Curse

TabascoSauce · Oct 02, 2007, 05:18 PM // 17:18

Maybe a clearer way of phrasing would be to say that if skill > time, then rewards for skill should be > those for time?

Thanks!
TabascoSauce

Hyper Cutter · Oct 02, 2007, 05:20 PM // 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mordakai

I have no problem with requiring "elite" Hero Armor to be needed. After all, we have to have "eilte" character armor to be shown, correct? Is this a Hall of Monuments, or Hall of Everything?

If they require armor upgrades for heroes, they should at least show the hero in upgraded armor. Also, they need to get rid of that generic animal statue and show what our pets actually are...

And allowing greens into Valor would go a long way towards making it not suck.

Str0b0 · Oct 02, 2007, 05:23 PM // 17:23

I agree with the weapons section. I was looking forward to putting my hard earned Torment Scythe up there but noooo. I have to put a lame Destroyer skin that is five times easier to get.

Loviatar · Oct 02, 2007, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by thezed

Account based mini customization is needed, and more weapons in Valor would be nice.

But your assumption that "We all want it to be account based and not character based." is WAY off. The HoM should remain character based. My mesmer i have played for a total of 12 hours should not get credit for the 5000+ hours i have put into my warrior.

they have already stated that the minis will be corrected to account based but it is a low priority at the time.

they stated the correction would be retroactive covering all pets already done

another vote for character based as it is a monument to what that character achieved not the account.

that is why each character has their own hall

Vinraith · Oct 02, 2007, 05:34 PM // 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by TabascoSauce

Maybe a clearer way of phrasing would be to say that if skill > time, then rewards for skill should be > those for time?

Thanks!
TabascoSauce

That I can agree with.

Still, Anet really painted themselves into a corner with that initial game design. If you make a game where skill is actually more important than time spent, how do you keep skilled players playing? How do you keep adding content if the power curve is flat? What's the motivation for players to play for thousands of hours if they get nothing of any substance for the effort?

I think they originally though most people would play the game for a few hundred hours and move on, the community they got is very different from the community they envisioned. I'm not necessarily defending the direction the game has taken, but I can understand how it got here. To be honest, if they were going to keep the 1000+ hour component of the community happy without some kind of massive overhaul of the game design (ie raising the level cap) I don't know what else they could have done. In game effects for title grind is basically just a way of providing greater power for greater time spent while, at least nominally, keeping the impact minor enough that the rewards for skill are still more substantial than the rewards for time spent. I think that was the idea, at least.

MudBone · Oct 02, 2007, 05:35 PM // 17:35

I agree with 90% of the respondents to this thread, why would I want my LvL 2 mules tied to the HoM, I also think that I should be able to display my two bows(greens) that I worked hard(grind) to get.

Shadowmoon · Oct 02, 2007, 05:42 PM // 17:42

Curruntly I like how hall is set up as it is now. yeah account based mini sounds like a needed improvement, but how valor works I like it. I have to agree that only destroyer weapons should lead to unlocks, only other canidate would be tormented imo, but then you have to remember the mass dubing of armbraces. Even if they tell us that exploit was only used for mb a week before the banning, I beleive that was just PR CPR right before GW:ENs release. I'm right now sketical of the legitamacy of the average armbrace on the market today, and if a reward was added to a items that was known to be mass duped i would be disappointed. Do you honestly beleive every duped armbrace was removed from the game then?

cebalrai · Oct 02, 2007, 06:01 PM // 18:01

I think having a ton of different little HoM's is kind of silly. It's fiddly and fussy to say the least. I agree with the OP for the most part.

I'd like to see the HoM be a shrine to things I've accomplished as a *player*. I think that having to login as all 7 of my characters to see what I've done in this game is a disorganized royal pain.

Also, my most precious weapons are almost all golds. Why can't those be enshrined?

Divinus Stella · Oct 02, 2007, 06:02 PM // 18:02

I was hoping that it would be an account based representation of a players experience and skill to carry into GW2.

Instead it's just a single characters armour and titles, but anet never admits mistakes so i think it'll just stay crap.

Mordakai · Oct 02, 2007, 06:04 PM // 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hyper Cutter

If they require armor upgrades for heroes, they should at least show the hero in upgraded armor. Also, they need to get rid of that generic animal statue and show what our pets actually are...

And allowing greens into Valor would go a long way towards making it not suck.

Agree with both these points. Although, if they get rid of the generic animal companion, could you just enter one non-"elite" pet, or could you have a whole zoo?

That might be what Anet was trying to avoid... (although if somoeone wants to level up all the animals... wow. That should be rewarded, right?)

zamial · Oct 02, 2007, 06:04 PM // 18:04

The HoM is designed as a "inheritance" system. With this take on the HoM, I wouldn't be at all suprized that the inheritee in gw2 will need to be human. there will be many playable races but it would stand to reason that my human necro did not mate with an asura......

Account based is not necessary. The HoM is for UNLOCKS only in gw2. It has been stated that the unlocks will not provide any advantage over a new player.
If all it does is unlock stuff who cares what weapon is displayed. I for 1 am happy that I will get ANYTHING for gw2 from gw1, think how many games in the past have done this..........

greendc27 · Oct 02, 2007, 06:05 PM // 18:05

There are only a couple things I really think need to be changed. I definitly think we should be able to display more weapons than just the destroyer ones.

Also, I know this has been brought up many times before but they really should find a way to let older characters at least have a chance to get the survivor title. As of right now characters that have been around since the beginning are at a disadvantage. Then people wouldn't be able to complain about it being character based since every character would have the same chance at all the titles.

Loviatar · Oct 02, 2007, 06:13 PM // 18:13

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greendc27

Also, I know this has been brought up many times before but they really should find a way to let older characters at least have a chance to get the survivor title. As of right now characters that have been around since the beginning are at a disadvantage.

exactly what is the disadvantage and how does it affect you?

they said GW1 UNLOCKS will not give any ADVANTAGE in GW2

if it will not give any advantage how is not having it a disadvantage?

EternalTempest · Oct 02, 2007, 06:20 PM // 18:20

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

exactly what is the disadvantage and how does it affect you?

they said GW1 UNLOCKS will not give any ADVANTAGE in GW2

if it will not give any advantage how is not having it a disadvantage?

But will give some sort of weapon skins, armor skins, useless in combat mini-pets. Same reason why people tend to work for festive items, they have some form of "Exclusiveness" to it. PvE's love this stuff. PvP's tend to not care, there looking for the combat advantage 1st (and cool looking is a good 2nd).

That aside, other then survior and Ldoa titles, older charaters are at an advantage (more bdays = more mini's, more likely to have more skills / elite unlocks, better mapping progression, etc).

Stormcloud · Oct 02, 2007, 06:20 PM // 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prowlinger

Dear Gaile/ Andrew:

Nobody likes the HoM current design.

Really? Thank you for letting me know cause as confused as I get sometimes I actually thought I liked it.

I mean wow thank you so much for setting me straight.

greendc27 · Oct 02, 2007, 06:21 PM // 18:21

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

exactly what is the disadvantage and how does it affect you?

they said GW1 UNLOCKS will not give any ADVANTAGE in GW2

if it will not give any advantage how is not having it a disadvantage?

Maybe disadvantage was the wrong word, all I meant is that it would give people with older characters the same opportunity as a character that was created today. To be perfectly honest I don't care about that title too much, the point I was trying to make was that if they did that people wouldn't be able to make as much of an argument for an account based hom.

Kahlindra · Oct 02, 2007, 06:24 PM // 18:24

Absolutely agree about the weapons, especially as it is account-based... my necromancer won't be displaying her Destroyer shield now, will she? Would be much better to have a different selection of weapons, tormented and greens for example, so that you can have a good selection for your class and make a really classy display.

I was skeptical about character-based until I actually saw it in action; even the characters I don't play much don't really have too crappy a hall, because you get the 'hero' monuments for completing the campaigns, and they have the best statues! Lich statue ftw. Plus I have a 15k set and a mini on each character and that looks great in the hall. Ok maybe some people don't have that, but for a bunch of characters with only a few maxed titles between them, my alts actually have pretty cool halls. Maybe I have low expectations, haha.

Additionally, my main has SO MUCH STUFF that displaying the whole thing in one hall would be impossible. Unless they remade the HoM to be a huge palace, with different rooms for each character (all in one instance). If all my characters achievements had to be displayed in that completion/carto/skillhunter etc. bit that exists now, then it would be a complete mess.

So yeah... if you haven't seen it in action or tried it out, you really should; as stated above the only thing that makes a difference is the customisation of the minis, so avoid that if you want to. But give it a try and see how it actually looks. It's quite fun.

Only gripes= lack of weapons and the fact that my armour colour bugged on nearly every character. Boo hoo!

As for the inheritance thing.... I can't even get my head round it yet. I usually make and delete a few experimental characters before sticking with the perfect one, so I hope there is a good system for allocating the inheritances.

Vinraith · Oct 02, 2007, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamial

The HoM is designed as a "inheritance" system. With this take on the HoM, I wouldn't be at all suprized that the inheritee in gw2 will need to be human. there will be many playable races but it would stand to reason that my human necro did not mate with an asura......

Maybe they adopted?

Lady Ana Stacia · Oct 02, 2007, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prowlinger

Dear Gaile/ Andrew:

The community is in limbo about GWEN's HoM section. Many of us, including myself, are waiting to do anything with the HoM (besides just applying the tapestries) until Anet makes changes.

Why?

Nobody likes the HoM current design. We all want it to be account based and not character based. Only destroyer weapons are allowed/saved in the weapon section but greens are not (and the destroyer weapons are far from being liked). There are still numerous issues in placement of heroes and pets... they don't show up correctly. The design should allow any and all heroes to be shown but maybe only 5 on the pedestal at a time. Titles are only shown for the character that has grinded there and spent alot of time to do so.

the Mad King dost cometh soon!

Please don't post something and ASSUME that everyone agrees with you. If anyone had truly thought about it, listened to what anet said about it before the preview weekend, logic says it would be charactor based.

I prefer the charactor based system, and so for me wow I actually like the HoM's current set up. I have a ton of weapons that I would like to display but oh well, life goes on. How often really will you be dragging people in to ooh and aah over all your great achievements and prestigious hall?

The only thing I would like to see changed is the mini's and they have already stated it will be changed to account based eventually.

Btw, all those screaming for acct wide? No thanks, 1 hall is full enough without being able to display 2/3rds of it so why would I want to even attempt to cram 10 chars worth of stuff in one?

Personally my opinion they look sharp and clean the way they are currently.

Kattar · Oct 02, 2007, 06:43 PM // 18:43

I don't know if this has been mentioned yet and I by no means want to get involved in a flame war, but has any thought been given to letting us buy more than one copy of GW2 to bring more than one character into the new game? This way, if you want to get the benefits of more than one of your GW1 characters' Hall of Monuments you can, but you have to spend more money buying more copies of GW2 and create separate accounts. This would allow the players to get the benefits of more than one character's Hall of Monuments if they want and A-Net would make more money without creating too much more hassle for them. This seems like a simple solution to me.