Curse

Madan · Jun 19, 2005, 03:11 PM // 15:11

What's the difference between "missions" and "quests" and how do I know which are the missions/quests that will speed me up?

Can anyone draw that 20 hour line of levelling to finish? I might just finish all my side quests for giggles but the freedom to break the cycle might compel me to return and play.

baranovan · Jun 19, 2005, 03:33 PM // 15:33

Missions are in towns/cities with shields for icons on your map. Usually if you don't get to a mission town right away, there is a quest in the next outpost/town that will take you to one. The first mission is the Great Northern Wall (there is an exit from Ascalon to this town [Behind Tydus]). Upon it's completion you will be taken to another mission town - Fort Ranik. The third mission you have to walk to but I believe it's tied to a primary quest on your quest log. For the rest of the missions, you can get to them in a similar fashion.

To enter a mission you gather a group and if you are the party leader you hit: "Enter Mission on your party screen." Be careful, unlike exploreable areas, if you're group dies, you do not get respawned with a DP, you will have to start the mission over again. For a completing a mission you get 1000 XP and a skill point. I believe almost every mission has a bonus part which will grab you another 1000 XP. Gwonline has a mission objectives guide for finding/triggering the bonuses and hints for their completion.

*Edit: Last I checked it helped you all the way though the Sanctum Cay mission, which after finishing will get you to the Crystal Desert.

Loviatar · Jun 19, 2005, 03:43 PM // 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madan

What's the difference between "missions" and "quests" and how do I know which are the missions/quests that will speed me up?

Can anyone draw that 20 hour line of levelling to finish? I might just finish all my side quests for giggles but the freedom to break the cycle might compel me to return and play.

look at your map

any mission area will have a shield on it with 1,2 or no swords indicating the primary mission filled, or the secondary bonus filled or both or none done yet

the first mission is the great northern wall gotten from sir tydus in askalon at the start of seared after the searing which will take you to the next mission at fort ranik
which will take you to the
ruins of surmia
then to nolani academy
borlis pass
the frost gate

be sure that you hit the ENTER MISSION button rather than simply leaving the area looking for the mission

edit

i was afk and should have looked before posting as a much better was done already

oops

dnws517 · Jun 19, 2005, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Madan, you come here seeking advice, and you say no to people who try to help you, without even any explanation.(On page 2 you say "no" to all 3 suggestions given to you)

Heres my advice
Mesmer is probably one of the harder self sustaining professions and i also reccomend that you take up a W/Mo.
I had a similar problem like you, i started a elementalist, and found that i couldnt survive on my own, but i made a W/M and loved the sheer power i had.

I know that its a very popular profession among the new players, but it is a good one and I believe the easiest and most rewarding profession.

If u dont like tanks, take up a ranger. They have great and fun skills to play with and can be great by themselves.

Mesmer's IMO are a profession that usually you take up after getting to know the game a little(e.g. after W/Mo), because of their unique abilities. Its very hard to make a good build when you dont know much about the game,(Where are you exactly right now?) especially a mesmer.

I am simlpy trying help you understand what you are doing wrong, like you say in your original post. And if i fail, well i tryed.

Cheers,
Dnws517

Madan · Jun 19, 2005, 06:06 PM // 18:06

Dnws517 :

Quote:

Madan, you come here seeking advice, and you say no to people who try to help you, without even any explanation.(On page 2 you say "no" to all 3 suggestions given to you)

I'm not listening to any advice that explains my "grind" as stupidity or lying on my part. You're absolutely right. Perhaps you can reread MY post and that one and try and put yourself in my position for a change.

My mesmer is a good three levels ahead of my warrior. So NO. I'm not dropping it.

I'm NOT some mongoloid that doesn't know how to play, the problem was I was spending my time getting all the side quests done which several people have admitted here is a total waste of time. So again, NO, I'm not going to accept and kiss someone's ass.

Especially when they're acting like a child.

But thanks for trying to fault me for the misbehavior of others. I appreciate it.

Actually, I already have my solution, given by people that didn't act like toddlers.

Thanks.

Poppinjay · Jun 19, 2005, 06:53 PM // 18:53

I actually think the two profession system is brilliant. I think it is much better than having 5 fundamental stats that you build up for a profession as in most games.

(I keep thinking that a game where anybody can buy any skill might be interesting, sort of like the RPG GURPS, but that is obviously not for GW)

There is one criticism in the review that I really agree with however, and that is that the economy is broken. Not necessarily for the reasons that the reviewer outlined, but because the A.N has nerfed farming while doing nothing about the real problems that cause all these online economies to fail:

#1 Limited exits for money for very rich players. I have made several suggestions in other posts on how to fix this. In short, letting guids compete to build larger and larger statues and monuments (that go up in price by the volume of area the monument takes) would be a start.

#2 Tax the rich. Unlike a real economy/political system, there is no particular reason why rich players should have more influence over the system than the poor ones. Players just starting off should not be taxed at all. Players worth more than 40p should be taxed lightly, over 100p moderately and over 200p heavily. This would encourge individuals to compete to build items like those mentioned in #1 (which will also cause money to leave the game), and if they don't the money will slowly disappear anyway through taxes. [BTW taxes should be assessed through accounts---total the value for all of a players characters and their storage.]

Pop

baranovan · Jun 19, 2005, 08:24 PM // 20:24

Quests and exploration are helpful too, you learn the maps and when you need to find something(certain drops, bosses, skills) or go somewhere, you will be one step ahead. My advice: do both missions and quests; at least for your first character. Take your time, so that your second's progression will be much smoother.

Aranarth · Jun 19, 2005, 08:48 PM // 20:48

You keep complaining that people aren't giving your ideas a fair chance, but you read your own things into many responses to make them say things they do not. Then, ironically, you use that to claim that people are putting words in your mouth.

If you want your opinion heard fairly, give everyone else the same courtesy.

A lot of the points you made originally do make it sound like you have not had much experience with the game so far. The mentality that it suggests when you sound disappointed that you're not getting Everquest for free does not help. Many of us, including myself, liked Guild Wars in the first place because it was something different than the standard made popular by EQ.

Try being a bit more civil toward the people who are trying to help you rather than reading hostilities into every word.

Madan · Jun 20, 2005, 12:00 AM // 00:00

The hypocrisy sometimes never ceases to amaze me. I'm not exactly new at posting online but, honestly, the amount of hypocrisy always manages to blow me away:

To witch:

Quote:

You keep complaining

I'm complaining? Fine.

You're being hypocritical.

Quote:

that people aren't giving your ideas a fair chance,

I never said that. I SAID, that some individuals were being downright rude and nasty in their replies. Overall, most individuals have been very nice. Some have agreed with me. Some haven't, but that's ok with me as long as the replies have been civil. Civility was key. You haven't seen me attack people that disagree with me. And plenty of people have.

I've taken account, however, individuals that equate disagreement with weakness. You happen to be one, in trying to label me as a troublemaker and a hypocrite, when I've simply been responding, in kind, to individuals.

I've responded to comments, in the same tone I've received them. Nothing can be fairer than that.

Quote:

Try being a bit more civil toward the people who are trying to help you rather than reading hostilities into every word.

More hypocrisy. You're either willingly reading vitriol in my posts(which I've posted out plenty ppl have) or you simply want to ignore the nasty posts made before.

Either way, if you're not going to be fair, and try to label me as the troublemaker, that's your prerrogative.

But it's clear as day, to anyone with a clue, that you're about as right as wrong.

JoDiamonds · Jun 20, 2005, 12:44 AM // 00:44

Quote:

Let's put it this way:
1. If a skilled team that has unlocked all the goodies often beats a skilled team that hasn't unlocked much, that's not a big problem IMO.

2. If a skilled team that has unlocked all the goodies ALWAYS beats a skilled team that hasn't unlocked much, then that's probably a problem.

3. If an unskilled team that has unlocked all the goodies ALWAYS beats a skilled team that hasn't, thats DEFINITELY a problem.

Well said. These are interesting different levels to think about. That said, you have mixed up your personal feelings about the priorities along with the definitions of the levels. I have no problem with people having opinions, but it's a little less clear.

Clearly, these are all shades of grey. The binary problem (as in, the problem exists or it doesn't) is this:

Playing time is a significant factor for reasons other than practice and learning to use the system. You currently need to do things besides playing PvP (or the subset including GvG) in order to compete equally.

I contend that this is simply true, and unarguable. You must spend time playing "lots" of PvE in order to compete equally with in PvP, for some definition of lots.

There's a counter argument which usually is something along the lines of, "... but it doesn't matter much!". I am not here to agree or disagree with that statement, but to point out that it's entirely different than agreeing that the original issue exists. Once we agree that there IS an issue, it's a matter of shades of grey (i.e. determining how severe the problem is, and what needs to be done to fix it).

Obviously, the entire issue can be made to go away by simply allowing PvP characters access to EVERYTHING a PvE character can access (including all items, runes, skills, elites, etc.). This includes things like multiple armor sets (which all PvE characters can take advantage of).

Many people object to the extremity of this solution, and that's fine, but it's the ONLY solution that actually removes the problem instead of merely making it less severe. (Again, I'm not trying to advocate this as a solution, but it's the only complete solution.)

As another practical consideration, it appears that Arena Net has made an explicit design decision that players will have to participate in extensive PvE in order to participate in 100% fair PvP. If we take that as gospel (and while Arena Net hasn't really stated it, unless they do we can largely only assume it's true), then we should focus our energies on limiting the severity of the problems this design decision causes, rather than changing the design decision (since that's clearly ArenaNet's choice, not ours).

It's fine to see if people agree or disagree with the design decision, but there's unlikely going to be a very creative solution besides giving everything to everyone up front for PvP characters. (The most "creative" thing in this area is making players "finish" the game in order to get this option, which is only really justifiable for training purposes.)

That's it for now.

squakMix · Jun 20, 2005, 01:05 AM // 01:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCS

Everyone can get near flawless gear with minimal work. You complain about grind then complain about how the items are too weak and everyone has the same?

Great point. I got the best armor and best weapon possible for my character with 15 thousand dollars (14 thousand spent on the end-game armor). I never did any grinding and easily had the 15k to spend (with only 60 hours of game-play). That means that you DON'T have to have to Grind to compete in pvp. Maybe the reviewer just sucked at pvp.

Another point: What dye besides black costs 1000+ bucks!? The reviewer said that most dyes cost 1000gold. No. Try 1/5 of that.

Buoyancy · Jun 20, 2005, 01:08 AM // 01:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Madan

Now, before I go into an Arstechnica philosophy of hopelessly and relatively unecessarily picking appart every comment you make with the quote tag, I'll just instead, *read* your points and address your message as a whole.

This, of course, allows you to selectively ignore anything he states that you would have difficulty addressing.

Quote:

This doesn't sound cool here or in real life. And no, you haven't proven that my OPINION is wrong. Opinions can't be proven wrong. That's why, they're like, opinions.

And like assholes, everyone has them. Claiming that people cannot attack your post because "It's just an opinion!" is nothing more than a lame cop-out designed to throw a red herring in the face of your opponent.

squakMix · Jun 20, 2005, 01:16 AM // 01:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

Playing time is a significant factor for reasons other than practice and learning to use the system. You currently need to do things besides playing PvP (or the subset including GvG) in order to compete equally.

I contend that this is simply true, and unarguable. You must spend time playing "lots" of PvE in order to compete equally with in PvP, for some definition of lots.

There's a counter argument which usually is something along the lines of, "... but it doesn't matter much!". I am not here to agree or disagree with that statement, but to point out that it's entirely different than agreeing that the original issue exists. Once we agree that there IS an issue, it's a matter of shades of grey (i.e. determining how severe the problem is, and what needs to be done to fix it).

Obviously, the entire issue can be made to go away by simply allowing PvP characters access to EVERYTHING a PvE character can access (including all items, runes, skills, elites, etc.). This includes things like multiple armor sets (which all PvE characters can take advantage of).

Many people object to the extremity of this solution, and that's fine, but it's the ONLY solution that actually removes the problem instead of merely making it less severe. (Again, I'm not trying to advocate this as a solution, but it's the only complete solution.)

The fact that play time inpacts pvp competitability SEVERELY (ONLY because it's severe) makes it a problem; Making it not significant would eliminate the problem (because if it's not severe it's not a problem).

Let's say you do make everything unlocked for pvp right away. Then there will be people with 100+ hours of Pvp that are very good at it, organized and in a guild that have whole routines set down. You would still be able to jump in and say "The game has a problem because they've played longer than me and can beat me easily. You need to do things besides start a pvp character and play once to be able to compete in pvp. " You get my point.

Buoyancy · Jun 20, 2005, 01:30 AM // 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by funbun

Yes, you maintain a job in a socialist society. But the job is provided to by the government.

No, that's communism. Socialism is simply ensuring that everybody has a minimum standard of living, much like the U.S. currently does.

Madan · Jun 20, 2005, 01:47 AM // 01:47

Quote:

Great point. I got the best armor and best weapon possible for my character with 15 thousand dollars (14 thousand spent on the end-game armor). I never did any grinding and easily had the 15k to spend (with only 60 hours of game-play). That means that you DON'T have to have to Grind to compete in pvp. Maybe the reviewer just sucked at pvp.

Another point: What dye besides black costs 1000+ bucks!? The reviewer said that most dyes cost 1000gold. No. Try 1/5 of that.

The game released about a month ago?

YOu've played for 60+ hours. I'm assuming you didn't play everyday. But even if you did, you're looking at over 2 hours of gameplay per day.

No grind there. Btw, it must be nice to have so much time off. Congratulations.

Rieselle · Jun 20, 2005, 03:03 AM // 03:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

Well said. These are interesting different levels to think about. That said, you have mixed up your personal feelings about the priorities along with the definitions of the levels. I have no problem with people having opinions, but it's a little less clear.

Clearly, these are all shades of grey. The binary problem (as in, the problem exists or it doesn't) is this:

Playing time is a significant factor for reasons other than practice and learning to use the system. You currently need to do things besides playing PvP (or the subset including GvG) in order to compete equally.

I contend that this is simply true, and unarguable. You must spend time playing "lots" of PvE in order to compete equally with in PvP, for some definition of lots.

It's fine to see if people agree or disagree with the design decision, but there's unlikely going to be a very creative solution besides giving everything to everyone up front for PvP characters. (The most "creative" thing in this area is making players "finish" the game in order to get this option, which is only really justifiable for training purposes.)

That's it for now.

That's the only solution if you start with the assumption that everyone has to have everything to "compete equally".

I question that assumption. If you have a subset and I have a subset (of equal size), then we are competing equally, right?

Then the problem is usually where other people have a larger or smaller subset than me. GW addresses this to a limited extent with the 8 slot system , the low level cap, and the rune traders: He who has a larger subset may be more flexible, or may be able to build around certain important skills, but generally he won't be more powerful in a brute-force sense.

My opinion is that it's a subtle enough problem "not to matter" but clearly some people really want absolute and total equality. (re: the FPS whingers)

So here's an alternative "final solution" - it's not a good one, everyone will hate it, heck, I dont even support it myself, but hypothetically:

Place a limit on the total number of things you can unlock, such that, after a short amount of PVE time (for "training") you have reached the limit. You can "refund" and relock something to get something else, but it's limited in some way (either you have to quest to unlock something else, or you can only refund things at a limited rate.)

There we have the situation where "not everyone has everything" yet "everyone competing equally".

I think the current system is a compromise between giving people incentives to play more and get stuff, and the "not everyone has everything, but its still fair" principles. Whether it's a good compromise or not, is up to individual tastes I guess.

JoDiamonds · Jun 20, 2005, 04:37 AM // 04:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rieselle

That's the only solution if you start with the assumption that everyone has to have everything to "compete equally".

I question that assumption. If you have a subset and I have a subset (of equal size), then we are competing equally, right?

I think that's a reasonable question to ask. The problem is ensuring the subsets are "of equal size", as you say. And I'm actually incredibly interested in playing PvP games that force a subset of different but equal (in theory) games (i.e. Limited Games, as exist in CCGs; other threads have explored this more).

For full on PvP, though, as happens in the Tombs and Hall of Heroes, I think the situation is different enough to make the solution different. Also, it's clearly, unambigously fair if the subsets are identical, which is true when the subset is actually just "everything". At the least, it's the only way to ensure a 100% fair game. Otherwise, there's all KINDS of balance questions where subsets are theoretically different but equal.

At the least, I think GuildWars should have SOME form of PvP that is obviously fair without any grinding. (In my opinion, it would preferably be the highest form, Tombs, Hall of Heroes etc.)

Quote:

I think the current system is a compromise between giving people incentives to play more and get stuff, and the "not everyone has everything, but its still fair" principles. Whether it's a good compromise or not, is up to individual tastes I guess.

I actually question whether or not it's fair. I think players who grind more have a clear and obvious advantage that doesn't lie in skill or natural talent, just in grinding more. To me, that's unfair.

Rieselle · Jun 20, 2005, 12:38 PM // 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

For full on PvP, though, as happens in the Tombs and Hall of Heroes, I think the situation is different enough to make the solution different. Also, it's clearly, unambigously fair if the subsets are identical, which is true when the subset is actually just "everything". At the least, it's the only way to ensure a 100% fair game. Otherwise, there's all KINDS of balance questions where subsets are theoretically different but equal.

I think if you both have the option to choose the same subset, then it doesnt matter if the two subsets you actually choose are unequal - it's still fair.

Take arcade fighting games... no matter how hard the developers try to balance things, it can never be perfect. Even if its just "Character X is stronger than Y at lower skill levels, but the reverse is true at higher skill levels." But it's fair because both people can choose the same character. However, if I persist in choosing nerfed-to-hell Athena instead of cheap-as-bastard Iori, just because I have some sort of bizarre fetish for schoolgirls, well, that's my problem, isn't it? It's still -fair-. Even 100% fair. (And it makes winning with her all the sweeter, even without her costume change winning pose :P)

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

At the least, I think GuildWars should have SOME form of PvP that is obviously fair without any grinding. (In my opinion, it would preferably be the highest form, Tombs, Hall of Heroes etc.)

I actually question whether or not it's fair. I think players who grind more have a clear and obvious advantage that doesn't lie in skill or natural talent, just in grinding more. To me, that's unfair.

Well - for the Equalness freaks out there - here's another solution.
Give us more templates, and make some PvP arenas only open to template characters. There. Perfectly fair PvP, without the grinding. And pve rewards still in place. And it doesn't impact on the rest of the game, for those mixed pve & pvp people, or those pve only people, or those pvp people who aren't Equalist fanatics.

Anyone who argues for UAS versus template-only, really ARE only interested in "silver-platter", not "equalness"

I guess here's another point. Have you heard the saying "Well, luck is a skill all its own." Or, for Naruto watchers out there, "Your genius is Hard Work, Lee!".

Well maybe, just maybe, "free time and an obsessive personality is a skill all its own." Those people complaining that other people have more time to grind than them - it's perfectly fair because YOU TOO can grind just as much, if you choose to do so. Quit your job. Divorce your wife. Sell your children to pay for food and internet.

And that's just an extreme exaggeration. (ie. for WoW players). GW has reduced the grind, so that all you need to do is divorce your wife and let her take the kids. You can KEEP your job and still compete in GW at the highest level! Be grateful!

Things FPS competitions reward you for:
Aiming skill.
Ability to concentrate on the area of screen just around your cross hairs.
Twitch reflexes.
Watching lots of Clan tournament vids posted on the net set to heavy metal music. (time consuming)
Practice. (time consuming)

Things Chess competitions reward you for:
Ability to plan ahead.
Knowledge of previous and famous games. (time consuming)
Ability to keep track of many possible combinations at the same time.

Things GW competitions reward you for:
Ability to think in real time.
Knowledge of the game, website browsing. (time consuming?)
Ability to pay attention to several things at once.
PVE play time. (time consuming)
Practice (time consuming)

Actually - now that I think about it, one thing that attracts many people to RPGs is that, even if you have no natural ability whatsoever, if you persist at it, you'll eventually overcome any obstacle, from sheer levelling if nothing else. Whereas they might get discouraged from FPS's because they'll never get enough twitch reflexes to be able to compete at a reasonable level. Whereas an RPG always dangles a bit of a carrot to keep you playing just a little more.

GW offers a nonthreatening environment for such people (carebears?) to trade time for a bit of a leg up, whilst still being "fair" enough so that skilled players can come along and whip their asses. The legitimate (non-whinging loser) complaints probably come from skilled players who are annoyed at the advantage grinding time gives to other skilled players. The anti-carebears argument usually comes from skilled players, because they are skilled, thinking that they are more important than the plodding masses.

Unless they can come up with a way to please those who want a highly refined competitive pvp experience, without taking away the motivations for other people who like to spend time getting rewards in pve, then ANet will have to decide which group it wants to please more, and what compromises to make. But I guess we all knew that, we're just pushing for the line to go a little more towards our respective preferences.

(And no - a seperate UAS pvp ladder isn't the solution, cause if a pve player can simply make such a character and then see all the spells and stuff, then discipline alone isn't enough to keep the "reward" in the grinding game. However, a template-only arena would probably do the trick.)

So hey, whaddya think? Give us some more templates, some more varied templates (I'd like to see 5-6 templates per CLASS, myself), and give those hardcore pvp'ers template-only arenas to "prove their skillz". If they want to play around, be creative, or see all the stuff, well, then they must GRIND :P
Has this idea been raised before? Anyone got a link to a discussion about it?

Heheh, I went from being pissed off at replying to some guys poorly-exampled opinions (in my first post), to being interested in exploring the topic now.

Thanks, JoDiamonds, I hope you continue to be interested in discussing this topic

PS. Having said all that, I wish ANet would just let us unlock things by playing pvp matches, and shut all of us up :P :P :P

Shadow_Avenger · Jun 20, 2005, 02:01 PM // 14:01

Hmm you know what they will actually do, what any sain games developer would do.
They will ignor the hardcore PvP crowd and ignor the hard core PvE crowd as the majority of players PvP abit and also PvE. If the Hardcore PvE and PvP players left, they would probably lose 10-15% of the current player population. Sounds bad?? Not really they dont charge a monthly, so to coin a phrase, they already had your cash.
This 10-15% will also be leaving GW in the Future anyway. The hardcore PvP, twitch gamers will leave as soon as something new comes along and the hardcore PvE players will either leave and go play WoW / EQ2 etc or the new Morrowind when its released. And there is a huge plus side also, it would rid the forums of 99% of the whingers.

Some how you all manage to turn each and every thread in to the same old battlefield.
Simply put Guild Wars is what it is nothing more and nothing less. A Good game, with a length online storymode which can beplayed with or without human players, which lasts upto 100 hours, and a well balanced selection of PvP arenas. The tournaments whilest nice that they are organised by A.net, would infact be there and organised by fans of the game anyway, just like players do with every other competitive online game.
My fav review so far actually put it this way, Some MMORPG's use instance gaming, CoH , AO both use this, they create small missions which are unique to the play / group playing them as a interlude from the actual game world, Guild Wars does it the otherway round, they have taken instance gaming and made that into the gameworld.
It is this simple thing that will in the end determine if you love or hate it. It is not your typical MMORPG it is a CORPG with PvP as the main thrust behind it all. The missions are training for the PvP, they hopefull teach abit aout team work and show you the actual different types of gameplay available in PvP.

Rieselle · Jun 20, 2005, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow_Avenger

Some how you all manage to turn each and every thread in to the same old battlefield.

What can I say? I'm a hardcore forum PvPer :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow_Avenger

It is this simple thing that will in the end determine if you love or hate it.

Simplifying arguments like that are boring. It ends threads quickly. I'd rather discuss the nuances ad infinitum. Sometimes a really good idea needs a lot of fertilizer before it can grow.

Hmmm... I REALLY should be spending this time playing the game instead ^_^;