Curse

dreamhunk · Mar 28, 2006, 07:00 PM // 19:00

I have to say about the skills unluck that was more of pvp player problem than a RPG player problem. I don't see anything about fixing RPG problems.

I would also like to note it is kinda unfair that anet change pve and not battle Island. I Personly don't think that RPG should not be depended on any pvp player or players. I think Anet should focus on what RPG players want and would like. I only see this as forcing pve players to play with pvp players. There already has reports of people fighting, people being rude. Also RPG players dropping out because they don't want to pvp. I think in the real changes will not be seen until the game comes out. There is not alot people who come to these fourms that play the game. I really don't think this will work. Pve players want different things than pvp players.

I think people need wake up and smell the coffee. I maybe wrong but I can bet money on it this will not work. I think that Anet really miss the boat on this one.

All I hear coming from Jeff Strain is pvp. I can go and write list of reasons rpg players are different than pvp and why it will not work. I also think that Anet has not put in their system. What it is rpg players really wnat. I think pvp or anything that is pvp should be a opation not forced in any way or form. I would have to wonder about Anets 1000 beta testers. How be it that in the fourms are where the problem was first brought up and not in the beta test! It really makes you wonder. I also feel there is not laot pve players who know what is going on. When they buy the game they maybe in for a shock!

look at HOH right pvp right now. I can see the whole fractions allinace going that route. One does not have to look far to see a train reck. I also like to note that is pvp is not up to par, there is always the Rpg to keep Anet a float. What happens in the pvp sinks, you this have rpg to keep anet afloat.

Think Anet is is driving the pvp and rpg players out the door! A game company should not take the players for granted! They should be respect for their styles. Like I said before pve players know what they want. Those people fighting agisnt other peoples play styles. Your only hurting the game even more. Your driving people out of the game. When that happens, you may one day have drived eveyone out of the game.

Ensign · Mar 28, 2006, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kali Ma

Since Gaile works for Anet, it seems pretty clear that our ability to do quests in the opposing territory was for the FPE event only.

Either that or Gaile was wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kali Ma

And I must reiterate the obvious benefits to PvE based guilds being in an Alliance with PvP based guilds

Incorrect. It behooves a guild to be in a *faction* with lots of PvP-based guilds that can claim territory. For their alliance, a guild is best off if it joins with several *farming guilds* to maximize their alliance standing and gain control of those cities and outposts. As far as control of cities goes, the good PvP guilds are going to be patently *bad* allies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WasAGuest

Much in the same way many pure PvEers are seeing the high end Elite content access dependant on PvP border fighting?

Those players don't have the slightest clue how the mechanics actually work. I'm not saying that there won't be radical changes before release, but as things stood during the FPE your access to 'Elite' content depends 99% upon your alliance's ability to zerg standing with one faction or another.

Here's a rundown of the mechanics as they stood during the event, to the best of my understanding:

Each faction has its own 'ladder' of alliance standing. Standing is gained by dumping large amounts of faction into it, and that standing decays over time, so maintaining standing is a continuous process. To gain a high standing and a high place on the ladder, you need a lot of players each gaining a lot of faction that they're willing to use to pump up that standing.

The alliances for each faction are given control of major cities and outposts that belong to that faction. The Luxon alliance with the highest standing had control of Cavalon, for example. How the different outposts were handed out I'm not sure, but basically the teams on the top of the faction ladder had control.

The cutoff point for how many guilds from each alliance get access to this high-end content depends on that faction line and how outposts shift control. If the Kurzicks are winning at any given point in time and control more territory, more guilds from the top of the Kurzick standing ladder will have access to elite content. The same goes for Luxons. It should be noted that the *number* of alliances granted access to elite content does not change.

Similarly the most powerful standing guilds are going to be largely immune to these shuffling effects, because they have first grab at any territory that their faction does happen to control. Only guilds on the bubble in the alliance standing will be affected, because the break point for gaining access to a territory is a dynamic thing.

Helping your faction gain territory is more of a cosmetic feature, it's largely going to be impractical. If you're an alliance that's on the bubble, that's affected by the swings in the faction lines, then it's of paramount importance that you maintain your standing at all costs. If alliance battles remain the way they were during the FPE then moving the line is going to depend upon large numbers far more than individual actions. However if moving the lines and taking control of outposts cuts into your faction per hour (FPH) then you're actually hurting your chances of taking a city, as even though you might gain territory it's likely that a more dedicated FPH will pass you in the standings and take control of that outpost you gained. A good player that can win all of his alliance battles will have trouble cracking 3000 FPH from alliance battles even if he wins every time - the repeatable quests should be worth a comparable amount, if not more, once they are analyzed and farmed.

In other words it becomes largely like the favor system, where your needs to focus on your alliance standing above all else if you're on the bubble, and hope that the PvP part of your faction comes through to give you access to content.

If you want to powergame the system to gain control of the best cities, the technique is fairly simple:

Create a massive faction farming alliance of 1000 people who contribute to the alliance standing pot. This will maximize your standing on the alliance ladder and give you control of the best cities available.

Make sure that your alliance is composed of serious farming guilds, not casual players. Faction is going to need to be farmed like it's a job if you want to stay on the top.

Refine the farming of repeatable quests to an art so that you can gain faction more quickly as in individual. Train your alliance in how to run these missions to really push that alliance standing.

Join whichever faction has the strongest PvP presence - avoid the PvE favored faction. During the FPE this was the Kurzicks. Not only does that faction control more territory more consistently, but the competition on the ladder will be thinner, making your job of maintaining the top spot easier.

That's how the game works right now. If you don't like how that works, complain vigorously about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WasAGuest

If I were in a mission with another Co-op group, holding a line of mobs back so they could do something else, that would be interesting as it would have a meaning and a purpose. We have yet to see this in PvE yet.

That's simply creating a PvE map with multiple, simultaneous goals. There isn't anything terribly special about that.

What I'm asking is what random grouping would do to enhance people's PvE experiences. In PvP randomness is incredibly important because it applies to both teams, and has important metagame considerations. Organized teams and random teams will play out very differently even if they're playing on the same map with the same objectives.

At the same time I don't see how random groupings for PvE will accomplish anything. There aren't exactly metagame considerations to deal with or things like that. How would, say, forming up two groups of four in a mission outpost, then randomly pairing them up for a mission lead to a better gameplay experience than just choosing the 8 from the beginning?

Quote:

Originally Posted by WasAGuest

Holding off wave of wave of mobs just for the sake of it gets old. But in supporting another group seperate from your own, while they struggle with their part of the same mission would be fun.

I guess I just don't see it. If you have two teams in a mission that don't interact with each other, all you're doing is adding an arbitrary failure point to the mission. I.E. in your example your mission is basically 'hold off wave after wave of mobs for N minutes, where N is a randomly determined number between 1 and infinity'. I really don't see how that's any more fun than 'hold off wave after wave of mobs for 10 minutes'.

If the teams do interact, and as far as I'm concerned they have to, then again, what's to gain from adding the random grouping component? Why not let teams form themselves for the mission and split up as needed?

PvE, at least in my mind, is a puzzle game. You're presented with a set of obstacles and it's up to you to figure out how to overcome them. Once you figure out how to beat something you just execute it and complete the mission. I am certainly game for more complex puzzles and will lobby for their inclusion. But what I'm not keen on, at all, is random failure factors. "Figure out how to beat a mission, then continue forming teams, failing for reasons beyond your control, and entering the mission until you get a lucky pairing and complete it."

Quote:

Originally Posted by WasAGuest

so hours of fighting with nothing gained but points.

What exactly are gold pieces if not tradable points?

Quote:

Originally Posted by WasAGuest

However, groups with groups vs more and tougher mobs would bring in some interesting missions.

The most interesting mission, of course, would be 'how many times will I have to enter this mission until I get a random group competent enough to complete it?' Oh look, a Whammo with henchies, better quit out and try again.

Making that whole process maddening is the direct relationship between the need to quit out and how interesting the mission actually is. If it's a trivially easy mission you can just wait it out while the random teams stumble through their parts. But if it's a difficult mission with a non-trivial failure chance for even a good group, you're going to want to be very discriminatory if you don't want to waste your time. Join, check other team, if it isn't up to spec quit out and try again.

Granted this is a problem of every random format (I quit early and often in random arena, and in 12v12 I'll leave immediately if I see certain problems like quad assassins), but at least in those formats both sides are subject to the same randomness. If, say, you were forming a team in random arena, and *knew* that you were going to be playing against an organized team from team arena (which isn't even equivilent to a static PvE mission but it's closer), then you wouldn't even bother waiting for the match to start with, say, 80% of the teams that you get spawned on. You know you don't have a chance, and playing it out just wastes everyone's time, so you just keep re-entering until you get a group that does have a chance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

"Alliances who have both PvE AND PvP Players will be the most strongest"

I know they said that, and it might be their intent - but they need to seriously re-evaluate the mechanics they're using if they want that to be a reality, because right now that just isn't the case.

Peace,
-CxE

Prefectus · Mar 28, 2006, 11:22 PM // 23:22

ok i love pve its all i really play but...i love the 12 v.s. 12 battles finaly i can pvp with some meaning woot! and no /rank emote hateing thats why i never got in to HA or any form of HoH fighting its no fun you have to be a cookie cuter build to get anywhere in there and thats no fun just becuse i have a w/mo that uses sword im hated becude i dont use iway or change to ganger for the easy pet kills to up my attacks im happy with where there takeinf factions plz a net keep upo the kick a@@ work ill keep paying to get new chapters ^_^
gold furious katana of fortitude (+15% wile in stance) FTW

dreamhunk · Mar 28, 2006, 11:46 PM // 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prefectus

ok i love pve its all i really play but...i love the 12 v.s. 12 battles finaly i can pvp with some meaning woot! and no /rank emote hateing thats why i never got in to HA or any form of HoH fighting its no fun you have to be a cookie cuter build to get anywhere in there and thats no fun just becuse i have a w/mo that uses sword im hated becude i dont use iway or change to ganger for the easy pet kills to up my attacks im happy with where there takeinf factions plz a net keep upo the kick a@@ work ill keep paying to get new chapters ^_^
gold furious katana of fortitude (+15% wile in stance) FTW

Did you know that that 12 vs 12 will not be radom like the weekend! The radom 12 vs pvp just for this event!

Prefectus · Mar 28, 2006, 11:49 PM // 23:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

Did you know that that 12 vs 12 will not be radom like the weekend! The radom 12 vs pvp just for this event!

that would suck but im still happy with my katana when i get one

Savio · Mar 28, 2006, 11:52 PM // 23:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

Did you know that that 12 vs 12 will not be radom like the weekend! The radom 12 vs pvp just for this event!

No it's not.

WasAGuest · Mar 29, 2006, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Those players don't have the slightest clue how the mechanics actually work. I'm not saying that there won't be radical changes before release, but as things stood during the FPE your access to 'Elite' content depends 99% upon your alliance's ability to zerg standing with one faction or another.

My understanding was this: PvP wins and moves the lines. Those cities now "won" would then be awarded by the alliances with the most ladder points. Since this is done once a day, largest cties are then awarded to alliances with the most and then it trickles down to outposts and smaller cities. Is this not correct? If not, what does PvP do if anything? I am just so lost. lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

That's simply creating a PvE map with multiple, simultaneous goals. There isn't anything terribly special about that.

There's also nothing special in anything we've seen in Factions so far either*. 12v12 is being called fun by PvPers that are playing it, why not adapt something new to PvE? There is something new about it, something we don't have now. Keep reading.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

What I'm asking is what random grouping would do to enhance people's PvE experiences. In PvP randomness is incredibly important because it applies to both teams, and has important metagame considerations. Organized teams and random teams will play out very differently even if they're playing on the same map with the same objectives.

At the same time I don't see how random groupings for PvE will accomplish anything. There aren't exactly metagame considerations to deal with or things like that. How would, say, forming up two groups of four in a mission outpost, then randomly pairing them up for a mission lead to a better gameplay experience than just choosing the 8 from the beginning?

It's not total randomness at all. It would be as follows. You enter mission area and find the grouping is limited to 4 to 6 players. You build your group click "Enter Mission". One or Two other groups have done the same and the server links the two or three groups placing them in the instance. Each group is given a goal that needs to be completed. When that goal is done, another is given untill the end is reached.
The randomness comes from not knowing who the other team is, and what goal your team is going to get set with.
If any other team wipes or drops, then your team would be assigned those mission goals as well.
PvE would be easier to lure people into staying with descent drops at the end of each goal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensign

I guess I just don't see it. If you have two teams in a mission that don't interact with each other, all you're doing is adding an arbitrary failure point to the mission. I.E. in your example your mission is basically 'hold off wave after wave of mobs for N minutes, where N is a randomly determined number between 1 and infinity'. I really don't see how that's any more fun than 'hold off wave after wave of mobs for 10 minutes'.

Eventually, the teams will interact. Either through a mid-point "video" or at the end when the final confrontation takes place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

If the teams do interact, and as far as I'm concerned they have to, then again, what's to gain from adding the random grouping component? Why not let teams form themselves for the mission and split up as needed?

Yea, answered above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

What exactly are gold pieces if not tradable points?

Can those points be universally spent in all areas of the game? Are they going to be usable in Chapter 3? Can they buy each and every comp I need for every piece of armor? Even you have to agree, they are far from close.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

The most interesting mission, of course, would be 'how many times will I have to enter this mission until I get a random group competent enough to complete it?' Oh look, a Whammo with henchies, better quit out and try again.

Making that whole process maddening is the direct relationship between the need to quit out and how interesting the mission actually is. If it's a trivially easy mission you can just wait it out while the random teams stumble through their parts. But if it's a difficult mission with a non-trivial failure chance for even a good group, you're going to want to be very discriminatory if you don't want to waste your time. Join, check other team, if it isn't up to spec quit out and try again.

Granted this is a problem of every random format (I quit early and often in random arena, and in 12v12 I'll leave immediately if I see certain problems like quad assassins), but at least in those formats both sides are subject to the same randomness. If, say, you were forming a team in random arena, and *knew* that you were going to be playing against an organized team from team arena (which isn't even equivilent to a static PvE mission but it's closer), then you wouldn't even bother waiting for the match to start with, say, 80% of the teams that you get spawned on. You know you don't have a chance, and playing it out just wastes everyone's time, so you just keep re-entering until you get a group that does have a chance.

This is where the more forgiving nature of PvE comes to play. One doesn't have to have a perfect build in order to beat the game. Just someone who can enjoy his/her character and stay alive with it. If that Whammo with henchies claims he/she can pull it off, then go for it. If they wipe, my team will get this goals and his drops. Might take me longer to complete the missions now, but the added "goodies" will make it worth the trouble.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

I know they said that, and it might be their intent - but they need to seriously re-evaluate the mechanics they're using if they want that to be a reality, because right now that just isn't the case.

That's all we (PvEers) are wanting, for Anet to re-think the direction they went with Factions and redo/add some more dynamic, more interesting mission types with future chapters.

*From what I've seen and read (in this post alone) PvEers got PvP in a clown suit (still my favorite line in the thread - thank you for that

), lots of "gofer" missions (Fed-ex), missions to compete on a score board (PvP e-sports), and faction points to farm (as if farming wasn't already dull, now we get to do it a lot more). Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see any new "dynamic" play system here for PvE. Locking cities and Elite missions is surely not a new dynamic either, we have that with in a similar flavor already with FoW and UW. The only really new dynamic is the 12v12 Alliance battles... again, PvP.
So, yea, I and many others would like some new additions to PvE other than "fluff" and "clown suit" mini games.

Lastly, correct me if I'm wrong here, I know you or someone will. PvE gets to do farm for faction points. PvE HAS to farm to get FoW and 15k armor. PvE HAS to farm to get the gold for items they want and need. PvE can opt to farm to gain drops from current Chapter 1 zones. Can Anet think of nothing for PvEers to do other than farm? I mean, wow, we get to either kill the exact same thing over and over or run the same route over and over again... No new dynamic mission maps... No new multi-team missions with multiple goals and puzzles... but hey, we get more farming...

dreamhunk · Mar 29, 2006, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

No it's not.

If even if it is or isnot radom how will it take take till. it does become what pvp players want. Call it what you want it if forced pvp on pve players.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s....php?t=3000396

Savio · Mar 29, 2006, 12:59 AM // 00:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

If even if it is or isnot radom how will it take take till. it does become what pvp players want. Call it what you want it if forced pvp on pve players.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s....php?t=3000396

I have no clue what your first two sentences mean, but the last one: "Call it what you want it if forced pvp on pve players." 12v12 has a minor effect on PvE. You can PvE all of Factions without a guild or alliance, and all you'd miss are a few elite quests/areas and occasionally an NPC merchant won't talk to you. Big whoop. You have all the storyline quests available to you, a bunch of new weapon skins, armor looks, and pets to make you happy, and you don't even have to PvP to gain Faction. As Ensign stated above, you can take over the map without ever touching PvP.

Ascension · Mar 29, 2006, 01:10 AM // 01:10

Please feel free to lose your soul to a Korean MMORPG. This game made it clear up front it would have the full spectrum, including a focus on PvP alongside traditional PvE content. I'm sure you disregarded this fact with the large amount of preview events and superb content. It is not Anet's fault if you demand the the sheer amount of PvE content of MMORPG's, yet aren't paying or being forced to grind.

Anet is connecting into the vibe of most new games - conflict. To be blunt: it will sell. Anet's economic model is in selling those expansions, so a common trend needs to be followed. They aren't doing this coldly, however, as they appear to have a true desire at unifying the playerbase. Count yourself lucky that Anet would never think of server transfering epic players to endlessly gank your new character.

Besides, you don't worry yourself, there are plenty of farmers on PvP WoW servers. Count yourself lucky you won't be ganked by people 10 levels lower then yourself due to you stuttering "pee vee pee?" Pure PvE is still viable, Anet has just offered incentive to broaden your skills (puppy dog AI is a shame, isn't it? - albeit a rabid puppy!). I think players need to experience the game in the full spectrum. Unlocking skills conventionally as well as chasing that faction down. Go out and experience the whole game, it will give you better perspective on your skills.

dreamhunk · Mar 29, 2006, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ascension

Please feel free to lose your soul to a Korean MMORPG. This game made it clear up front it would have the full spectrum, including a focus on PvP alongside traditional PvE content. I'm sure you disregarded this fact with the large amount of preview events and superb content. It is not Anet's fault if you demand the the sheer amount of PvE content of MMORPG's, yet aren't paying or being forced to grind.

Anet is connecting into the vibe of most new games - conflict. To be blunt: it will sell. Anet's economic model is in selling those expansions, so a common trend needs to be followed. They aren't doing this coldly, however, as they appear to have a true desire at unifying the playerbase. Count yourself lucky that Anet would never think of server transfering epic players to endlessly gank your new character.

Besides, you don't worry yourself, there are plenty of farmers on PvP WoW servers. Count yourself lucky you won't be ganked by people 10 levels lower then yourself due to you stuttering "pee vee eee?" Pure PvE is still viable, Anet has just offered incentive to broaden your skills (puppy dog AI is a shame, isn't it? - albeit a rabid puppy!). I think players need to experience the game in the full spectrum. Unlocking skills conventionally as well as chasing that faction down. Go out and experience the whole game, it will give you better perspective on your skills.

Ok so why don't they go change HA why PVE! I really hope anet doesnot market this faction as RPG! they should be clear what it is! Why pve depended on pvp?Why can't pvpdepended on pve?

Ascension · Mar 29, 2006, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Technically they did. HoH became HA and the former HoH became an elite PvE instance which unleashed green item sets to the fans, if I'm not mistaken?

Let's not forget the poor Minion Master. A staple of PvE, he suddenly found out he rocked 12v12. "Change" is a relative term. You are just so biased you only look at the change on "your" side.

dreamhunk · Mar 29, 2006, 01:25 AM // 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ascension

Technically they did. HoH became HA and the former HoH became an elite PvE instance which unleashed green item sets to the fans, if I'm not mistaken?

Let's not forget the poor Minion Master. A staple of PvE, he suddenly found out he rocked 12v12. "Change" is a relative term. You are just so biased you only look at the change on "your" side.

That is where you ar wrong! In the business worl you mean what you say! You say what you mean!

HA is still pvp, until they place npc in it it has not become anything but pvp!

Where I come it is about facts, I am far from byuss! You can't call guild wars RPG! There is some bad rpg in the game and littlle of it. So I want to see how anet will market this product. They focus more pvp more than anything else.

Your a professer you should know how the legal system works! Why do you need me to tell you. You should be well aware what is facts and is not!

Savio · Mar 29, 2006, 01:28 AM // 01:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

That is where you ar wrong! In the business worl you mean what you say! You say what you mean!

HA is still pvp, until they place npc in it it has not become anything but pvp!

Where I come it is about facts, I am far from byuss!

He meant tournament games were moved to Heroes' Ascent, while the old Tomb of the Primeval Kings became a high-level PvE area.

I still fail to see how PvP affects PvE in Factions any more than it does already in Prophecies.

Quote:

You can't call guild wars RPG! There is some bad rpg in the game and littlle of it.

Most so-called "RPG" videogames nowadays have little of the Role-Playing in it. If you really want an RPG, play a pen-and-paper game like Dungeons and Dragons. If you want real grind, play another MMO. Arenanet stated that this was to be a CORPG, or "Competitive Online Role-Playing Game". That's right, competitive. As in Player versus Player.

dreamhunk · Mar 29, 2006, 01:33 AM // 01:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

He meant tournament games were moved to Heroes' Ascent, while the old Tomb of the Primeval Kings became a high-level PvE area.

I still fail to see how PvP affects PvE in Factions any more than it does already in Prophecies.

Most so-called "RPG" videogames nowadays have little of the Role-Playing in it. If you really want an RPG, play a pen-and-paper game like Dungeons and Dragons. If you want real grind, play another MMO. Arenanet stated that this was to be a CORPG, or "Competitive Online Role-Playing Game". That's right, competitive. As in Player versus Player.

I really think that pvp is froced on pve players. One does not have to llook to far to see it. You have to chosse a side. You can't even do the story based mossions with out even a taking a side. Pvp is no longer an opation but forced.

As for rpg I can get stanard game terms for you! When look at them you really cannot class GW as RPG.

Savio · Mar 29, 2006, 01:39 AM // 01:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

You have to chosse a side.

In several single-player RPGs, you choose a side too. Example - in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, you can choose Light or Dark side. Doesn't make it PvP.

Quote:

You can't even do the story based mossions with out even a mission.

Um... of course you can't do a mission without a mission.

Quote:

As for rpg I can get stadard game terms for you! When look at them you really cannot class GW as RPG.

Get those standard game terms for me. You'll find that in video games, the term RPG can mean a variety of things.

Ascension · Mar 29, 2006, 01:41 AM // 01:41

Thank you for the clearification, Savio.

I was delighted to get my Professor POST RANK (duh?) as I haven't losted around here in rougly 5 months. I like to get my posts with grammar, spelling, and punctation wrapped up in a more involved process then some of the chatter spewed out.

In terms of me speaking about the economic goals of Anet, it's what they've said up-front. Also, any game of this genre is an RPG as you are in the ROLE of your CHARACTER PLAYING in a GAME. But please note all MMORPG referances were to WoW. Guild Wars is not in that classic MMORPG category as it lacks a monthly fee.

jpsantos20 · Mar 29, 2006, 01:45 AM // 01:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Savio

Um... of course you can't do a mission without a mission.

Now thats just funny heheheh

Minus Sign · Mar 29, 2006, 01:58 AM // 01:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kali Ma

Oh, ok then...

The following is a direct quote from Gaile Gray, taken in the Marketplace D1 on 3/24 of the FPE:

"No, you cannot do quests in an area controlled by another faction. That is why you want to help to gain that control."

Here's the link to the original: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...d.php?t=142804
It's in the first screen capture, toward the bottom.

(Should be interesting to watch what spin gets put on this one...)

And...Anet shoots their foot off with a rocket launcher...I'm going to read that conversation in hopes that there is a saving grace, but that just seriously pissed me off.

Edit:RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO. Unfortunately; nothing more than that; no follow-up responses, no answeres as to how difficult/possible it will be to change you/your guilds Faction if you so choose.

This worries me...

Weezer_Blue · Mar 29, 2006, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ecksor

Topic. Do you get this vibe too or is it just me and my guild? My guild is a PvE guild, and with the release of the Factions Preview Event, we think that Anet is almost forcing the PvE gamers to PvP just to unlock more PvE places. I know this is what it is like with UW and FoW, but one faction could take over the ENTIRE land, and the PvE gamers wouldn't be able to PvE where they wanted to. Well, I was just throwing this out there and seeing if anyone else thought this.

haaaaaaaaaaaahahahahah! haaaa! haaahaahaa! haha...haha...heh..hehe...ha...

sorry...sorry... too much irony.