Curse

mikez himself · Oct 09, 2007, 06:00 PM // 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

I think you're missing the point of GW, when it was supposed to be skill over time.
Wanna example? Let's say you want Ebon Vanguard armor. You need 26k. You do all quests, dungeons and you'll be r3, r4 in best case. So what do you do to get to R5? That's right, grind. Now you're probably going to jump out with retarded 'grind is optional'. But guess what? If you don't want to grind, you're missing out the GWEN content. If you want that armor you HAVE to grind.

Should lvl 1 warrior in pre be able to display R12 hero when he's never been to HA?
Should some Dervish be able to display Ally of the Luxons when he's never been to Cantha?

Which part of 'grind-based' you don't understand? AFAIK survivor isn't grind-based.

enough of the blasphemy

this man wins

/signed.

ValaOfTheFens · Oct 09, 2007, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

I think you're missing the point of GW, when it was supposed to be skill over time.
Wanna example? Let's say you want Ebon Vanguard armor. You need 26k. You do all quests, dungeons and you'll be r3, r4 in best case. So what do you do to get to R5? That's right, grind. Now you're probably going to jump out with retarded 'grind is optional'. But guess what? If you don't want to grind, you're missing out the GWEN content. If you want that armor you HAVE to grind.

So I guess you didn't get the Vanguard Patrol blessing even once? Getting a new armor set isn't a vital aspect of gameplay. What content is unavailable w/o grind?

Quote:

Should lvl 1 warrior in pre be able to display R12 hero when he's never been to HA?
Should some Dervish be able to display Ally of the Luxons when he's never been to Cantha?

Umm...the Kurzick/Luxon titles are linked to your guild's faction, which is shared throughout your account anyway. So it makes sense for your toons to be able to all display your achievements in your faction. I've never understood why Balthazar faction is shared between toon but since I haven't gotten bored enough with PvE to PvP regularly it doesn't concern me.

Quote:

Which part of 'grind-based' you don't understand? AFAIK survivor isn't grind-based.

In most cases it is grind. I know some people who got it w/o even knowing it existed but not many. I have r1 on my Mesmer and grinded mercilessly on Istan and now I'm going to get r2 and r3 by killing Jade Brotherhood in HM. Getting Legendary Survivor just by playing the game is just too risky. Lag, noobs, and jerks who won't skip cut scenes when minions are rampaging can kill you. Heck...I heard that the last cut scene in Vizunah Square where Shiro "kills" you counts as a death. So getting LS is like 90% grind and 10% luck.

BlackSephir · Oct 09, 2007, 07:19 PM // 19:19

Quote:

So I guess you didn't get the Vanguard Patrol blessing even once? Getting a new armor set isn't a vital aspect of gameplay.

I don't know how you came to conclusion that I didn't get EV blessing even once, probably the same way you realized that survivor is grind-based title.
Next thing I know, I'll wake up in the morning and Explorer or/and Protector will be grind-based titles... or at least people will say so.

Quote:

What content is unavailable w/o grind?

Um, it's in my post that you quoted. Read it again.

Quote:

Umm...the Kurzick/Luxon titles are linked to your guild's faction, which is shared throughout your account anyway.

So? Why can't they be character based? Your new D won't have it because *dun dun dunnn* he didn't earn it, right? You want r5 friend of luxons/kurzicks? Earn it yourself, right?

Quote:

So it makes sense for your toons to be able to all display your achievements in your faction.

No, it's not. You can even get max rank of friend of x on a character that didn't get any factions. Blasphemy!

Quote:

In most cases it is grind. I know some people who got it w/o even knowing it existed but not many. I have r1 on my Mesmer and grinded mercilessly on Istan and now I'm going to get r2 and r3 by killing Jade Brotherhood in HM. Getting Legendary Survivor just by playing the game is just too risky. Lag, noobs, and jerks who won't skip cut scenes when minions are rampaging can kill you. Heck...I heard that the last cut scene in Vizunah Square where Shiro "kills" you counts as a death. So getting LS is like 90% grind and 10% luck.

The truth is, survivor doesn't require grind at all. It requires you to get enough exp without dying. So, unless 'grind' changed from 'boring, repeatve action that does not require any skill but time and isn't challenging at all' to something else then no, survival isn't grindable

ValaOfTheFens · Oct 09, 2007, 07:41 PM // 19:41

............................................______ __
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,
.........................,/...............................................” :,
.....................,?........................... ...........................\,
.................../.................................................. .........,}
................./.................................................. ....,:`^`..}
.............../.................................................. .,:”........./
..............?.....__............................ .............:`.........../
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`. ......._/
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../
...,,,___.\`~,......“~.,....................`... ..}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|........... ...`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,.............. .............`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\........ ..._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\

This is a circular argument. We both think we're right and so I doubt we're doing anything to change any minds. Let's just agree to disagree. k?

freaky naughty · Oct 09, 2007, 08:37 PM // 20:37

GREATEST IDEA EVER.

Maybe if this happened other people would have more time to pursue the titles that actually take some skill.

/Signed an uber number of times

lyra_song · Oct 09, 2007, 08:54 PM // 20:54

well, just my opinion on the Account based titles (except the Luxon/Cantha faction).

PvP based like Fame, is based on what the player is doing, not the character.

The player can swap out a PvP char from one class to another. The player can fill in many types of roles using his characters. Its a title for the player, not the character.

I dont see PvP as achievements of the character since your character does not develop in the storyline. In fact PvP can be done without entering the storyline, therefore those are account based.

The PvE grind titles are part of your developing your character's storyline. You develop your character to become a survivor, to become a cartographer, to become a guardian, etc.

BlackSephir · Oct 09, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

So, you can develop your character's storyline by making him for example Explorer but you can't by making him Mighty Gladiator?
Yeah, makes sense.
Oh, w8, it duznt make any goddamn sense.

Trying to justify something with storyline over mechanics = big, fat PHAIL

Mangione · Oct 09, 2007, 10:28 PM // 22:28

/signed.

At least for the titles like Wisdom and Treasure Hunter.
There's no particular skill involved in opening chests or identifying items, no different technique from character to character as it might be titles like protector or explorer.

So I don't see the need to keep Wisdom and Treasure Hunter character based.

Good idea.

(And I like the posts by BlackSephir, BTW... lots of good reasoning)

Pompeyfan · Oct 10, 2007, 12:59 AM // 00:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

The point of boring repetetive grinding is for those who wish to do it none of this is forced on any player but some players want to force their wishes on everyone else.

It is at the moment a free choice what titles each player wants to gain.
Some players to make their experience more fun want to short change everyone else.

What if someone wants to complete the game with each character class just for the challenge and they want the same opportunity to grind as often as they like for as many years as they like.
Who the heck are you to take that away because you want something.
The world doesnt run by what you want and neither should the game.

Some things are shared storage, items money etc it doesnt bother me because its just a game mechanic and because it would have been very hard to do it any other way.
Using that fact to justify account wide skills doesnt wash because if thats so then ok all my characters are able to change primary profession.

My necro is a ranger and my ranger is a necro can use either armor has the hits and energy the others have,
That's just as logical.

Have what you want but don't take away from others to get it

Isn't that exactly what you're suggesting? If not account based then have quest rewards high enough (or enough quests) for people to max titles without boring grind then you have a choice - do quests and get the title or grind and get the title, everyone's happy then.

Not everyone wants titles to pose in outposts for people to see how great they are - some want titles that actually improve the Pve aspect of the game and make it more fun. Take skill hunter - it's useful so that all elites are unlocked to use on heroes, but what is the point of capping a skill on a character that can't or won't use it? Surely as long as the player has capped all the elites then whether they've done it one one character or across 4 or 5 should be immaterial - the player themselves still earned it and did the work.

I notice one of the biggest complaints is that characters should only be able to display what they earn't - well thats bollox as the characters themselves have earned sod all - it's the person playing them thats done the work - the toon themselves would still be L1 in starter armour if not for the player. Anyway what difference does it make if someone wants to display a maxed LB title earned on a Ranger (or in most cases earned across the whole account) - the player themselves have still earned the title the same way a warrior in LA posing in his shiny new FoW armour might not have earned the ecto/shards on his warrior, but the player probably still earned them from using a 55 monk or drops across all characters.

lyra_song · Oct 10, 2007, 01:27 AM // 01:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

So, you can develop your character's storyline by making him for example Explorer but you can't by making him Mighty Gladiator?
Yeah, makes sense.
Oh, w8, it duznt make any goddamn sense.

Trying to justify something with storyline over mechanics = big, fat PHAIL

If only pve characters existed in PvE, yes.

If there was a complete absence of PvP characters and PvP only accounts, i would agree with you.

But once you take into account those players, account based titles for pvp makes more sense.

With PvP as integrated into the design of the game, you must allow players the flexibility of rerolling.

I MP I · Oct 10, 2007, 01:30 AM // 01:30

/signed Even though it'll likely not happen

gremlin · Oct 10, 2007, 07:38 AM // 07:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pompeyfan

Isn't that exactly what you're suggesting? If not account based then have quest rewards high enough (or enough quests) for people to max titles without boring grind then you have a choice - do quests and get the title or grind and get the title, everyone's happy then.

Not everyone wants titles to pose in outposts for people to see how great they are - some want titles that actually improve the Pve aspect of the game and make it more fun. Take skill hunter - it's useful so that all elites are unlocked to use on heroes, but what is the point of capping a skill on a character that can't or won't use it? Surely as long as the player has capped all the elites then whether they've done it one one character or across 4 or 5 should be immaterial - the player themselves still earned it and did the work.

I notice one of the biggest complaints is that characters should only be able to display what they earn't - well thats bollox as the characters themselves have earned sod all - it's the person playing them thats done the work - the toon themselves would still be L1 in starter armour if not for the player. Anyway what difference does it make if someone wants to display a maxed LB title earned on a Ranger (or in most cases earned across the whole account) - the player themselves have still earned the title the same way a warrior in LA posing in his shiny new FoW armour might not have earned the ecto/shards on his warrior, but the player probably still earned them from using a 55 monk or drops across all characters.

Preamble before the ramble

Can we not find some common ground or compromise
Maybe players could refuse titles or as has been suggested make them less boring and repetative that sounds good to me, hell I might even go for some if that was so.

Let me reply by saying how I view and play the game because its why I feel this way about the titles.

I love rpg style games and I have been role playing for years and years, never lost my love of it.

Now ok gw isnt a pure rpg but it has lots of rpg elements to make it close enough for me.
I can also accept the crossover between characters, common storage moving weapons between characters etc.
I play that in my head as if all my characters are in a common guild and share stuff, hey its role playing.

Some things the game doesnt share and some it shouldnt share.

Yes the player achieves everything and the "toon" is the puppet of the player, however if you follow that logic then you must follow it 100% not just enough to chieve the ends of making "grind titles" account based.

So
Character skills all shared not just unlocked
Elites shared ditto
Capaigns shared
Map exploration shared
Towns unlocked shared
and anything else you can imagine

Ranger tames a pet black moa ok every character that changes secondary to ranger has the black moa ok, well hey you say you achieved it so its on all your toons.

I understand that to some people its vital that once they max all the skills for one character they should be able to rinse and repeat for all characters without repeating the really boringly repetetive ones.

Its just that for me it removes some of the role playing aspect so I am against it.
I cannot believe that I am the only player in the entire game that doesnt to some level role play the character and play each character slightly differently.
Its the only way "for me" to not become bored with a game.

Lets just take one title drunkenness.
I would like to have differences between my characters and I was intending just for fun to take the drunken title for my ritualist and have stored large amounts of alcohol ready for that.
I decided that ritualists deal with spirits all the time and need to drink, the blindfold headgear is to survive the headaches that come from the drinking.
Thats a role playing decision.

I dont want all my characters to have the title, yes I know I dont have to display it but I know its there.
So to get what you want you force everyone to have it too.
Suppose later I decide on the same title for another character I cannot go for it because I already have it, that problem will happen for all the tiles made account based.

Secondly will there not be an effect on the price of alcohol, not so much need for it if the title goes account based, same for any other resources needed in this way.

apologies for the length of post I will try

to make them shorter in fiture

bilateralrope · Oct 10, 2007, 08:53 AM // 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

I do not want to do any of the ridiculous "to me" grinding quests" I do not want sweet tooth drunkenness or any of them.
I am not arguing for me I am arguing for a principle.
That to get what you want you are willing to take away from others.

And by making these titles account based, what exactly are we taking away from the people who only want them for one character ?

Quote:

Its a game some people will have more time others more skill or luck or friends etc.
You want to bring the whole game down to make it work for you lets face it you want this so every character you run can max all the titles.

The only thing that the grind titles show is that one person has had more time playing the game that another.

And how will it bring the game down ?

Quote:

Be honest that is it, you resent those who play all the hours of the day and night and come out in your opinion ahead of you.
So you have to set it up so that you can do the same.
Then someone with even less time will want the rest altering.

Even if there are people who would want stupid changes made later because this came through, why does this mean that this suggestion is a bad one ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ValaOfTheFens

There is no required grind in GW except the SS title track and in a small way the Kurzick/Luxon track. You don't have to get a really high ranking in any title track to advance the plotlines of any game.

True, but some titles do directly effect our gameplay.

Quote:

I think ANet needs to either increase the faction rewards for the Luxon quests or add a new one so you can get 10k factions w/o ABing, getting a priests blessing, or doing those long, boring repeatable quests.

Lets discuss our thoughts on this in another thread please.

Quote:

I think some people are missing the point of titles. Titles are about individual accomplishments. The Kurzick/Luxon titles are account-wide b/c they emcompass more than just the PvE aspect of the game.

Can you then tell me why Lucky and Unlucky are account based ?

Unless there is something I'm missing, they are only earned by things in PvE.

Quote:

Should a perma Pre toon be able to display Holy Lightbringer when they've never been to Elona?

It does nothing, so why not ?

Quote:

Should a toon who's died over 1,000 times be able to display Legendary Survivor?

Survivor is one of the titles I classed as failable, meaning its not one I'm asking to be changed here. But even if it was, what iss the harm in it being displayed on a different character ?

Quote:

Should an Elonian or Canthan toon be able to display Legendary Defender of Ascalon when they arrived years after the Searing?

Again, not one of the titles I'm asking to be changed. And again I'm not seeing any harm in doing so.

Quote:

The answer is no.

Why is the answer no ?

I can see no harm in these examples here, because they do nothing except show that you have some experience on other characters.

A better example might of been a low level character using a Sunspear skill. But that can already be done with people using the Factions PvE only skills, and I still haven't seen anyone attempt to show that this would cause any harm. So since there is no harm, why should we be against it ?

And here is another question. Lets say I decide I want the Wisdom title on one character. So I go and acquire all the unidentified golds with different characters, and only ID them with the character getting the title. Why should only that character be able to display them when the other characters did the majority of the work ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pompeyfan

Isn't that exactly what you're suggesting? If not account based then have quest rewards high enough (or enough quests) for people to max titles without boring grind then you have a choice - do quests and get the title or grind and get the title, everyone's happy then.

This would be acceptable if the quest rewards were fully retroactive for the players that had already completed the quests.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

Some things the game doesnt share and some it shouldnt share.

And this thread is asking for ANET to change some of the things that aren't shared to being shared.

Quote:

Yes the player achieves everything and the "toon" is the puppet of the player, however if you follow that logic then you must follow it 100% not just enough to chieve the ends of making "grind titles" account based.

There is a clear difference between grind titles where your doing the same thing over and over, and task titles where each character does each task once. Currently while I can justify making the grind titles account based, my reasoning doesn't work for the task based things. So that is where I stop.

So why should we go further than what can be justified ?

Quote:

Lets just take one title drunkenness.
I would like to have differences between my characters and I was intending just for fun to take the drunken title for my ritualist and have stored large amounts of alcohol ready for that.
I decided that ritualists deal with spirits all the time and need to drink, the blindfold headgear is to survive the headaches that come from the drinking.
Thats a role playing decision.

I dont want all my characters to have the title, yes I know I dont have to display it but I know its there.

If your role-playing suspension of disbelief can't handle the drunkard title becoming account based, how does it handle the lucky and unlucky titles now ?

Quote:

So to get what you want you force everyone to have it too.
Suppose later I decide on the same title for another character I cannot go for it because I already have it, that problem will happen for all the tiles made account based.

That doesn't stop you performing the tasks again, it just makes it a bit harder to keep track. But if your roleplaying you probably would want to keep your drunk character drunk all the time, even after obtaining the title otherwise he would be a sobered up drunk, not a real one.

Quote:

Secondly will there not be an effect on the price of alcohol, not so much need for it if the title goes account based, same for any other resources needed in this way.

Maybe the price of alcohol from events will go down unless ANET reduces the drop rate, but the merchant stuff should have its price stay constant.

Quote:

apologies for the length of post I will try

to make them shorter in fiture

No need to apologies for a long post with content, it shows your thinking about it.

RhanoctJocosa · Oct 10, 2007, 09:20 AM // 09:20

If you people think GW has grind you have no idea.

That is all.

Perfected Shadow · Oct 10, 2007, 09:22 AM // 09:22

Woot a new char based => account based titles thread. I'd like to play multiple primary profs without compromising title acquisition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

Yes the player achieves everything and the "toon" is the puppet of the player, however if you follow that logic then you must follow it 100% not just enough to chieve the ends of making "grind titles" account based.

So
Character skills all shared not just unlocked
Elites shared ditto
Capaigns shared
Map exploration shared
Towns unlocked shared
and anything else you can imagine

This thread is about account based titles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

Its just that for me it removes some of the role playing aspect so I am against it.
I cannot believe that I am the only player in the entire game that doesnt to some level role play the character and play each character slightly differently.
Its the only way "for me" to not become bored with a game.

Role-play your heart out, titles becoming account based does not restrict you from pretending.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

Suppose later I decide on the same title for another character I cannot go for it because I already have it, that problem will happen for all the tiles made account based.

Using your awesome role-playing capacity, you can make it happen. You can still earn 1337500 exp without dying even if LS is unlocked on your account, you can still cap every elite skill even if ESH is unlocked on your account,..., you can still do x even if title y is already unlocked on your account.

The arguments for opposing the change look weak to me.

Oh yeah, /SIGNED

Ferret · Oct 10, 2007, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by gremlin

What great logic someone has limited playing time so make the titles account based.
Ok suppose I only have time to play 1 hour a month can we just roll the whole game down to say 6 missions then I can finish everything in 6 months.
Ok that's a mad idea but I am getting mad at a lot of the posts here.

I do not want to do any of the ridiculous "to me" grinding quests" I do not want sweet tooth drunkenness or any of them.
I am not arguing for me I am arguing for a principle.
That to get what you want you are willing to take away from others.

Its a game some people will have more time others more skill or luck or friends etc.
You want to bring the whole game down to make it work for you lets face it you want this so every character you run can max all the titles.

Be honest that is it, you resent those who play all the hours of the day and night and come out in your opinion ahead of you.
So you have to set it up so that you can do the same.
Then someone with even less time will want the rest altering.

be an adult not a kidult play the game fairly and if you dont want to grind then don't.

I am an adult, and as such, have to work, look after a house, pay bills and do all manner of other things. Therefore, i have limited time.

I'm not sure what kinda point you're trying to make, in fact the wording of your post is fairly confusing.

I work hard in GW, my main char spends the time to get titles and do all the missions. My other nine characters also work through all the missions, but adding the time to get titles on top for each becomes a rather tiresome and overly time consuming process. With all but 2 characters characters i have already completed Factions and Nightfall and done Prophecies with my main.

Yes, i could decide that maybe i should not use 10 chars (one for each profession), but i like to try them all out. If you note, i did limit the title choices to those such as EoTN and SS/LB. Mainly as these are required to obtain access to certain areas of the game/NPC's, whereas most others are not.
My main has the Protector titles for all three chapters, but i'm not asking them to be account-based. They represent time and skill in the game, but are not required to gain access to NPC's.

I dont really care about having a max title to show on any char, but having to grind to rank 5 for ten chars with 4 groups is a bit much...i mean, 40 times, come on!!!

I do not resent those that play all hours of the day and night, that is their call and they get many other rewards for doing so. Even if i could, i wouldnt, as it'd be unhealthy to do so.

You really shouldnt make assumptions about people and i was solely expressing my support, for my reasons. You may not agree, that is fine, but that is no excuse to make judgements about my character.

Peace,

Ferret

bilateralrope · Oct 10, 2007, 09:42 AM // 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhanoctJocosa

If you people think GW has grind you have no idea.

That is all.

So Guild Wars shouldn't be improved because there are some games that are worse ?

How does that make any sense ?

BlackSephir · Oct 10, 2007, 09:55 AM // 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by RhanoctJocosa

If you people think GW has grind you have no idea.

That is all.

You have to get to R8 Sunspear in Nightfall to even progress in storyline
You fail at internets.
Good day.

wu is me · Oct 10, 2007, 11:02 AM // 11:02

It seems to me that one of the reasons people oppose this is that they seem to think this article is about grinding less for the same titles....
I can't see how people who enjoy grind would be opposed to this idea... i mean if you grind on more than one character then, under the current system, you wouldn't be able to show off your uber surplus of time, whereas with an account based system you would be able to show off all the grind from all your characters, given that the requirements for maxing the title would be raised.

On the note of "roleplaying" which seems alien and irrational to me, my first thoughts were that, the roleplaying experience would be improved with account based titles because you get to share your love with many characters, it wouldn't matter which character got smashed etc, who says your characters have to have static personalities!. But like i said lol... it is IMO a totally whacked/obsessive compulsive concept, and yet.. it still sound basis for argument oO.

gremlin · Oct 10, 2007, 11:42 AM // 11:42

I think we have given the powers in the game something to work with here, although we would be better to refine our views till we come up with something more or less cohesive to present to arenanet or they may well do nothing.

More than happy to go with a majority view on this one because I for one am now posting with more passion than logic and soon may be posting incoherent drivel "if I havn't already reached that point"

Would it be fair to say that

1/ we would like all the titles to be achievable in difficult but interesting ways
if not possible then

2/ remove some of the repetition by making those that are very depressingly boring and repetetive account based so you only have to do them once.
or

3/ Something else should be done as the present situation doesn't please anyone very much.

4/ Some titles however grinding must be considered player based because by their nature they are notable achievements.

If this isnt reasonable I think some of you should come up with a similar post that we can all "hopefully" aggree to as a compromise solution to an otherwise hopeless argument.