Curse

dansamy · Aug 25, 2007, 06:31 AM // 06:31

All I know is that I will not buy GW:EN or GW2 if HoM stays the way it is now. You can not seriously expect me to believe that it's intentional to require rank 9 for all PvP titles except Hero, which requires rank 12. That's a slap in the face that says "Grind more n00b!" As if rank 9 in the PvP titles didn't already take up a block of time, but to make one, and only one, require rank 12 seems very, very unfair and just plain wrong. They can fix it one of two ways: make all PvP titles require rank 12 or make them all require rank 9.

FelixCarter · Aug 25, 2007, 09:08 AM // 09:08

I thought the HoM was what they were putting most of their effort into... Just by the way they were talking about it. I mean, they made it out to be such a big thing. Assuming they do make huge changes in the next 6 days, why did they wait until now?

-------------------------

Minipet Customization: What? Customizing a minipet? I don't understand this at all. I understand Anet wanting to make the rarity of the minipet equal in GW2, but that can be solved simply...

Give Minipet to NPC
NPC immortalizes minipet into the HoM
Minipet shows a STAR (or something) next to it's name, showing it has been immortalized.
Minipet can be sold AND used by others, but cannot be immortalized again.

Armor: They have to be still working on this, so I'm not going to bother... Just wondering why they waited until now...?

Weapons: Same as the above. Hopefully, they're still working on this. Rotating statues with the stats and rarity beneath was what I was expecting... But I like to blow things outta proportion.

-------------------------

The minipet customization still has me upset. The above method is sound and would make people happier...

The Herbalizer · Aug 25, 2007, 10:37 AM // 10:37

I dont really understand why GWEN only weapons can go into HOM.

Its not like they are going to be the only weapons which will have sentimental value to us.

They allow us to take non GWEN armour into HOM.

They allow us to take skills and titles not obtained from GWEN.

Even if they limit us to say 5 weapons from each previous chapter it would be nice.

Jongo River · Aug 25, 2007, 10:57 AM // 10:57

I assume they've probably implemented some tag to EotN weapons, that lets the system ID or store them more easily. Some fudge, like the rest of HoM - that would have been forgiveable, if it hadn't been presented as the central feature of the expansion.

Shattered Self · Aug 25, 2007, 11:04 AM // 11:04

Gaile, please read!

There's been a lot of controversy surrounding the Hall of Monuments and related issues as we have acquired more information about it. Gaile has been kind enough to grace this discussion thread with her presence, so we owe it to her to try to remain polite and clearly explain our positions, and try to provide workable alternatives to things we don't like. We also owe it to our fellow players, as a response from Gaile to a well-written post is much more informative than a response to an invective-filled rambling diatribe.

There are multiple issues at hand, many of which have been blended together by various posters, complicating a clear discussion of them. I'll be addressing the following points in this post:
1) Character vs. Account concerns as related to the Hall of Monuments as a showcase of accomplishments
2) Character vs. Account concerns as related to GW2 inheritance
3) Title concerns
4) Armor concerns
5) Mini-pet concerns

Issue One: Character vs. Account - HoM as a Showcase of Accomplishments (The Needs of the Many)

If I recall correctly, before inheritance in GW2 was even mentioned, the Hall of Monuments was described as a presentation of all of your accomplishments, a way to show friends or even random waylaid strangers all the things you've done. The problem with the current implementation of HoM arises from the fact that different people play Guild Wars in different ways, something that ANet has previously done an at least reasonable job of supporting, and often an excellent job.

I feel that I speak for the community in general when I say that we imagined (or at least hoped for) HoM as a showcase for a player's accomplishments. Our characters have not accomplished anything; though always beloved and often roleplayed, ultimately they are merely tools, vehicles through which we, the players, accomplish things. In its current incarnation, HoM is dedicated to a single character; for players whose playstyle is a focus on a single "main" character, HoM still successfully accomplishes the ideal of showing off everything they've achieved. For those of us with a stable of characters, however, HoM is disappointing; at any given time/viewing, it only displays a fraction of what we've accomplished.

Someone posted a good example of the issue a ways back in the thread, and it didn't seem to get much attention, so I'm going to paraphrase it here:
Player A: Hey, come check out my Hall of Monuments.
Player B: Sure.
Player A: See, I've got these titles, these armor sets, and I've done all these things.
Player B: Pretty cool! So, off to FoW?
Player A: What? Oh, no, I still have to show you the Halls of my 9 other characters. It'll only take an hour or so. Now wait right here while I swap characters and map over here.
Player B: *weeps*

Thus, some of us would very much prefer to see a HoM that displays the accomplishments of all our characters, not just the active character; even some of the single-character players are strongly in our camp. Because it's impossible to get every title on one character, especially if you made your main character well before the introduction of the Legendary Survivor and Legendary Defender of Ascalon, many players made side characters for the express purpose of getting these titles, with the intention of eventually having a HoM that showed they'd gotten every title available, albeit spread over a couple characters.

Of course, it would require a considerable amount of work to change the currently existing HoM code. This discussion has been largely to describe how a considerable chunk of the player base feels on the matter; realistic suggestions are few and far between at this point. Gaile, even just an acknowledgment of how we feel and a (truthful) "We'll look into it," would be appreciated. We understand (at least most of us do) that with only 1 week left before official release, a change of this magnitude is highly improbable. There have been other major changes (such as reconnects, etc.) that have been made in the past following release, however, so all we ask is that you let us know whether we can hope for such a change to HoM at some point in the future.

Issue Two: Character vs. Account - Guild Wars 2 Inheritance (Complex Genealogies)

A lot of people have jumped to conclusions about how inheritance in Guild Wars 2 will work based on how HoM apparently works in GW:EN. While I caution those people to calm down, since at this point we're dealing with just a bit of tentative thoughts from ANet and a lot of speculation, it's nonetheless prudent to begin discussions of how inheritance will work now, while ANet is in a position to act on any ideas produced and nothing is set in stone/code yet.

A lot of the concern seems to be based around the interpretation that GW2 players will only be able to set up a one-to-one inheritance: each GW2 character will inherit from only one GW1 character, and each GW1 character will be inherited from by only one GW2 character. This is not to say that players want all their GW2 characters to inherit every GW1 accomplishment, but rather that they would like to have more control than a simple "one ancestor to one inheritor" system would provide.

In the context of GW2 inheritance, many people think of their GW1 characters as a family, and resulting GW2 characters as being descendants of all of them. While Gaile rightly pointed out that a person can't have black hair and red hair just because they had one ancestor with black hair and another with red hair, the issue is more complex than that. I have my father's coloring, and my mother's body type. In terms of personality, I'm closest to my maternal grandfather, though I've been told I have my paternal grandfather's sense of humor. My sister, on the other hand, has my mother's coloring, my father's body type, and her personality is very similar to that of my father's younger sister. Inheritance is a complex thing in real life, and GW2 inheritance would benefit from incorporating a bit of that complexity.

My suggestion is that GW2 characters, when created, be shown a list of GW1 characters and their inheritable accomplishments. Rather than picking a character to inherit from, however, they would select individual accomplishments to inherit. GW2 characters would not be able to select duplicate accomplishments (such as GW1 char A's Protector of Tyria and GW1 char B's Protector of Tyria). Nor would multiple GW2 characters be able to inherit the same accomplishment from the same ancestor, though they might get the same accomplishment from different ancestors (the more blonde ancestors there are, the more blonde descendants there should be). Account-wide GW1 accomplishments (PvP & lucky titles are the only ones at this time, as far as I know) would be inheritable by all characters on the associated GW2 account. If an inheriting GW2 character was deleted, the accomplishments it had inherited would once again be available.

Another way to think of it is that all the GW1 characters on an account get a token for each accomplishment, with the name of the accomplishment written on it, and all those accomplishments go into one big pool from which GW2 characters from the associated account draw. The GW2 characters can take as many tokens as they want, but they can't take a token that's a duplicate of a token they already have, and if the character is deleted then their tokens go back into the pool.

From a roleplaying perspective, it might be described this way: X inherited A's bravery (Legendary Guardian) and B's fortitude (Incorrigible Ale-Hound), while Y inherited B's wanderlust (Legendary Cartographer) and C's talent (Legendary Skill Hunter), and both inherited their family's allegiance to the Luxons.

This way, players who used several characters to get every title possible can give all of them to one GW2 character if they wish, and those with one primary character can spread that character's accomplishments among a stable of descendants should they so desire, but there's still only one GW2 character benefiting from each accomplishment.

Issue Three: The Monument of Honor (Whose Titles Count?)

Many players, myself included, upon arriving at the Hall of Monuments were disturbed to note that, besides campaign completion, the Monument of Honor only listed the Kind of a Big Deal title and certain PvP titles, and those only if a very high requirement was met.

By recognizing certain titles and not others, it creates the impression that the unrecognized titles are trivial, or not "worth" anything. Are thirteen thousand fame, 95% of Tyria explored, five thousand high-end chests opened, or 7.5 million faction donated so easy to achieve that they're not worth recognizing? Because that's what the current Monument of Honor design tells us: "If you're not going to grind your way into the top 0.1%, don't even bother trying." One of the primary mantras of Guild Wars used to be, "Skill, not grind." I even described it that way to friends when trying to convince them to play. To a lot of players, the Monument of Honor is a complete betrayal to that ideal.

Altering the Monument of Honor to just display a list of all displayable titles achieved at the end would be relatively simple from a coding standpoint. Even coming up with flavor text descriptions, as for completing the campaigns, wouldn't require too much effort; heck, I'll even do it for you if you'd like (though I can't handle translations, unfortunately). While we would like for every title (not just every max title, but every displayable title) to offer some inheritable reward, no matter how tiny, that's not nearly as important as simply recognizing in the Hall that we accomplished these things. Please, please, Gaile, ANet, at least consider making this small change.

Issue Four: The Monument of Resilience (That's Not My Armor)

The images and video of the Hall of Monuments that showed sets of armor from multiple classes were initially hailed as evidence that HoM would be account-based, and there was much rejoicing. To a lot of players, especially those interested in displaying particularly expensive armor sets like Obsidian or Vabbian, the discovery that the armor monument in fact simply displays armor sets of the same type (Elite Luxon, Primeval, etc.) from 2 apparently randomly selected classes, instead of the showing the armor you added, undoubtedly seems like some sort of cruel trick.

Gaile, ANet, if there are technical reasons why it can't simply display the armor we showed it, or even just an undyed set of the correct type, gender, and class, please tell us so, because otherwise it just seems kind of, well, half-assed. If there aren't technical limitations constraining us to the current system, then we would very much appreciate it being corrected or at least having the reasoning behind it explained to us. It's very disappoint to be told we can display our armor, then finding out it just shows a few random sets of armor that that character couldn't even use.

Issue Five: Mini-pets (Noah's Ark)

Oddly to many people, one of the biggest topics of discussion and sources of outrage was that HoM customized any mini-pets you chose to display, so they could only ever be used by that character. Fortunately, an excellent solution to this less-than-ideal arrangement has already been proposed and Gaile has indicated that ANet views it favorably: an NPC similar to the Festival Hat NPCs would duplicate customized miniatures for all your characters. The trick now is to make sure that the needs of both the players and ANet are met.

The players want to be able to trade minis around their characters and add minis to HoM. ANet wants to prevent any given mini from being added to more than one HoM. The trick is to find a solution that allows a mini to be used by all of a player's characters but only added to one HoM. Perhaps only uncustomized minis can be added to HoM, and become customized in the process; only customized minis can be learned by the minis NPC, and any minis he makes are auto-customized.

In closing, I'd like to ask ANet to consider the issues and solutions proposed here and let us know their thoughts on the matter(s). Everyone else, let's try to remember that Gaile is limited to what the devs tell her, and ANet doesn't have an endless supply of coders to make major changes, especially to a product they're planning to release 7 days from now. Bitching and moaning is a waste of time if you can't propose a solution ANet is actually reasonably capable of implementing.

arcanemacabre · Aug 25, 2007, 12:15 PM // 12:15

OK, one thing I'd like to know is:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Cool, I like the storytelling here. But again, do you feel you should be able to make ONE character who is explorer, drunk, diabetic, fortune-seeker, and fighter? I mean, in a real inheritance, no one gets all that each ancestor did and had. No one has the red hair of the grandmother and the raven waves of the great uncle, right?

This is in reference to passing down obviously PvE titles (cartographer, drunkard, sweet tooth, etc) to characters in GW2, obviously via the HoM. It's obvious that Gaile assumed, just like many of us, that PvE titles would be represented in the HoM, and at a per-character level.

Now, my question is, and this is directed at Gaile: Was this purely assumption, only to find out otherwise, or is it simply not added into the HoM yet? Her silence on the matter since the BE went live leads me to think the former. Also, if it is the former, why is it this way and can we get it changed?

JONO51 · Aug 25, 2007, 01:40 PM // 13:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by dansamy

This is, frankly, complete and utter BS. The only PvP title to require higher than rank 9 is the absolute insane rank 12 for HA. Seriously. FIVE TIMES the number of points required for rank 9? When ALL the other PvP-based titles require only rank 9?

One thing I've been trying to find out: Do faction titles also require r9?

Tijger · Aug 25, 2007, 02:01 PM // 14:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by dansamy

All I know is that I will not buy GW:EN or GW2 if HoM stays the way it is now. You can not seriously expect me to believe that it's intentional to require rank 9 for all PvP titles except Hero, which requires rank 12. That's a slap in the face that says "Grind more n00b!" As if rank 9 in the PvP titles didn't already take up a block of time, but to make one, and only one, require rank 12 seems very, very unfair and just plain wrong. They can fix it one of two ways: make all PvP titles require rank 12 or make them all require rank 9.

Sorry but if you all want to buy EN for is an e-peen display (HoM) then you're right, you shouldnt buy it.

HoM is a nice freebie, thats all.

Solar_Takfar · Aug 25, 2007, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Very well put, Shattered Self. Your post describes exactly what I envisioned as a possible solution for the HoM/inheritance system. I'll post the other system I thought up sometime soon.

BenjZee · Aug 25, 2007, 02:52 PM // 14:52

shattered self nice post

You bring up some fair points, please Anet have a read.
The overall HOM isnt that bad really, people are saying now there titles are worthless; what about before the HOM. Its just for honour and hsowing off anyway. If someone wanted to show off something special they would own the sed minipet/armor/title anyway.
Im not happy about the minipets thing

so what if people would trade them in guilds. oh well, how can your guild trust you with there kuunvang anyway. If they wanna risk there items let them. PS my guild, i wont steal lol
Account based sounds better for minipets; i recon there should be a checklist feature which shows the stuff you've unlocked on the account (similar to priests of balthazar) and you tick the ones you want to show. You could register a mini pet or seomthing to the account like the way you register your account name to tournament npc
considering the HOM is PVE im really surprised that you need pvp titles to show yourself off

dansamy · Aug 25, 2007, 04:37 PM // 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tijger

Sorry but if you all want to buy EN for is an e-peen display (HoM) then you're right, you shouldnt buy it.

HoM is a nice freebie, thats all.

No, they've been drumming up the HoM for ages. The HoM isn't (and will not be) the only reason I will buy GW:EN, however, I will change my decision about buying it if things, like the PvP title requirements, are not equalized. It makes no sense to require rank 9 in every single PvP title except Hero, which they make the requirement rank 12. I will not support that. The best way to let them know that we don't support their decisions regarding how the HoM is set up is not to buy GW:EN. Personally, the change to the PvP titles is only one change I'd like to see. I'd also like to see the PvE-max titles displayed. Currently, there's no difference in just completing the last mission of a chapter than there is for Protector.

Loviatar · Aug 25, 2007, 04:47 PM // 16:47

if any of this would give you a GW2 playing advantage i could understand the foaming mouth rabid responses.

it has been stated that the GW2 *UNLOCKS* will be nice but not give a playing advantage to a maxed GW1 player starting GW2 over a brand new player starting GW2.

they will both start equal............NO PREVIOUS GW EXP REQUIRED TO BE THE TOP GW2 DOG

and all those super rare GW1 unlocked minipets will be customized to prevent someone from getting rich with them

Solar_Takfar · Aug 25, 2007, 05:39 PM // 17:39

So I decided to lay out a detailed explanation of my suggestions for HoM and the inheritance system. Please make your own comments and sugestions in the linked thread:

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...25#post3076625

VitisVinifera · Aug 25, 2007, 05:40 PM // 17:40

Shattered owns. I sure hope Gaile puts that in the CR report. But given her state of denial, I have my doubts.

I also find it ironic that Gaile was telling us just to wait until GWEN goes live and we'll see for ourselves the great wisdom in how HoM was designed.

Instead it further exposes some serious issues generally revolving around betrayal of the fanbase, and Gaile has been silent ever since.

So this is the future of GW eh.........? Is it Gaile?

Solar_Takfar · Aug 25, 2007, 05:54 PM // 17:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitisVinifera

Shattered owns. I sure hope Gaile puts that in the CR report. But given her state of denial, I have my doubts.

This whole thread is exposing a lot of the players' thoughts and suggestions. It'd be for the best if Anet seriously considered everything posted here. Oh, and do read the thread I linked above, which I posted in the Sanitarium, so as not to clutter this thread too much.

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitisVinifera

I also find it ironic that Gaile was telling us just to wait until GWEN goes live and we'll see for ourselves the great wisdom in how HoM was designed.

Well, it -might- work differently when it goes live (as in, including PvE titles). But it's unlikely it'll be changed to account-wide by then...

Quote:

Originally Posted by VitisVinifera

Instead it further exposes some serious issues generally revolving around betrayal of the fanbase, and Gaile has been silent ever since.

So this is the future of GW eh.........? Is it Gaile?

It's Saturday. It's been a busy week. I'd wait until Monday night at least before suggesting she is purposefully avoiding the community.

Winterclaw · Aug 25, 2007, 05:58 PM // 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by FelixCarter

I thought the HoM was what they were putting most of their effort into... Just by the way they were talking about it. I mean, they made it out to be such a big thing. Assuming they do make huge changes in the next 6 days, why did they wait until now?

Yeah, considering they even named the stupid game after the area where the HoM is.

Herbalizer, just so long as every known skin drops in GWEN, I guess it wouldn't be too bad. Maybe they could add a green crafter who can craft any skin so you can use them in the HoM.

Vitis, Gaile always says that everything Anet does is great, even the original version of the loot drop nerf.

Cacheelma · Aug 25, 2007, 07:34 PM // 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by JONO51

One thing I've been trying to find out: Do faction titles also require r9?

No. Actually you can't show it even though you have max rank. (I'm assuming that you're talking about the Kurzick and Luxon titles here).

ReSpAwNeD · Aug 25, 2007, 08:01 PM // 20:01

I'll post it should be ACCOUNT BASED here also! As I am very sad to report that I customized 1mil worth of GW mini pets. UNAWARE they were being CUSTOMIZED at all, and to ONE specific character ONLY. *SHOCKED*, *ANGRY*, *SAD*!!

Gimme back my mini's!!

demno113 · Aug 25, 2007, 08:29 PM // 20:29

i was thinking that it could be account/character based.

for ex, ill use some of my toons in the mon of honor:

Mon.. of Honor
Elementalist: Lingarro Tsugame:
Completed Proph...
Protector of Tyria
Spearmarshal
Vanquishing Lightb...

Ritualist: Kamaro Tygashi:
Completed Factions
Prot... of Cantha

and the list would continue on w/ all of your characters who have made it to HoM along w/ weapons, armor, etc. and in GW2, you can somehow choose which toon is an ancestor of a GW1 toon and inherit their stuff, while at the same time in GW1, you would not have to switch between toons to show ppl your HoM.

ReSpAwNeD · Aug 25, 2007, 08:41 PM // 20:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by AngeloM3
are we getting access to HoM during the preview?

Yes, you will be able to visit the Hall. I do not think that you will be able to start building your monuments yet, however.
__________________
Gaile Gray
Community Relations Manager
ArenaNet
The Guild Wars Site

As a matter of fact I have 4 Mini's lost in the HoM's So yeah you CAN access it THIS WEEKEND!!! PLeASE ReMOve My MonUMEnt! I want nothin to do with HoM!!!