Feedback talk:Linsey Murdock/Journal

Assurance?

Will the new Bi-Monthly process will lead to more precise and targeted balance changes? --ilr 04:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure that is the goal, but assurance? What do you want her to say? "Yes, we guarantee that skill updates are going to please you more than they have in the past?" I don't think you're gonna get it. -- Wyn talk 05:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, as Wyn said, that is one of the goals but there isn't really any way I could guarantee it. I can guarantee that we will try real hard... - Linsey talk 19:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

linseyawesome - Wuhy 20:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I guess there's no way to ask this question without giving actual examples (but then the wiki thugs will just move it again). What I meant to ask was: How can We... better help You? What can we do during this biMonthly update to help make your work easier and more focused? --ilr 20:49, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Latest skill changes have been quite decent, specially in the PvE side. MithTalk 04:13, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, ilr, Linsey has said they are going to post the upcoming skill changes one month in advance. What you can do to help is when that happens, give them real feedback with reasoned arguments. Too many people (not saying you) have had a whole lot of nothing substantial to say in regards to game updates and we end up with walls of text of LOLWUT? etc. The feedback space has been created because ArenaNet (Linsey in particular) is in fact interested in what the community has to say, if it's based in reality, and given thought and consideration. Btw... as far as I'm concerned, you can move that wall of text back here I personally didn't have a problem with it being here in the first place (other than it was a WOT). -- Wyn talk 04:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

ಠ_ಠ        --ilr 10:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

"Your assurances leave me cold" -Lord Bale (quote from DoW1) --Boro 19:40, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Linked RA districts

The last update was supposed to end the synchronization in RA by merging some districts, which is a great thing, but now the general level of the RA teams is decreased: before the update international and korean district used to be populated by the most " skilled " players. I was wondering why you simply didn't merged the asian districts (where people synched) with the international district, which is always populated? Is possible to keep the international district unlinked, so people can get (sometimes) decent teammates instead of being paired with american and euro people? Thanks for reading and sorry if i posted this in a wrong section, i'm a BIG wiki noob, and this is the first time i post.User:Kiros 12:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

There is no meaning in keeping a Random arena segregated. RA is meant to meet all kinds of different players. From the ones that have just bought the game to the most experienced and skilled ones. It doesn0't matter if you want to meet only experienced players or bully unexperienced ones. It's better when they are all together, it's Random Arenas, for gods sake. MithTalk 13:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, as an American I find this idea seriously condescending and insulting, and I don't even pvp (this is a good example of WHY I don't pvp btw). In Random Arenas, as far as I understand it, the entire concept is for it to be random team assignments, so you should be prepared to have people of every play level potentially on your team. If you want them to be BETTER, take the time to teach them, rather than ask for them to be removed from the potential gene pool, and bring the level of play back up to "your" standard. -- Wyn talk 13:17, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

"take the time to teach them," I try, but so many of them just laugh it off or are unwilling to change anything or simply don't believe me when I tell them flare and two superior runes is a bad idea. And when people do listen, I usually end up taking ~20 minutes helping them put together a nice build with the skills available to them (most only have one or two campaigns etc). That takes away from the amount of time I get to play, and I can understand why most people don't go to the trouble of trying.

The anti-syncing update made it a lot harder to get gladiator points without syncing, because now every team has two or three players with Flare, IWAY, Defy Pain, healing breeze, no res signet, are a caster class using a sword/axe, etc, and who honestly don't know what they're doing, which, ironically, encourages people to sync more to avoid them. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 14:24, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

If you want good teammates why not TA then? M3G 14:27, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Because TA is filled with retarded stuff that's a pain in the ass to monk against. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 14:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

To clarify: TA is not fun. There's a reason they're getting rid of it, not many people play it anymore, because it's not fun. RA is often fun, but bad teammates who refuse to listen to advice can make it incredibly frustrating at times. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(talk) 14:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

@Mith: actually RA was meant to form teams from people joining from the same district(s), so if i'm joining from id, i'm running a build that i won't run if i join from ad. That because the better players gather in id or korean d; if i want to run a build for the lulz, i join from ad or euro districts. @ Wynthyst: i'm not saying all people from ad are bad, there are bunch of excellent players; i'm just saying that if you join from ad you will get on average 3 sin on your team. And i can't teach anything in a 30 seconds game.@M3G: TA is pretty dead atm, and is going to be removed/converted into SD.User:Kiros 15:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No, people being separated in different districts happened because regions where separate, and within an region, there could be various languages. Avoiding synch has become more important that forming parties that share a native language, that's all. Segregation in TA was a side effect of synching. Both never should have never existed. MithTalk 19:55, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what's wrong with segregation in RA. Good players playing against bad players isn't fun for either party; good players playing with bad players is frustrating and unfun (and, in all honesty, it RARELY makes the bad players better - only the ones who make a conscious effort to improve improve, tbh). I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that the district merge has made RA less fun.

On a related note, many PvP games (s4 comes to mind) have optional room segregation based on skill level (or experience level, as the case may be) for the above reasons - why not Guild Wars? is for Raine, etc. 05:53, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

There's no system to determine "skill level" per se right now. Time played is skewed by PvE. The best would be the Gladiator Title, but that's not a very good indicator also. — Poki#3 (talk) 14:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Gladiator title would likely be the easiest thing to base it off of (it's certainly better than nothing), but a ladder for RA would probably be the ideal solution. is for Raine, etc. 14:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sealed Deck

Sealed Deck, eh? | 72 {U|S|T|C} - 23:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe Linsey won't be able to look at that. It's outside the Feedback space. - Reanimated X 06:53, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

They are not serious Rex. -- Wyn talk 06:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, my bad. - Reanimated X 07:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Linsay, I'd really like you to look on Guild Wars Guru in the PvP section regarding some concerns, mostly the weekly changing of the Sealed Deck skills resulting in a stale format. I know nothing is confirmed but it is best to do this before it's too late. http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10399183&page=2 222.154.174.206 07:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

PvP "love", huh ?

..It's hard for me to write those words. No, really: most of thoughts of that journal entry sure won't pass any censorship, so I should now stay at most civil part of ideas about it. So, no more TA. No more TB. No more Heroes in PvP - they would be restricted by... Well, by "Live team". Was those people ones who coded that all ? Let me doubt it. Alot. Being game developer myself I understand how hard to code such (trivial; from user's point of view). Another question now: why this would happened ? Because people aren't happy 'bout ? Let me doubt it too: rants about HB and TA aren't even relatively comparable to ones with Ursan Blessing and Shadow Form, yet those two aren't going to be removed. So why ? Let me guess: because balancing of PvP modes requires real work. Not mindless butchering of code, but some thinking, plan. I already got that member Live Team really bad at mind activity: most "skill balancing" was just hammerwork from one side to another, which created awful mutants like completely (sic !) different skills for PvP and PvE. Was those constant carnage really (like linking Chilling Victory to Wind Prayers f.e.) really needed ? No, it was accepted by people just 'cause life illusion, created by it ? "Balancing goes = GW living", easy as that. But now situation got really serious: "balancing" turned into open vandalism. Are you suited to solve PvP problems ? Well...no, I agree. But is it really excuse for breaking other people hard work, replacing it with completely unneeded in MMOPRG ideas ? No. You can't amputate injured hand if you can't heal it until it's condition seriously threaten person's life. Heroes weren't planned to become useless PvE junk, which got forgotten after campaign’s completion, no. They was unique feature, one of vital parts of GW, added some "tactical simulation" features to it. Now that's going to be replaced with even more random: dumb henchmen instead of controllable and customizable heroes and easy (or someone really believe that it would be balanced ?) winning by getting some good skills form generator of random numbers instead of true team play (is someone yet managed to always coordinate random allies in RA ?). Saddest part here: no way back to retreat and no interest in people opinion (may be there should be some polls before such decisions). Pathetic and painful, that is... --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.140.212.253 (talk).

They nerfed ursan blessing a long time ago, nobody complains about that anymore, while tons of people complain about HB. Also, decisions on improving the game should have nothing to do with how much work went into a concept that didn't, well, work. (Satanael 14:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC))

HB is a side I can understand fully. It was broken in several ways: Shadowstepways, /roll'ing to the higher ranks, and AI != 100% Player vs. Player. TA is a totally different ball park, here. Organized 4v4's being canned... Why...? Is it really that much work to open up guru forums, wiki discussion pages, etc.. to obtain feedback on issues, gather the developers for some assessment, then execute ideas via code? Seems to me that the hardest part would essentially boil down to the coding, and that's about it. Smiter's Boon'ing things [as most players would put it] is clearly not the answer to resolving 4v4 issues because there're still so many avid, hardcore 4v4ers around that enjoy the liberty of assembling four players to organize a team build and compete with others. Now, if the whole idea behind all these demoralizing updates is to drive your player base away from GW1 servers in preparation for upcoming games like Aion, GW2, D3, etc..? Then, we could understand things a bit better; and if that's the case, why not just be completely honest to the players about it? Be blunt! Tell us it's not good business to allow players to linger around GW1 for so long. Let it come from your [Anet's] mouths. --Ulterion 22:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

>>They nerfed ursan blessing a long time ago

This exactly is what I was talking 'bout: despite of everything around it in past, UB was just nerfed, not permanently removed. Still far from perfection, but at least can be used. HB\TA, on other side, doesn't going to be nerfed - for some unknown, but mortal sins they would just face complete erasure. Is it fait ? I doubt so...

>>Also, decisions on improving the game should have nothing to do with how much work went into a concept that didn't, well, work.

Sure, but I doubt that we get such amount of work for old\good GW anymore, so any of such scrapping would just mean some permanent degradation of gameplay.

--85.140.215.205 08:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Dude, Have you read the Journal at all? I think not. Now, please go back and read every line carefully. All the explaining you need is already posted there. - Reanimated X 08:23, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

...And more then once - 4 times, including repost on GWGuru. Anymore questions ? --85.140.215.205 08:27, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

*sigh* Linsey gives reasoning for the removal of HB: "Let's talk a bit about the reasons for this. We recognize that the Hero Battles format has reached a state of acute distress. It has always been a niche format with a player base comparable to that of the Ascalon Academy, despite its tournament support. This is largely due to flaws in the core mechanics of the format, compounded by years without skill balances to keep it in check."

And for TA: "Team Arena was once very popular, but a competitive atmosphere and a degenerate metagame have caused the player base to dwindle a great deal. We'd like to give the format more support, but we don't have the bandwidth to take on more balance maintenance. Now with Sealed on the table, it seemed like the perfect opportunity to give Team Arena some lovin' and remove its degenerate meta in the process." Now you might not agree with the team's assessments, but they're not doing this just because. And removing things even at this point makes sense, HB isn't a popular format and players have been complaining about it being broken almost since it opened. Is it really worth keeping a failed PvP format around just because it's there? They've already removed 4 arenas from the game already.

@Ulterion I think some of the problem with the TA 4v4 format may have to do with skill balance, in that a single skill (or PvP version of one) is supposed to be balanced (in a perfect world) for 3 different formats right now, 4 player teams, HB teams, and HA/Guild 8 man teams. And it should be fairly easy to find skills that got nerfed because of imbalance in one format that negatively affected all the other formats. Removing TA simplifies that balancing because a Random team shouldn't typically be able to exploit a skill (or single build) as it could be in TA. Yukiko 08:32, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, are you people ever read my messages ? Once again: "We can't (and too lazy to) fix it, so we would just kill it with fire" - is kinda...bad excuse from my point of view. No doubts that both format have problems. No doubts that Live Team one and only fixing tool - big wooden hammer isn't suitable for problems fixing it. But even that’s facts still not form a reason for permanent deletion without asking players. Well, I'm kinda tired to quote myself further - just read main post for more info.

>>Is it really worth keeping a failed PvP format around just because it's there?

Does it require some upkeep ? No. Does some people still playing and enjoying it ? Yes. Can LT offer some good compensation for such removal: highly doubt that, "Sealed Deck" adaptation is fun and neat, but never ever were meant as replacement for serious formats. TCG <> MMORPG.

>>They've already removed 4 arenas from the game already.

...I said that it was a good idea ?

--85.140.215.205 08:46, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Your comments are idiotic. When you read the Journal you saw what you wanted to see. Linsey clearly stated there that they don't have neither the resources nor the time to fix all the pending issues with HB and TA, which are frankly quite a lot.

@ Your 5th "sentence", Who are they going to ask? The handful of players that play the formats? TA and HB are D E A D. Get over it. - Reanimated X 08:56, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Sad part is that instead of FIXING HB they decide to just remove it. There really arent many skills and bugs to fix and it would certainly require less effort than making an entirely new pvp format mthinks. Heck, HB community is bigger than TA one too. --Super Igor 09:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

>>Linsey clearly stated there that they don't have neither the resources nor the time to fix all the pending issues with HB and TA, which are frankly quite a lot.

Pardon me, wasn’t I already mentioned this and my opinion 'about it ? May be you should just pay more attention when reading thing ?

>>Who are they going to ask? The handful of players that play the formats?

Is those people really so miserable, compared to other GW players ? It's not so little population as you think, BTW: a lot more then playing low-end PvP, for example.

--85.140.215.205 09:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Arguing the size of the player base for any format in this game with the developers who have the absolute numbers at their fingertips is just ridiculous, and is not going to further your case.

I don't believe saying the team is too lazy to fix the issues in these formats is a very fair statement. They have proven they are willing to work very hard, but the simple fact is they inherited massive problems that they simply do not have the time and resources to try to unravel and still provide new content for the festivals as well as the skill balancing they wish to do with the new test krewe. Or to provide the Sealed Deck format that so many have asked for for so long. It's not like they can sit down for an afternoon and hammer out all the fixes required, it would literally take months. Do you really want all the rest of the players in the game to go without any attention from the developers to try to save parts of the game played by a minority? Do you really want to see the pvp community continue to be fragmented? I know... fear of the unknown is running rampant here, but I would like to ask you to have a little faith. It may prove that the developers really do know what is going to work out best (and you might end up with something that you are going to enjoy more than what you have). As for the comments that they don't pay any attention to forums or the community, I think the steps they are taking prove exactly the opposite. The fact that it's not exactly what you want, well, none of us ever get exactly what we want, it's part of life. -- Wyn talk 09:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

>>They have proven they are willing to work very hard, but the simple fact is they inherited massive problems that they simply do not have the time and resources to try to unravel and still provide new content for the festivals as well as the skill balancing they wish to do with the new test krewe.

Um, it would strange if they didn't: even EQ1 still getting some expansions. Facts, however is still with us: LT spends considerable amounts of time on laughable additions. Automatical map rotation as a big update ? Heck, I doesn't even mention such things in changelogs. Ah, but may be it's all 'cause code is just so bad and robust ? Well, even if so... How ANet managed to finish this project in first place then ?

>>Do you really want all the rest of the players in the game to go without any attention from the developers to try to save parts of the game played by a minority?

No, but... Addition of SD format is fun for me, even if I didn't like it even in MtG, where it's belongs. But why it (being complete unneeded thing to me) going to permanently replace some things I'm (and not only) enjoying ? People already paid for access to HB when purchasing NightFall, so why now they should be suddenly robbed of such possibility ? BTW: may be I'm searching in wrong places, but there are a lot less pleas for addition of SD then...well...7 heroes in PvE. So why so selective ?

>>Do you really want to see the pvp community continue to be fragmented?

So, unification matters more then satisfaction of different people's requirements for you ?

>>As for the comments that they don't pay any attention to forums or the community, I think the steps they are taking prove exactly the opposite

Sorry, which steps ? Removing PvP formats when people were just asking fix'em. Oh, well, reminds me some poll in Dangerous Fantasy 2: "Should solo players gain more experience then group ?". And when majority voted "yes"... Well, then lead developer created topic on official forum with following text: "Are you, people, sure about ? Are you understand that group would just receive less exp now ?". Oh, may be he should join ANet's Live Team too ? They got quite similar logic, if you ask me...

P.S. You are my most enjoyable (to read) opponent so far, grats).

--85.140.215.205 10:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) No, I haven't read any of your longer posts. I don't enjoy gibberish. But I did read this one (and I regret it). ArenaNet isn't able to deal with HB and TA because most of their team is currently working on GW2. You enjoying those formats doesn't change this fact. Majority > Minority. It's always been this way. But in the end the decision is Anet's to take. - Reanimated X 11:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

IP (aka, 85.140.215.205), I say this with all the love in my heart, but I think you could REALLY benifit from this. I have no real opinion on this whole issue one way or another (as I'm a PvE'r primarily), but I think that link could really help your case if you're trying to prove something :D Hope you find it helpful! -- Timeoffire45 rawr 23:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so we finally got our very own variant of http://lleo.aha.ru/na/en/ ? Grats ! --91.77.158.150 07:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, you found it, I was looking for that. Let me be blunt, ANet are making these changes for the majority, so there is nothing you can do about it, get over it. King Neoterikos 23:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

HB

was one of the few formats of Guild Wars that i really liked. Reason 1: Independency from other ppl in your group = Absolute control yay. Reason 2: a real battle. not 16 players on the area of a pick-up truck, but 8 on a BATTLEFIELD! Battle strategy always has to do something with movement, and I really liked how you could play commander there. Even better than AB/CM. Its sad... 91.16.144.70 09:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

/signed (Qanar | talk) 18:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It was dumb. only cap points results in lame defenseways. --Boro

Hmm ya hi Im kinda mad (would use other words, but it would be inappropiate) 1~ ya y in HB was crossing nvr removed, today i just went from 400 to r600 because i got crossing 6 times and guess what, my heroes run off the shrines whenever another hero gets attacked SO it screwed me over 6 times!! Yay!! And 2- HB shouldnt be removed, wow ppl thru an AT, make a new thing like they have to at least get hold of a shrine or score a point, ur gunna remove HB b/c of 10 ppl and u want to place something new in?? Instead of running by the HB'ers to see if they wanted it saved, just destroy it!! Awesome!! U do realize most ppl throw matches b/c they nvr do HB and with the Z Quest, they come and farm the quest for zkeys... Thats where ppl are throwing matches on purpose! I used a lot of sarcasm b/c im that mad and cant use bad language —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tiesto (talk • contribs) at 23:41, 25 September 2009 (UTC).

Just add dishonorable to the bastards who leaves their poor heroes and problem solved ~Blamelance

PAX goers

Alright, which one of you gave them cooties?! >:| ^_^ :P —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 000 00 00 00 (talk • contribs) at 17:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC).

Get better! Here: (Satanael 17:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC))

Hope it's not the H1N1. My job is requiring that we get the shot now...and we all got sick from it. Karate Jesus 19:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

The 'vaccine' for this 'super-deadly pandemic' is more dangerous than the phantom menace H1N1 flu. Worldwide fatalties from H1N1 are truly nowhere near as large as 'reported' in mass media, and mostly only kill the same classes of people the normal flu does yearly (elderly, sick, immune system difficencies, etc). Dig around a bit & you'll find some interesting info. - i n s i d i o u s 420 19:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Conspiracy theories aside, the vaccine sucks. Karate Jesus 19:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Insidious, you're wrong. The mortality rate among healthy individuals is greater with the H1N1 than with common influenza. I didn't know the USA was already using the vaccine, though. Erasculio 19:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I work with teenagers, and sometimes children, and they have a higher chance of mortality from the disease. Also, I live within a few hours of Mexico, so they want us to be careful. Karate Jesus 19:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to insinuate a 'conspiracy theory' or anything, but I do think the 'pandemic' is being blown waaay out of proportion, for whatever reason, & more simply that the vaccine is potentially as harmful as the virus itself. In regards to the mortality rate vs standard flu, we're still looking at something relatively small (depending on where you find your stats) that makes a lot of people see the pandemic & widespread response to it as very alarmist & knee-jerky, at best. All I'm saying is I've heard/read some shady things on each side of the fence & it's never good to take anything at face value from any one source. Peace. - i n s i d i o u s 420 21:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

heal

hoping it won't last long. --Boro 19:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm using Restore Condition on Linsey Murdock! Get well soon! ;) --Sensei 20:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I hope it's not the swine flu ^^. If it is, I cast smite condition upon thee Athariel 21:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

See, this is how rumors and information get blown out of proportion. No reports have said that H1N1 was "rampant" at PAX. There has been ONE confirmed case out of 50,000 attendees. Please be responsible with these kinds of "facts." --★KOKUOU★ 22:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hoping for a fast recovery! -- Alaris 22:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, fixed ^_^ Athariel 22:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Looks like my necro's virulence spell worked well on lins.....ummm.....HEY LOOK A CONVENIENTLY PLACED DISTRACTION! -runs- personn5 22:41, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

All I can offer you are words of comfort, sadly it wont heal your condition but I hope it makes you feel a bit better Talamare 23:20, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Screw the update, nobody should be sick the day Rock Band Beatles is out. That's not fair.--4thvariety 08:01, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Best wishes too. (seems like I forgot that one) Also the reason words of comfort doesn't heal well enough is that it is weak. So I'm using Mend Condition instead. --Boro 17:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

artbook

← moved to Feedback talk:Regina Buenaobra

Many people seem to have similar feelings, so I'll put this here

This is copied from a conversation with Martin on GWGuru, and I know that many people are having similar feelings. Ahead of time, I want you to know that I wish you all the best health and am in no way trying to offend you or anyone else on the Live Team.

"Originally Posted by Martin Kerstein"

Being sick as hell is not an excuse.

I will not get into the whole process of how things work, but the work process requires man/women power in the last stages of a balance cycle as well.

[snip]

"So, in return for this openness, we expect you, our community, to be understanding when projects that we have discussed may be canceled or changed, or a project or build is delayed. We want you to have ambitious expectations for us, but to understand that there are always limitations. Everyone has to deal with finite resources, competing priorities, and unexpected complications, and we’re no different. By embracing this reality, we can work together to bridge the gap between development and community for the betterment of the game."

Get better soon Linsey...

"Response by Karate Jesus:"

I don't think anyone here is meaning offense (and if they are, then I'm not speaking for them), but I think most GW players would admit that we really don't fully understand the process the Live Team has to go through in order for things to get done.

What we have to go off of are our own life experiences....and, again not speaking for everyone, but if I had to leave for a conference (not the same as a con, obviously, but as close as I get), then I make sure to get all my work done ahead of time....otherwise there are some big consequences to pay later if I'm unable to work after the conference...and I'm the staff director.

I think many of us just relate to the "normal" work environment atmosphere, where if we don't get our work done when we say it'll get done then we get reprimanded. If it happens several times, or even innumerous times and seems to be a pattern of our performance, we get fired. Especially if we were to offend clients, or in my case, the state.

The gaming community just has a very different perspective on performance than most of the other places I've worked (for the third time, not trying to speak for everyone).

I think a lot of us just don't understand how the process works and would like to find out so all we have to go on isn't just our personal experiences...which are obviously very different. I know you guys have already said you'd do this, and that you're sick this week, but we're in dire need of some sort of understanding. Karate Jesus 22:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Even if all the coding was done and all that was needed was a single button press to roll it onto the live servers, it's still not realistic to expect the update this week. With no offense intended to the team, but when was the last time you saw an update roll out that didn't have a bug that needed fixing fairly quickly. If the team's not up to par, they might not be able to find a potentially game-breaking bug in the early hours of going live. Given that, I'd rather wait a week and have a better chance of a bug-free update, or at least a rapid repair update, than an update this week where a bug may go unrepaired till next week.--Pyron Sy 22:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

That's a lot of what Martin said. Apparently there's a lot of work that goes into the very end of the process, which I'm surprised about. Considering the last several buggy updates, I've been assuming the final parts of the update process was automated. Karate Jesus 22:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

What we generally relate as work, is products or services with conventional or rigid boundaries allowing for much more obvious results and time frames. Game design must usually produce something 100's of times more subjective much like Art. And it's going to vary from studio to studio. In musical comparisons, you could probably expect a CD-manufacturing plant to have a strict timeline for producing a certain quantity of albums, but you couldn't give that same timeline to any of the real "Talent" b/c there's ALWAYS something they probably could have done better (atleast in their minds) or more they could have added if every step of the process had just gone unrealistically "smooth". ...if you don't believe, try learning to Draw professionally or some other subjective "talent" and then see for yourself just how "easy" it is to stay on a schedule. --ilr 23:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

I think the service, support, & updates for GW during its life cycle has been exceptionally good, period. But if you need justification: you pay for stand alone product(s), with no subscription fee, yet still receive monthly (?) updates, skill balances, etc (essentially free service); & many other games don't get supported half as long and/or half as well as GW has thus far. While I & others may think that some of the skill balances, for ex, could be a little 'better' thought out or more frequent, it'd be foolish for anyone to complain about the support we're still getting. IMO, big kudos to the whole GW team & Live Team specifically. - i n s i d i o u s 420 00:21, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Who said it wasn't? I'm looking to get more information on the process, so we don't get this bitching and I was giving an example from my experience and why it's confusing for people who have similar experiences to me. I honestly have no idea where you even got that topic from. Karate Jesus 00:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Karate, this line... "I think many of us just relate to the "normal" work environment atmosphere, where if we don't get our work done when we say it'll get done then we get reprimanded. If it happens several times, or even innumerous times and seems to be a pattern of our performance, we get fired. Especially if we were to offend clients," Gives the post the feeling that you are saying.... "If I were to to this in my job, I would get fired. I'm your client and I'm offended, so you should be fired." thus the reactions/responses you are getting. (I know that isn't what you are saying, but it could easily be taken that way.)-- Wyn talk 00:44, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Like Pyron said, even if the update were 100% finished now and it were just a matter of pressing Enter for it to go live, I would rather wait until the entire Live Team were around. The update will probably introduce some kind of bug, so I would rather wait until those who can find and fix the bug quickly were in the office than have a week possibly filled with bad bugs. Given the swine flu incident at PAX, I wouldn't be surprised if the Live Team were told to stay at home for seven full days. Erasculio 00:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Yeah, I'll admit that it isn't very well worded. However, if you read my comment right before yours, that's more of what I was aiming at. I was trying to relate the idea that a lot of people seem very frustrated with the several "missed" due dates, which a lot of people interpret as punishable because of the environment in which we live and work. That's all. Karate Jesus 00:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't post often, but read a lot around the wiki. All the issues being discussed here are always debatable, in favor or against any idea. Punishable? Whatever. Any decisions ANET executes will have consequences, be good or bad, and I'm sure the whole team is well aware of this, yet, I prefer to treat employees as human beings, not "Company Resources". From what I read here and other mediums, this Live Team has been giving so much more of themselves than many other people and companies, even if sometimes it doesn't seem like it. I really must say, The people from ANET and AION has clearly demonstrated that they really care about their games, the communities and the team. I always say, how do you know if people truly care? During crisis, when things go bad, thats when you know who people really are. Getting sick is a clear sign of body saying "Linsey! Emily! You are Humans!! GET SOME REST!!! Only computers work 24/7/365 non-stop (ideally at least). Get well soon Linsey! --Nekki 15:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Getting sick isn't a clear sign the body is saying get some rest, but then again I don't think it's worth going into the numerously large amount of ways one can get sick. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 13:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wyn, there would be consequences for me and the institute I work for if I did not have my presentation for next week ready because I was sick at the start of this week. I would not be held personally responsible, but that does not mean I would not have to deal with the bullshit that resulted. As a result I decided to suck it up and go to work anyway Monday and Tuesday. My illness was not so severe that I could not perform my duties, I cannot comment on how sick the live team is. The consequence for the live team of not being able to perform aspects of their job (which as far as I know they self defined) is bitching from the community. Realistically that is the total consequence, it won't actually change anything. That is their version of bullshit they are going to have to deal with. I don't intend to add to it because I don't actually care, but people are going to be upset and people are going to bitch about it and they had to know that would happen in advance and clearly they decided that enough critical members were sick enough to justify dealing with that bullshit. Misery 13:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Our work on an update doesn't end until the build completes and often continues throughout that day should there be any issues. If it was just me that was sick, we could easily handle putting out the update, but it isn't just me. It's me, Robert, Joe, Martin and Emily all out with swine flu (and that's just on the Live team). That's every key person needed to do the update literally barred from coming into the office so that we don't continue to spread H1N1 to everyone else at the company. This isn't about some sniffles and we are too lazy to suck it up and go to work like "normal" people. - Linsey talk 16:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I suspected H1N1, been quite a few confirmed cases from PAX. I probably would have reached the same conclusion that dealing with bullshit was worth it in your case, in fact I suspect I wouldn't have had a choice. Gute besserung. Misery 16:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

We didn't even assess the community's reaction as a factor in making the decision. I let Mike know I was going to be out, so we started running down the list of people who were also out and it became immediately clear that trying to do the build would be insane. We just can't do it with this many people out, it doesn't matter how many players are going to be annoyed by it. - Linsey talk 17:05, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

All we have to do is to send 8 heros miniaturised by an asuran machine in the elite area that must actually be the bio-system of Linsey. Yseron - 86.209.193.158 17:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Anyone who bitches that they didn't get their precious update needs to shut the fuck up and realize that ppl get sick and shit gets delayed. It's a game, made by humans. Shit happens get over it --adrin 17:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

That could be applied to almost every complaint anyone ever makes, unfortunately people still bitch. Misery 17:27, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Even I accept that shit happens. --Boro 14:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Everyone does. Btw, the original intent of this section was not to call Linsey or anyone on the Anet staff "lazy". The intention was to point out our desperate need for understanding and the reason that I personally have a hard time relating. I know Linsey said the Live Team would be working to help us understand the process, but we haven't heard any of that yet and it would really help us out to know. I hope you guys get better. Karate Jesus 14:27, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I just question why you had to have this information when you've been told they are all out sick. I mean, I know that when I'm home with a fever and feel like I want to die, I just really want to be reading and answering stuff on the wiki. I mean... it really could have waited until they were well, and back at work. -- Wyn talk 14:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I had assumed she wouldn't come on the wiki until after she gets well again. I know when I'm sick, I don't check the wiki at all, much less contribute to it. :/ Karate Jesus 14:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Also I haven't ever seen her having a rest. --Boro 14:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

^ true. I should have assumed she would be a work-a-holic and just waited, but I sincerely thought she'd wait. Karate Jesus 14:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Quit Complaining people. Jesus. They cant deal, they cant deal. Please stop bitching because the staff can't stroke all your shlongs individually. They do the best they can, and they do a lot more than most other Pay-2-Play games ever will. Half the gaming companies on the internet don't give a shit what their communities think, much less have feedback boards. Im pretty sure they can shot down these boards and stop listening to you all piss on thier efforts, and more likely than not do a better job without your incessant and ungrateful nagging Stop being spoiled babies and appreciate it.Felecorr 03:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

^ Reading comprehension ftw? Karate Jesus 14:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

=O

We love you Linsey!! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Felecorr (talk).

Deleting TA and HB

I purchased this game with the promise I would be able to form a team of friends and go into an arena to fight against other teams. I have enjoyed doing exactly that. I have been engaging in battles against foes, winning, losing, and having fun. But it seems now that you have my money, you are deleting major parts of the game I purchased from you. As a result, I would like a refund of $150.00 USD, and have Factions, Nightfall, and Eye of the North removed from my account so I can play Prophecies PvE. 75.64.50.41 01:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You can still form a team of friends and play in an arena by playing in HA or in GvG. You are also going to have the option of playing in the Sealed Deck arena in the future. Oh, and since I have used my time replying to this, I'm going to charge you to pay me for the time I have spent writing this. Erasculio 02:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) In HB, you didn't form teams. In GvG, AB, HA, Zaishen Challenge, Zaishen Elite, and possibly the new Sealed Deck arena you will still be able to form teams. You are losing nothing. Thus your poor excuse of a demand of a refund (not even the right person), is not legit. -- Konig/talk 02:16, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

If you bought an SUV then your car dealer took it back and gave you a small car and said you can still get places in it, would you be satisfied? 75.64.50.41 02:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Well did you buy a SUV from Anet? No. so quit your complaining. personn5 02:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I purchased this game with the promise I would be able to form a team of friends and go into an arena to fight against other teams.

May I direct you to Heroes' Ascent, GvG, Alliance Battles, or Sealed Deck? ~Shard 02:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Heroe's Ascent and Alliance battles are not my team vs another team. Heroe's Ascent is sometimes, but it only takes a few rounds before you lose not because the other team was better, but because you were fighting 8v16. In alliance battles you only get to make 1/3 of your team. GvG is something I enjoy playing, but it is much more difficult to form a team of 8 people and even when you do if you're american you spend more time waiting for a match than playing. It is very difficult to play more than 4 rounds in a single night before people have to leave and your team breaks up. I did not buy this game to play 4 matches per night. As for sealed deck, I'm not able to play it yet but I have a strong feeling it will quickly result in everyone running thrown-together builds for the first day after each new weekly set of skills comes out (that is how they are planning to implement it, correct?) before a 'best way' to use that particular set is decided upon by the community and any attempt to run anything else gets crushed. With sealed deck we won't be able to look at what our wiki noob foes are using and run a counter to it like I can now. My preferred TA build involves many skills devoted to countering an enemy team that uses a Primal Rage or Devastating Hammer warrior, a Foul Feast + Plague Sending necro, a Magebane ranger, and a stance WoH monk. I can devote my entire team build just to playing against that one team build and still win most of my matches easily just because they think its the 'best build'. In Sealed Deck we will all be forced to use the 'best build' or lose because the limited skills don't offer proper counters. Real PvP is gone. Its not dying as a community, its not being abandoned, its actually being DELETED. Real PvP is being removed after I paid for it, and I would like a refund. 75.64.50.41 04:54, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

"Build Wars is gone"

Good riddance. Vili 点 05:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You have no understanding of sealed play at all.

Real PvP is not gone because TA and HB are being removed. Real pvp is gone because arenanet can't do balance updates right, but Sealed Deck is the second best way to fix that problem, and it adds a game type that many people will find enjoyable. Yeah, it totally sucks for people who actually play TA instead of cheating 10 wins through RA. Oh wait, no it doesn't, because SD will be the same as TA, but with a less pungent metagame and with less cheaters. If you want a fully constructed team for pvp, HA and GvG still exist and are in far better quality than TA has been for a long time.

I would also like to make the point that "Real PvP" by definition does not include Hero Battles. ~Shard 05:14, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Why does everyone say there will only be a new deck each week? Has this been announced by Anet? For all you know, there will be a plethora of sealed decks that will rotate with each match, not on a weekly basis. Again, you are crying about something you have no facts to back up. Another thing I would like to ask the OP, how many play hours have you wracked up since you purchased the game? If it's even 1000 hrs, you have played for a whopping $.15/per hour. I don't think Anet owes you anything. There is absolutely no other form of entertainment that will give you that kind of bang for your buck. Get a grip. -- Wyn talk 06:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

You can still enjoy what you buy GW for, even if you bought skill unlock packs for pvp... for format you are enjoying. From what i know we don't have been told a release date for next big content update yet, it could be either this year or next anniversary.

I am personnaly very enthousiast about what they are doing, but people that bought GW units recently and especially for these formats (TA&HB) may feel cheated. But noone really care (or understand) about micro minority anyway, see above comments. Especially when vocal minority will probably enjoy SD as everyone else, or not. Elephant 07:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Back to my previous point WHERE in this does it say there is going to be a weekly rotation of the deck? Link it or it didn't happen. As far as I have seen, Linsey (or anyone else on the GW Live Team) has not posted any further details regarding Sealed Deck. If you are reading some post by some fool on some fansite forum, and taking it for gospel, and then coming here ranting and raving, rather than waiting for ArenaNet/Linsey/GWLT to actually provide you with the rules and structure for the new format before you start with the QQ posts, you need to totally rethink your position as you are simply wasting space on this page. -- Wyn talk 12:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Linseys post here seems to imply it wyn. ~ PheNaxKian 12:59, 13 September 2009

I don't think that's enough to reliably say it's going to be strictly a weekly deck rotation. I still say, wait until the rules and structure are detailed by Linsey and the team before starting to piss and moan. -- Wyn talk 13:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

That line from Linsey, seems to me that there will be multiple bars per profession. Which would be nice, kind of like HA rotations, but with builds. I'm hoping both past Costume Brawl builds to be used. But not expecting. Either way, sealed deck seems like it will be my favorite PvP. -- Konig/talk 00:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

It's more likely they will have "sets" of skills that you still get randomly, and the sets change weekly. For example, one week, you get packs of prophecies-only skills, next week might be core+nightfall. Linsey knows what sealed deck is, I doubt she would call something sealed deck when it's really limited constructed. ~Shard 00:47, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Shard, that's what I said. :p (just more detailed). -- Konig/talk 01:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

No, you said there will be premade builds. That's not sealed deck, that's costume brawl. Sealed deck is when you get random skills and you make bars from scratch. The only thing that will change is the skill pool. ~Shard 01:12, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough, I misunderstood what you said. :P -- Konig/talk 01:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

"I demand a refund because you're turning my Simon into Scrabble... BAWWWWW" --ilr 22:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

""I demand a refund because you're turning my Scrabble into Simon... BAWWWWW""

I fixed your analogy :D. I'm pretty sure SD would relate more to Simon than Scrabble.... Karate Jesus 22:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

NO U. Also you're a massive newb now for 2 reasons: Scrabble gives you random pieces(SD) while Simon is a game of mindlessly chasing the same patterns every time (current Meta) that even Pigeons have been shown to be "accomplished" at by behavioral researchers... but also b/c you edited someone else's comments and violeted ownership policy forcing me to write this rant just to explain how badly you corrupted my clever analogy --ilr 23:05, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

ohnoes! Someone changed my internet commentz! And I looked at it like this: Simon has four colors...that's it. You get to push them in different order...but there's still just 4. In Scrabble, you may only have a certain number of letters, but you are free to use those letters however you want (as long as they form words). So, sounds like Simon = SD and Scrabble = TA, to me. But then again...it could be just a fuck analogy that doesn't matter. Btw, wut's functional histrionic disorder? :D Karate Jesus 23:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Back to legitimate discussion, a bigger question is going to be "Will the sealed deck system allow people who have not unlocked certain skills to use them if they appear in the sealed deck's list? Does this include skills from campaigns they do not own?" --Ckal Ktak 19:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Remember the "Game experience may change" in the box? MithTalk 17:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Instead of deleting TA, and HB , why not leave it and just add SD, that way you please both those who want ta&hb deleted and thos who dont want them deleted? It would be less work for you guys i think. just add it as another station somewhere in the map. that would be way better since your not removing content but just adding more in which would make my day. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.234.60.202 (talk) at 06:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC).

A little late to the party, eh? - Reanimated X 11:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

I will be very sad if or when HB is deleted from Guild Wars because I very much enjoy being in solo control over whether my team wins or loses in a large sized map area with 8 combatants involved. I am fully aware of all the ladder and match manipulation cheating being done now in HB. I am also aware of the problems that the very popular and illegal RR Day has created for anet in HB since I have noticed that during past RR Days at peak times there have been in excess of 50 districts active in HB with tens of thousands (or possibly more) players turning in completed zaishen combat quests every few minutes which is an absolute astonishing rate for players to be earning such rewards.

RR Day has therefore created unusual server loads and added massive amounts of illegitimate gold and zkeys to the Guild Wars in-game economy and this is an obvious problem for anet to have to spend time to deal with. I think the main problem with the RR Day cheating is that most player participants do not even know or suspect that RR Day is considered cheating by anet.

Probably many player participants in RR Day may suspect it may POSSIBLY be considered cheating by anet but participate anyway because of the massive numbers of fellow players involved. Few players in Guild Wars really want to be left out from participation in such a huge bonanza of "free" gold and zkeys. Anet is probably reluctant to broadcast a general notice to the players that RR Day is officially considered cheating on the log-in page of Guild Wars with the other official notices for fear of alerting even MORE players to the existence of RR Day and thus encouraging even more players to participate in it.

Please remember that Guild Wars is a fantastic bargain and you can play it for thousands of hours and invest only about $40 or even less in the game. Players who desire to do so can purchase additional options and, of course, invest hundreds of dollars in the game (this includes me) and yet everyone can play Guild Wars for as much time as their real life schedule permits with no additional fees or costs ever required to be paid. To me, this is a fantastic bargain and it is absolutely unprecedented in the game industry for such a massive and state of the art quality game to be offered for free play.

Anet needs to be THANKED by EVERYONE for providing this service which they are obvously NOT required to do. Please read your EULA which gives anet the authority to totally discontinue Guild Wars One from existence at any time they desire. If they discontinue the existence of Guild Wars One then nobody will ever be able to play it again. Ever. They also have the authority to begin charging monthly or other types of fees to players that want to keep playing Guild Wars.

I am a player who wants to keep playing Guild Wars for as long as I possibly can. Anet seems to me to be valiantly trying to keep Guild Wars available for free play on a very limited budget since relatively few new players are purchasing software and starting to play the game and therefore the money to keep Guld Wars running obviously has to be somewhat limited. I suspect the vast majority of anet's income is now generated from selling popular optional items to existing players like extra character slots and extra xunlai storage options.

For a clue as to what the future of Guild Wars One may be, please look to the fairly recent addition of such real dollar purchase options like the pet menagerie and the makeover options. These types of options will probably have limited appeal to most players and therefore will not generate the large amounts of income which is probably needed by anet to keep the game running on a daily basis. So when anet makes difficult decisions to cut or replace either popular or unpopular parts of Guild Wars out of gameplay forever (this includes HB and TA), please look at their decisions from their viewpoint and also from the all-important economic viewpoint.

A constant inflow of dollars is needed to keep Guild Wars running and HB may just not be popular enough to enough players to justify its continued existence. Anet does not have an unlimited budget to devote large amounts of employee hours to constantly fix the obvious and really bad skill and profession imbalance problems now existing in HB.

So instead of being upset about the really bad skill and profession imbalances now present in HB, and also being upset about the obvious and fairly widespread ladder and tournament manipulation cheating now done on a daily basis in HB, and also being upset about the hugely popular and massive RR Day cheating now done on a weekly basis in HB, why not just enjoy HB as it now exists for as long as it exists?

I think everyone owes a THANK YOU to the players (you know who you are) who have invested large amounts of personal time trying to help anet fix the problems in HB. Perhaps your efforts may convince anet to extend the life of HB in Guild Wars for a short time longer or perhaps your efforts may convince anet to completely change their decision and allow HB to continue to exist in some form or another in Guild Wars forever. I certainly hope so.

I will reserve my opinion about Sealed Deck until it is actually released and is available to play. All complaints about Sealed Deck are sort of difficult to consider until Sealed Deck is actually released. I do not pretend to be an expert HB player or all-knowledgable about HB in Guild Wars. I simply am a player who likes HB and hopes HB will continue to exist. And I am a player who is very grateful to anet for continuing to provide Guild Wars to me so I can enjoy it like I do. I welcome any and all debates about HB and hope debate continues. Polite discussion and debate is healthy. Discussion and debate lets anet know we care about HB and that we care about Guild Wars. -- player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 19:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Holy Wall of Text, Batman! If you really want anyone to read ANY of this, I'd suggest condensing it to a maximum of ten sentences. ··· Danny Pew Pew 18:09, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I certainly apologize to Danny Pew Pew and any others who do not like my personal comments in particular or just do not like ANYONE'S lengthy comments in general. I am simply a player who cares passionately about Guild Wars and also cares passionately about HB in particular. There are very very many issues involved in anet's stated intention to remove HB from Guild Wars and perhaps some healthy debate may influence anet's decision to do this in a way I would consider "favorable". I did not post any of my comments to offend Danny Pew Pew or any other player in any possible way. You have my sincere apology if my comments offend you in any way whatsoever. As you can see, I am a very fast typist and I love a good debate or discussion about GuildWars, a subject I care about passionately. -- player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 19:06, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think he meant he was offended, just that it can be hard to read long comments, particularly when they're all in one paragraph. Please sign your comments on talk pages, so that discussions can be followed, as well. Thanks. -- FreedomBound 18:54, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

^ that, and i'm far too lazy to read something that's that long unless it's got Auron's signature after it. ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Again I really apologize to all players using this forum. I will really try harder in the future to actually remember to sign my comments and I will certainly try much harder to make sure I offend no one by properly parsing all my comments into proper paragraphs. -- player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 19:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

First of all, it's not a forum, and secondly, not only will most players not read such a massive wall of text, I can almost guarantee that Linsey will not read it, simply because she does not have time. If you wish to condense it and break it into paragraphs, you'd have a much better chance of getting any sort of feedback. As for RR day cheating? Gaile has made if pretty clear on her support page that ArenaNet considers this cheating and reports of the behavior can lead to suspension of an account. I would guess that repeated reports of such behavior could actually lead to the permanent loss of an account. The fact that so many players are doing it, and not very many are reporting it, doesn't mean it's not known, just that everyone doing it doesn't care. I personally feel that the sooner HB is removed, the better off the game will be, if for no other reason than to eliminate this. -- Wyn talk 22:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I wish to defend my previous comments about my wish to have Hero Battles continue to be available within Guild Wars against the replies that my comments generated. From the reply to my previous comments, I now finally understand what is happening here and I see now how players can expect to be treated who take the time to post their "feedback" here on the many subjects raised within. I was previously naive to think that my "feedback" would be treated with respect in this "forum" since I had previously posted very polite and respectful "feedback" comments for all to read. Instead of welcoming all "feedback" from all players, to include "feedback" from average Guild Wars players (like myself) and also "feedback" from the self-proclaimed elitist Guild Wars players who feel that their opinions about this wiki and about Guild Wars are the only opinions that matter, I now see that this "forum" is to be considered the intellectual property of a few individuals who have taken upon themselves the right to insult certain new or casual users of this "forum", like myself, for the trivial offense of not properly parsing their paragraphs or for the offense of their "feedback" being considered "too long" by certain individuals or for the improper or proper use of the word "forum". I fully expect my comments to be censored or otherwise changed or twisted by these same obviously self-proclaimed elitist players to suit their own needs and to make other players who read their witty replies and comments think how charming and intelligent and wonderful these self-proclaimed elitist players are.

A clear example of how one such player who replied to my "feedback" has tried to twist my words is when he or she very subtly hints within their reply that I somehow support or condone RR Day and it's associated problems for anet and the Guild Wars community within the "feedback" I have posted. Nowhere in my previous "feedback" have I supported or defended RR Day in any manner whatsoever and I actually never even stated what my personal opinion was of RR Day. I will now state my personal opinion of RR Day. At first I very much liked the idea and concept of RR Day and considered RR Day to be an absolutely brilliant idea until I found out that anet does not allow such conduct and such conduct is actually considered cheating by anet.

I try to support anet in every way I possible can and issue sincere thanks to the powers that be on every single day for just the simple existence of Guild Wars. I consider Guild Wars to be the ultimate online game and I therefore consider anet to be the ultimate game publisher. Because of this my opinion of RR Day has, of course, changed completely and I now find RR Day to be very personally offensive and I hope other HB fans will support anet's decision on this and every other subject concerning HB. I am the senior officer and, for 6 months out of every year, I am the leader of my guild which has a fairly good number of members and I have tried to let every guild member know anet's official policy on RR Day and therefore discourage fellow guild members from participating in it. I believe I have been completely successful in gaining support from every guild member in this since none of my fellow guild members want their account to be banned or even suspended and so I now feel I have done everything possible to personally support anet's policies on RR Day.

This certain other player then goes on to say that they wish Hero Battles would be removed from Guild Wars and removed very soon. Sorry, but I am a very big fan of Hero Battles and being a Hero Battles fan is NOT a crime. It is certainly also not a crime to NOT be a fan of Hero Battles either. It is clear to me from reading many, many, postings within this wiki that this certain player, among certain other players, considers this Guild Wars wiki to be their own personal intellectual property and that I, as a casual user of this "forum", am not allowed to respectfully post my "feedback" to the subjects raised within this "forum" as I desire without the threat of subtle patronization and subtle insult. From the sheer massive quantity of postings that certain such individual players, like the player I have just mentioned above, have posted within this wiki, I see now that perhaps average players and casual users of this wiki, such as myself, are perhaps not welcome here.

Please prove me wrong and show casual and first time wiki users respect and give dignity to their opinions when these casual users themselves post their opinions with tastefulness and respect. And please save your intellectual snobbery for others who do not have the energy or time to reply to it. I will absolutely defend my decision to post my "feedback" here and with well parsed paragraphs or perhaps with no paragraph parsing whatsoever. Any censorship of my "feedback" is, plain and simple, censorship. Any verbal patronization to players who have posted tasteful and respectful "feedback" is, plain and simple, subtle self gratifying verbal patronization. If you consider my "feedback" on any subject raised here to be too long then please do not read it, plain and simple. I have read the posted rules of this "forum" and nowhere within these rules are lengthy comments prohibited or even discouraged by the anet owners of this "forum". If you do not like how I have parsed my paragraphs, please do not read them, plain and simple. If the employees of anet who monitor this "forum", such as the obviously hard-working Linsey Murdock and others, do not have time to read my "feedback", that is perfectly understandable and is quite acceptable to me, and is possibly even perhaps to be expected.

If you do not like it when players use the word "forum" to describe wiki or this "feedback" page then please kindly and respectfully without insult explain to other casual users of this website WHY it is not to be considered a forum instead of issuing patronizing or abrupt or insulting corrections. The abundance of insults within this wiki discourage many players from using this wiki or posting their opinions or even reading this wiki at all. Please remember that not all players who come to read this "non-forum" are elitist players or even know what a forum is and I certainly do not know why the use of the word forum would upset anyone. Some players who come to read this "feedback" page are just average players who have a passion about some subject or other within Guild Wars. I have a passion about Hero Battles (and also everything else about Guild Wars), plain and simple. Also, if you do not like reading "feedback" from players who have used their allowed option to not sign their comments then please do not read it, plain and simple. I realize that signing comments allows the thread of the conversation to be more easily followed by the readers, but some players do not want to sign their comments for personal reasons known only to themselves. If you still do not like reading such unsigned "feedback" comments then petition wiki to change their current policy on allowing anyone's unsigned comment, plain and simple. If you do not like the length of someone's "feedback" then petition the employees of anet or administrators of wiki to set arbitrary limits on the length of postings within here or simply do not read the postings that offend you. I have read many, many very lengthy comments and postings from many other players in almost every section of wiki that I have been able to read. Actually it seems to me to be quite impossible for any one person to read everything about Guild Wars posted since there seems to be many many thousands of articles in existence. Certainly my postings are not the most lengthy and I highly doubt that lengthy postings offend all the readers and users of this wiki. Above all, quit insulting new or casual wiki users, like myself, into worshipful silence by your fault finding over absolute trivial details like paragraph-parsing or the proper use of the word "forum" and other such trivial nonsense. And quit playing the role of a wiki "boss" by your patronizing attitude. I know when I am being subtly insulted and I will defend my opinions with my own words. I will be very curious to see what kind of witty replies certain individuals will post now in response to my postings or perhaps my postings will simply be censored. Intellectual snobbery and subtle patronizing attitudes can NEVER be defended when used against players like myself who dare to speak out except by total censorship and censorship is the last refuge of a corrupt and totally worthless system.

Simply put, if you do not like the length of or the quality of my "feedback" then do not read it. I now also fully expect to be badgered with a barrage of witty reply(s) from certain individuals that are designed to impress others and also perhaps replies from certain of these individual's friends. Or perhaps I will just simply be censored. This wiki is not a "feedback" page hosting a battle of wit and charm designed to impress other players and I hope that average Guild Wars players like myself are allowed to post their "feedback" on any subject raised within and that tasteful comments will be respected and replied to with tastefulness and tolerance. I care a lot about Guild Wars and Hero Battles and my very very very very lengthy comments should show this. Censorship through intimidation is the last refuge of a worthless system. -- player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 06:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Honest to God, I beg you, please use some text formating! Press Enter twice every few sentences to make a new line when you're writing short novels like this, because it's impossible to read and not get lost in that maze of letters... — Poki#3 (talk) 02:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

We are just trying to help you to understand that these massive walls of text that are not broken into shorter, more concise paragraphs are a real turn off to someone who has just enough time to skim over comments for the important points. Quite honesly, your double walls of text are a total turn off. We are simply suggesting you change your posting style in the effort to assist you to communicate more effectively. -- Wyn talk 02:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

L2Paragraph. People read your stuff less when it's a big wall than when it's organized thoughts. ~Shard 02:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

See it is not difficult to issue well-meaning and polite corrections to new or casual users of this "feedback" page without appearing to be patronizing or insulting. It seems to me that most of the replies to my most recent comment are well-meaning and mostly respectful. However, when anyone uses the term "we" to describe their own personal opinion they are, of course, suggesting that their own personal opinion is shared by the vast majority of players using this "feedback" page and I find it impossible to believe that everyone who used the term "we" to reply to my comments is actually speaking for the majority or all of the players using Guild Wars wiki or this "feedback" page.

Indeed, it appears to me from the constant verbal player squabbling that I frequently read within almost every section of this Guild Wars wiki over frequently the most trivial of issues that many of the average Guild Wars wiki users are a cranky and cantankerous sort of player that seem to love a good verbal confrontation or fight. I suppose that this really should be expected as long as players who have opposing views are are also allowed to post them in response. My main objection is not an objection over the actual content of issues posted, but rather the habit that many players have in using subtle patonization or direct insults or even, in extreme cases, profanity, to make their comments stand out from other player comments or to reply to players who they disagree with or to reply to players that they seem to dislike. Also, please realize that using such terms as "massive walls of text" to describe sincere and respectful postings by players, such as myself, who care passionately about a particular Guild Wars subject, such as Hero Battles, will not usually generate a favorable reaction from the player who has taken time to post their sincere opinions. You should plainly be able to see from the length and content of my comments that I care a great deal about Guild Wars and Hero Battles.

Your point about breaking up long comments by properly parsing paragraphs is well made and I agree with you and have made very sure that all my previous postings are re-edited and are now properly paragraphed. All my other opinions and comments I stand completely behind one hundred percent and I especially want to make the point that sincere and respectful debate and discussion, whether long or short, about any Guild Wars subject is both healthy and beneficial to the game and also shows the employees of anet who monitor this website that players actually care about Guild Wars and/or Hero Battles and want the best possible Guild Wars game to the extent that anet has the resources to possibly provide. I welcome any player who disagrees with me about anything to reply to me using my email address which I will happily provide to anyone who asks. Sincerely, player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 06:25, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

To fix HB simply remove zaishen quest and balthazar faction. Make the unrated mode for practice period no gaining anything. In rated games you could issue a skill/item upgrade/rune unlock token for that account (non tradable) after x amounts of wins that can be traded to balth guy. Keep the title. Keep the tournaments. Use dishonorable conduct system. Although I am sure you guys have made up your mind on killing it & this was just an idea to try to save something truly unique to the pvp system..

I hate that with the removal of HB there will be no single player options for PVP. Some players really like doing pvp on their own by their wits and skills. So here comes my Idea pitch. How hard would it be to add a 1 vs 1 duel option to the gvg system already in place. People in guilds do it all the time. I have even joined guild run tournaments. You just run to the middle and kick butt. Make it 2 out of three then match is over. rework the hero battle ladder system to work for it or incorporate it into the gvg one. I played a game once with a duel arena and it was wildly popular.

Thanks for your time. Ravenmark 14:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I really like Ravenmark's above idea about a single-player one versus one tournament/ladder dual option being added to Guild Wars which would add a solo pvp format back to the game after the VERY UNFORTUNATE removal of Hero Battles finally takes away all such formats from the game. It would probably turn into a real guessing game about which build to take into the dual because obviously one of the opponents builds would almost always be superior and deadly to the other opponent's build and frequently the dual would probably be mostly decided before it even began. I do not see how the problem with this great idea could be fixed but maybe some smart player can fix it so we can again enjoy one versus one pvp combat after Hero Battles is gone.

There is a fantastic place within this wiki called Guild Wars Wiki Feedback:Main where wonderful ideas like this can be submitted and all such submitted ideas can easily be read and used within the game by employees of anet should they choose to do so. I believe that the current licensing policy of this wiki as it pertains to copyright law prevent any anet employee from actually using any player submitted idea unless the idea is first posted in this Feedback:Main location where the idea then becomes the intellectual property of anet and can therefore be used by anet in any way they choose. Maybe someone wants to take this great idea and submit it there so perhaps it can someday be incorportated into the game. That would be really great. -- player Cat Dance--Cat Dance 19:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

TA/HB are being removed this week according to Gaile. You can stop writing gigantic walls o' text now. Karate Jesus 19:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The insulting term just used, "gigantic wall o'text", is another example of how a group of some players who consider themselves the self-appointed owners of this wiki constantly treat other new Guild Wars players and new wiki users who submit their own humble ideas here in a tasteful and respectful way. It is NOT a crime to be a big fan of Hero Battles and it is certainly not a crime to NOT be a big fan of Hero Battles. I am a big fan of Guild Wars and Hero Battle and I am proud to say this. And I am very sorry that Hero Battles is to be removed from the game. This is a great place to read and discuss certain parts of Guild Wars that interest each of us and Hero Battles greatly interests me so it would be best to quit your subtle patronization and intellectual snobbery towards some players whose ideas or style of submission differ from your own.

As I have previously at great length defended my prior "feedback" about the removal of Hero Battles from the game from the subtle patronizing insults of some of these self-appointed "player owners" of this wiki, I now direct you to my previous comment where I simply suggest that you not read any comments that offend you in any manner. I also suggest that you stop simply insulting the ideas of other new players like me and actually focus your criticism on replying to the substance of the ideas themselves. Not a single solitary one of the group of players I have previously mentioned has taken the slightest small amount of time to actually discuss the issues I have raised but instead just keep posting their subtle insults in reply. I welcome any criticism of my actual ideas but I do not think posting only insults towards the ideas of other players is productive in any way and it certainly does not encourage other new players like me to begin to participate in this wiki. I still stand behind my support of Hero Battles within Guild Wars. I welcome further discussion of this to any player who wants to reply to me by using my email address which I will gladly provide. I now await with great interest to read what the next witty insult directed towards my ideas will be. And again, censorship through intimidation is the last refuge of a worthless system. -- player Cat Dance--Cat Dance 21:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sweet God, man! Please, pleeeeaassse learn to condense your comments. The mark of an intelligent writer is one who can make their point using the least amount of words possible. So, please, follow that advice. Also, I would recommend just letting this go. It wont be an issue on Thursday. Karate Jesus 21:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

We are the active maintainers of this wiki, most involved with this particular subset of the overall guild wars community. We are not trying to insult you, we are simply advising you on a better, more appropriate way to communicate with this community, using the wiki format. Wall of Text is what we call a post that makes your eyes cross trying to read it, and will therefore rarely read it. If you truly wish your opinions to be known and considered, a little good faith could go a long way on your part. This is not to be elitist it's to be HELPFUL. -- Wyn talk 21:19, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

A) You sound like an uppity asshole and no one likes uppity assholes. B) OH NO PEOPLE ARE TELLING ME I AM WRONG THE CABAL MUST BE OUT TO GET ME. C) Until you learn to be concise, your opinion is as valid as that of a foilhat. I can almost assure you that no one that has replied has read more than the first 3 sentences of anything you have written, and I can assure you even moreso that ArenaNet employees will be far less inclined to read the ignorant blatherings of someone who doesn't even care enough about the topic he is trolling to make an intelligent, condensed argument. ··· Danny Pew Pew 21:24, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

It is utterly amazing to me that since I have previously been respectfully stating and defending my opinions about Hero Battles and the fact that I am a big fan of both Hero Battles and Guild Wars, that now certain player(s) have actually began to publicly reply to my opinions using actual profanity like "asshole" or "uppity". Uppity is a word that carries the suggestion that the focus of the word is rising above his or her allowed position in life. Uppity is a class distinction word, plain and simple. Uppity is usually used to describe the members of a lower class by the members of a self-appointed upper class. Uppity suggests that only a certain group of players have control over a situation and that only the opinions of a certain group of players matter. Uppity just reinforces what I have already said, that a certain group of players consider this wiki to be their own personal intellectual property and anyone daring to disagree with them in any manner or daring to refuse to reply to them in worshipful awe or silence will be insulted or badgered time and time again by this same group of players until it is very clear to everyone what the fate will be of any new Guild Wars player daring to be "uppity".

Again and again this same group of players replies to my ideas about Hero Battles with subtle or outright insults instead of replying to my actual ideas or suggetions themselves. Again and again, I have issued a welcome to any player wanting to reply to my ideas about Hero Battles to reply with genuine ideas of their own and to reply to me either here within this wiki or reply to my personal email address. Instead, my ideas and opinions about Hero Battles have been met with increasingly loud and self gratifying verbal abuse. And yet not a single one of this group of players has bothered to criticize any of my actual ideas about Hero Battles but have only been criticising the style with which I have I have using to convey my ideas. This really accomplishes nothing.

Also, in my reply to Ravenmark about Hero Battles, there is no conceivable way that an unbiased observer could call my reply a "gigantic wall o'text". Everything in my reply to Ravenmark concerned Hero Battles and the removal of Hero Battles from Guild Wars in a reply which was both respectful and much shorter in length than many of the other replies on this page. And yet because I am "uppity" and do not know my allowed place, my reply to Ravenmark with my opinions about Hero Battles were instantly publicly insulted within a few minutes time of my posting them. I truly hope you will now bother to take the time to criticise the substance of the my ideas about Hero Battles and stop the profanity and personal insults which accomplish nothing. Censorship through intimidation is the last refuge of a worthless system. --player Cat Dance----Cat Dance 22:33, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

You must've missed Wyn's comment. I may be unnecessarily blunt with my comments, but until you start making logical, condensed arguments, your opinion is basically null and void. Passive aggression accomplishes nothing on the internet, besides drawing in more articulate trolls who don't get lost in the smoke screen of text. ··· Danny Pew Pew 22:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sweet Jesus, God, Moses, Allah, Buddha, Yahweh, Sheol, Shiv, and Tyler Malone. Wtf, man?! Apparently, you're unable to read rational requests so I'll go cruise control: CONDENSE YOUR COMMENTS OR NO ONE WILL READ THEM. Better? Karate Jesus 22:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I want to continue to defend my opinions on Hero Battles within Guild Wars. I keep suggesting that interested players discuss this issue without the continuation of personal attacks, witty and subtle insults cleverly disguised, and outright profanity yet few have yet bothered to reply to my opinions about Hero Battles except in this manner. Few have bothered to even discuss Hero Battles at all. I would really like you to consider these questions. Do you really want this wiki to be intolerant of conficting opinions or different styles of speech and presentation? Do you really want new users of this wiki to read how some past users have been shocked into silence by a series of insulting replies or personal attacks? Do you want new players to feel free to post their opinions, long or short, intelligent or even "unintelligent" about any Guild Wars subject that interests them? I invite interested players to contact me indirectly or directly through my email address to further discuss the subject of Hero Battles. I would appreciate it if you would please limit your replies to a discussion of the issues. Censorship through intimidation is the last refuge of a worthless system. --player Cat Dance--Cat Dance 00:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Cat, no one is trying to intimidate you or censor you. We have tried, REPEATEDLY, to explain to you that is it hard to read poorly written, rather large edits. However, you have refused to listen. The only one here who is censoring you is yourself. Learn to make succinct statements, and it'll be easier for your points to be heard. Karate Jesus 01:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I ask again that any players interested in discussing the impending removal of Hero Battles from Guild Wars contact me either directly or indirectly. The removal of Hero Battles is scheduled very soon. Please limit your replies to my opinions to a discussion of the issues and not on personality conflicts or other disagreements over how best to communicate or not communicate properly when using the written word. It would be greatly appreciated if efforts to entirely focus attention on the ways I have personally chosen to express my opinions about Hero Battles would cease immediately and focus would begin on actually discussing the impending removal of Hero Battles from Guild Wars. Perhaps few players enjoy playing Hero Battles and interest in HB is now minimal. This is, of course, entirely understandable and should be accepted by everyone, including myself, if true. --player Cat Dance--Cat Dance 02:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The removal of TA and HB is scheduled for Thursday. No amount of discussion/ranting/raving/or even succinct arguments will change that at this point. I'm sorry you feel abused, and Danny, you are pushing the limits of NPA. -- Wyn talk 03:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll be sure to be more passive aggressive rather than just plain aggressive, in that case. ··· Danny Pew Pew 20:02, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

PAX

Linsey I watched the PAX videos and you did great. While I already knew most of the information you gave (obviously I follow your journal + wiki updates), it was nice to see the people of the Live Team. I bet you guys were pretty nervous/embarassed going at public like that, no? lol, you still looked quite adorable, gj. On another note, Kristen's hairdo rocks - you should tell her to make it a selectable hair option for GW2 playable char, I'd play it. j/k, but yeah tell her it looks cool. :P Thanks for all your work, anticipating the update and hoping the Anet team is recovered from this mean flu! --Sensei 15:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I have to fully agree with you Sensei. Way to go Linsey. --Nekki 15:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Weekly Nicholas

I asked before, before the feedback issue was worked out. Are those of us who can't do Nicholas every week until the weekend at a disadvantage due to the anti-farming code? Are the items that drop for him (usually trophies) exempted from the anti-farming code? The documentation I've seen on the wiki elsewhere says it's not. --136.142.214.19 20:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion? - Reanimated X 20:16, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Anti-farm_code lists the known exemptions. --136.142.214.19 20:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I've not had any problem obtaining any of the weekly nick items using a full team of heros and henchies even late into the week... MrPaladin † talk 20:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

TA and HA

Hey Linsey, I have a quick question. Once TA is removed from the game, how will new players (or those who haven't yet) access HA? I for one have never unlocked it, but I'd like to at some point. What will be the alternate way to unlock HA once it's impossible to get a 5 win streak in TA? Thanks! 63.115.40.129 14:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure they will add another way; either remove that unlock-station completely, or use the new format for unlocking instead. poke | talk 16:42, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

TA turned into 6vs6 HA

What if TA was turned into 6vs6 HA instead of deleted -Talamare- feedback 14:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

a 6vs6 arena is really needed. Add it to your suggestions and work on it a little more. --Boro 11:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Anet tried 6v6 once and it was a disaster of epic proportions. ~Shard 02:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It's true that GW PvP is balanced for 8v8 instead of 4v4 or 6v6, but I thought that 6v6 was a good format for HA. At least you had 6 people instead of 6 people + 2 heroes, which is what happened as soon as 8v8 was reintroduced. Additionally, those same whiners that complained about 6v6 have now brought us seriously gimped henchie bars designed by people who had zero experience in PvP for the most part, and who used PvXwiki bars designed for human players. Half the problem with the team using heroes was that heroes can do some things better than indifferently skilled players (though heroes don't kite at all well and thus can be neutralized), but the other half of the problem was that teams needed to use heroes because it's just too hard to find 8 players. It already takes too long hanging out in HA to get a group of 6, let alone 8. ceolstan 13:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

How about, y'know, 4v4 HA? is for Raine, etc. 03:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Max title

So, will r1 commander be counted as a max title? 194.252.105.84 20:53, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to see that too... 194.249.207.133 10:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'd agree with r1 being counted as max, but seeing as no one has appeared to reach the max, something should be counted. At r3, you can display the title in the HoM, so perhaps that would make a decent cutoff point? Then again, with another title being released, perhaps it doesn't make sense to allow a "gimme" of sorts. ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I would imagine that they'll leave the max at max and the HoM at r3, since they're adding a new title and all. Karate Jesus 19:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

But all the HB-ers /roll'd or RR'd their r3+'s fair and square! They deserve that +1 to max. :< ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to get max for r1, but I seriously doubt they'll do it. Karate Jesus 20:42, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

viewing alliance guild rosters

hey, it would be great if you could add a button into the guild window so you can see the roster of other guilds in your alliance and see who is on and who isn't. It would be helpful to people just checking themselves instead of making them ask in alliance chat and wait for someone to reply. It would also help if you wanted to make a group for something in just your alliance and wondering if there were enough people to start it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.134.139.205 (talk).

There's an existing suggestion for that very thing, from BattleSage. -- FreedomBound 17:36, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, this has nothing to do with the content of Linsey's journal. -- Wyn talk 17:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Time Emote

← moved to Feedback talk:Joe Kimmes

Blinding Surge is stupid

Blinding Surge: It's shutting down and spammed on any and every melee opponent that tries attacking anything. Are you ever going to nerf its recharge time or something because its spamability overcomes any condition removal. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:First Blood Seven (talk).

I agree that blinding surge is very annoying to players that use a lot of melee skills and professions and its very quick recharge makes it extremely difficult to counter. It almost seems to be able to be reapplied faster than it can be removed by most popular methods of condition removal. I keep trying all sorts of different methods to counter blinding surge and have yet to find any really effective ones that do not require excessive energy or time or skill slots to perform. But even though I have yet to find an effective counter to blinding surge, this does not necessarily mean that an effective counter does not exist. I will keep trying to overcome blinding surge until anet decides to nerf this skill and it becomes less popular. Actually, I have a lot of fun working on this problem and maybe blinding surge will never be nerfed. Rits are also very annoying when they use skills that result in blinding being very quickly applied and reapplied but I also highly doubt rit blinding will be nerfed any time soon by anet. But perhaps I will be wrong about this. --player Cat Dance --Cat Dance 08:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Sight Beyond Sight, Antidote Signet. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 09:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Blinding Surge is not mentioned on Linsey's Journal page. Please keep your comments here on topic with the associated article. If you wish to make a suggestion please go to the Feedback portal and make your suggestion from there. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 09:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Dishonesty will not be taken seriously. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 09:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Mending Touch followed up with a D-shot. --Boro 13:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Besides why do ppl seem surprised that things are stupid in guild wars? --Boro 17:59, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Solutions: Just to name a few. Also, blind/condition reduction mods on your shield is good I hear.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 18:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Lol active topics. etc. ---Chaos- (moo) -- 09:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget . its awesome. --Boro 11:31, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

PvP Skin Update

Around 2 weeks ago we were informed that the bugs preventing this update from going live were fixed - along with the added changes on implementing zcoins. You have made the community wait a very long time for this to be done (I think around 6 months?) since these were added then removed from the game due to mentioned bugs - I'm starting to get increasingly frustrated that you have informed us that its finished yet two weeks later it still hasnt gone live (you have done at least 1 live builds in this period). If your objective was too frustrate whats left of the very small PvP Community your succeeding. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.234.125.201 (talk).

This topic has nothing to do with the content of Linsey's journal, so it doesn't belong here. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 02:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait.....it isn't?

"PvP Skins - Reduce the TRP cost of PvP skin upgrades, make them purchasable with Zcoins, and (fingers crossed) fix the graphical glitch that prevents us from releasing the Eye of the North skins."

Just saying...it is technically in her journal. Karate Jesus 02:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

"Around 2 weeks ago we were informed" would be referring to this so comments regarding it should go there, not here. -- Wyn talk 02:55, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Good point. Karate Jesus 02:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

CA Secondary Elite Skills

I dislike using this for a feedback page, but I don't really know where else it belongs. For starters I want to give you loads and loads of hugs for CA, since it's absolutely amazing. It admittedly frustrates me and many others, though. Especially healers have it really toughhhhhhhh. Anyways, I understand the balance issues behind allowing secondary elite skills, but hurgh, I want it :> ---Chaos- (talk) -- 17:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

It's one of the key things that keeps it balanced, trust me when I say you don't want every team trying its best to run the flavour-of-the-day elite skill shoehorned onto the 4 different professions in the team. --Ckal Ktak 18:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Feedback regarding the update should go on Feedback talk:Game updates/20091022 (She is reading it even if she doesn't have time to respond atm). Hopefully, Linsey will have some time to clear off her talk page after Halloween and then you can give her your personal kudos if you wish. -- Wyn talk 18:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

That may be true, but the reasoning for eliminating 2 other Arenas to bring us this one is right here in her Journal. So it's on topic... Was it worth it? Will we get a follow-up Journal? There are more people waiting for Linsey to enlighten us this Topic than there is actual players waiting for Codex teams currently. --ilr 21:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Owell. Just make codex versions of EDA and "IJAFW!" :> ---Chaos- (talk) -- 14:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

ilr, what does your comment have to do with this topic? This is not about the reasoning for removal, it's regarding the mechanics of CA. That belongs on the game update page. -- Wyn talk 15:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The exact mechanics of the upcoming Bi-Monthly change proposals might also be shoved off to another page, but their reasoning and discussion there-of belongs right here... As does a new journal entry that atleast attempts to smooth some of this over. You know and I know there's only so many pages Lin will even commit to *watching*. Her latest inattentiveness to the community, and the poorly received PvP update(s) are not unrelated.
--ilr 21:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

If you're gonna whine about Guild Wars so much, go play WoW. The fact that ArenaNet even bothers to pay any bit of attention to the community should speak to the fact that they actually give a fuck about the playing experience, not just the profit. If you feel like complaining about shitty communication, I know some boys over at Infinity Ward who could use a lecture. ··· Danny Pew Pew 22:39, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Costume Brawl

I love me some Costume Brawl. It's a really fun event that rewards you for playing skills you may normally not use.*cough* Palm Strike*cough* It also i think is just a fun AB-like battle that requires tactics to reach those rewards.

May I ask who was in charge of the builds this year. I found them very balanced in respect to each other and found no synergy that would make one build even more unbalanced *Pin Down + PS* with each other. SO if you could give me the name of who was in charge of builds this year,I want to hug them a bunch. /sarcasm

In all seriousness I can understand that balance attaining balance in Guild Wars is like try to get a Vegan to kill a lamb with his/her bare hands. But the builds this year are just unbalanced to each other.

Monks = Yea getting damage in there and letting them play support is hard, but Ray of Judgement, really, why not put Shield of Judgement in there, a nice anti melee and it has a balanced duration to recharge ratio.

Mesmers = Fine.

Eles = Ok, could be worse.

Rangers = Pin down helps power trampling ox when monks remove the PS cripple, and Melandrus arrows yet again "shafts" the monks.

Warriors = It's hammer time yall.

Paragons = I like this year.

Necromancers = you love piling the hexes in there. I like this build on its own, does what it needs to, has a great self heal, and can pump some steady damage out, but when combined with another hexing class it gets a lil over whelming. Otherwise its awesome.

Dervishs = Cool. I like to see a non-scythe mastery elite.

Ritualists = Not bad.

Assasins = I don't know if your making up for something you plan on doing to that class in the future, but the fact that if there is more then one of these on the other team or yours, they kinda do their job a lil too well. And when your on a map with a battle cry shrine *noisemaker* , the fun begins where not only can they snare you they can actually chase ya down and then gift you with new orifices. It really isn't that fun when you don't actually fight and spend the entire match running from these lil guy/gals

Honestly whoever was in charge of it this year didn't do such a bad job, but this seems to be a case of the candied apple that spoiled the bunch. Please forward to the one that was in charge of bars this year. Thank you.

8:14pm EST, October 25, 2009

WUT? (where did Lin mention this?) --ilr 02:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, i know that the live team is in charge of events, so i figured Linsey is the best bet (though she never checks here often anyway) to pass information along.

Feedback regarding Halloween should wait until Linsey's main talk page is open again. Yes, I understand that is unlikely to happen before the event is over, but in this instance at least, I don't see them changing the Costume Brawl bars before it is done for this year anyway. You could always post your comments on a fansite forum. This page should be only regarding the content of her Journal. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 14:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

K. Thank you Wyn.

GW Announcements

This was not one until late October -- last week, I think -- and last week was when they made the change. I mean, do you all really expect that we ALL trounce on Linsey's talk page waiting for the latest insider news?

Great idea though, just would've appreciated the more communicado.

But, Linsey didn't mention one HUGE thing that is a MAJOR PLUS for scrapping TA and HB:

Now there are 1/2 less causes for skill updates! (GvG and HA will still cause them). I mean in the last half-year (last 4 updates or so), the skill updates have been both BRUTAL and AWESOME at once (and warriors almost completely neglected, nerf and buff-wise. Suppose that's a good thing?). Not only that, a MEGA GRIPE we all had with the skill updates was the dev team's half-will to keep pvp and pve splits for certain skill changes ("Oh, we did not feel the new changes warranted a pve/pvp split", can't remember which skill but check the august/september updates and search for that quote). So, there being the potential for less skill updates = good.

THANKS! :)

99.247.19.65 01:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't think you understand what a "plus" is. In a game like GW where everything is lopsided balance-wise, less balance updates = bad. ~Shard 01:41, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

But the need to balance skills for two less arenas is good. ··· Danny Pew Pew 20:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

^ No more balancing just for TA or HB. The only balancing Codex needs is introducing a set of banned skills. King Neoterikos 03:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

They really just need to tier the skills, tbh. ··· Danny Pew Pew 17:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Tiering that many skills would be A> impossible B> Admitting their game is more imbalanced than most people ever realized. & C> Likely to attract more Criticism & Drama than A & B combined. The main problem is that they have no sub-categories. The game doesn't know if it's picking a Conditional Skill, Physic, or Defense. It's also picking too many Elites which just compounds the Broken Spike-Meta issue. They just need to make each class' "permanent pick" self-heal remove 1 condition & 1 hex. --ilr 22:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with just about everything you said. ··· Danny Pew Pew 23:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually they already are tiered, just not very well. I think the tiers could use an update now that the arena is actually in motion. -- Kirbman 21:20, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

If you have a source that says they're tiered, I'd love to see it. Right now, all we have is a little over a week's worth of data that suggests that self-heals are automatically included. ··· Danny Pew Pew 17:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Are Rits and Monks even getting that much? --ilr 20:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Every profession gets 20 skills every day, plus res sig. Right now, other than the freebies, the most times a skill has been pooled is 8/10 (Mighty Was Vorizun). If they are chosen randomly, the chance of that happening is 1/837339 ~Shard 20:25, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't get started on how common aberrant behavior is in Random Number Generators /w bad copypasta'd code. And assuming that wasn't the case... MwV isn't even a heal. Nor is Martyr AND none of the self-condition removals are coming up often enough for that approach. It's almost like they expect Monks & Rits to just wing it every single day with only a slight Armor bonus and any spare attribute points they shouldn't even have --> displaced into a bad secondary if they expect any kind of regular heal. I don't understand it and we still haven't gotten a Dev Update page explaining it. --ilr 21:50, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

MwV is worse than smiter's boon. ~Shard 22:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Revisiting lifting 3 hero party limit.

I know that everyone asks this, but I'd just like to bring it up since it's been a while since this has been discussed. Gaile's original statement about why there's a limit is because it encourages people to play with other people in pugs. The fact is now, noone pugs anymore. The only pugs i see are for zbounty/mission quests.

There isnt a global party search system (i know there isnt going to be and probably couldnt work anyway), but if you go into Dzagonur Bastion ready to do the mission, more often than not, it's dead empty. Most of the time I just add 4 hench and go, or, I'll have my friend load up some heroes and then leave so i control them.

It just seems like it's been quite a while since this question got a no, and I think it needs to be asked again. --adrin 07:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I was just in Dzagonur yesterday b/c I was working on Cartographer title. It was still quite busy (probably b/c of the epic failure-rate of PuGs in it and the tactical challenge the mission presents) or atleast had plenty of people rotating in/out while LFT. ...Besides, henchmen are *almost* as good as Heroes now --ilr 08:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Use permaform tbh, solves all your problems. Don't need those silly henchmen and heroes when you have invincibility. Also, pospospos!152.226.7.201 08:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

perma doesn't work if you're trying to master Dzagonur, because you can't get all the aggro and they'll destroy at least one of the defenses before you can beat even one boss. I've done it with 3 MM heroes and balanced hench. The heroes guard each defense point and the hench come with me to kill the bosses. Only thing you gotta do is give each MM heal party and some self heals as well to keep them alive while you fight. (Satanael | talk) 17:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I dont care about that mission directly, im using it as an example. Plus, most of the pugs don't know how to run the bars you'd like them to run, and the ones they want to run are terrible. Plus, after playing with a pug you'd probably do MAX 1 more mission with them, if that. The occurance of that happening anyway in comparison to just doing it with H/H is miniscule. --adrin 19:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Ahh... Now Ve getz to ze REAL Probzem dat iz troublink jzu!
...after 4 years, there is still newbs running LoLimBAD bars and you just couldn't resist such a lolcow topic. Yes indeed, the GW community is statistically one of the worst in the biz next to Halo & (soon to be released) Starcraft2. But giving everyone 4 more heroes to run won't fix that, nor is it even necessary. I've run Moddock Crevice on Hardmode /W Bonus several times already with just Heroes and Henchmen and I'm notoriously bad at runnin LoL-RP builds instead of FotM'metas that other Pros run. I also got Masters on the Bastion & GrandeCourt with just H&H's and no EotN skills. ...When I pug, I just hang back and let people MAKE their mistakes and when they get sick enough of failing, most of them magically metamorph into good listeners. --ilr 20:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

StarCraft 2 is going to have a bad community? What's your basis? 74.50.104.2 21:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Starcraft1... Duh --ilr 21:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

The original StarCraft is a professional sport in Korea. Didn't you know? 74.50.104.2 21:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

micro 2 perma heroes and you win? 74.50.104.2 21:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Well if most people just use 4 hench, whats the difference between 3 hero/4 hench and 7 hero? They're more customizable, easier to control, and serve the same purpose. If the real problem is not having people play in pugs, why allow heroes AND henchmen to begin with. According to that rationality, there should be a 3 AI limit. Makes no sense. --adrin 02:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Because if people could use 7 heroes no one would ever use henchmen. 24.6.127.61 04:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

And there's something bad about not using henchmen?--Unendingfear 04:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I just got Protector and KoaBD today after completing Jehnurs bonus with 2 or 3 other Pug players... they didn't have any HB Monks so we added Mehnlo to the party and won with him. IoW: Henchmen are fine, and are still being used even in parties with 2 or more players. --ilr 09:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

"Because if people could use 7 heroes no one would ever use henchmen." Indeed, and I would prefer to just roll over Cynn and the others as Heroes. It would be so much easier and sensible that way.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 18:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The only logical reason I see to include henchmen is for people who don't own Nightfall/EotN. Otherwise, it makes no sense to use henchmen when you can use heroes. It's the same thing, the only difference is that people would be happy about it. --adrin 19:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

You're forgetting the (possibly newer) people that have crap unlocked for skills, and/or don't know how or don't want to try to put together a good build outside of the profession they are playing. They could also not have the money or resources to gear up their heroes to satisfactory levels (like how I haven't bothered with most of my heroes on most of my characters,). — Jon Lupen 21:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

They get hero skill points for rewards and hero leveling, as well as a limited skill set that comes with the hero. There are plenty of options for newer players. And less we forget that they can actually play the game to unlock skills through quests or trainers. Lets not make the excuse of dumbing down the game more than we have already.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 21:08, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Despite all that, I've introduced several friends to the game, and their heroes still suck much worse than the henchman for a while. Bottom line: what do you stand to gain from removing henchmen? Absolutely nothing. — Jon Lupen 21:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Jon has a good point in how it would be hard for a new player to enter the game and be faced with the idea that he's expected to make a build not only for his own character, but also for seven other party members with professions he has no idea about. Such player could be told to use henchmen instead of heroes, but he would know he would be just doing the second best thing. Of course, this too is something simple to solve, at least in theory - give the ability of using seven heroes only to players who have finished at least one campaign. It would prevent completely new players from being overwhelmed with choices. Erasculio 21:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Who the hell said I wanted henchmen removed? No. When I said "the only reason to include henchmen" i meant in the party not the game. In fact I've given reason why henchmen are useful. I'm asking for an OPTION for existing players to use 7 heros. The hench can stay, I just want more control. I don't know how anyone could disagree with that. --adrin 23:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Two words: extraneous logic. I put two and three together and got six. My point still (mostly) stands though. — Jon Lupen 23:18, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand why your friend might want to use henchmen, but that doesnt pertain to what I'm saying. I'm not talking about people who have crappy heroes, I'm talking about people who want to have full control of their team's bars and don't want to pug. --adrin 23:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

(EC) Jon & Erasculio...this game is 4 years old with 3 expansions, hundreds of skills...the game is going to be overwhelming no matter what due to those factors and the sheer size of the game for new players or returning players. That's true with most games like GW...I felt the same way when I first got into ROM and NWN...even Starcraft. But there are plenty of guides, guilds and obviously the wiki that compensate for that. As far as hero builds...there are plenty of places like PvX or Guru to help with that. And don't give me the tripe that "they don't know to look there", please, this is the digital age...we aren't restricted to only Nintendo Power, you can google or type "Guild Wars" or "Guild Wars builds" into any search engines and find the help you need. Reasonable people do that... I do that with just about everything I start playing. Secondly, there is such a thing as "trial and error"...everything should not be handed over on a silver spoon, and in all honesty, that is one of the major issues I have with this game, its too simplistic and has dumbed down its gameplay and player base. Again with trial and error, you can play the game and get good at it by going along, you make it sound like build making is impossible--it isn't, in fact its a major part of this game--not getting spoon fed builds shoved down your throat. The meta doesn't control this game's playability, you're giving that aspect too much merit.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 23:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

See, you are expecting people to study Guild Wars before playing it. That is not going to happen - most new players are not going to stop to read skill lists on this wiki and builds on PvX wiki, and even if they did, they would only be crushed by the one thousand and more number of skills. Guild Wars is already too complex, regardless of how easy it is, to force a new player to deal with all that and have any idea of how to build seven heroes. Just introduce it gradually, like everything else in the game - keep the current 3 heroes limit, and open it in the end of the game, when players would have more familiarity with the setting. Erasculio 23:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Usually I like to know a little something first before I begin a game, but thats just me. I'd have no issue with removing henchmen past the lower level areas of the game.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 23:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's just you. Now factor in the rest of the player-base and their mentality. — Jon Lupen 23:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

What happens to those of us that only have Prophecies and Factions, and therefore have no heroes? 74.50.104.2 23:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

(ec) The it is unfortunate. The world could do well with a little organization. And honestly, this game isn't that difficult. Some bad AI running bad bars isn't going to be a crucial factor in how well new players cope. @The IP there are heroes you can get in Proph and Factions...infact, the change over would benefit you to where you would have equal access to heroes.--*Yasmin Parvaneh* 23:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Owning Prophecies gets you Olias, owning Factions gets you Zenmai. That's two heroes, hardly enough for a full team. — Jon Lupen 00:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

fuck it, we lost topic 2 pages ago. i'm too tired to do a tl;dr so just forget it --adrin 00:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Come on, what's wrong with allowing players who have access to ~25 heroes have 7 of them in their party? People could've bought nf/eotn for the heroes. Keep the henchmen for the people who don't buy nf/eotn for whatever reason. Heck, it could be an incentive for people to buy the later games. Lol. As it's been said before, heroes are good for their full, customisable bars, armour and weapons. The only downside I see to 7 hero teams is giving players who don't have them a not as effective team. I can't remember how I found this wiki, it was ages after I started playing, and I've been able to make some decent (non-meta) builds for me and my heroes, who are much better than the henchman before and after their bar update. --smøni 00:33, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The problem with having 7 heroes could be a design one. I mean, we need 5 buttons on the map thing to control our 3 heroes, adding 4 more could make it really crowded and not very easy to use. Also, if you only use factions and prophecies you can't get any heroes. You need NF in order to get the quests for olias and zenmai. So, henchmen have to stay in at least those games. (Satanael | talk) 16:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

You bring up a good point though... WHY do we have to own Nightfall to get Olias and Zenmai if players who own EotN are allowed to get Heroes later even though they don't own Nightfall? DOES NOT COMPUTE ...I've been introducing a new player to the game this week and he's really desperate for some Necromancer heroes but all he owns is Prophs & EotN. Kinda feel bad for him b/c he's missing out on 2 of them; and without Factions, he has no means of turning Xandra into an MM/sab either. --ilr 00:40, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Because GW has almost no retroactivity. Things get added to new campaings, and the old ones are left abandoned. Prophecies has huge areas, but the only reason to visit many of them are vanquishing and maybe Nicholas appearing there. Nightfall gets drops, skills and armors for Assassins, but Prophecies doesn't. If you favor a dervish, you'll get almost nothing for your profession of choice if you get Prophecies or Factions. Things getting added to the end content without renewing the old is always a bad design choice. Cheaper, but still bad. There should have been at least purchaseable update packs or something to renew old content. Making NPCs sell armors and skills if you got the update pack, and making bosses spawns and drops appear if all party members have the update or something like that. So far, the only retroactivity Prophecies had was... let's see... lip synch, end credits area, insignia, the 'mission starter' icon over Sir Tydus in pre-Searing, and a coupe of visual changes, like the Crystal Desert centaurs and the improvement in charr appearance, the rest of the things it got require the rest of the campaigns, so it doesn't count as retroactivity. It even lost its elite areas when they became 'core'. When I look in the cabinet where I store my GW game boxes, the Eye of the north one laughs at the rest, while the Prophecies one cries in a corner. As for heroes, I don't see the need for 7 of them until they release GW2. Then it would make much more sense, sine it would be hard enough to form parties. For now a Zaishen mission is enough to bring enough people to make most things. MithTalk 22:59, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I hate dealing with people and I hate being limited. That is my only statement. I want 7 hero slots. Vael Victus 06:30, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

HEY! why not 8 heroes? then you wouldn't have to play the game. --Boro 09:21, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it makes no sense that if I am saving the world that everyone wouldn't help me out, I want 36 hero slots and however many slots are need to take all the henchmen in one outpost please.--Orry 21:19, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

/e *Marisa Tomei emote*

• Aug. 28, 2009: "we’ll try to post the update notes/dev update for each skill balance about a month before the update actually goes Live..."
• Date of last skill balance update: Sep. 17, 2009
• ...about a month before the update actually goes Live...
  ಠ_ಠ
• ...about a month before...
  ...tick tock...tick tock... --ilr 21:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

who said the next skill update was this month? (that's what you seem to be implying so sorry if i'm wrong) ~ PheNaxKian 18:28, 5 November 2009

I think he was suggesting that it should be posted this month, otherwise the next skill update wont be until January. Which means, the last "real" skill update (and by update, I mean an actual change in skills and not just a random balance of the super OP builds) will have been over 6 (?) months old. Karate Jesus 19:31, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

"who said the next skill update was this month?" They did, actually. On the 17th of September that did say: "This is our last skill balance update before moving officially to a bimonthly schedule". We're at the start of November now, if we were going to be picky we could say "So, two months from the 17th of September is the 17th of November, right? Doesn't bi-monthly require to a two month gap? /cough".

BUT to hold Arenanet to exacts is something we've done in the past, foolishly though; we must remember that their environment is a dynamic, roll-with-punches-in-a-rusty-drum-barrel-where-things-can-change-on-an-hourly-basis-because-thats-what-seems-to-happen-on-a-daily-basis" situation. I think holding them to their word, like in the past, which one would think would be a reasonable stance, is foolish. We just know better. That's not to say don't expect some information this month, or the skill update for that matter... well, actually I am saying don't expect information or the update this month, it's just easier that way. PLUS they've been very busy. I mean, there's was all the Halloween stuff going on... anyone know what's actually was happening with all of that? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I actually predicted it would take them atleast 3 months... This is just a tongue in cheek reminder to everyone that they keep ratcheting up the promises on communication (even though they probably never needed to) while the established pattern looks more like procrastination until the 11th hour --ilr 20:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Valve time anyone? Also, can we please start using "bimestrially" instead of "bimonthly"? "Bimonthly" is confusing to those of us on a "bimonthly" pay schedule. 74.50.104.2 21:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The side effects of that level of chronopartical bombardment is clearly Troll-itus on an Epic widespread Scale. Trust me, We don't need another Robin Walker. --ilr 22:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Micro transaction game

← moved to User talk:Kraken#Micro transaction game

Happy Wintersday, Linsey!

Rose Of Kali 23:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

This topic has nothing to do with the content of Linsey's journal, so it doesn't belong here. Thanks! - Mini Me talk 10:07, 25 December 2009

Happy wintersday to you too! --Boro 11:49, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

This is the only Linsey's page that's not blocked. <_< Rose Of Kali 19:48, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Coal for you You Mini-me! ...Meanwhile we'll just pretend that Linsey wished us a merry christmas here in her Jounral, I'm sure her efforts on improving wintersdays were basically the same thing. /Have some cookies and a good Xmas Linsey! --ilr 01:13, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hope ya had a great Christmas and a happy new years to come! Also for GW's side, Happy Wintersday! -- riyen ♥ 09:43, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

happy wintersday and newyears and x-mass and zombie yodel <3- Zesbeer 08:50, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The rest of this discussion that is not part of wishing Linsey Happy Wintersday has been

← moved to User talk:Shard#Happy Wintersday, Linsey

Shiro's weapons

I don't know who to direct this question to or if this has already been addressed. Do we know why Shiro's Daggers require such a high dagger attribute (15 and then 13)? Can someone from the development team give us some insight? My guess is it's a lore issue. Shiro was highly skilled and the daggers are the largest in the game. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 22:02, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Where should this go? I'm quite sure it has absolutely nothing to do with Linsey's Journal. I've seen quite a few lore questions on Emily's page. Rose Of Kali 22:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think this is a lore thing. But there really isn't a need for it... would like to know, but finding someone who was around for Factions might get the question answered faster. Then again, are any of the devs from Factions' time on the wiki? -- Konig/talk 01:04, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

It is a lore thing. Shiro was supposed to be 1337, and so his greens were gimped for no reason. NuVII 01:07, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I recall it being that they only wanted Assassins to use Shiro's Daggers. Other professions can't reach the 13/15 req. –alistic 01:09, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

IIRC, Linsey has answered Factions lore questions before by selflessly tracking the answers down within Anet but since she has apparently been in a constant state of "too busy for us" for roughly 6 months now, the question would need to go to a C.R. instead. (IE: MOVE PLZ) --ilr 02:16, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

^^Yes. They started off with q15, but were lowered to q13 due to player QQ. Afaik that was exactly so that only primary Assassins could use them. So really, this is answered and can be archived somewhere. Rose Of Kali 02:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

I chose this page because linsey's title is "Lead game design" or something. I don't know the hierarchy of game development and who decides what. Also the assassin-only thing sounds familiar but "as far as I know" doesn't quite answer it for me. Links? Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 20:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, wouldn't even know where to find links for this, it was so long ago, but remember reading the QQ threads when it was q15, and then the answer as to why it was dropped to q13 and not q9/10/11/12 was so that secondary assassins couldn't use them still. But again, Linsey won't answer this due to her "lockdown from wiki" thing, and this is her Journal. I'll link this to Emily, anyways. Rose Of Kali 16:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thankyou Rose for your help. I don't understand the logic since as I've mentioned those secondary assassins can just make another pair of vampiric daggers. I guess it was a "here's a treat" decision. Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 21:03, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

What does this have to do with Linsey's Journal? Please move this discussion elsewhere. This page is NOT a replacement for her talk page while her talk page is locked. Thanks! -- Wyn talk 22:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

As you could see after reading a few lines, we have requested a move, but dunno where to put it. Any ideas? You've done a lot of cleanup on Gaile's pages, so you might be the best to ask. Rose Of Kali 02:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend AliceandSven's talk page. -- Wyn talk 03:09, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

gg adding more to it wyn... any way u could move it to one of the weapons pages.- Zesbeer 04:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

HB Question

Hi Linsey!

Now, I'll admit I miss Hero Battles but I did not /roll 100, /rockpaperscissor or /redresign, but I did enjoy Hero Battles while it lasted. I just didn't read these Journals until it happened. Anyways, I've been wondering about this quote:

"A simple truth emerged: to fix Hero Battles, we would need to virtually redesign the entire format."

It was stated on the Journal. Just, out of curiosity, what did the Development team have in mind to redesign the entire format of Hero Battles? Than 05:48, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

change it into Codex. ··· Danny Pew Pew

I don't think they had anything in mind, they just realized the whole format was fundamentally flawed. ~Shard 06:25, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Bad AI v. Bad AI has it's problems, especially when you get to decide what skills the bad AI uses, hence the removal of HB and of heroes from all PvP. --Orry 12:43, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

We actually did explore a lot of different changes we could make before coming to that conclusion. We talked about various changes to existing mechanics, we talked about build restrictions, we talked about AI changes and map changes, we talked about detaching the camera to give players a top down view, we even talked about basically turning it into an RTS. We did talk about it a lot, but just kept coming back to the feeling that we could not fix its fundamental issues without completely changing the design and changing the design could potentially just swap one set of problems for a new set in a never ending cycle of suck. - Linsey talk 22:36, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

What are these "fundamental issues" you speak of?60.234.161.141 08:02, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

GW was never designed with 1vs1 in mind. MithTalk 13:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

It's a PvP format with four times as many bots as players. It could work if it were 4 heroes and 0 players per team (and it would be all micro), but there will be issues as long as players and potentially broken bots are in the same place. — Raine Valen 17:45, 29 Oct 2010 (UTC)

Plus RR day was breaking the Zkey economy, and making it too easy to obtain Zrank. RTS format would have only worked if the skill sets were locked, and each hero had a given "job" that is a bit alien to the existing GW gameplay, but more in line with an RTS style game play. --Lania 18:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

@Mith: Interesting you should mention that, since there is the scrimmage option in your guild hall which was implemented in Prophecies where people can 1v1. Don't say anything about it being 4v4 because, well, you know . . . RA/TA/Ascalon Academy.

@Raine: Funny thing is, I and many others have played in all corners of HB and we hardly ever encountered bots and even then, it isn't hard to beat them since they can't split.

@Lania: I specifically remember RR day starting only after Anet announced HB's removal and I'm pretty sure you have been told that before, don't let it leave your mind this time. I'm really asking for what Anet regarded as the "fundamental issues" 60.234.161.141 00:39, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

"@Raine: Funny thing is, I and many others have played in all corners of HB and we hardly ever encountered bots."

Uh? — Raine Valen 1:14, 30 Oct 2010 (UTC)

On your other points: Yes, you can 1v1 in GW – no, it's not balanced for 1v1; RR was going on long before the announcement of HB's removal. — Raine Valen 1:18, 30 Oct 2010 (UTC)

Just because you keep saying something doesn't make it true. Note the dates of those revisions referring to red resign. Compare to the date of the announcement that HB would be removed. Also of note: the capability of doing 1v1 in scrimmage is not the same as being designed for 1v1, and the "bots" Raine was referring to are the heroes themselves, not actual botting players. - Tanetris 01:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, as Tanetris said RR or "resigning" started not that much after z-combat quests were added. HB removal was announced in September. It mainly boiled down to... who brought the skills on the heroes that exploit the AI the most won... which made it very boring... hence the flaw in the design. You really didn't need much skill to win after a while, if the other person brought a hero team build that didn't exploit the AI as much. --Lania 02:10, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Please note, that I was talking about "RR-Day" not red resign. Completely different. I talked about "RR-Day" because it was what Lania was talking about, which was false. I expected someone to bring that up, about people asking to resign when the zquest was implemented, so, please direct yourselves to these posts by high-profile HBers: Read the one that responds to Kook~NBK and Read the second response down

So, you see, yes, red resign was around, and yes people "tried" to get it going but it did not catch on and fell flat. Your "proof" only shows what people were talking about when the zquests were just implemented. Any proof of red resign anywhere between late may and early august? Oh and Lania, regarding your statement that someone who exploits AI will beat someone who doesn't exploit AI, that is only true in the low ranks. If you were actually good, you could get through any AI exploits. I know, I've done it, those two forum posters above did it. Players not wanting to improve is not a fundamental issue of the format. 60.234.161.141 16:15, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

"If you were actually good, you could get through any AI exploits."

"Hi, I'm 12 and what does 'game balance' mean?"

You're supposed to have to play better than someone to beat them. If you're half-assing and your broken AI exploits carry you to victory against someone playing hard, there's something wrong with that. I broke top 500 playing 3 SF heroes (or 3 pack hunters) with mesmer ints and a monk, and it took very close to no skill at all. Splits consisted of their split characters getting obliterated in a blazing inferno; 4v4 consisted of everyone getting obliterated in three times the heat. I beat players that I know were better than me at HB by abusing heroes; that's not balanced at all.

RR day was happening every HB ZQ day (rr itself was happening since /roll got banned from PvP) (also, lol @ banning /roll in PvP, btw). The ZQs started before the removal was announced, no? — Raine Valen 21:51, 30 Oct 2010 (UTC)

Uhhhh, you're basically building on what I already said. Those people you beat aren't good, trust me, being in the top 1000 is no achievement. It was dead easy to get into the top 500 even if you weren't exploiting the AI. I said that any good player can beat someone like you who exploits the AI. What does that tell you about the people you beat? Just because you perceived them to be better than you doesn't make them any good and doesn't mean that it was your exploiting of the AI that led to your victory. And I'm not gonna try to correct you about red-resign/red-resign-day anymore. It's like telling a lemming to stop committing suicide. 60.234.161.141 23:27, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

"Just because you perceived them to be better than you doesn't make them any good and doesn't mean that it was your exploiting of the AI that led to your victory."

They may not have been good, but that is irrelevant because I never claimed that. My claim is that I was terrible and putting in almost no effort against players that were less terrible putting in more effort; by all accounts, a terrible player putting in no effort should lose to a mediocre player putting in more effort. That is not what happened. I won far more than I should have, given my skill level and that of my opponents. What made the difference? Me abusing broken AI (and broken skills, for that matter). The game giving me, a horrible HBer, a crutch that allows me to compete with and best better HBers is the opposite of game balance.

"And I'm not gonna try to correct you about red-resign/red-resign-day anymore. It's like telling a lemming to stop committing suicide."

What was the date of the announcement of HB and TAs removal? What was the date of the first RR day? Sources, please. That's all the evidence you need to support your claim; I'm going off of my memory, which may well be wrong. However, without anything to substantiate your claim, I trust me more than I do you, so I'm going to continue to believe that I'm right and you're not.

Thanks! — Raine Valen 23:45, 30 Oct 2010 (UTC)

"My claim is that I was terrible and putting in almost no effort against players that were less terrible putting in more effort" How do you know they are less terrible? You may think they are, but in actual fact, they are not, if they are to lose to a terrible player you claim to be. You may think they are putting in more effort only because it's more than you would do. That does not mean that the more effort that is put in is adequate enough. Ever considered that good HBers would have put in even more effort which would have been adequate enough to win? On the RR crap, yes, red resign started when the zq was implemented, but it was not a problem nor widespread as many, many people chose to ignore these rretards and beat them. The sources you have provided shows what the /roll abusers tried to do once it was nerfed, but, anyone who played HB regularly will tell you that this fad died out almost as quick as it's inception and it became something that only friends would do amongst themselves during dead hours. red resign day however, is different. This new form of red resign started only after the announced HB removal. At first, it was intended to be a small community thing so that people could help some hardcore HBers gain the max rank. However, they realized that there were huge advantages to doing this on zq day and thus, RR Day was born. The only sources I have are the 2 links above. The thread started by Ares (guy who this small community were trying to help) was created in the HB sub-forum on Guru (which I know you have never read) about a week after the announced removal. The sub-forum has since been deleted and I cannot access my sources. You had to have been there - which you clearly were not.

Oh, one thing I must say. When I said "Ever considered that good HBers would have put in even more effort which would have been adequate enough to win?", I am only saying that so that it will make it easier for you to understand. In actual fact, any good HBer would not need to put in a single ounce of effort against terrible players as they already know how to beat them easily. 60.234.161.141 05:58, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

HB is Dead GET OVER IT if you guys want to continue this endless never going to see HB come back argument do it on your own talk pages please.- Zesbeer 07:37, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

In retrospect, I don't think Anet understood what people actually liked about HB when they took the decision to remove it. Perhaps the HB community went too far in pointing out all the negative aspects of the format to the point where Anet just gave up. After years of no updates, Anet went from "we're finally going to update HB" to "let's just kill it instead" in a matter of weeks/months, that just happened too fast (in my opinion). I recently talked to some of the other ex-top 100 players, and we all seemed to agree that the format was actually fun despite all its issues and that there's just nothing even remotely like it now in GW. We'd really like to play the format again in some form or another (even if it's just during special events).

And concerning RR: Match manipulation was probably a factor in removing HB, I should know, I submitted plenty of reports about all the different kinds of match manipulation going on to Anet's support department and Izzy. RR however wasn't a problem until after they announced that the format was going to be deleted, at which point people started to form "farm" groups knowing that Anet wasn't going to ban them anyway. --Draikin 15:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

WtB Help

This page has been seeing a gigantic revert war because of a stupid bug note. Are you the person I would ask to confirm whether this is a bug or intentional? I think you are but I'm not positive. Anyway if it is a bug, Some players seem to want this to work this way. So maybe you could clarify by saying something along the lines of "yes its a bug but its one we don't plan on fixing" or something? So we can stop with the huge fight about it? --Master Briar 06:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Isn't the definition of an "exploit" a bug that you use to gain advantage (i.e. one you wouldn't want to see go away)? -- FreedomBound 15:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

UW and FOW

Isnt it funny that only players attempt to conquer the fow/uw. Why wouldnt the white mantle or any other faction held by some npcs tempted to conquer these territories ? Yseron - 90.15.54.26 14:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Not ascended? King Neoterikos 13:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Only Ascended and a few creatures like demons, ghosts, spirits, undead, nightmares, dragonkin and elementals seem to be able to enter there. What is it that they all have in common? MithTalk 13:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

They all shop at Pottery Barn? Tylenol Jones 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Otherkin? ... ಠ_ಠ
Some of the Mantel bosses obviously can see the seers and communicate with the Mursaat = Ascended too. Maybe they farmed Drunkard Points like Saul. --ilr 20:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Not all white mantle can see them... and maybe those who can saw them because the Mursaat chose to reveal themselves. MithTalk 22:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I always thought that the two areas where under attack all the time..that's why we get quests there in the first place isn't it? Lou Wolfskin 01:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

...And Elonians walk into a big roofless cave Kournans somehow never-discover and then play Orkin-man until they Ascend. Maybe ascension for the Mantle is getting drunk enough that the Mursaat have to come throw you an Intervention. OP's probably trolling anyway since we all know that FoW & torment is crawling with Mantle --ilr 20:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The Shadow Army are unrelated to the White Mantle. That has been confirmed by devs. They sure have the symbol, but that's just due to reused skins for the modified models. IF I have to guess why many nightmares resemble other things is, well, they are nightmares fro the Mists. They must resemble things players hate or fear. MithTalk 22:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

"They must resemble things players hate or fear." Then the Nightmares should resemble that old tall fat guy with homosexual tendencies while drunk and the ability to pass wind in public places without realizing he did it, who's on my business administration course then. Huge oversight on Anet's part. I'm not going to buy GW2 until they rectify it.. :) In all seriousness though, how cool would that be if Nightmares in GW2 appeared differently to each player, using various triggers from each players progress and choices in the game, to determine how it looked and behaved. Tylenol Jones 22:53, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't try to say that the shadow army is related to the mantle just that there is a faction controlled by npc's attacking FoW/UW. Lou Wolfskin 22:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember where (one of the recent ANet blog entries), but it has been stated that there will be some "Nightmares" thing in GW2 that actually changes depending on your answers to the biography questions. Rose Of Kali 23:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I meant 'player CHARACTERS', I can't possibly fear anything in the game, XD. As for the change in appearance, I always though that should be. Like making nightmares of each profession appear as a desaturated, darker and spiked version of the creature of that profession that killed that character the most, and just use the 'white mantle' lookalikes when the character has been never killed by that any creature of that profession. I though something similar for the doppelganger it should have been a copy of the character, just without color and darkened. MithTalk 11:54, 3 June 2010 (UTC)