Curse

YunSooJin · Aug 24, 2007, 03:49 AM // 03:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

So, maybe want to take back the insult? Like a nice person??

Some I don't even read any more, but I think you're salvageable.

A menu from which you build a new char? Wow, LS, I don't know. That's not the way I understand it -- I think it's more direct lineage. But please give me time to ask, and that won't be until after PAX, to be honest. I have more 16-hour days ahead of me, but I'll hope to be able to delve into more details next week, ok?

Here is how I understand the complaints:

GURU PERSON A:
I want HoM to be an assimilation of all of my accomplishments across all characters!

GAILE GRAY A:
But that would unreasonably confer you with special statuses in GW2. In GW2 we have the concept that a new character is 'descending' from one of your old characters. Therefore, HoM is tailored to a per character basis, since we feel that all your new characters in GW2 receiving the benefits of your entire account is unfair.

MY TAKE:
I think Gaile Gray makes sense here. It doesn't make sense. ANET could change it to this if they wanted to, but it seems to me people are just asking for the easy way out.

GURU PERSON B:
I want HoM to be an assimilation of my achievements, but I want the achievements shown to reflect on which characters I got them on!

GAILE GRAY B:
<I haven't seen a clear reply from Gaile Gray about this??>

MY TAKE:
I think that if ANET could make HoM account based, but allow us to only port over achievements from ONE CHARACTER AT A TIME for GW2, then that would be satisfactory.

What do you think, Gaile Gray?

dawnmist · Aug 24, 2007, 03:49 AM // 03:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

How are you "throwing away" a title simply because you cannot multiply it by the number of characters you have?

Let's speculate that it works like this:
You got X.
You can give X to one character, the "descendent" of the character that got X in the first place.

Instead, some seem to say:
I got X.
I want every character I make in the future to have whatever reward X brings in GW2.
I only earned it once, but the Hall of Monuments should be a copier of credentials, giving me what I earned on one char to multiple chars.

I know not all of you are saying this. But I fear that some are, and it just doesn't make sense to me.

Ok, lets take an example.

2 Guild Wars players, each having maxed 15 titles. For arguement's sake, we'll say the same 15.

The first player enjoys a particular class, and mainly plays with that class. They've not had much desire to explore other classes as primary class, but may have experimented with them as a secondary class. They may have a few characters, but their main character is the one where they've put their time - and this character has all their achievements.

With GW2, their "decendant(s)" will be able to inherit from all 15 achievements.

The second player enjoys playing over multiple main-classes, and has a level 20 character of each primary class - which meant they bought extra character slots.

Because they were playing multiple characters at once, their achievements are split among their characters.

With GW2, their "decendant(s)" will likely have a max of something like 4/5 achievements to inherit from.

Both players have invested the same time/effort, but the player with multiple characters (who had to pay extra to get the additional characters) is being penalised. Further, this player did not know that when they achieved specific titles with specific characters that they were going to be penalised for not consolidating everything on a single character, and in some cases did not have the chance to get some titles on their characters.

How is that fair?

Further, the whole "inheritance" thing itself relies on *something* being actually inheritable - so what is being passed on? Maps, diaries - a "library" of how those achievements were made? I find it hard to believe that a Cartographer title or Mission completion title would be genetic (although a sweet tooth could be *grins*).

The reason this is coming out now rather than a month ago is that when people asked about how HoM would work, there was no definitive indications. They looked at the videos, with the armour monuments containing multiple class & sex armours, and believed that indicated the HoM would be account based.

I've got no problem with only being able to choose "a few" achievements to inherit - e.g. so both those players can only choose say 3 of their titles as inherited ones for their GW2 character.

Having separate, split HoM I do have a problem with - there's no point to it, since you can see the achievements on a char with that char anyway.

Naming who got the achievement and storing them all in the same hall (or "library") would be great. The HoM effectively becomes like a Guild Hall for an individual account - which I think a lot of people thought was what would happen.

Our characters are already a family - otherwise they'd be *no* account-based titles. They already *share* resources - storage, gold, materials. So making a consolidated HoM for the "family" - and having their decendents inherit from a selection of those "consolidated" achievements (what they chose to study from the "family library" as they grew up?) - this makes sense, and is fair for both the single-character player and the multiple-character player alike.

I've still got a major problem with mini-pets being character-customised rather than account-customised, but if the HoM was consolidated it'd be of less importance.

Stark Dynasty · Aug 24, 2007, 03:53 AM // 03:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Series
Your necro explored tyria, your assassin explored cantha. Therefore, it is recorded in the HoM that your necro explored tyria and your assassin explored cantha. Makes a LOT of sense to me.

I want to be able to visit the HoM with my Ranger, Warrior or any character on my account and see that my Necro explored Tyria and my Assassin explored Cantha.

I'll wait and see if ANet has made it this way. If not then I'll ask them to change it.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by YunSooJin
GURU PERSON B:
I want HoM to be an assimilation of my achievements, but I want the achievements shown to reflect on which characters I got them on!

GAILE GRAY B:
<I haven't seen a clear reply from Gaile Gray about this??>

MY TAKE:
I think that if ANET could make HoM account based, but allow us to only port over achievements from ONE CHARACTER AT A TIME for GW2, then that would be satisfactory.

What do you think, Gaile Gray?

I'm kinda thinking along the same lines as Guru Person B. I'd wish HoM to just see all my accomplishments on my various chars in the one place. In no way do I think my char's should just automatically gain the title or armour monuments gained on one certain char for themselves, but just see that a different char on my account did. Or even 2 chars on my account did.

Also, I think it's too early to quibble about how inheritance will work in GW2. Nothing's set in stone yet.

Neo Nugget · Aug 24, 2007, 03:56 AM // 03:56

What im wondering is how peeps with LDoA are gonna be able to put it in the hall of monuments.

Solar_Takfar · Aug 24, 2007, 03:59 AM // 03:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawnmist

Further, the whole "inheritance" thing itself relies on *something* being actually inheritable - so what is being passed on? Maps, diaries - a "library" of how those achievements were made? I find it hard to believe that a Cartographer title or Mission completion title would be genetic (although a sweet tooth could be *grins*).

My point exactly. Not only a single HoM makes sense logistically and as a game mechanic, it makes sense as a story device - in fact, much more sense than having an Asura elementalist 200 years in the future "genetically" inherit a protector trait from a human warrior who saved tyria back in GW1. If they read about it, or studied under a certain tradition or school, or even just received a nobility title (because their great-grandfather helped said human hero back in the day) from it, it'd make much more sense. And it's a much more versatile solution, as the titles could be redistributed and concentrated or dispersed at will on the GW2 chars, too.

AceeBlueEagle · Aug 24, 2007, 04:02 AM // 04:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rhys

I knew I shouldn't have focused on so many characters at once. I should have just chose one character and stuck with him.

Oh well, at least I'll know what to do in GW2... heh.

I kinda feel the same. But at the same time, playing many, many classes of characters is what kept the game vibrant for me. If I had to play any of my characters most of the time, the game would have lost it's appeal ages ago.

I was thinking that HOM would be account based. This just plain sucks. I have every class of character available and all have beaten the 3 chapters.

Bryant Again · Aug 24, 2007, 04:05 AM // 04:05

I guess we can only hope that this version of the Hall of Monuments doesn't go live. At least I only worked for titles on one character...

Zinger314 · Aug 24, 2007, 04:08 AM // 04:08

It's ironic. Guild Wars entices players to support multiple characters, through easily obtained levels, armor, and weapons.

Now, with the rep grinds in GW:EN, it's confirmed that ArenaNet wants you to focus more on a single character.

I personally don't have a problem with it, since I only play my Necromancer, but it's a slap in the face to those who play otherwise.

Solar_Takfar · Aug 24, 2007, 04:13 AM // 04:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by gaile

Please help me understand why some of you are making such dramatic, negative comments about this

Because this kind of mechanic clearly affects the way we play the game (one character vs. many characters), and because this type of decision, along with others (ie. the idea of having unrestricted level cap) is sort of dragging people who like to play with varied characters into the opposite territory.

Sure, we'll still be able to have fun playing with different chars in GW2, but if that means they'll be lacking in several cosmetic (inherited titles) and even practical (PvE grind skills, higher level) advantages, it starts to feel not only unfair, but also a complete change of heart from the dynamic and free game that GW was born as, and which pulled us in, in the first place..

sindex · Aug 24, 2007, 04:22 AM // 04:22

Well since my idea is already up there; I have to say, I think it will create storage clutter and a type of nothingness in certain places, in each HoM per toon.

Honestly I would like to see just one HoM per account. I really don’t need to copy and paste every accomplishment, to every toon I create in GW 2. I just would love to show that I accomplished a verity of things within GW1, without the constraints of constantly switching to different toons.

You see I am probably going to have 1 set of armor, 1-3 weapons, 0-1 pet, and 0-1 minis per HoM (10 toons spread out). That’s going to make things pretty empty in certain places of my HoM’s.

The only Pro side of this whole mess is that you will have more room to move around per HoM.

I mean I see the idea that people focus on one character at a time, and make it to be verily powerful. However there are others out there, which spread their collection, resources, and time across many different toons. I mean it’s a bit unrealistic to say “well then you should focus on all the different toons equally then.” I have put in over close to three thousand hours into GW; so I should spend over thirty thousand hours trying to get the same result per toon? GW is fun, but it’s not my life.

*REMINDER.* This still contends to that I rather have a hall filled, but not a duplicate transfer accomplishments to all toons created in GW2. I don’t want all titles to just be handed over just like that either.

Hyper Cutter · Aug 24, 2007, 04:25 AM // 04:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by dawnmist

Ok, lets take an example.

2 Guild Wars players, each having maxed 15 titles. For arguement's sake, we'll say the same 15.

The first player enjoys a particular class, and mainly plays with that class. They've not had much desire to explore other classes as primary class, but may have experimented with them as a secondary class. They may have a few characters, but their main character is the one where they've put their time - and this character has all their achievements.

With GW2, their "decendant(s)" will be able to inherit from all 15 achievements.

The second player enjoys playing over multiple main-classes, and has a level 20 character of each primary class - which meant they bought extra character slots.

Because they were playing multiple characters at once, their achievements are split among their characters.

With GW2, their "decendant(s)" will likely have a max of something like 4/5 achievements to inherit from.

Both players have invested the same time/effort, but the player with multiple characters (who had to pay extra to get the additional characters) is being penalised. Further, this player did not know that when they achieved specific titles with specific characters that they were going to be penalised for not consolidating everything on a single character, and in some cases did not have the chance to get some titles on their characters.

How is that fair?

Further, the whole "inheritance" thing itself relies on *something* being actually inheritable - so what is being passed on? Maps, diaries - a "library" of how those achievements were made? I find it hard to believe that a Cartographer title or Mission completion title would be genetic (although a sweet tooth could be *grins*).

The reason this is coming out now rather than a month ago is that when people asked about how HoM would work, there was no definitive indications. They looked at the videos, with the armour monuments containing multiple class & sex armours, and believed that indicated the HoM would be account based.

I've got no problem with only being able to choose "a few" achievements to inherit - e.g. so both those players can only choose say 3 of their titles as inherited ones for their GW2 character.

Having separate, split HoM I do have a problem with - there's no point to it, since you can see the achievements on a char with that char anyway.

Naming who got the achievement and storing them all in the same hall (or "library") would be great. The HoM effectively becomes like a Guild Hall for an individual account - which I think a lot of people thought was what would happen.

Our characters are already a family - otherwise they'd be *no* account-based titles. They already *share* resources - storage, gold, materials. So making a consolidated HoM for the "family" - and having their decendents inherit from a selection of those "consolidated" achievements (what they chose to study from the "family library" as they grew up?) - this makes sense, and is fair for both the single-character player and the multiple-character player alike.

I've still got a major problem with mini-pets being character-customised rather than account-customised, but if the HoM was consolidated it'd be of less importance.

This guy said what I've been wanting to say for the entire life of this topic, but much better...

Also, still waiting on an explanation for the screenshots showing one HoM with armor from multiple professions...

Frostnova · Aug 24, 2007, 04:31 AM // 04:31

from what i've read so far, i'm guessing ANet is most concerned about GW2 inheritences and stuff....but i mean c'mon its practically 2 years from now, i mean if the HoM and be combined to one then that could be considered a problem solved temporaily and then afterwards think of some other way so it can satisfy everyone's needs. Because right now all everyone is saying is..

--- HoM should be account based so we can see ALL our accomplishents in one place on ANY char
--- Inheritences could be spread however the player wishes to spread it when GW2 comes out ex. Tyrian GMC gives you weapon X, whereas Canthan GMC gives you weapon Y. When GW2 comes out, the player can decide how to split the family's(account's) inheritences from GW

I'm guessing this is what everyone's saying???correct me if i'm wrong =)

AlienFromBeyond · Aug 24, 2007, 04:40 AM // 04:40

I don't see the problem with inheriting from multiple characters, we'll somehow be doing it across species already.

gstricto · Aug 24, 2007, 04:40 AM // 04:40

I'm sure I'm speaking for plenty of people who haven't voiced their opinion on this topic so far.

My necromancer has I'm Very Important and FoW armor.

I collect tons of rare weapons for my warrior.

My dervish is a Legendary Survivor (since my necromancer never had a chance to even attempt it).

These are all titles and things I MYSELF HAVE ACCOMPLISHED.

Reverse the direction this HoM is going in. Should each and every PVP character have their own fame and gladiator track? (Well, your monk was the only one you ever took into RA, so he's the only gladiator you *get* (because we're so nice) to have. That warrior you HA with? He's the only true hero on your account, your skills be damned.)

Would this EVER be supported? You JUST got around to doing the right thing with the favor system. Reverse of that old method would be saying that regions could only GVG when their area had beaten Hell's Precipice 100 times in the last hour. Absurd, exactly right.

The Hall of Monuments being character based is f***ing stupid. I can already press H and see that lame division of labor. The Hall of MonumentS (!!! notice the capital S at the end) should be something special. As it stands, you are only putting a 3D representation of the text I can already see a lot quicker (and $40 cheaper) by pressing a key on my keyboard at any time of the day.

A few key points:
- Minipet trader should be implemented by default.
- Character based Hall of Monuments seems like some lazy ass programmers decided it was too much work to do it right to begin with. (After all, I am quite sure that it would be LESS storage on servers to make a single monument instead of duplicates of empty data storage for characters that may never enter their monument.)
- This idea begs to be changed into a monument to the PLAYER, NOT THE CHARACTER (i.e. account vs toon) after all, its the PLAYERS who pay your bills, I suggest you take that into serious consideration.

I've pre-ordered GW:EN, I've bought all 3 collector's editions, I've dumped thousands of hours into this game.

I'm being shafted.

This preview weekend better do something EXCEPTIONALLY correct, or I can safely say that I, along with hundreds (if not thousands) of players will not be giving ANet another chance to correct their faults.

*edit* For all of you asking why there are multiple characters in the hall in some of the videos or screens, etc. Go look up some early Factions screen shots, there is one distinctly showing a Guild Lord selling an item called Guild Vault. Point being that this would not be the first time they've f***ed up an idea shortly before release.

lyra_song · Aug 24, 2007, 04:51 AM // 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

OK, wait, how is that logical at all? The minipet is essentially a toy. It can be freely traded and "played with" by anyone, anytime. The only reason for customization of any kind is to have a restriction so that it cannot be traded about and "shown" by all friends and guildies, passed around like a cheap harlot.

That's the only reason. I can understand that reasoning completely. So, the best solution would be to lock it to the account, so it can't be passed around except to your small family of characters. They would be the physical item version of all those account-wide titles that the same family shares (for some reason).

im speaking strictly about passing on stuff, not adding to hom.

the idea of taking a mini-pet and customizing it to an account is fine and dandy with me (it should be the same with weapons also...imo).

However the problem comes when you get to GW2.

You used 1 Kuunavang to unlock Kuunavang for all 10 characters (under your proposal).

Would the GW2 descendant get 1 Kuunavang or 10? If theres only going to be one copy passed along anyway, whats the point in adding it to the other 9 HoMs?

Lee plays Guild Wars · Aug 24, 2007, 04:51 AM // 04:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstricto

I'm sure I'm speaking for plenty of people who haven't voiced their opinion on this topic so far.

My necromancer has I'm Very Important and FoW armor.

I collect tons of rare weapons for my warrior.

My dervish is a Legendary Survivor (since my necromancer never had a chance to even attempt it).

These are all titles and things I MYSELF HAVE ACCOMPLISHED.

Reverse the direction this HoM is going in. Should each and every PVP character have their own fame and gladiator track? (Well, your monk was the only one you ever took into RA, so he's the only gladiator you *get* (because we're so nice) to have. That warrior you HA with? He's the only true hero on your account, your skills be damned.)

Would this EVER be supported? You JUST got around to doing the right thing with the favor system. Reverse of that old method would be saying that regions could only GVG when their area had beaten Hell's Precipice 100 times in the last hour. Absurd, exactly right.

The Hall of Monuments being character based is f***ing stupid. I can already press H and see that lame division of labor. The Hall of MonumentS (!!! notice the capital S at the end) should be something special. As it stands, you are only putting a 3D representation of the text I can already see a lot quicker (and $40 cheaper) by pressing a key on my keyboard at any time of the day.

A few key points:
- Minipet trader should be implemented by default.
- Character based Hall of Monuments seems like some lazy ass programmers decided it was too much work to do it right to begin with. (After all, I am quite sure that it would be LESS storage on servers to make a single monument instead of duplicates of empty data storage for characters that may never enter their monument.)
- This idea begs to be changed into a monument to the PLAYER, NOT THE CHARACTER (i.e. account vs toon) after all, its the PLAYERS who pay your bills, I suggest you take that into serious consideration.

I've pre-ordered GW:EN, I've bought all 3 collector's editions, I've dumped thousands of hours into this game.

I'm being shafted.

This preview weekend better do something EXCEPTIONALLY correct, or I can safely say that I, along with hundreds (if not thousands) of players will not be giving ANet another chance to correct their faults.

*edit* For all of you asking why there are multiple characters in the hall in some of the videos or screens, etc. Go look up some early Factions screen shots, there is one distinctly showing a Guild Lord selling an item called Guild Vault. Point being that this would not be the first time they've f***ed up an idea shortly before release.

Quoted for truth. The Hall of Monuments should display the player's achievements, as should all titles, just like PvP titles.

It makes no sense that I can get Rank 3 on my monk then have it on any character I make on my account, but I can't do the same with current PvE titles or Hall of Monuments.

MithranArkanere · Aug 24, 2007, 04:57 AM // 04:57

I store the miniatures in the Xunali, and use them with all characters.

I don't want to make all of them stuck to one single character andunusable for the others.

This seemsplain senseless.

Winterclaw · Aug 24, 2007, 05:15 AM // 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

It's ironic. Guild Wars entices players to support multiple characters, through easily obtained levels, armor, and weapons.

Now, with the rep grinds in GW:EN, it's confirmed that ArenaNet wants you to focus more on a single character.

I personally don't have a problem with it, since I only play my Necromancer, but it's a slap in the face to those who play otherwise.

True enough. Most people don't get the same title on multiple chars because getting it once is a pain in the butt.

Frostnova · Aug 24, 2007, 05:18 AM // 05:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

True enough. Most people don't get the same title on multiple chars because getting it once is a pain in the butt.

so with u there lol SS/LB titles.....*shudders* nvr want to do that on all my chars XD

Bryant Again · Aug 24, 2007, 05:19 AM // 05:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

True enough. Most people don't get the same title on multiple chars because getting it once is a pain in the butt.

Just earlier today I thought "AIGHT! Let's go get Spearmarshall on mah 'sin!" Glad I didn't go too far with it...

But agreed, this is a SLAP in the FACE! for those who farmed thier asses off on numerous characters.