Curse

3D House of Beef · Jul 02, 2007, 09:02 PM // 21:02

/signed to making the title account wide.
/not signed to increasing the requirements
/not signed to RedMagma's new, overly complicated and highly inelegant solution

To the few who think that this would somehow affect the game in a negative fashion:

The current situation just means that anyone serious about farming chests does it all with a single character so that they can utilize the bonus of the title. As stated above by Scary Raebbit, it simply forces us to:

"ID with only one character
Chest run/open chests with one character
Salvage with only one character"

...and this is what is being done already. So the change would have little effect on the economy.

I think making it account wide would be great. As it is, people like me who enjoy making new characters and trying new classes end up getting burned for trying the new classes that Anet builds for us. With all of our achievements spread out over 8 characters, the titles that give in-game bonuses don't reflect the effort at all. Compare the effort involved in the following example:

Player A makes one character, develops him enough to gain the skills needed, and get to an area required to unlock chests for title, unlocks 800 chests. He has a 9% bonus from the title. (gained at 550)

Player B makes 8 characters, develops all of them enough to gain the skills needed, and get to an area required to unlock chests for title, unlocks 800 chests, 100 per character, No character gets better than 3% (gained at 100).

The effort required for player B is huge compared to player A, yet Player A gets the 3 times the benefit for 1/8th the effort. With the addition of titles to Guild Wars, the winning strategy if you are motivated by titles, is to make one character, and do everything with that single character. Any branching out to try new classes, punishes the player titlewise.

Simply making the title account based would be a nice step in not punishing us so badly for wanting to actually play more of the content that has been developed for us.

-3D House of Beef

Beck · Jul 04, 2007, 11:13 PM // 23:13

/Signed for account wide

bilateralrope · Jul 05, 2007, 12:53 AM // 00:53

An argument I came up with in another thread that also applies here:

Personally for things like this I divide titles into two groups:

- Task based titles where they have a list of tasks you need to complete, but you only need to complete each task once. Eg vanquisher, explorer, mission completion.

- Grind based titles where you need to keep doing the same task over and over until you max out the title. Eg treasure hunter, SS, LB, any PvP title. You should note that the hardest of the grind titles are PvP ones, which are all account based. Compared to getting them all the PvE grind title are very easy to acquire.

For the task based ones I can see having the title character based because they show you did those things on that character. But for the grind based ones, I can't see why they shouldn't be account based.

IceQ · Nov 11, 2007, 04:44 PM // 16:44

/signed making both these account based.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3D House of Beef

/signed to making the title account wide.
/not signed to increasing the requirements
/not signed to RedMagma's new, overly complicated and highly inelegant solution

To the few who think that this would somehow affect the game in a negative fashion:

The current situation just means that anyone serious about farming chests does it all with a single character so that they can utilize the bonus of the title. As stated above by Scary Raebbit, it simply forces us to:

"ID with only one character
Chest run/open chests with one character
Salvage with only one character"

...and this is what is being done already. So the change would have little effect on the economy.

I think making it account wide would be great. As it is, people like me who enjoy making new characters and trying new classes end up getting burned for trying the new classes that Anet builds for us. With all of our achievements spread out over 8 characters, the titles that give in-game bonuses don't reflect the effort at all. Compare the effort involved in the following example:

Player A makes one character, develops him enough to gain the skills needed, and get to an area required to unlock chests for title, unlocks 800 chests. He has a 9% bonus from the title. (gained at 550)

Player B makes 8 characters, develops all of them enough to gain the skills needed, and get to an area required to unlock chests for title, unlocks 800 chests, 100 per character, No character gets better than 3% (gained at 100).

The effort required for player B is huge compared to player A, yet Player A gets the 3 times the benefit for 1/8th the effort. With the addition of titles to Guild Wars, the winning strategy if you are motivated by titles, is to make one character, and do everything with that single character. Any branching out to try new classes, punishes the player titlewise.

Simply making the title account based would be a nice step in not punishing us so badly for wanting to actually play more of the content that has been developed for us.

-3D House of Beef

This is sort of the scenario I find myself in. More than one char but getting raped for it.

---

Also I have read in this thread, people talking about "unfairness" about having a level 5 with a better salvage rate... ok. how about this:
1) where can a lvl5 go? noob island? what are they going to get that that is worth anything?
2) they should remove elite tomes then. (I just KNOW I am going to get flamed for this

) "WHY?!?" "ARE YOU MAD??!?" no... unfairness is the Spitefull Spirit on my necro... Who had it at lvl2. Having elites on a new lvl2 char seems bit off don't you think? then why not better salvage rates? why not make them account based?

I am agreeing with this purely out of a practical standpoint. I Work about 40hours a week (this is without overtime) I sleep 56 hours a week, there are 168 hours in a week. That leaves 72 hours. In that time Most of us have to cook, do washing, do the shopping, entertain friends/family/girlfriends/boyfriends/husbands/wives. Personally I only have a few hours a week to play. Making the title account based will make it less of a grind. All of those that do not agree with making it account based, obviously have more time to get the gold and to do runs. Mostly students ( I was one too, you have time ) & school children.

( I am SO dead for that last line

) Don't care really, but that is what alot of us need to deal with. Real life does exist. And mommy or daddy doesn't pay my bills so I can grind titles.

My 2c worth.

Aera Lure · Nov 11, 2007, 04:48 PM // 16:48

These are the two titles not currently account-wide that I feel should be. So:

/signed

I just wonder if Anet would ever go to adjusting these, their being this way for so long.

Knight Othin Of War · Nov 11, 2007, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophitia Leafblade

/signed for making them account wide,

/unsigned for increasing the requirements.

/Signed for this statement

Lord High Pwner · Nov 12, 2007, 01:04 AM // 01:04

/not signed....again sadly another post like this. we have years till gw2 guys how many other MMO's offer you a chance at 10+ chars to make your mains.

BlackSephir · Nov 12, 2007, 06:14 AM // 06:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord High Pwner

/not signed....again sadly another post like this. we have years till gw2 guys how many other MMO's offer you a chance at 10+ chars to make your mains.

"Other MMO's" ?
Quick, somebody tell him that GW isn't a MMO!

MirkoTeran · Nov 12, 2007, 06:29 AM // 06:29

/not signed for making this game any easier then it already is.

Abnaxus · Nov 12, 2007, 03:06 PM // 15:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirkoTeran

/not signed for making this game any easier then it already is.

So for you:

1000 chests with one character = already easy

125 chest x 8 characters = dumb easy, no effort required at all

Never realized this before

Alicendre · Nov 12, 2007, 06:15 PM // 18:15

What if we could transfer all titles of an account on one character ?
I mean, there's no difference between someone who worked one title for each of his 10 chars, and someone who has one char and worked 10 titles for him/her, but the last one will get his Pantheon full, and probably more rewards on his/her GW 2 char...

Randvek · Nov 12, 2007, 07:23 PM // 19:23

My first thought when someone wants to do someplace hard is "can I take my main character along?" If I take some other character along, any chests I get won't really do me any good, and all the golds will have to be transfered to my main, anyway. I would play my other characters much more if the things I did with them actually mattered to my main.

/signed

freekedoutfish · Nov 12, 2007, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

"Other MMO's" ?
Quick, somebody tell him that GW isn't a MMO!

Massively Mulitplayer Online Game. How is it not an MMO? It may sway more towards the RPG aspect, but it is online and it doesnt contain a massive multiplayer aspect.

Anyway /signed for wisdom and treasure being account based. The max levels are just unrealistic for even a single character to max out easily.

MithranArkanere · Nov 12, 2007, 10:11 PM // 22:11

I will always agree with Wisdom, but not for treasure.

A PvP character or a level 2 that has never left town can get Wisdom title, but can't get it. So, it doesn't matter who identifies the items, and it should change it to account-wide. It's the player who decides who identifies the items, regadrless of characters, level, type or profession.

But not for Treasure since are the characters, not the account, the ones that has to get to the items. Getting to the treasures (either running or fighting)it's not as easy for all professions.

ironox · Nov 12, 2007, 11:47 PM // 23:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

I will always agree with Wisdom, but not for treasure.

A PvP character or a level 2 that has never left town can get Wisdom title, but can't get it. So, it doesn't matter who identifies the items, and it should change it to account-wide. It's the player who decides who identifies the items, regadrless of characters, level, type or profession.

But not for Treasure since are the characters, not the account, the ones that has to get to the items. Getting to the treasures (either running or fighting)it's not as easy for all professions.

/signed for Wisdom
/notsigned for Treasure

For the reasons above.

It's stupid to have to save all your golds for ID'ing by one character - one more timewasting hassle too annoying to be worth the title. Account-wide makes sense, especially since people who already have the title/single character players aren't hurt. After all, it took just as much time and adventuring to find all those golds on many characters as on one. That's why it makes no sense to up the requirements. It's not like you could be running all 8 characters out there at once.

For Treasure, what MithranArkanere said. Though now with EotN there are so many treasures around I'm not sure it makes a difference anymore. The real tricky part is affording lockpicks now.

Lil Ferk · Nov 13, 2007, 12:42 AM // 00:42

/SIGNED SIGNED AND SIGNED
I didnt even read this thread and i already agree with it

杀TanK杀 · Nov 13, 2007, 10:25 AM // 10:25

Make the title and ability to show character based, but the benefits account wide...

Effendi Westland · Nov 13, 2007, 10:45 AM // 10:45

/signed for making them account wide,

/unsigned for increasing the requirements.

Mangione · Nov 13, 2007, 11:00 AM // 11:00

I like this idea.
There are so many threads about making some pve titles account wide that I don't remember which ones I signed and which ones I forgot to sign...

anyway if I didn't sign this one, then
/signed.

I see that atm in Sardelac there are at least 4 threads in the first page about different suggestions on making some pve titles account wide... This means that a good part of the community is asking... will Arena Net give us an answer on this issue?

wu is me · Nov 13, 2007, 11:33 AM // 11:33

lol i'd like to b the optimist and think no answer = theyr considering, since their answers generally involve "no" =P