Curse

Death CDXX · Jul 03, 2012, 05:58 PM // 17:58

I think the current update to the survival title has completely eliminated the purpose of it.

My suggestion:
Everyone with 0 deaths upon reaching max level gets Legendary Survivor.
If they die, it drops to indomitable
If they die again, it drops again.
If they die a 3rd time, you're out.

The real problem lies in everyones complaint about not wanting to throw away years of grinding for armor that can only be worn by THAT character. So the better solution would have been to let the game transfer Customized Armor to another character if they fulfill these requirements.
1) Same exact name
2) Same exact primary proffession
3) Same account

As for them complaining about losing other titles in the process. Too bad so sad.
The way I see it, the survivor title should be used to enhance the meaning of every other title.

What makes more sense?

Aquire a bunch of titles while dying along the way. Then you get another chance to get the survivor.

or

Aquiring a bunch of titles and having never died in the process.
0 deaths = 0 deaths

This would also have made Legendary Survivor a title that was always in progress. Instead of something where you put just enough effort into it to show it off, then let yourself go.

Survivor is currently a joke title with the new update.

Mod Edit: This post was originally referring to and found in this thread.

TSBasilisk · Jul 03, 2012, 06:28 PM // 18:28

So, a return to the way it was, by moreso? You want it even more gimmicky than it was? You want to give people even more of a reason to bail on groups when the going gets rough? You want another source of drama?

It's fine; the title may be worthless right now, but so are the majority of titles in-game anyway. Like a failed Survivor, this thread did not need a resurrect.

Death CDXX · Jul 03, 2012, 07:32 PM // 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by TSBasilisk

So, a return to the way it was, by moreso? You want it even more gimmicky than it was? You want to give people even more of a reason to bail on groups when the going gets rough? You want another source of drama?

It's fine; the title may be worthless right now, but so are the majority of titles in-game anyway. Like a failed Survivor, this thread did not need a resurrect.

What groups? There haven't been any PUG's running since they implemented customizable hero's. So why even use that as an excuse? When everyone plays by themselves, or with people they know for the most part. Having random people who are going for Survivor titles bailing on you isn't an issue.

And I like how you decide to whine about necro'ing the thread anyway.

See unlike you, I read the rules and the rules say to post in thread that already pertains to the subject if it already exist.

GOT IT?

Can you handle me following the rules?

See my little preface I put in my first reply? Yeah, I put that there just so for people like you.

You're right though. Most titles mean absolutely nothing.
So why then, when someone puts forth a suggestion to make one of them actually mean something. You fight against it, because you're afraid of something that will literally never happen to you unless you willingly allow it, by joining random groups?

You people endlessly grind away doing the same thing over and over and over again anyway. So what's it matter if someone bails on you in the middle of a mission when you're all dropping like flies? Accept it for what it is and try again. Not that hard.

Think of it this way. A survivor title that actually means something. Creates replay value.

By the way, if you're going to throw the word gimmicky around. You should learn it's meaning. Because the current form of the title is gimmicky, if you can still aquire it when /deaths shows anything other than 0

Hey I'm a Legendary Survivor, but I have 14k deaths.

Premium Unleaded · Jul 03, 2012, 08:00 PM // 20:00

title that actually means something

Kind of falls apart here regardless.

TSBasilisk · Jul 05, 2012, 03:56 PM // 15:56

Gimmick - a quirk or feature added to a product to make it stand out
Gimmicky - when the gimmick of a product feels overly-contrived or forced

The original title permanently halted all progress if you died once, making in unachieveable on that character. The only title with a somewhat similar restriction is LDoA. Hence, it's gimmicky.

Now, you want to not only halt progress, but take away said progress, something no title does. On top of that, you want to make the game clone a character so the Survivor can be enshrined and never leave town again, something I find completely out of left field. And you're saying this isn't gimmicky?

The current Survivor title is gimmicky, yes, but it's also readily managed by the current system put in place by ANet and still requires a significant bit of planning and preparation. The old title was far more stressful due to the permanent penalties and the random chance of connection-based deaths ruining an otherwise perfect attempt.

Bringing back the old system and adding the penalties you suggested could very well wipe out all Survivor titles, as suggested by Gill. And that's before suggesting ANet devote resources they've already moved to working on GW2 to developing a Diablo-style Hardcore Mode for the original game. And even with this system, there would still be people who would buy Kathandrax's Crushers and a runner to Catacombs.

PS: Your idea constitutes a separate and distinct idea compared to the discussion of the original thread, especially when you consider the previous posts were all before the update to this title. As such, your post deserving of its own thread. As you can see with the post before mine, posting in a dead thread can lead to confusion on the actual topic of current discussion.

Death CDXX · Jul 05, 2012, 07:10 PM // 19:10

I'll repeat it in case you missed it.

When you go into the game and type /deaths.
And it shows anything other than 0. You do not deserve the title.

Anything less than those requirements. Makes the title gimmicky and worthless.

I went back and re-read some of the other replies in this thread. And I'm seeing alot of perfect examples of people whining and crying about making stuff easier.

Such as making Legendary Survivor an account wide achievement. What are you smoking? That makes the title even more of a joke. Please tell me they didn't also implement this suggestion as well?

Something like the survivor title and you people suggesting that it be an account wide title... no. Hell no. You have no business suggesting anything if you think that.

Think of the title as the equivalent of Diablo 2's hardcore mode.
You can't die and then continue playing. You have to start over. That is what makes that title what it is.

Look at what you turned it into.

Go here, farm this area, done, your a legendary survivor...thank you... next!

YOU made it a title that's just meaningless fluff.
It was already a title that was meaningless, and you made it even more so. Instead of fixing it the proper way.

Premium Unleaded · Jul 05, 2012, 07:14 PM // 19:14

You're literally complaining about something that is inherently gimmicky, period, being gimmicky.

Death CDXX · Jul 05, 2012, 08:03 PM // 20:03

So.. you're saying that if no titles were account wide...

And someone had 'GWAMM' all the while /deaths shows 0...still.

You think that's gimmicky?

Survivor was GW's hardcore mode. Now look at it.

You don't know the meaning of the word.

It's the context that the title provides, if the title is actually implemented to be meaningful.

Here's the real reason why it doesn't matter, since you guys are having trouble finding any real reasons to reply.
*You can only show off 1 title at a time anyway.

TSBasilisk · Jul 05, 2012, 08:11 PM // 20:11

Neither do you, Death. A gimmick is a feature unique to a product, in order to make it stand out.

A survivor with deaths is not a gimmick, it's a paradox. Two mutually exclusive realities, coexisting.

Also, Death, you shouting about the account-wide thing? They posted that four years ago. That's why you need to pick and choose thread revivals.

Death CDXX · Jul 05, 2012, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Well, this is the only thread that came up in the search. Sorry, cry more about necro'ing please.

I also notice that 4 years ago...according to this thread people were also bitching about counting xp from the last death.. so that no matter how many times a person dies, they can continually keep attempting the title on that character.

That suggestion was apparently implemented...unfortunately, I wasn't here to debate against it.

My question was: Did they also make it an account wide achievement?

I hope not.

TSBasilisk · Jul 05, 2012, 08:22 PM // 20:22

No, they did not. LS and LDoA remain character-specific. Its only presence account-wide is as a statue for your HoM.

Regardless of all the previous discussion, ANet showed their hand a year ago when they nerfed this title. It's highly doubtful they'll revert it to the original method, much less make it more difficult to keep. The presence of the HoM only makes your proposal more difficult, as this would require the player lose a statue from it as well. And that's before you get to a mechanic for copying an existing character while leaving the original intact.

And still, this doesn't change the fact that, regardless of how hard you make the title, somebody will use their mains to buy a ton of Crushers and do a marathon hand-in to get all the exp with zero risk. Your proposal doesn't hurt the exp min-maxers that much, but it does limit the options of the more casual players.

Whatway · Jul 05, 2012, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death CDXX

I'll repeat it in case you missed it.

When you go into the game and type /deaths.
And it shows anything other than 0. You do not deserve the title.

Players should not be punished for rubberbanding, crappy server maintenance & support, power outages, and related events that are 100% outside their control. Your notion of "deserving" needs some work.

Citri · Jul 06, 2012, 02:05 AM // 02:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death CDXX

Survivor was GW's hardcore mode. Now look at it.

I disagree. Even before the title change to Survivor, people were using "gimmicks" to get the title. There isn't much hardcore about skill capping your way to Survivor, dwarven boxing, wurm killing, wurm riding, running away from spawns, doing easy farms, etc. Not saying everyone did this, of course. And I don't really care if people use these methods to get LS. But lots of titles are really gimmicky imo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death CDXX

Here's the real reason why it doesn't matter, since you guys are having trouble finding any real reasons to reply.
*You can only show off 1 title at a time anyway.

I dont get it!!! Please explain, thank you!!!

Daesu · Jul 06, 2012, 03:23 AM // 03:23

/not signed

Don't want to turn all my characters into cowards.

I prefer the current get LS and move on. If you want to play like cowards at least do it and earn your LS while you are lower levels. Like every title, getting LS doesn't mean you are a better player, it just means you hit your quick macro to get out like a coward very often.

"Oh noes! I lost one-third of my hp, quick hit the fast escape macro now....!!!!! Screw the rest of my team-mates!"

MithranArkanere · Jul 14, 2012, 04:53 AM // 04:53

There is no point in beating dead horses.

The title is fine as it is.

You can retry it, you can get it with any character.

A survivor is someone that HAS survived.

If you did it, you did it.

Mintha Syl · Jul 14, 2012, 10:53 AM // 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

/not signed

Don't want to turn all my characters into cowards.

This

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

There is no point in beating dead horses.

The title is fine as it is.

You can retry it, you can get it with any character.

A survivor is someone that HAS survived.

If you did it, you did it.

and this.

I know many complain it has lost its prestige, but it never had any. Many could have got it the legitimate way, but most got it by simply buying those silly hammers or running kilroy like there was no tomorrow. Those are not really ways to make you special, mh? I find the current way more allowing to get te title in ways where you really might claim yourself a survivor.

Brega · Jul 14, 2012, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mintha Syl

I know many complain it has lost its prestige, but it never had any.

^ this +1
the survivor title lost what little, if any, prestige it had when ppl figured out they could stand outside the Lutgardis Conservatory and flag 3 heros to complete a repeatable quest.

I don't understand why you want to revert this title and then further change it by making it possible to permanently loose the finished title.

I find it funny that after years of pre title ppl complaining and asking for a fix someone wants to revert the title.

/not signed

Wielder Of Magic · Jul 14, 2012, 12:00 PM // 12:00

I think the idea is worth a shot.
But allow everyone who already has the current max survivor keep their max title to avoid drama.

Instead I would suggest to add a new type of survivor that abides to the restrictions you made in your first post.

Seems to me it would be ( perhaps not perfect ) but a step into a direction everyone can live with.

Those who don't want to do so can simply max the old survivor title, hardcore people can play for this new survivoresque title so they can show it to the world.

To avoid GWAMM and HOM drama the old and new survivor title would not count as seperate title in either of those.

Winner · Jul 17, 2012, 08:23 AM // 08:23

/definitely not signed

It would be same as saying: Oh I got masters reward on all missions, now if I go help someone and we fail, I should lose my title.
Pointless.

Lordkrall · Jul 17, 2012, 02:11 PM // 14:11

/not signed

How would this work with people having put the title in HoM?
Removing the statue?