel from Embark->ToA?) |
Kanyatta
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by epervier
Unfortunately no, Temple of ages is not a missin outpost. If Anet added ALL outposts and towns to the travel agents, I think I would use it far more frequently than I do now.
|
I suppose you're right in the fact that the Traveler NPC's should have outposts as well as missions, but it's really an inconvenience more than a gamebreaker.
epervier
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kanyatta
But you can go Embark -> Hell's Precipice (or equivalent 8-member mission) -> ToA
I suppose you're right in the fact that the Traveler NPC's should have outposts as well as missions, but it's really an inconvenience more than a gamebreaker. |
maptravel to kamadan (lose 4 dudes), maptravel to sunspear sanctuary (pick up id kits), maptravel to lions arch, maptravel back where I started, zone into explorable with only 4 dudes (feel foolish), turn around, add 4 dudes and resume content. [6 maps total]
Maptravel to embark beach, maptravel to somewhere in kourna, maptravel to sunspear sanctuary (pick up id kits), Maptravel to embark beach, maptravel back where I started. [5 maps total]
If the travel agents offered all the outposts my little example would only need 4 maptravels total.
Of course the better option is when talking to the travel agent, they show the map of continent with all the areas you unlocked available. You then wouldn’t need a northern travel agent because the tyrian travel agent would have that covered. Though for this to work perfectly, the northern travel agent would have to move to the elonian area and offer the realm of torment map and be renamed tormented travel agent. And be ghostly (preferable pink).
Steps_Descending
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by epervier
Unfortunately no, Temple of ages is not a missin outpost. If Anet added ALL outposts and towns to the travel agents, I think I would use it far more frequently than I do now.
|
DoA (if it's not)
the challenge missions (are they?)
and maybe the cpital cities (cavalon/HzH/kodash...)
Raven Wing
If you also follow kinda ingame logics and lore....Let the port city in NF be Consulate Docks.
Kamadan already got this port area. Native elonians have to get there at a time anyways, and it would only be logic that foreigners arriving by ship land there first. It is already 8-man area, so nothing much needs to be changed.
Hmmmm....it might require moving some quest npc's too, maybe it isnt so easy...
Just a thought.
For Lions Arch it is kind of less obvious.
Kamadan already got this port area. Native elonians have to get there at a time anyways, and it would only be logic that foreigners arriving by ship land there first. It is already 8-man area, so nothing much needs to be changed.
Hmmmm....it might require moving some quest npc's too, maybe it isnt so easy...
Just a thought.
For Lions Arch it is kind of less obvious.
Improvavel
They should just let you pick the destination from a list as long as you have unlocked it.
Don't see the point of adding embark beach to facilitate travel but still making it annoying by only being able to jump to mission locations (that and spread the damn travel guys amidst of a sea of npcs and sign posts).
What does the game gain by forcing you to go to embark beach then pick mission x to get to outpost y instead of just embark beach ->outpost x or even guild hall ->outpost x?
Don't see the point of adding embark beach to facilitate travel but still making it annoying by only being able to jump to mission locations (that and spread the damn travel guys amidst of a sea of npcs and sign posts).
What does the game gain by forcing you to go to embark beach then pick mission x to get to outpost y instead of just embark beach ->outpost x or even guild hall ->outpost x?
J3az
I like the Elona port change, but the others don't need this. Unless you go to Elona via Embark Beach you'll have to go through Kamadan which is the reason I turn trade chat off when I'm not feeling "spendy".
/notsigned
/notsigned
Kunder
Probably easiest just to modify the party system so that you can still have 8 people in all towns but when you zone you are automatically reduced to 4/6 players as appropriate.
In any case, not worth the effort to make the change.
In any case, not worth the effort to make the change.
Div
One of the few good suggestions here. I'm all for making things more convenient and less of a burden to play as opposed to simply easier, which is what most other ones are wanting.
Or do what some have suggested and keep the 8/6, but when you zone you lose the heroes.
Or do what some have suggested and keep the 8/6, but when you zone you lose the heroes.