Feedback talk:Linsey Murdock/UnansweredF1

This Archive

Is for questions that I don't have answers to for any number of reasons (mostly because they are sooooo out of date and potentially irrelevant because of that). If you feel that your topic has been unfairly moved here, you are free to reopen it on my main talk page and see if it survives another go-a-round.

Mantra of Resolve

Hi Linsey, I just wanted to ask since this wasn't really addressed in the dev update. It seemed like most of the reasoning for the MoR nerf was related to PvP play. If that is the case, why didn't the team split the skill into PvP and PvE versions? Thanks very much for any response you can give in this regard. (Satanael | talk) 01:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

From the way I read it seems like most of the reasoning for the MoR nerf is because it causes problem for how the game (PvE & PvP) plays, but that's just me. DarkNecrid 03:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it was how it had caused the game to play. Though, I wonder if the Warriors and even the Necromancers in PvE are being looked into. Just noticed a lot of them popping up lately. ♥ Ariyen ♀ 03:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Caused the game to play... @.@ Anyway, they nerfed it cuz they think constant uptime protection from interrupts is baed. I dont think they should have hit it this hard however. I guess this was a skill they could change, but they did it completely wrong, not surprising. --adrin 07:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

"Second, by requiring the caster to use the skill right before casting a spell, we give enemies a chance to see that Mantra of Resolve is in effect. We didn't feel that it was reasonable for someone's interruption attempt to be countered by an invisible stance that was activated a full minute or more earlier." - That's pretty exclusively a pvp reason, the other two reasons (making the caster think and making the energy cost matter) are neither here nor there. (Satanael | talk) 13:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

If they wanted to make MoR more active, that would have been fine, but they didn't do anything except reduce the duration. The reason it has such a monstrous energy drain attached to it is because it lasted a long time; that was the cost of using it. If they wanted it to have such a high recharge and initial energy cost, they should have simply removed the energy loss mechanism altogether. At this point, a skill like Glyph of Concentration becomes obviously superior, since it costs less, recharges faster, and won't cost you 20 energy if there's a ranger too dumb to figure out what's going on near you. —Jette 16:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Okay, that's fine. I think we have had ample discussion about what should/could have been done here and elsewhere. I'm really just trying to see if Linsey is willing to answer my original question, so let's please leave it at this until Linsey says more. Thank you. (Satanael | talk) 22:08, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

A month ago (or 2)... I wanted to know why Finale of Resto and Dway-Touch didn't get a PvE Split. Lin never formally "addressed" that either. But this month we all got an answer anyway. Boon'ing a stance in PvE that already had half a dozen other similar skills that will just replace it anyway, seems like a dumb thing to get too worked up about and as such I expect you won't be getting a formal explanation beyond what Regina already posted. ...they obviously don't like repeating themselves... --ilr 22:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Today, in PvE, this skill was changed back to it's prior status, the question I have: Why? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 07:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Farmer RAEG?... Now where's the PVE revert for my Ruby Djinn's ONLY ATTACK? ...But I did totally call it though, no explanation whatsoever... Better luck next time Satanael! --ilr 08:07, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Pure speculation: They wanted to nerf it in both PvE and PvP (hence why it wasn't a PvP-only change in the first place), but didn't want to hit it as hard as it turned out in PvE, so rather than do a rush-job fiddling with the numbers, they reverted the PvE version until they can take a better look at it. That's my guess, anyway. - Tanetris 08:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Meh, the revert is an explanation in itself. I think the just didn't mean to nerf it for both, or there was some communication error or something like that. In other words, any explanation they would give would just be embarassing to admit publically (though most likely perfectly reasonable and innocent), so they just reverted and din't say anything. In any case, I'm happy now :-) (Satanael | talk) 16:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

If the nerf was originally intended to be PvP-only, the one-week delay wouldn't make sense. We've seen them push updates to fix similar mistakes the next day or occasionally even the same day. - Tanetris 18:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

2009.09.24 update fail. Big Epic Fail. (at least from Mantra perspective) --Boro 18:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

"Bimonthly"

This word is ambiguous, as it can mean bimestrial, "once every two months," or semimonthly, "twice a month." I avoid it entirely for that reason. In regards to the new skill update schedule, which do you mean: once every 2 months, or twice a month? I hope it is the latter on the basis that in order to restore balance, small, frequent tweaks are needed, rather than massive overhauls that often introduce more bugs & problems than they fix. —Jette 08:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Quoth the journal: "We’re going to slow things down by switching to a longer development cycle for each skill balance. We'll be shooting for a skill balance every other month instead of every month." (emphasises emphases added) - Tanetris 08:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

That would be "emphases." Thanks though. —Jette 08:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually it would be "emphasis"...(Satanael | talk) 16:52, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Eeez funneh cuz eet goes both ways... hoo ho hooooo --ilr 08:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

This made me lol. Thank you. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 01:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Fear not Jette, they will show us what will be updated prior so we can tell them NO!--98.238.169.189 19:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

update date moved back?

just a quick question as the date for the winners of the hencmne contest has been moved to the 1st of octber, does that mean the big PVP update will be moved back onto that day as well?--Thedreadlordpie 17:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

we dont even have a date for it to start with so i dont see how it could be pushed back for a date we don't even have.- Zesbeer 02:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the update is coming out 2 weeks after "whenever they want to." ~Shard 02:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

the thing that i love is that we have very little to no info about what to expect from this update besides no more heroes in ha and gvg and no more hb or ta and sealed deck but we know almost nothing about how sealed deck is going to work (though i know that they are going to change the skills in sealed deck weekly from pax09) forgot to add that we will probably see some new content for Halloween ie quests.- Zesbeer 03:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

it was said that the update will be after the setember torment at the end of the mounth that was the date i was goin on.--Thedreadlordpie 07:13, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

The hero skill bar deal end date was moved to Oct. 1st, so sometime after that probably. DarkNecrid 07:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Have they updated their Facebook and Twitter pages, I don't take either place serious enough to actually register with them so I don't know myself. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 23:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Ugggghh I hope that isn't true about weekly sealed deck rotations. That won't help ANYTHING. 218.214.126.215 08:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

i don't see how weekly skill rotations for sealed deck isn't going to help anything. it will keep the format fresh. what i don't get or understand is; how they are going to even out the skills for professions that dont have as many ie rit sin derv and para.- Zesbeer 09:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

They don't. DarkNecrid 09:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Wintersday content

It was mentioned that the Live Team wants to add new content to Wintersday. That's cool, but does that include adding to the Gwen/Thackeray story arc? Because it's fine as it is now. Not everyone likes the pairing, after all. Some do, some don't. The way the characters' interactions are currently shown, it's ambiguous enough that it could be seen either way, either the beginning of a romance or just the act of a concerned friend. By leaving it as is and not giving any sort of definitive resolution to the story arc, both those who like the pairing and those who don't can be happy, as they can each interpret their interactions the way they want to see them. While it's fairly obvious that Thackeray probably likes her in either instance, it doesn't necessarily follow that such feelings would be returned (in Factions, for instance, one of the Kurzick henchmen likes Danika, but she never even mentions him once through the entire game, so it's likely a one-sided attraction). It could go either way, depending on how you choose to see things there. Not everything in GW lore needs to be explained and resolved, as many players like to determine for themselves in their own minds what happens or what things are like. This is one such case where that should be allowed, simply by not adding anything further to this story arc. I realize I put a suggestion in the space about this, but though I've let it sit for weeks, there's been no comment and I'd like to hear what Linsey has to say about it. --Nathe 12:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I doubt Linsey is going to reveal what the new content is going to be, surprise is most of the fun. -- Wyn talk 13:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't this suggestion also entered into the feedback area.. If so, what is it doing here as well? Anon-e-mouse 13:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Echo... echo... echo .... echo ~~000.00.00.00~~ 13:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

← moved to Feedback talk:User/Nathe/Leave Gwen/Thackery story as is

Henchman Contest

Fail at determining which builds are original. oops someone was faster than me --Boro 06:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

People honestly expected original builds to come from this? How long has this game existed with all it's skills? You think any build people come up with would be truly original after all this time? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 06:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

To keep discussion on track and hopefully civil, I would urge Linsey to remember the original purpose of removing heroes - to get AI abuse of certain skills out of PvP. If you remove heroes, but put in henchmen with the exact same skills, they're going to be abused just as the heroes were, and you in essence did a lot of work for nothing. To give a quick summary, henchmen/heroes should never have 1. interrupts, 2. a bar full of hexes, or 3. enchantment removal. The reasoning for each is obvious so I won't bother getting into it here. -Auron 06:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I would say in favor of a-net that they were logic to come up with the most commonly used bars for heros. Yseron - 90.15.190.203 06:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

If the reason was to stop people abusing 4 interrupts at once and bars full of hexes then its not in anets favor. It was a work for nothing. --Boro 07:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Well all I know is that my builds were original. Original builds are possible, and can still be good. >_> And Yseron, that makes no sense, seeing how the point is to remove the desire of heroes thus, having common hero builds would be absolutely pointless on the henchmen. I honestly think this is the first time I'm saddened by Anet. I wasn't expecting to win, but couldn't they have at least half the bars be original? And on that, not have 3 rangers and elementalists per PvP form? I was expecting 2 of every profession, to be honest... (done ranting) -- Konig/talk 07:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The results are definitely rather 'interesting', but overall, the winners won, and congrats to them. Personally, I loved this contest because it made me dig deep down and analyze innovative ways to make risky builds of skills (that are perceived to be subpar) work together to make them shine. It would have been neat if the rewards were less permanent, and the henchmen changed every so often with each major update, allowing the community to continue submitting new builds and showing their creativity, but this was probably a VERY intense contest to hold. I hope some people post their submitted builds on their personal wikipages (I posted mine on my page), as I think it would be interesting to see other people's original builds and maybe even learn new tricks off of them. --Rex 07:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I was not expecting this contest to be such a useless waste of time and resources. If you want a reason (trust me, you do) to scrap the builds that won, I've compiled links to where most of them were stolen from here. I've made a very easy to read list of builds not to accept here, but it's pretty much the same stuff Auron already listed. ~Shard 07:27, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

i loled and didn't even enter the contest because i knew what the out come would be (this) and that whatever bars i did submit would be nerffed before they got into the game or would get nerffed somewhere down the line. also because i was at pax09 and then gone before and after that. forgot to add that the ai dosnt know how to use 90% of the skills in this game.- Zesbeer 08:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory from Shard. Surprising. Try Obs sometime to see where they're actually from. Same place PvXwiki got them, btw. Backsword 08:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

well the point he is making is valid then. the builds are not original at all.- Zesbeer 08:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Expecting the winning builds to be original and both good and usable by the NPC AI was setting yourself up for a dissapointment. Anyone who's ever played GWs for more than a trivial amount of time would know that, more so if they had played with heroes in that time. Expecting the winning builds to be original and bad or unusable by heroes was just wishful thinking from people who don't want NPCs in PvP (rightly so, btw). The best you could have reasonably expected from this was a collection of slightly modified bars which are/were meta (some of which not even usable properly by the AI loldevhammerthatcantqknock) and maybe 1 or 2 that were original but, at best, mediocre in terms of competitive standard. Don't be surprised that's what showed up. Feel free to keep complaining that the winners weren't even remotely original, though. That really was a silly criteria to put on the contest if you weren't going to keep to it even if it meant henchmen with sub-par builds. Mr J 10:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It's possible to give Henchmen bars that are not overpowered, yet they will actually use very "functionally"... granted it does require a lot of testing but anyone who's atleast used the henchmen in EotN can see what a good "functional" Henchmen bar looks like. Ironically enough, PvE is actually the best place to *TEST* which skills they use most and in which order. Often times the skills they use most effectively are not even used in gimmicky player builds... therefore the criteria for judging this contest is clearly flawed --ilr 11:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It certainly is. I never said it impossible, just unrealistic. The "original" criteria was mainly flawed because ANet doesn't design competitive team builds. There's not many people who play GWs, in fact, who could look through hundreds or thousands of pseudo-random submissions and work out a collection of bars that work really well together, alone, and in a variety of popular PvP teams. Because that's what they need to do to be fit for purpose; they must be a good solo substitute and a good compound substitute in what people are running. So what you got was unoriginal (or classic, take your pick) bars that work well enough that they were present in a variety of past metas. Mr J 12:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

pffffff........... how epic fail is this..... i'm seriously considering uninstalling right now.... go to pvx copy paste random code, you win 500000 ectos in the form of a rare tonic and a special henchman named after you! seriously... I expected a bit more from you linsey... - Wuhy 14:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I feel ANet has lied to us and wasted our time with this contest. The rules of the contest clearly stated that builds submitted must be original, and what we got was a bunch of meta builds, many of which seem to be duplicates of builds heroes are currently running. The results could have been essentially duplicated had ANet simply gone to PvXwiki and picked builds from the database there and handed out everlasting henchmen tonics to players at random.

To those who claim there are no original builds left: This is quite untrue, due to the lowered expectations of quality we have learned to expect from henchmen over the past three years. I submitted, I believe, a warrior build with Winter's Embrace and Crippling Slash. The rest of the bar was filled out with less than optimal skills (Body Blow instead of Savage Slash, no Conjure Water, stuff like that). It's an original build and it has the level of quality one has come to expect from henchmen (slightly improved because builds such as Talon Silverwing's cripslash build simply don't cut it in PvP).

-- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 14:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad I spent my time trying to come up with original builds that the AI would run well, rather than just copying and pasting the builds on PvX so I might have a chance at winning........OH WAIT! Nvm, apparently all I needed to do was copy and paste the builds from PvX or from my meta folder in-game. Thanks Anet!!! (dumbfucking liars). Karate Jesus 14:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, can't find anything original from any of those builds. - J.P.Talk 15:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Category:Users who think ArenaNet is terrible gogo - Wuhy 15:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Please 75.61.32 keep a little more civil. We all agree that this contest was a failure beyond epicness, a waste of time, both of the players and the developers, a time which could have been spent to actually improve the game. Now the developers have two choices.

• A: Use the current winner bars. - If Anet chooses this option, they will still face the very same problem of AI abusing hexes, interrupts and enchantment removal. This will leave them with the only option of changing hero AI, with the contest wasted.
• B: Trash the PvX copy paste builds and choose original ones. Don't chose 4 interrupts or 3enchantment removals because they will either be abused or unused at all This will solve the current problems.

Its your choice Linsey --Boro 15:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

People,Get your sticks and torches and cookies.Yes lots of cookies ! No raging at linsey without cookies! Now seriously linsey this is the worst thing you guy's have done in a while.To be honest thats quite a prestation.Lilondra *poke* 15:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that there are fewer builds for non-core classes, especially Rit and Sin. Manifold 15:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Let's not blame this solely on Linsey. Technically, the whole Live team chose these Meta builds that in no way followed their own contest guidelines. So, let's be pissed at all of them instead. :D Karate Jesus 15:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That would require me to use more braincells then the average anet employee.No thx raging at linsey is enough Lilondra *poke* 15:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Keep the discussion on-topic and away from personal attacks - Lilondra has been blocked for it and a few others are only about a post away from following.

Yes, it's obvious that anyone interested in PvP had a huge letdown with the results of this contest. Anyone that entered following the rules of "originality" was similarly let down. ANet, however, should know this by now - the guru thread and this thread make no bones about it. We should just wait to see what their response is. Hopefully they see the errors they've made so far with this contest and backtrack a bit before making an even bigger mistake by actually putting it into the game :< -Auron 15:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll try to keep off the block list, but I will say this. I don't think they can backtrack at this point. They're kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place. If they actually implement these in-game, they're just going to cause the same problems (hopefully they know that by now) and make plenty of people mad for not obeying their own contest. However, if they don't implement them, then they have to take away the awards from the winners who have already been announced, which is unethical. Tbh, I think they're stuck....but that's what happens when you make stupid decisions. Karate Jesus 15:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Do they care about ethics? Do they care about anything at this point? - Wuhy 15:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW if they really care about the game they will change the winners and/or bars. --Boro 15:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I think at this point they're stuck with unethical options. Probably their best option would be to keep the winners and change the bars (essentially screwing both sides, but not as badly as all their other options). Man....I would not want to be them right now. Then again, if I were them, I probably wouldn't have made these poor of choices in the first place. Karate Jesus 15:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

did you see the dual falling faceroll sin bar btw? neither hero nor hench ai use falling spider/falling lotus strike EVER (quote from the Hero behavior article: "Heroes do not seem to use Falling Lotus Strike or Falling Spider on their own.") - Wuhy 15:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Tbh, I did see it, but it's not as lulzy as the Prage build (lol AI doesn't know how to cancel stance) and the MB Distortion ele (didn't they acknowledge that they disliked this build?). Oh well.... Karate Jesus 15:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

btw, keep the winners? you want to give random retards from pvx 25k ectos and name hench after them? i don't, they don't deserve it. - Wuhy 15:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Simply keeping this set of winners is an ethical problem. --Boro 15:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Exactly my point. They have no ethical solutions now. They've already announced the winners and can't go back on that, without being seen as being incredibly unfair. However, they also can't keep the same bars and be ethical either. Like I said, I don't agree with what happened, and I definitely think they made terrible decisions leading them to this hole; however, I think their best option now is to keep the winners (which sucks, but it's the most ethical thing to do) and get new bars (also the most ethical thing to do, but essentially not giving rewards to the correct people).

They could re-do the contest; however, I would really advise against that at this point. They've already messed up badly enough. Karate Jesus 15:52, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

last time i was this disappointed with anet was when eotn came out(pve skills cons GRINDEM) - Wuhy 15:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

BAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWW. Seriously, the same people saying the same thing 15 times is not going to convince them more. You've said your piece, move on. If you have something new, interesting and relevant to say, by all means, go ahead, but if they haven't heard what people have to say by now, they won't ever. Misery 16:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Rolol Lololol > Zhed Shadowhoof imo. --Cursed Angel 16:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Original interpretation of the word original. Next time, don't ask people for entering a contest and copy PvX directly - it saves your resources for better stuff. Ɲoɕʈɋɽɕɧ 16:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid that "No Anet employee that looked at them had seem them before" doesn't qualify as "original". ANet employees have access to PvX as any other player has, and sites like that should have been one of the first things to check before disqualifying builds. But now... nothing like cheaters getting away with it to believe a little bit more in humankind. They disqualified someone in one art contests, didn't they? This shouldn't be different. MithTalk 17:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

tl;dr'd this entire thing because I just wanted to express how deeply disappointed and sad I was to see that there was no AoD hero chosen. :< ··· Danny Pew Pew 17:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

---

Though it's true that the bars they chose are somewhat disappointing and unoriginal, you forget one advantage of this replacement, which is that neither skills nor heroes were universal to all PvPers, which frankly wasn't fair. Now, unfair AI or not, everyone gets it; the field is level. By the by, for those of you decrying replacing the heroes with henchmen as opposed to, say, nothing: the time to make such a complaint was when the program was announced, not when the results were announced. | 72 {U|T|C} 19:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry; how were neither skills nor heroes universal? 90% of PvPers are UAX. Also, yes, those complaints were made at the contest's announcement (and have been made for quite some time before then). -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 19:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

now after this huge wall of texts i feel a few things need to be said one is i am not suprised at the reslutets of the contest. the other they said most of the bars were war and monk bars and 2 they said that most of the bars didnt have an elite. with that being said i already knew that the bars that were going to come out of this contest were going to be crapy meta also i had enough forsite to see that 90% of the player base dont know how to play i mean when i talked to linsey she told me that most players dont even change ther hero skill bar from the starting bar.- Zesbeer 20:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

---

Tl dr - Anyone going to comment on how stupid AI is with frenzy? -Talamare- feedback 20:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

<sitting reading comments> I wish I could bitch, but I was in one of the countries removed from entry. -.- :P ~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Lol at this "contest". What a waste of time and resources. Let me guess: you guys were so busy with the henchmen skillbar contest that your next update will be delayed yet again? Friendly piece of advice: managing your priorities properly can lead to successful projects. 209.89.252.164 04:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

---

My view on the contest results: LOLWUT.

Why? Because quite frankly, this type of result was inevitable, due to each and every fail skill update since Factions was released. ArenaNet has painted the playerbase and themselves into a corner because broken OP skills were added (Searing Flames/Shadow Form/Wounding Strike/Lingering Curse/Wail of Doom) and rarely addressed properly, and UP skills that have been around forever, have never have gotten fixed. So, now everyone is stuck with gimmicky crud because there is no viable way to be useful outside of gimmicky meta-builds. There is no such thing as 'balanced' anymore, it went out with the dodo back in 2006. -thejynxed- 03:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Linsey,

I have to say don't write letters very often; I prefer to post an angry wall-of-text NPA rant to explicate my point. I feel that might be poorly received and perhaps unjustified here, however, so please bear with me and my ponderous, lackadaisical writing style.

When I first heard that you were removing heroes from PvP, I was overjoyed -- I thought it might be the first step on a long road towards making the game playable again. When I heard that you were replacing them with improved henchmen, I was a bit less overjoyed than before, but I thought it was understandable, since not being able to play competitively without an entirely human team is unrealistic in a four-year-old game. But when I heard you were letting players pick the skills, I knew right then and there it would be a catastrophe.

From what I've seen, Linsey, I don't think you're anywhere near as bitter, cynical or genereally misanthropic as I am. That's probably a good trait to have, it generally means you'll live a longer, more fulfilling life and are much less likely to, for example, get fired for being an ass to fans. As such, I don't think it's in your nature to despise the majority of the playerbase the way I do; after all, they're playing your game. I do have to tell you, though, that both from the perspective of someone like me and from the perspective of other, much friendlier people, the Guild Wars playerbase is, by and large, pretty terrible in every sense of the word. They embody everything that is bad about online gaming: immaturity, barbaric manners, universal disrespectfulness, a complete lack of understanding of what a game is supposed to be about. A game is supposed to be about having fun, as I was led to believe. From wikipedia: "a game is a structured activity, usually undertaken for enjoyment and sometimes used as an educational tool. Games are distinct from work, which is usually carried out for remuneration, and from art, which is more concerned with the expression of ideas." Ergo, unless Guild Wars is an extremely well-disguised exercise in game theory, it is to be assumed the point was originally to enjoy the game.

But you can't enjoy Guild Wars by playing. In my experience, you can't enjoy it at all anymore, but for the sake of argument, we'll assume that some degree of satisfaction can be extracted through hours spent at the screen. But where does it come from? Let's review the most popular activities in-game:

• Farming. This is #1 on the list, sadly. And "farming" essentially means "600/smite" or "shadow form," meaning that 8 out of eleven farmers will be shadow form assassins, 2 will be monks, and the last will be a necromancer, who is only needed for one area. Assuming professions distribution is equal, this excludes at least 70% of players from the biggest part of the game. In reality, most serious PvE players (lol) have deleted all of their characters except one or two -- their GWAMM character, their assassin, and their mules. What are these players farming for? Overpriced minipets, of course. That's all that's left, basically. Overpriced minipets and impossibly rare weapons. There are, what? Less than 24 Kanaxais in the game? What were you thinking when you did that? Why do you guys, ANet, as a company, choose to waste valuable resources on an aspect of the game that less than 24 people will be able to enjoy? How is that fair to the players who don't want to spend thousands of hours accumulating literally tens of millions of gold (one Island Guardian went for 55,000 globs of ectoplasm, traded through the use of armbraces of truth)? I'm going to drop this subject and leave it alone, now, because I don't expect you to introduce new versions of the ultra-rare minis, nor do I expect you to handle the economy -- it wouldn't be a massive improvement to the game but would require a lot of work. It is a bit ridiculous, though.
• PvP. After farming, PvP is pretty prevalent, which makes sense for a game "designed from the ground up to be a competitive PvP game" or something to that effect. But players don't PvP for fun, you see. No, even here, 99% of the players who PvP are farming. They want a title. That's it. They don't PvP for fun. To me this doesn't even make sense -- I'd always assumed the idea of playing a game was to enjoy it, not to achieve a title. Even the most competitive of Olympic medalists got there because ultimately they loved the sport they were participating in, not because they were trying to show off. Having a gold trim to brag about or a tiger to hit X really fast with are both fun, but they're just not what the game is about: you're supposed to have fun, but from the attitudes of players who farm for PvP titles all day long -- both from the in-game chat and their detestably high-pitched voices in vent -- I can gather that they are not enjoying the game they play.
• Missions/Vanquishing/etc. These do not happen, except as Zaishen quests. On the rare occasion someone does want to do a mission, it is done alone -- usually with 3 necromancer heroes running the same stupid Discord build and 4 other henchmen who aren't actually important. Aren't you supposed to play with people in a massively multiplayer online game?

To keep this from turning into a rant, assuming it doesn't already look like one, I'm going to stop there. I'm going to finish this with the following plea that, though I cannot speak for anyone but myself, I believe reflects the opinion of the majority of the PvP community and original fans of the formerly great game Guild Wars. It's a simple set of instructions that I sincerely hope you will follow.

• Remove heroes from PvP.
• Don't replace them with new henchmen.

That's it. I said it was simple. I know you have the resources to do this, since you've already spent time getting ready to pull the plug on heroes. If you must, you can give the new tonics to the players who "won" (though it was more of a lottery, let's face it), but I really don't think you should. But that, along with the comments expressed above, is merely my opinion and such matters are, of course, up to you. Still, you will find many of the old players returning to Guild Wars with this minor adjustment. For that matter, you might find many old PvE players return if you give them something to do, and remove heroes from PvE as well, though I feel that would be too drastic a change to implement at once, and would require significant resources devoted to creating new areas.

Sincerely,

–Jette 18:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. While I'm here, I'd like to direct your attention to my question about devourerers, above. P.S.S. This is a letter to Linsey. I realize this page gets more traffic than the main page, but it'd be nice if she didn't have to wade through 20 other walls of text just to reply. You're all welcome to comment, just don't... y'know... bitch and moan. Oh yeah, almost forgot.
tl;dr new henchmen are gay ban them.

I could be terribly wrong, but I'd imagine that most of the Guild Wars PvE player base is casual gamers who aren't necessarily around to grind out titles, but just hop in, grab an H/H team, and go about doing whatever they haven't done yet. That's exactly how I used to play, and that's how the majority of my non-PvX friends in Guild Wars play. Half of them don't even know about the wiki, and those that do tend to only farm when they want a new suit of elite armor. ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

EXACTLY. That's the worst kind of playerbase a company can hope for. Do you think I should keep my monocle? —Jette 19:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

No question about that. Did you know that there's this Miniature Mad King's Guard coming :S - J.P.Talk 19:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I know! :3 Aren't they cute? I'm going to write a halloween horror story and give ANet the rights to publish it on their site for free if they gimme one. I'm actually a decent author, when I get my mind around to it. Knowing me, though, it won't be done until next halloween.  :< Don't you think the Shards of Orr quest's backstory would make for a good short story? I mean, we know how it ends... but it's the telling that's important. It's a pity I can't just draw; bloody artists, so overappreciated... —Jette 19:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

WUT? JP, wtf does the Halloween art contest prize have to do with Jette's letter. Also Jette, I'm sorry, but you are wrong about some of what you said, at least in my corner of the world. I don't farm whether it's 600/smite, or Perma, and I don't PvP (ever), and I do do missions and vanquishes outside of Zquests, not to mention simply doing quests, and I do still enjoy my play time even after 14,000 hrs. -- Wyn talk 19:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

honestly wyn, who cares? go play your awesome game then.. im sure there is much to grind still left.. - Wuhy 19:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The same amount who care your precious pvp is broken. -- Wyn talk 19:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

@jette 1/2 agree should keep monocle. @ wyn LOL, agreed with wuhy- Zesbeer 19:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Wyn, that makes you part of a very small minority. I'm actually part of it as well, as I do enjoy old-fashioned GW from time to time, but the number of people who play like that nowadays are very small. In any event, the general point of my statement remains: PvP heroes are baed, and the new henchmen are just as baed. I really want one of the little candy corn golems.  :< They're so delicious and adorable-looking. —Jette 20:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) Sorry, Wyn, but defending Anet today is just a bad move. They fucked up. *shrug* Whatcha gonna do? Oh, and I would imagine that you're in a very rare class of players that have played for that long, don't pvp, and don't farm. Just saying :/ Karate Jesus 20:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama drama. PvE and PvP are both very serious business. ··· Danny Pew Pew 20:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry but who the hell cares about your opinions? --Cursed Angel 20:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

"Results may vary, stop making generalisations."

I think there are both good and bad points mentioned here, but then again they're already well known, and a lot of it is wild generalisation. A lot more of this is also player controlled, is that Arenanet's fault that players can be generally more into gimmick/title than actually playing the game? Yet, I don't see what you want Linsey to actually say, or do about it. They're aware of all of this, although people would like to think they're idiots, they're actually not. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

See tl;dr. —Jette 21:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

So? Additionally: I'd say without the monocle, had to double take first time, looked like someone had decked you.~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

IMO, they shouldn't really focus on adding more things for PvE players to do (given how the only thing they could add that would keep people busy for longer than it takes for them to implement something would be by adding tons and tons of grind). But regarding Jette's complain: do you really think those new henchmen are going to be a problem? Regardless of how much the AI is updated, I doubt a henchmen using Rush and Frenzy would be anywhere near as useful as a human player with the same build. Erasculio 21:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Jette's talking about the LC/Soul Bind/Interrupt Spam heroes that ANet decided were balanced enough for the AI to use. ··· Danny Pew Pew 21:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

"...the Guild Wars playerbase is, by and large, pretty terrible in every sense of the word. They embody everything that is bad about online gaming: immaturity, barbaric manners, universal disrespectfulness, a complete lack of understanding of what a game is supposed to be about."

Funny, pretty much everyone in the guild I'm in (and have been in for about ten months now, ever since I first got GW) is polite, helpful, sometimes funny, and generally relaxed. Admittedly, we do have a minimum age requirement (16), but even so, we get along quite well, and our guildmaster's pretty levelheaded and always willing to lend a hand or answer questions. It's what we as a guild do, basically, as we get a lot of people new to the game and that's who we're geared toward. So I don't think your statement's quite as true as you might think, Jette. I think you might just be a little jaded, but that's just my opinion. --Nathe 23:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

TBH, I find it sad that Wyn gets an NPC named after her in the PVP REALM OF THE GW WORLD when all she is going to do is laugh at how we care for our "precious pvp". Because GW is a game that was built as a PVP game from the start. (too lazy to link the video) Tbh, I could say some more but I'll try to avoid making a personal attack. Underated 03:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I find it sad that you don't know how much she's helped on the wiki. Wyn, and everybody else that has an NPC, deserved it (except for the 1 or 2 people I don't know at all, but they probably deserve it anyway). Wyn and pvpers are in separate minorities, but wyn's minority still has some good gameplay left, ours doesn't. ~Shard 03:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

GUYS GUYS I FIGURED IT OUT.

EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOU IS PART OF A VERY SMALL MINORITY!

AHH, WITH THAT PROPOSITION GRANTED, IT ALL MAKES SENSE AT LAST | 72 {U|T|C} 03:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Protip: everyone on the wiki is part of a very small minority, because 99% of the players aren't active here. PvE players who actually enjoy PvE -- like Wyn -- still have something to the game left to enjoy, and I wish them well. Actually, PvE isn't that bad if you have friends and/or a guild to play in. PvP, however, is basically dead, mainly for reasons listed above. PvP players can't choose to only play against good PvP players, they have to take the good and the bad, which means most of PvP is just PvE lite. —Jette 03:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Someone is in the "Can't find the caps lock key" minority. ~Shard 03:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

In response to shards comment.. I know she's done so much on the wiki. I understand and do believe she deserves some recognition. I just find it ironic that she would get a pvp NPC. Plus there's the fact that I really don't care for the extremes on any end, ie. pve only players who care not for anyone elses care for their "precious pvp" or the elitist pvp player that ridicules pve players. Underated 03:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

How is the pet tamer a "PvP NPC?" It can be used by both pve and pvp characters. ~Shard 03:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Because it's easier for people imaginations if it just is. /shrugs That's how a lot of non-sense starts. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 03:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

/sigh Of course it can be used by both. But it sure is tied very heavily to pvp. No need to overanalyze my point. On topic, I agree with a lot of what you said, Jette. Concerning minorities/majorities, ect. we can all accept that as important as pvp might be individually to each player (coming from a player who loves pvp) it is still the minority currently. But I believe that its hard to judge what the minorities in certain cases or subjects are without hard to judge. As seventy-two said, it seems the idea of a minority seems purely subjective depending on your point of view, without hard facts of course. Underated 04:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As the menagerwhatsit makes acquiring desired pet skins on PvE characters much easier (it removes the hassle of, for example, getting PKM or running Underworld in the hopes of getting the right "drop", or running to whatever random corner of the world has the pet you want), I don't think it's fair to categorize it as PvE or PvP specifically. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 04:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Meh, I guess I failed at pointing out irony then. Underated 15:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

[1]

The pvx user User:Frosty posted this long before your contest for hench bars was even imagined. One of the bars selected as the winner of the contest is a direct copy of that build posted by User:Frosty, yet he was not awarded a prize for this and his intellectual property was essentially stolen under the cc-by-nc-sa license. Ups.--168.122.167.210 19:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, while i haven't gatehred all of the specific examples yet, this is true for 25+ of the other builds currently selected as prize-winners for the henchman contest. I doubt you'd realistically have any legal troubles because of this, but it could very well stir up some pretty bad PR among the community once it becomes public knowledge that you're awarding prizes to individuals for builds that are very widely used (and were NOT created by the users who submitted them and could thus be viewed as stolent intellectual property).--168.122.167.210 19:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

User Frosty here! I would like to say that I feel slightly left out of all this Crazy Henchmen Skill Bar Contest stuff, seeing as one of the skill bar entries was a Direct copy (except merely re-shuffling the skills) of a build I posted on to PvXwikia. Now by cc-by-nc-sa license this is technically "stolen" so to speak, so do I get a reward for the Skill bar that got picked? I am going to quote the main condition this entry breaches:

• Originality: Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source. Your submission must not infringe on any patent, copyright, trademark or other intellectual property right, or any privacy, publicity or publishing rights of any third party, or be libelous, obscene or otherwise contrary to law.

As you can see, the skill bar is a replica of the one in the heading. May I had that although this is only one incident, this could be taken up with a MAJORITY of the skill bars entered, as they are documented on PvXwikia and have a high chance of being simply ripped from PvXwikia, so, do all the authors of the Builds get a reward, or is this Henchman idea simply a bad one... Down to you. Frosty 19:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You're a bit late for the party. Scroll up - there's two sections here on that, plus at least one thread on both guru and GWO. There's probably more (and in more places), but I've not been paying a whole lot of attention to everywhere this is happening. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 19:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

None of them directly talk of breach of licensing, as has been done here. Although someone pointed it out to me on PvX/Guru. Frosty 19:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Feedback_talk:Regina_Buenaobra/Journal some more input (at the very bottom)--aRTy 19:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

A Funny claim to make. Now provide some evidence. Backsword 05:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Those builds circle around HA players before PvX editors write them into articles, all useable builds eventually ends up there. Also build wars is build wars, both derv builds have WS, coincidence? May have something to do with 10% of the skills being op, 90% useless. --Cursed Angel 19:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

You're just reinforcing the point that it's very improper to be awarding prizes to individuals who simply submitted bars that "belong" to the pvp community as a whole--168.122.167.210 19:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

" Yes, these skills are the bane of my foes when seeking a place in the Hall of Heroes."

You original spinal shivers + ice spear build isn't very useful in HoH is it? And yeah, that's what they're doing, randomly rewarding people for submitting builds they could get in Obs. --Cursed Angel 20:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I do not believe that point has been contested. I could be wrong, though. -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 20:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Earth to IP!...
GW builds are not Original Writings or Content. The only "Intellectual Property" found on PvX is the write-ups and guides on using the skills which your PvX example is SORELY lacking in... In other words, there is no case for Trademark Infringement or Plagiarism, and NONE of the content licensed under PvX is under Federally registered copyrights so even if it qualified as "ripping off", the actual offense and infringement of property theft would basically amount to stealing rotten apples. --ilr 20:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Even if there isn't a legal case for conditions being breached, the whole contest was a botch, Live team members said multiple times that the builds would have to be creative, not meta gimmicks, and be usable by hero's and not player replacements. None of those "guidelines" were met with the winning builds, since they are simply builds ripped off of Observer Mode/Builds already known by the PvP Community/ or Builds ripped from PvX (which are in essence builds ripped from the Obs or the community). This whole Henchmen Skill Bar Contest has gone from something that the PvP Community will have loved (submit some Hero bars that can suffice if missing a player, while removing OP heroes) into a complete shambles with meta builds on hencmen that they either won't be able to run or are simply builds people will have used on heroes.

Let me sum it up for you, the "Live Team" have put a big stain on their already pretty tarnished reputation, and not even Cillit Bang will remove it (brit joke). Frosty 20:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I believe We've ALL argued THAT point somewhere already. Anet outright LIED to us and this puts a huge blemish on Robert Gee's career before he even really got it off the ground. I'm sorry you feel cheated, and you're right to feel that way, but I think that second repercussion I just pointed out is 10x more tragic. If I was a staff member of Anet, I would be here trying to handle this Shit Storm instead of taking the weekend off because it's a lot uglier than than some silly little slip up like the buggy skill patches or canceled features they've "monitored for PR damage" all weekend-long in the past. --ilr 20:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, IP. What a horridly lame concept. NOTHING is ever created in a vacuum. All creations are built upon and inspired by other creations. Freaking out about it is pointless. ----Nathe 00:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of missing the point, these "creations" were not built upon and inspired by anything else, they were completely ripped from other sources. Read the other topics so you can learn what this is all about. King Neoterikos 00:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Technically...Frosty's right. Under the PvX license and the rules to the henchmen skill bar contest, it is copyright infringement......just so everyone is aware. Now, obviously people used the bar before Frosty posted it; however, by being the first to post the build on PvX and under the license w/in the site, he (or at least the site) has the right to contest the build being copied. Ups, Anet.... Karate Jesus 13:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You always have right to contest it. It's the law. Don't need any of that other stuff for it. You'll also get laughed out of court if you try. Backsword 14:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait a second, so the fact that someone posts it somewhere means they 'own' it? There's only so many ways to put together a (usable) skillbar. Sorry, I don't buy that. 71.146.86.174 00:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

There is no copyright infringement here bolded so people might stop to read this. The skill concepts, icons, and inherent mechanics all belong to ArenaNet. The very idea of accusing them of stealing their own material is absurd. If I buy 8 paintings by Picasso and arrange them on my wall in non-chronological order, does that make them my intellectual property? Of course not. elix Omni 05:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Soo

Hey Linsey, were the rules of this contest that the first one to submit a popular bar wins or were all of the other entries seriously that shit? I mean come on, PvX wiki is even listed as a god damn fan site on Guildwars.com. I'm pretty sure any build that could have possibly been considered plausible is stored on this site so claiming that you are rewarding players for originality when submitting contest builds is a fucking joke. To sum it up, LOL HEY GUYS LETS ALL RACE TO PVX AND YANK A BUILD TEMPLATE, hell, even just using obs any time during the past few months would have sufficed. Way to fucking go.--Shadowsin 19:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

if U look ...U will find 95% of all builds made over time on pvx.wikia.com to make a build on the last 5% is the same as two VS drops in one run... ce★devilman

VS has a 25% drop rate?

Back on topic, it's not hard to come up with original builds. Have you seen the RtL wars on obs now? Guess what didn't exist when the contest started. Sure, it's very similar to the standard shockaxe. It's also an entirely different play on the same basic concept, which definitely qualifies it as "original".

I could come up with more examples, but I'm going to rest my case here. is for Raine, etc. 01:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget where you put it down, now | 72 {U|T|C} 02:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

its drop rate is actually closer to ~22.5% for a 8-man team according to him. that means a ~2.8% drop chance for you and a ~5% drop chance for 2 ppl on the team. - Wuhy 10:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Um....are we ever going to get a reply on the henchmen contest stuff?

I've seen one sentence about it from Regina on GWGuru and it basically ignored all the bullshit, so....yea....are we even going to get a reply? I understand that this is tough and all, but disobeying your own contest rules and allowing copyright infringement (which, btw, PvX has the right to claim under their license) can lead to problems like this. So...whatcha going to do about it? Ignore us? Karate Jesus 13:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

"I like this ship. It's exciting!"

This is exciting. ^_^ ~~000.00.00.00~~ 14:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry kinda came into this half way through and not completely sure whats going on. Just on a legal note, a build using GW's intellectual property can not then be guarded by anybody else's license. Thus PvX does not hold any proprietary rights to any of the builds that are on PvX wiki as they are all utilizing anet's intellectual property. If that's not what this is about, my apologies for misunderstanding. -- Salome 14:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

However, Regina said on GWGuru that they're going to have each winner sign an agreement stating that the build they made was, in fact, made by them....which I think is liable under that agreement. Karate Jesus 14:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

But I'm not a lawyer or anything, and only have a basic understanding of copyright laws. Karate Jesus 14:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I see your point. However on a legal sense one cannot claim ownership of a build (or anything else within the game) as A) its common legal practice and B) its stated in the EULA that everything remains under the sole ownership of Anet regardless of what you do. I don't think the disclaimer is for legal purposes, I think it's for PR purposes. Thus anet can say "hey they said they made it!" and the other 10,000 people who have ran that build before get told to moan at the person claiming to have made it rather than anet themselves. Personally I think any build on PvX wiki should have been disallowed to avoid this, further to that I also think any build with 6 identical skills in it to a PvX build should have been disallowed. I myself could have entered about 12 of the winning builds as I have them saved on my build templates, but didnt as I knew they were PvX builds. I still think Anet should have just made 30 henchies themselves and then left the last 10 builds open to the community, would have been much easier for them to balance and judge and avoided all these issues. -- Salome 14:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) PvX doesn't hold copyright to anything when it comes to Arenanet's material, as far as I'm aware. However, if a winning build can be proven to be identical to a PvX build, or of the core structure and variations mentioned within a PvX build that pre-date the competition, then the originality of the winning build can come into question. It's difficult for a person in the competition to claim their build is actually their's when similar, if not identical builds could be found on PvX or another source, which then brings this clause of the competition into consideration:

Originality: Entries must be the submission of the contestant and cannot be taken from any other source.

Arenanet was destined to run face first into this, I'm surprised people didn't see this coming. I part-agree with Salome, Arenanet should have just made the builds themselves. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 14:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

No how it works. You need to show that they couldn't have come up with it themselves and that they copied it specifically from you. Not the other way around. Backsword 14:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

"then the originality of the winning build can come into question": way too late for that, there are plenty of complains already stating that everything was copied from PvX. Good luck proving that a build wasn't "created" by the user who submited it regardless of it being available on PvX wiki or not.

The GW community is the worst community I have ever seen. Instead of focusing on the valid complains (as in, how the chosen bars have skills that henchmen won't use well, or overpowered stuff that Arena Net should nerf, instead of building bars around), people chose to focus on the one irrelevant argument (how the useful builds for the henchmen had to be useful, and therefore popular). No one has shown an unique non meta build that would actually give us even slightly useable henchmen. Erasculio 14:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

<hands Erasculio a torch> Go for gold, sweet heart, show us, the community, how it's done. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 14:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Auron, Jette and others have already mentioned some (valid) concerns about the skill bars. I don't see any point in repeating them, other than to try to make the constructive criticism to stand out from the "I want my unique (and terrible) snowflake build to win" comments. Erasculio 14:36, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing you'll get replied to once the weekend is over and they're back at work. You don't need to shout "teh injustices!" ad infinitum, and this page doesn't need to get any bigger with this topic - there's not much you can do but wait for their response (which will inevitably come). Considering these bars aren't even in the game yet, this issue isn't of the utmost urgency. --pling  14:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

agreed with erasculio, they are bad because they are retarded meta gimmicks, hench does not use them well and are not original in the slightest, not because they are from pvx and now we should fuck with legal issues... WHO CARES? >.<" and I guess they are never going to reply, they'll wait for us to calm down, pretend that nothing happened and ignore us as always. - Wuhy 14:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

There are a bunch of separate issues here Erasculio. One is that people who don't care about the quality of the henchman bars were screwed out of a chance of winning by following the rules of the competition instead of submitting builds off of PvXwiki and obs. Another issue is that they have given henchmen builds which were problems on heroes and as such, won't solve the problems they set out to solve. Another issue is that they have put bars on henchmen that the AI is incapable of running effectively and will likely never be able to run no matter how much magic Joe can work (you can barely teach people to snare and make haste correctly, good luck programming that). All three problems are relatively serious. I wish you good luck with all that ArenaNet and the Live Team. Misery 15:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The second and third issues are real problems. The first one is moot - the point was to have henchmen with good builds, not henchmen with "unique" disfunctional builds, and good builds have become common thanks to how people gravitate towards what works. It's ironic that so many people are complaining about the first problem while the two other ones, which are far more important and will have an impact in the game on the long run, are mostly being left aside. Erasculio 16:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

If I had entered builds in good faith and specifically not entered meta builds, I would be pretty pissed off too. Probably quite a lot of people are just stirring, but there are people who are legitimately pissed off. I didn't enter any builds, but I'll be giving Joe a nice list of the AI problems when I get the time. Misery 16:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Era, You seem to keep insisting that there's no such thing as an effective and original AI-run bar. I'm curious if this is just you being Contrarian as usual, or if it really is rooted in a lack of understanding of Event Triggers and Artificial Intelligence? Have you ever programmed your own AI scripts before? --ilr 21:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it's rooted in how people who think a build with one (bad) damage dealing skill is "devastating" believe they are even close to knowing how the game works in order to be able to judge what is effective and what isn't. Not knowing one's own limits is the worst kind of ignorance. Erasculio 22:18, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

You do realize you're being hypocritical then?, by not answering the question while hiding behind "Everyone else but me is ignorant on this, especially you!"... Typical, but you just saved me a ton of time since I don't even have to build a case to prove it now. --ilr 23:29, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Says the guy who's avoiding (again) my question about what would be a good and unique build behind (more) trashtalk. You have already proved how well you know what is a good build and what isn't the moment you called the pathetic "Zealot Sheoli" build "devastating". Feel free to try changing the subject in order to hide your own ignorance, but you are only making it clear how the actually constructive discussion (with the arguments presented by Auron, Jette, Misery and others) is being hindered by people who are just fond of hearing their own voice. Erasculio 23:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'll join the discussion here. I'm one of the paragon bar winners. Arenanet should not have been so vague in their language about originality. This caused a lot of confusion, including in myself, because I submitted bars that were more original than the paragon bar such as this warrior bar

or this Mesmer bar

When I made my bars, I crafted them around the AI at the time, because I don't trust Anet to make an AI that knows how to use Frenzy correctly. The same was true for the winning paragon bar

It so happens that after I chose an elite, most of the skill choices were no-brainers. You need really really want aggressive refrain, an anthem of weariness/flame, res sig, GftE and vicious attack. It happens that there is a PvX build that covers the rest of the variants after these obvious choices. Aevar talk contribs 17:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Whose fault is it that the rest of the skills suck?--98.238.169.189 17:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

What? Aevar talk contribs 17:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Aevar, the problem not that your build was bad; in fact, it is one of the better ones out there and the AI can run it no problem. The real problem is in the other bars that others have already said: they are just terrible when giving them to henchies. This is one of the main reasons why people are pissed off, because this not only shows that Anet has no idea how their own game works, but also they wasted so much valuable time into this project when it could have been spent on more dire issues. 209.89.252.164 18:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Builds that are "effective, therefore popular" are the result of bad skill balancing. When only 9 paragon skills are non-useless, of course 8 (7) of them will be run on one bar. That's an issue not worth getting into at the moment, but it's something to think about.

Many people instead are pissed that the hench bars, which the dev team said would contain no gimimcks, contains 90% gimmicks, and all but a few of them can NOT be run on a henchman without becoming either useless (frenzy) or broken (interrupts). Everything about this issue has already been said, and as Pling stated, you won't get a response until Monday. ~Shard 20:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

@Karate Jesus not until tomorrow Monday (its still the weekend here in Seattle.) i mean if you are expecting a reply that's when you should expect to get it.- Zesbeer 22:36, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Holy HELL, this is getting exciting ^_^ ~~000.00.00.00~~ 00:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Should we start bets on what it's gonna be then since there's so many ways they could go with this? --ilr 05:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Criticizing anet for something they haven't done yet isn't constructive. Wait until they give an explanation if you're not going to say anything else. ~Shard 05:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Wait a minute...Y SO SRS? You really think they might 'Cop' to this, don't you? Alright, alright... if you can hold back the cynicism then I guess I can too for a day. --ilr 05:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

...So, we got 2 kinds of responses now... Any comments? I don't know if you're a fan of weasel words but surely you must find some amount of inconsistency in the fact that they found time to sift through 30,000 submissions but can't even set aside the time to explain why the results don't even match the rules stated goal of the contest. Maybe Anet should try and get an Arbcomm ruling against all of us since it's proving so effective on their best critic. --ilr 00:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

they say over 35(?)k entries but they pick out the one that are alrdy existing for human players. for myself, i would say they just sorted the builds for each profession and then already kicked the ones with "nonconfirmistic" elite skills. BOOM 1k left. sort out the ones handed in by people who don't manage to copy wiki bars. BOOM 250 left.->gogo random

UWSC

You sayed 8min uwsc was wayway to fast in a reasend gw interviw at pax, now someone has done it in 7min. When will you guys update it:P. [2] 84.80.151.136 05:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

She is too nervous to answer right now. Yseron - 90.14.96.144 11:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

lol. --Cursed Angel 11:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I bet you cannot see anyone using Shadow Form to perform this exploit. It's been over a year now that UW is vandalized... M3G 11:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Give it six months from next Tuesday. I'm sure the developers are thrilled something that probably took them months to do can be completed so easily. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 11:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Given the professions there, I'd guess that if they tweaked one little skill, their problem would be solved.... -- FreedomBound 14:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Hard mode was meant to be a challenge! not a faster way to grind the fuck out of this game. Good Job GWLT! --Boro 15:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I seriously doubt we'll see an answer to any of the burning questions on this page today, guys. I imagine that Linsey is pulling the old "let's let them blow off steam first" tactic. Only problem is that they've done it for too long....and now we're getting pretty pissed. Btw, henchmen skillbar contest, XTH, TA/HB, Sealed Deck, skill update, Dungeon Balance/SC fix, etc. Does anyone actually expect them to do any of that correctly now? LOL. Karate Jesus 15:46, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

She's either doing that or discussing with the anet staff what she should respond.She has already posted on the wiki so she *did* see all the rage.The Ironic thing is that I didn't think they would do the sealed deck and stuff right (so I kinda am against the HB change since HB reduces grind and what we will get instead will proly be bad anyway).I *did* expect them to get good bars.So basicly the last bit of respect I had for anet was kinda crushed with that.Its just to ridiculous for words.But I guess people have already said the !!!! I wanted to say so I'm goin to stop here~. Lilondra *poke* 16:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I think Arenanet needs to rethink their approach. As nice as having the XTH back, putting in the Sealed Deck, making the changes to the pre-existing content; in terms of skills and the dungeons (if the skills weren't to be hit too hard) should come first. It's nice getting stuff for free, like the XTH, and new stuff like Sealed Deck, which sounds nice, but fix the foundation before you try to build an extention. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 22:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Please don't encourage them to re-think their approach again. They've done that at least twice this year and we're still yet to see any changes from it. I mean....the same stuff hasn't been done since April..... Karate Jesus 22:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Remember the 6 hour 1 day MoR nerf? Good joke. ··· Danny Pew Pew 22:53, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Compared to microsoft who came with the only os on earth whose progress bars can go backward they still got a lot to learn. Yseron - 90.9.120.70 22:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm just spending every moment I can stand to working on our active projects so they can be completed. If I don't have the luxury of getting a weekend off and instead worked until 2am on Saturday and am right now still working since Sunday afternoon (almost 24 hours straight), then I really don't have time for lengthy wiki discussions. Sorry guys, but the work takes priority right now. We can scream at each other later once I've gotten the chance to breathe. Oh, and I've known that someone had gotten UWSC down to 7 minutes for a while now, I just didn't use that as the example because it's a very rare occurrence, not the norm. - Linsey talk 23:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about lengthy wiki discussions. In-game results would be much MUCH nicer than hearing that you're working on it for the......well, let's just say for the "uptenth" time. Karate Jesus 23:39, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

im glad your working on the game. what i am not glad about is the bar contest. but i have a feeling that any issues we have with the contest should be brought up to Regina?- Zesbeer 00:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Please do. She's keeping me updated since I don't have time to read much of the feedback. - Linsey talk 04:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Ok, people who brag about their speed clears are idiots! The only thing you're going to do by bragging about how fast you can run an elite area is add fuel to the NERF SHADOW FORM NOW!! fire. You're going to piss off the people who are anti-shadow form, and you're going to give the devs a reason to nerf it. I KNOW you don't want this to happen, so stop bragging and they might leave SF alone! --MushaTalk 23:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't matter if they do or do not boast with it. They would be on the case wether or not there would be posers showing off their leet skeelz. They just dunno how yet. BlazeRick 23:17, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

You're half-right, it doesn't matter if they boast = because no new "critter" changes have been made to the area yet --ilr 20:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

@Musha, they don't do it for profit, they do it for 1. fun 2. bragging.. - Wuhy 11:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

To get the time of completion more in respective values, change essence of celerity (20% skill recharge into 15%). A couple of the Sc builds need adjustment then. Then take into consideration to give some of the foes life stealing and enchantment ripping skills (sf ripping onces) would do the job. Then people have to group again to succeed a more paced way, ecto prices will rise again, people already managed to buy everything due to sc are happy, uw is silence....people stop playing...newcomers aren't able to get nice weps, armor etc...and eventually stopping...meaning no trading, no fun no grouping...but then that's what people want imo...not me i play for fun...not ever done a sc in 4,5 years of playing Didis 13:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a suggestion page for the Essence making it so the 20% effects from the Essence don't stack with other bonuses of the type, so you couldn't keep up Shadow Form with just Deadly Paradox, but doesn't truly hinder it for everyone else. There's lot of things Arenanet could take into consideration to slow the stem of Speed clear builds, but, alas, I don't expect to see them actually address the issue until next year. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 19:26, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

(Reset indent) The only people complaining about this shit are ppl that cant do it and poor people. Just deal with it and learn to play the game. You can make a mil just going through the game in NM and HM. Drogo Boffin 21:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Could u....

...probably start caring about the real important thing in Guildwars: GVG? I mean it's not freakin funny to see good rank 100 guild been beaten by that new me/n fastcast bloodspike and rolled over just because arcane thievery by accident gets your woh? It's a build like the old bspam, you call it gimmick but it really starts disturbing me and if you would just take a closer look at either fastcast or that cultist fevor it will make the gvg community a lot better. (just a few guilds to show you: Hey A I O N [bbGW] or Schleiereulen Dont Say [UhU]. If you would watch them on obs you would clearly see they dont deserve top 100. ty! --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.122.163 (talk).

It's back again, always a expolitable gimmicky way wins easily against those guilds better than those lamers. I dont think it'd be fixed unless Anet really want to change...I still hope they could rework life stealing mechanism--TeaCat._. 04:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Bloodspike is far, far down the list of things that need to be fixed. Many other things are more important (hexes, for example). There was a day when bloodspike was a joke because, for one thing, the skills didn't recharge every 5 seconds, and you didn't have 6 of them to spam like you do today. There isn't anything inherently wrong with life stealing. It only becomes a problem when you give people too much of it. ~Shard 04:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

>it only becomes a problem when you give people too much of it

Yeah, that sums up about 75% of the problems right there, actually. –Jette 05:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

No, you guys don't understand the problem. It is NOT funny to get kicked out of the fcking champrange just because some gay germans think it's funny to instaspike you with soa+sb on you. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.122.163 (talk).

LOL im not gay or german but i think its funny you got blood spiked out of "champrange" and come on linseys page to rage and flop your e-pen around. games are surus busniz. also sign your comments plz - Zesbeer 09:19, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Blood spike is totally brainless, as always. It may not in fixing-list top3, but still a lingering unbalanced thing, since Prophecies. --TeaCat._. 09:38, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

we didnt get spiked out of cprange, and i have no clue how this signing thing works. we actually beat those guys, but it's simply not fun to play against. you just continiously keep smashing your buttons for 4 minutes and don't have to care about tactics... if you would have a clue about the meaning of playing against it at a high level you see its no comparable build because you cant run 3 woh monks in usual ladder matches.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.55.154 (talk) at 10:07, 14 October 2009 (UTC).

Use 4 tildes (~). - Reanimated X 11:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

This is why Bspike is Bad! (Its a link to a Obs match I frapsed with comment) Lilondra *poke* 12:59, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

So you say it isnt a problem because you can beat it by antibuilding (they were even bad at playing the antibuilds) and tactics? Ok good, R/A got nerfed too, i can antibuild it with 3 Whriling Axers and 3 Watereles while Splitting over the map, chasing single R/As and winning over lord damage.— The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.55.154 (talk) at 16:27, 14 October 2009 (UTC).

Has to be one of the worst guilds of all time that runs two earth shakers and a monk flagger and still manages to lose to r600 bloodspike =\ Not pushing the flag and letting them boost was moronic as well (there were two monks up, it would have been better to push the flag and die, but prevent them from boosting, than it would have been to give them 7 fresh sigs when they were completely burned). Terrible play on gthe part of blue =\--TahiriVeila 16:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Both sides btw.Lilondra *poke* 17:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

lol ur mic's baaad --ilr 19:25, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

tbh idc about guilds that act like morons, and also thats not the build im talking about. im talking about a build, with a spike, that hits about 700 damage armor ignoring and prot ignoring and apressure that could be compared to burning on whole group. and that you call a "gimmick"? byob is a gimmick, even the new one, because you need to THINK before you ACT, but bspike is just->T->1 GOGO HEAD OVER KEYBOARD --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.122.163 (talk).

So I played bloodspike back when the only good life stealing skills were Shadow Strike and Vampiric Gaze. It was very easy to beat if you had conscious monks on your team. There's nothing wrong with life stealing, it just gets balanced differently. Also, bad players running broken builds to farm good players has been happening for like 2 years. ~Shard 02:11, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but what exactly is the "new" version of byob? I was under the impression that you got a "new" version of byob every time someone different was on the team. How can that be gimmicky, if a gimmick is a pre-made build? -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 02:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Peeps also started running the mesmer version because the necro version got nerfed.I'm pretty sure its alo more vonorable.Lilondra *poke* 04:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Also I would like to add that this is exactly whats the problem.The Bspike guild played even worse then the R19 guild but still almost got to win.Lilondra *poke* 04:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

@Shard: Nop. Shadow Strike triggers RoF, which is enough to prevent a clean spike. It's the same reason that the Nightmare Spike teams stopped running Kindle Arrows: the non-lifesteal hurt the spike's integrity. Mesmer bspike is completely different than Shadow Strike and Dark Pact for that reason: your prot monk doesn't exist AT ALL.

Similarly, mesmer bspike is super lolbroken because Vampiric Swarm is just retarded. It's a non-hex spell with delayed damage and no animation at all. As soon as the mesmers press it, ups, someone takes 400 damage loses 400 health a second later and there is no way to tell who. No hex marker, no skill animation. I mean, you can kind of guess by looking at the general direction they turn in. lolskilledplay. What's really cool about Vampiric Swarm's delayed damage is that, with Fast Casting, your next spike skill hits a quarter of a second after Vampiric Swarm does. Hey, guys, that's as fast as Nightmare Spike, but unaffected by obstruction or block, without spike prep, and ridiculously hard to interrupt!

If you're going to leave it unprottable, at least make it infusable. Infuse CASTS in a quarter second, so, if you have a ping that isn't negative, it's too slow to catch a clean spike without HB (rofl, Strip Enchantment is also in Blood Magic! SUCH A FUN ATTRIBUTE!).

Oh, and their spikes cost nothing because putting the best energy management skill in guildwars into an att filled with damage skills was a cool idea. lolbalance. is for Raine, etc. 13:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Skill update: Unholy Feast is now a targeted skill. –Jette 15:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I lold. is for Raine, etc. 15:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

wow raine is the first one to understadn what i mean. you simply cant prot the spike, and even if they dont spike clean, and u infuse at about half of the vampiric swarm, the afterspike just kills the target with no way to heal it. also, there was (except of the veryveryvery beginning) always a good balanced how a prot and a heal monk were used. but if we see bloodspike playing ladder matches, we dont take a fullprot at all, we just run 3 wohs, wait untill there match is over and fuck them so we can play for the next hour with our normal build. is this a thing a "gimmick" build should do? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.130.122.163 (talk).

Since when is GvG the "Real important thing in GW"? -- Wyn talk 00:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

they have been balancing this game for something other then gvg that's news to me...- Zesbeer 00:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

BS, they balance PvE, too! is for Raine, etc. 00:16, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, some people tend to think of GW as a "PvP oriented game" or that "started as PvP" or something like that. Having a very good PvP compared to other games doesn't mean that, Prophecies put PvP entrances in the middle of PvE areas, and that was a bit of a mistake that made some people think that playing the game was just a "preparation for PvP", a mistake that was hapily fixed by taking (most of) them all to the Battle Isles. They are just different modes of gameplay, and that's all. But the majority of the players and the majority of the content is still PvE, and most of the players come to the game and stay in the game not for the PvP, but for the PvE parts. Keeping that in mind should not harm anyone. PvP needs more skill changes because it has to be as balanced as possible, since it deals with two equal sides, while PvE only needs to have the excesses cut, since it deals with two completely different sides. MithTalk 00:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to say it again. There. Is. Nothing. Wrong. With. Life. Stealing. The problem is when teams can bring 5 of them on one bar, and none of them have a recharge. The result is that even when a team is spamming their skills on recharge, they still do more damage than the other teams' monks can heal, even if the enemy team's monks are doing nothing wrong. Raine's gvg experience doesn't include running/beating bloodspikes in gvg for 3 years in a top guild. Mine does. Life stealing skills:

1. Need to be less abundant.
2. Need higher recharges.
3. Need to steal less life.
4. 25/90 Vamp Spirit.

And this silly bloodspike champion farm would go away, leaving mainly hexway to dominate. ~Shard 01:48, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Or....they could take less drastic measures and just rework lifestealing so it's not such a ridiculously easy spike to use in PvP. And hexway is just as easy (I mean...dual VoR...really?) and since half the new henchmen are hexway...I don't think Anet cares about it. Karate Jesus 01:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Reread the beginning of my post please. You're still not getting it. ~Shard 02:00, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

@Mith: [3] -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 02:02, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Armond, Guild Wars has two components, PvE and PvP... you do realise he was referring to the PvP element - I mean, they were at a PvP tournament after all - not Guild Wars as a whole. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 03:01, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

There may be two components, but GW was originally built for PvP to be the primary focus. Over time it became primarily a PvE grindfest, and it appears that that's the model the GWLT has officially leaned towards. Karate Jesus 03:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

@Armond: Have you heard of the concept of "paradigm"? Things change. Things evolve. For better or worse, that is to be judged, but you can't expect that after 5 years, that statement remains valid. I mean, if this was only a bunch of people fighting over supremacy over the other bunch, why even build a world map? Why elaborate on lore? Things have shifted toward PvE, and that's that. I hear your pain over the unbalance existing in PvP, and I do hope that the Live Team can find a way to have a redemption on the format, but stop biasing everything. Can't two concepts co-exist on the game? Oh, and for everyone else, yes, PvP needs to have balance, because you need fairness on a competition; PvE does NOT need balance, since after all, it's killing bytes, what PvE needs to be is challenging. -- Large 03:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Anet didn't just "decide" to focus on PvE instead. ...Over time, PvP failed to recruit PvE'ers into it -- PvP also failed to recruit PvP'ers from other Genre's -- case in Point: Anet was recently celebrating 6 million copies of GW being sold. That's pretty good for a fantasy RPG. However Call of Duty 4 has sold over 14 million... that's where a REAL PvP game should be these days. That's what "inclusive" PvP with "rank Grind" looks like. GW couldn't even get most of its PvE'ers to reliably crossover to PvP; on PvP venues that ironically enough involved more focus on A.I./NPC's than it did completely player-controlled situations. --ilr 03:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

"but GW was originally built for PvP to be the primary focus", please provide proof of this other than that one youtube video that can easily be taken the wrong way. Surely, with the whole 'primary focus was pvp' line people are trying to use, there would be more proof of such a stance. like to put out I don't care either way, but it's funny watching people get all worked up over the whole "GW was all for PvP" /cough ~~000.00.00.00~~ 04:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

One of the founders of Anet and creators of the game said "GW was built to be a competitive game." What more proof do you need? ~Shard 04:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

........and some years later, one of the devs (or maybe it was Gaile, I don't remember) specifically said GW was not intended as a PvP game. I could find the diff eventually, but it's buried pretty deep in archiveland by now. Vili 点 04:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Creator > Community Manager when it comes to knowing what a game is "supposed to be." ~Shard 04:52, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll be honest 000, I don't know how you can twist "You know this is what we've been working for, all this time. Y'know we built Guild Wars from the ground up as a competitive game and of course this is the ultimate expression of that competition right here"...at the biggest IRL Guild Wars tournament? You'd pretty much have to destroy the English language to twist that anywhere nonsensical. But sure, I'll roll with it. First paragraph on this page "ArenaNet has stressed from the start that it intends Guild Wars to be a competitive multiplayer game.", The first question on this page and his reply completely explains how they originally designed the game to have PvP as the end-game. They built Prophecies PvE to lead you into PvP in other words, sure doesn't sound like something a non-PvP focused game would do (see: Nightfall). This is of course ignoring that CORPG in the first place means Competitive Online Role Playing Game (I have no clue where people started adding Cooperative to it, probably after Nightfall, but you can find it used by ArenaNet as Competitive as early as July of 2003. Oh yeah and he says it's built from the ground up to be a competitive game here too. inb4BUTYOUCANTWISTALLTHATEASILY. DarkNecrid 04:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I won't argue that this game isn't PvP focused any more tho (and I'm OK with that so long as both sides get equal attention which rarely seems the case anymore). But to say it wasn't is definitely silly, you could easily dig up a ton of stuff from 2003-2004 (those links were the result of 2 minutes of searching) that says it was PvP focused. DarkNecrid 05:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Playing devil's advocate here, but keep in mind that being a "competitive" game doesn't necessarily mean being a pvp game. Perhaps they meant the game itself was competitive in the mmo market. elix Omni 05:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Makes no sense with the way it is worded in the articles themselves and also they called the genre "Competitive Online Role Playing Game" (CORPG) originally. :p DarkNecrid 05:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it would be silly to keep stubbornly addressing this as a PvE-only experience when one of the Co-founders of the company that planned, coded and built the product has stated what was the original plan for the game. But it is just as silly and stubborn to fail to recognize that the gears have shifted and now the PvE plate has more content on it than the PvP plate. I agree with DarkNecrid when he states that both aspects of the game should be there, and supported equally, Sadly, it is not. I don't do PvP. That doesn't mean I don't respect PvPers, I do, and very much, because they have tremendous ability to improvise and adapt to suddent situations. But think about it: PvErs also have to adapt themselves to an environment that changes constantly, so it is required that you have skill and willingness to adapt. Saying "PvE is a joke" or "PvP is an elitist joke" is foolish, since for each type of player, hey, they're srs bsns. -- Large 07:44, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is trying to portray this as a PvE-only experience when it is very obvious that it has a very large pvp component. I just don't think that harping on what may have been the initial intention of ArenaNet in developing GW considering what the player base has evolved into over 4+ years is really a worthwhile discussion. It's obvious to everyone that the pvp player base wishes that the original intentions of comepetive game play had been realized more fully, however, the current playerbase is, imo, heavily populated by pve style play, and as such, ArenaNet has been, and righfully so, focusing a great deal of their attention on addressing the concerns of that playerbase. Consdidering that for most of the time I have played this game the vast majority of skill changes have been focused on pvp (whether they were successful or not) and the pve playerbase has mostly had to suck up to whatever changes were made. This doesn't lessen the importance of the pvp players, but to consider "the real important part" to be GvG is just unrealistic. -- Wyn talk 09:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd say a balanced GvG would be the the goal of Anet or atleast anet 4 years ago.Right now there are more PvE players then PvP players so yes PvE needs some love.I think the point is that PvP Shouldn't suffer from PvE changes and PvE shouldn't suffer from PvP changes.If your not experienced at PvP Don't suggest PvP changes and vice versa.Thats the whole point.Lilondra *poke* 10:17, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not as simple as "Guys let's agree to disagree and each to his own." The fact of the matter is that the Guild Wars Live Team has so few resources (as they have had for over a year) that they cannot keep both populations happy. That doesn't mean they won't try, and kudos to them for that, but it's flat-out impossible. This- of course!- leads player populations to believe they are competing for the attention of the GW Live Team. It's one of the oldest adages in the book- the squeaky wheel gets the grease. So when people come to Linsey's feedback page to complain that the "real important part" of Guild Wars is being neglected, they're not saying "Drop everything and bow to our demands," they're saying "Hey, don't forget about us." elix Omni 10:38, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

TBH you have to pay attention to pvp till its finished.When its balanced its balanced and good to go for atleast months.PvE is a different scenario since you know it would be nice to have a different kind of HM,New Areas,... Lilondra *poke* 10:41, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

@Felix: That would be ideal, to have people come and say "Hey, don't forget about us.", but the majority of squeaky wheels come and make it sound like a demand for the Live Team to drop everything and bow. -- Large 14:04, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

And as I already said, having PvP as a final step was a mistake that was fixed by removing most PvP areas from PvP outposts and bringing them to the battle isles. PvP should always be a choice, a mode, not the 'final step'. You should be both able to play PvP only without touching PvE at all, and the other way around, and that's one of the best things GW has: YOU CAN. You can play without touching PvP at all, and you can purchase PvP packs and play PvP only. No way it should go back to as it was before. GW has a great PvP, one of the best if not THE best, but that doesn't mean that PvP is the protagonist here. Players are the protagonists here, and the choice is theirs. They can choose between PvP, PvE, both or not playing at all without being left behind the other players that keep leveling and finding more and more powerfull items. But no one should be complaining if they focus in one of the sides in a certain update. Yes, PvE needs more love, but that's because it's bigger, and PvP needs love too. You don't treat one of your kids better because he has more friends than the other one. When you have limited resources you make a list and order them from the most pressing to the least. And PvP issues where more pressing. If anyone want to complain about that, they shold direct themselves to the ones that decide which issue is more important, not to the ones that note each issue. MithTalk 17:03, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Except, here, you really do care more about the kid with more friends because he's the one making more money for you. This entire section is filled with poor logic and retardation, and, sadly enough, Shard's probably the only one making any god-damned sense. ··· Danny Pew Pew 18:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

You compare friends to money and don't include age,completely miss the point and then talk about nobody making sense exept shard.Perhaps its not the 12 other peeps that posted but just you.Lilondra *poke* 18:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

zzz anets is bæd, let's talk about it on linseys page guise –Jette 19:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Lil, you really are mentally handicapped, aren't you? ··· Danny Pew Pew 19:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

"I'll be honest 000, I don't know how you can twist"... Sorry, Dark, but I'm not twisting anything. I'm explorabling a possibility before going on a stance that it's set in stone. We, as a community, have a history of taking something the developers have said one way and having them mean it in another. Just look at the mess that Henchmen competition was, we saw the rules one way, they held them in a different light. I've seen more people say "No, it's this way you must listen to me nao!!!!" than people actually asking if we can take what one of the creators said at a PvP tournament as the truth for the entire intention of the game.

Players have a terrible history of assumption, and looking back at the recent history of assumption, "Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups" please, excuse my language there ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

This went from a complaint about bloodspike to everyone's opinions on the entire game. It's been done already. ~Shard 01:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

how maek Lillo handycap? --ilr 02:43, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

As a matter of fact I am not :> but you proly ask that to everyone who disagrees with you.On topic what are we going to do with the whole wall of text and what should Linsey actually read ? Lilondra *poke* 04:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

"Hey Linsey. We are really mad and bittered cus of stuff. Hexes and life stealing promote fun and interesting gameplay. Fix plox." BlazeRick 07:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

i think everyones life story is up there as well LOL walls of text.- Zesbeer 08:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Code=15

Anything happening? --Cursed Angel 17:28, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

nope they just havent fixed it again this time everyone is again RRing, they didnt remove quest,HB, or given players dishonouner they have done nothing again.84.80.151.136 17:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Add code 13s, 200s, etc. to that. The servers can't support RR day. I'm seriously concerned about the Halloween and Wintersday finales if they can't even handle 60 districts. Karate Jesus 19:28, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Generally the main centers in PvE have been able to handle far more than 60 districts. It would be that there is a smaller limit (?) on that one particular area of the game? ~~000.00.00.00~~ 19:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Im testing it, and ive been standing in FA, a VERY low population area, for a couple hours, and i get code 15 almost every time. Someone fix this or SOMETHING, i wanna do my old z quests. Da Sonic Sunday 19:50, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Entering and leaving battles repeatedly probably puts more strain on the server than a bunch of people hanging around chatting.

Sonic, what exactly do you propose they do? Shut down the HB servers so people aren't spamming the server with transfer requests? -- Armond Warblade{{Bacon}} 19:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

WTF is RR'ing? Is that like AB'ing? links pl0x --ilr 19:53, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Are you serious? If so, it's Hero Battles Zquest day. Otherwise known as Red Resign Day (RR day). The act of Red Resigning is referred to as RRing. Karate Jesus 20:01, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes... I can understand your shock at learning that somewhere; there are still a couple 'pve'ers' left who don't go out of their way to fuck up PvP just to farm copperZ. Thank You in any case for the quick Def --ilr 20:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I was just surprised that a wiki'er didn't know. I didn't know if you primarily PvE'd or PvP'd. Hope I cleared that up. Karate Jesus 20:09, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

There are also some people who still haven't HBd. ~Shard 20:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Btw, i dont mean neccesarily shutting it down, but maybe make the space HB's taking up not be the entire set of servers. Maybe leave some space for other gamers. Limit the # of districts to like 30 or so. Da Sonic Sunday 20:13, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I tried to HB a few times. But after 5 consecutive fights or so being insulted for not /rolling, I got a little bored and left for good. I tried again when they removed /roll, but they switched to the color thing and got bored again. I have 8 Commander points from actual fights, though, XD. MithTalk 20:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm shocked, Mith, you actually play the game as opposed to finding the shortest, least play-iest way of doing something. Got that <censored> out! O.O >:) ^_^ ~~000.00.00.00~~ 20:40, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I actually enjoy HB and the ironic thing is that RR day is what got me involved in it. I'm almost r2 and most of that is from normal playing (I don't RR much. I just got r3 Zaishen and I'm going for r4). Karate Jesus 20:43, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I've never done it, it looks so boring, but then again, I say that about most GW things nowadays. -- Tha Reckoning 20:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)