Curse

Isileth · Nov 12, 2007, 06:25 PM // 18:25

The problem with having to redo quests and such, is that when you take 5 chars through the game, you have already done them all 5 times. Let alone having to do them another however many extra times on each char to max the title.

Assuming you are at R5 after doing everything thats 3 NM Hero's Handbooks + 3 HM Hero's Handbooks.
7 times just for 1 char to max 1 title. 28 times for all titles. 140 times for 5 chars.

The reason the titles arent considered skill based is because given enough time, even the worst player could max it. Even if they can only get 1 point each time in HM. With enough time they would max it.

Something like protector has a set objective that has to be completed. If you fail that obj you have to start over. If you arent good enough to do it, without improving, you wont get it.

Red_Dragon56 · Nov 12, 2007, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Quote:

Edit to clarify: I am asking for the following titles to be changed:
- Drunkard
- Sweet Tooth
- Treasure Hunter
- Wisdom
- Lightbringer
- Sunspear
- Asura
- Deldrimor
- Ebon Vanguard
- Norn

/signed for non-bolded

The 6 that are bolded are storyline-specific. Also if you have max on one character you could access the 15k sellers etc. Without doing any work with that specific character.
The rest though I agree.

Oh, and add the Pre-Searing (LDOA) title to that list (deathlevel grind I feel doesn't take THAT much skill).

lyra_song · Nov 12, 2007, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

The problem with having to redo quests and such, is that when you take 5 chars through the game, you have already done them all 5 times. Let alone having to do them another however many extra times on each char to max the title.

Assuming you are at R5 after doing everything thats 3 NM Hero's Handbooks + 3 HM Hero's Handbooks.
7 times just for 1 char to max 1 title. 28 times for all titles. 140 times for 5 chars.

And whats wrong with that?

It's repetitive. Thats the problem.

The title isn't the problem or the what its attached to or that its pve based or account based.

The problem is that its boring and repetitive.

I propose a compromise.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10219511

freekedoutfish · Nov 12, 2007, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

The reason the titles arent considered skill based is because given enough time, even the worst player could max it. Even if they can only get 1 point each time in HM. With enough time they would max it.

Something like protector has a set objective that has to be completed. If you fail that obj you have to start over. If you arent good enough to do it, without improving, you wont get it.

I could argue that given enough time you can achieve protector and guardian. Both of which I have on all 3 campaigns, so I know.

Those titles can be hard and while they do require some skill, you dont have to be an amazing player to achieve them. You can also get run through alot of missons for protector and even some hard mode ones.

The issue is that its all down to opinion.

I could argue that all titles dont require skill and given enough time you can accomplish any of them, and thats pretty much true.

Does that mean we should make protector and guardian titles account based?

Obviously not, becase that would be missleading to others!

Although I now await the person who will try to argue that its ok to have protector and gaurdian be account based and then I will just point and laugh.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

And whats wrong with that?

It's repetitive. Thats the problem.

The title isn't the problem or the what its attached to or that its pve based or account based.

The problem is that its boring and repetitive.

I propose a compromise.

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10219511

What aspect of GWs doesnt need to be repeated to on degree or another? I think you'l find most of it gets repeated everytime you make a character. Should we make missions and quests account based?

Isileth · Nov 12, 2007, 06:48 PM // 18:48

I like that idea actually Lyra, however I would include the title effects being maxed. Because that would still leave a disadvantage for those with multiple chars.

Otherwise its deffinately a nice soloution.

Still doesnt help for people who max different titles on different chars and so cant get KOABD. So I would still want something added to allow those players to display certain maxed titles across all chars.

*edit to include freekedoutfish's post*

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

I could argue that given enough time you can achieve protector and guardian. Both of which I have on all 3 campaigns, so I know.

But thats not true.
If player X cant beat bounus Z he will never be able to max the title. He cant slowly do bits of the bounus and then add it all together at the end. If they improve yes, which is what makes it skill.

But someone who is unable to complete it and doesnt improve will never be able to.

freekedoutfish · Nov 12, 2007, 08:24 PM // 20:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

But thats not true.
If player X cant beat bounus Z he will never be able to max the title. He cant slowly do bits of the bounus and then add it all together at the end. If they improve yes, which is what makes it skill.

But someone who is unable to complete it and doesnt improve will never be able to.

Ofcourse anyone can get protector or guardian, you just need to get run through it or join a decent PUG! In which case its not a sign of their skill, its a sign of someone elses.

So again, I could argue all titles dont require skill and just take time.

What about LDOA? Thats purely requires death leveling!

Isileth · Nov 12, 2007, 09:21 PM // 21:21

Yes but I wasnt counting outside factors, simply because that makes to many variables.

Of course if I got the England team to play in one of my Sunday games I would win. So does that mean football isnt skillful since I can get better players to do the work for me?

I could get someone else to control my character for a mission im stuck on for example. So it can only be based on assuming 1 single level of skill across the group. Assuming the skill of the group isnt high enough as a group they will never complete it if they dont improve.

As for LDOA having that across the account would mean you could get survivor AND LDOA. Which would cause a lot of problems about 1 campaign having more titles. So I feel thats best left as it is.

freekedoutfish · Nov 12, 2007, 11:42 PM // 23:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Yes but I wasnt counting outside factors, simply because that makes to many variables.

Of course if I got the England team to play in one of my Sunday games I would win. So does that mean football isnt skillful since I can get better players to do the work for me?

I could get someone else to control my character for a mission im stuck on for example. So it can only be based on assuming 1 single level of skill across the group. Assuming the skill of the group isnt high enough as a group they will never complete it if they dont improve.
.

Whats the most realistic situation?

A player tries to complete a mission and bonus or on masters with henches and fails. They then try a few more times and cant do it.

Do they give up or try to use a PUG?

I would say using a PUG was the more realistic answer. So its not about taking lots of different variables into account, its about concidering the most likely situation.

In that case its safe to say alot of people have had help doing missions (including bonus and masters) at one time or another. Im not saying all have, but a big % will have.

That means a large % of players have used someone elses skills to help with a mission and to achieve protector and/or guardian. Also lot of missions really are either easy or their your basic kill, kill, kill mission.

Can you say that a basic killing mission is skill based, or just hack and slash and casting?

You cant 100% say that all missions are 100% skill based for that reason. Alot of missions are run for the player. Alot of missions are completed using PUGs and help. Alot of people use consumables to remove DP which make the misson easier.

All realistic and existing situations. Those things do happen!

For that very reason I can argue that not all missions and the protector title are 100% based on skill. Does that make the protector and gaurdian title a grind based title?

By your logic is does. I dont like saying that and I personally disgree with my own conclusion. But im going by your definition!

Your definition of a grind title, is one which doesnt require skill. It only requires time to do and achieve the end result. Am I right?

If I am, then we must include protector and guardian into your list of account based titles, because its not 100% skill based.

I say all this to try and show how the OP is flawed in some ways. Because people arent being rational. They are picking and choosing titles and calling them "grind" purely because they want the end result in an easier fashion.

Their not calling them "grind" out of rational thought. Because if they did think about it, they would realise grind is interconnected to all titles.

For that reason you cant pick and choose a select few and say "these should be account based because they have grind" and ignore the rest. If you argue one title involves grind then they must all involved grind.

But as you have admitted, we cant make all titles account based.

Titles like protector and guardian and LDOA and Survivor have to be individual because it make sense!

That then (IMO) means we have to keep these titles individual! You cant just pick and choose because it suits you!

wu is me · Nov 13, 2007, 06:24 AM // 06:24

Hows this for a definition: a grind based title is a title that may be progressed via the completion of non-unique tasks (ie absolutely no distinction whatsoever).

I think that should suffice as a formal definition of a grind based title.

Why this definition? because it means that each progressive stage of the title is a perfect substitute for every other stage, and thus, it would be simple to combine progress, from one player across multiple, distinct characters into a single title track.

You'll find that each title track suggested for changes follows this definition to the letter, and all those that do not, are not suggested.

freekedoutfish · Nov 13, 2007, 09:59 AM // 09:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by wu is me

Hows this for a definition: a grind based title is a title that may be progressed via the completion of non-unique tasks (ie absolutely no distinction whatsoever).

I think that should suffice as a formal definition of a grind based title.

Why this definition? because it means that each progressive stage of the title is a perfect substitute for every other stage, and thus, it would be simple to combine progress, from one player across multiple, distinct characters into a single title track.

You'll find that each title track suggested for changes follows this definition to the letter, and all those that do not, are not suggested.

That kind of works for the LB and SS titles, but not the GWEN titles. Atleast not if I understand you right. The reason being that the GWEN titles can be maxed by repeating quests and dungeons and filling books.

Where as the LB and SS titles are purely bounty hunting.

Mangione · Nov 13, 2007, 11:02 AM // 11:02

Oh, well...
don't remember if I signed already... there are so many threads about making (SOME) pve titles account wide...

If this isn't already /signed by me, then

/signed.

MithranArkanere · Nov 13, 2007, 12:36 PM // 12:36

Then at least books should be added to all campaigns, to reward replaying all missions.

A good reward for those that help allies, friends and strangers.

freekedoutfish · Nov 13, 2007, 01:01 PM // 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Then at least books should be added to all campaigns, to reward replaying all missions.

A good reward for those that help allies, friends and strangers.

I actually suggested that in a thread, as a way to solve this issue, and it didnt get far!

Isileth · Nov 13, 2007, 01:55 PM // 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

*Snip*

Hence the reason I said you take the skill of the group as a whole. If the same group fails and doesnt improve they will never complete it. If they replace someone with a better play the skill level of the group rises.

That still makes it skill based, the level of skill required for the group doesnt need to be constant across it. But as long as, as a team, they have enough skill to pass it that makes it skill based.

Because noticing who is holding you back, adjusting builds and team composition is also skill based.

freekedoutfish · Nov 13, 2007, 02:15 PM // 14:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

Hence the reason I said you take the skill of the group as a whole. If the same group fails and doesnt improve they will never complete it. If they replace someone with a better play the skill level of the group rises.

That still makes it skill based, the level of skill required for the group doesnt need to be constant across it. But as long as, as a team, they have enough skill to pass it that makes it skill based.

Because noticing who is holding you back, adjusting builds and team composition is also skill based.

I completely agree with that! I was just trying to get this idea accross that you could still complete a mission at all levels, even with a bad player in your team.

That bad player then gets a free ride! But I do agree you can have skilfull teams too who do deserve that prestige. But I personally wouldnt always say a mission requires skill 100% of the time.

Especially those missions which can get run!

Isileth · Nov 13, 2007, 02:24 PM // 14:24

The point is they cant be grinded. If the team doesnt meet the skill level required they cant slowly do bits of it each turn.

Protect an NPC the first time.
Go kill an extra boss the second time.
Carry something to NPC Y the third time.

If they cant do it all in one go they cant grind out little bits of it.

freekedoutfish · Nov 13, 2007, 02:25 PM // 14:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isileth

The point is they cant be grinded. If the team doesnt meet the skill level required they cant slowly do bits of it each turn.

Protect an NPC the first time.
Go kill an extra boss the second time.
Carry something to NPC Y the third time.

If they cant do it all in one go they cant grind out little bits of it.

You've lost me in your logic, so Im not going to try and understand it. But im sure it makes sense to someone.

Isileth · Nov 13, 2007, 02:32 PM // 14:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by freekedoutfish

You've lost me in your logic, so Im not going to try and understand it. But im sure it makes sense to someone.

Well basically if the team as a whole isnt good enough to complete all objectives in one go, without improving, they will never achieve it.

Unlike a title where you can slowly claw your way up without skill. As with my previous example of the rep titles, even if you can only get 50 points before everyone hits 60DP in HM. Eventually with enough time you would max it.

Amon Warrior · Nov 13, 2007, 02:45 PM // 14:45

Shouldn't one of you guys start a discussion in Riverside Inn on Title grinding or something?

Your posts are well beyond the topic of discussion on the OP's suggestion, like 10 pages ago. There's people still trying to input their opinion specifically to what the thread *was* about.

Your discussion is undoubtedly interesting, Shouldn't it be taken to a better suited forum? There's a lot more users there anyway. I can only imagine the hundreds of pages that such a thread would bring...

Isileth · Nov 13, 2007, 02:56 PM // 14:56

Yeah your right Amon, sorry about that.

I also feel the OP summed up all the points very well, to the point that most questions being asked have already been answered.