Guild Wars 2

Guild Wars 2 Dev Tracker




07 Feb

Comment

Originally posted by K0nfuzion

Hello! Thanks for your reply.

I have not completed the Scrapper elite spec on a different engineer.

The bouncy chest was not obscured by anything else, no. The one thing I did before it popped was opening up a Winter's Day giftbox from the home instance tree node. It awarded me a snowflake and a Scoop of Mintberry Swirl Ice Cream.

Sure, here's a screenshot of my Engineer's Scrapper Progression

I did not enter the home instance of any alt. Only on my Human Mesmer.

My character's are Damon Cousland (Human Mesmer) and Insufferable Expert (Asura Engineer). Do you require my account name?

No other account info needed, thanks though!

This is pretty strange... a few more questions for you (thanks for helping me figure this out BTW):

  • Can you please provide a screenshot of the completed achievement in the hero panel?
  • Do you use either of these characters for SPvP? If so, do you participate in no-progress custom arenas at all?
  • Which home instance did you enter when the issue occurred?
  • To the best of your memory, what did you do on your account leading up to going into the home instance? Was it as cut and dry as logging into the mesmer and heading in to do your daily gathering stuff?
Comment

Originally posted by rukkhh

What's the idea behind giving mesmer an axe as elite weapon for the expansion, only to make that spec completely unusable in any proper PvE scenario? Chrono does literally figuratively twice the damage now.

From the forums (If there's any other conversation on this, I'll copy it here)

Moving Confusion to have condition damage contribution ticks made it a damage-over-time condition in addition to its 'hex' style punishment of using skills. We needed to make a choice as to whether or not the condition was going to be used as spammable DOT, or rarer/shorter, with more potency. We've decided to push Confusion to be burstier and once again focus on punishing skill activation. The reason for keeping any dot component is to message that you're under the effects of the condition, so you can be informed of it without looking at your buff bar. With that said, we'll be moving weapons like Mirage's Axe toward Torment, rather than Confusion, as soon(tm) as the process allows.

Comment

'ey all, this behavior was unintended and we're looking into it!

Comment

The "This condition remains split between PvE and PvP/WvW" part has unfortunately caused unintended confusion.

To Clarify: Condition damage contribution of the damage-over-time component of confusion has been removed from ALL formats. 'Remains split' was meant to indicate that the base damage ticks are higher in PvE still, even without condition damage contribution.


06 Feb

Comment

There was a bug fix that went out related to pitch up behavior, but there was also a bug with that change that should be addressed in our next hotfix (also the note for the fix was delayed and will be in the late notes). For context, there has always been an 800 ms delay after doing a diving wing flap that enforces a minimum starting altitude if you want to go super fast. The core issue is that this delay could be interrupted by using the pitch up key, which was 100% not intended and would eliminate most of the risk, gaining the initial speed boost of the diving wing flap without paying a corresponding altitude cost. Additionally, though less important, animation was not set up to blend very well between the diving wing flap and pitch up animations. To correct these issues, it is no longer possible to pitch up during the delay period.

The bug, or more like poor behavior, with this bug fix is that pressing pitch up too early currently does nothing at all. This will be c...

Read more

03 Feb

Comment

Originally posted by RogueTF2

Guild Wars 2 Friend/Ships

artwork on webpage of Kasmeer and Marjory

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

The campaign is Friend/Ships because it refers to both platonic relationships and romantic relationships. The /Ships is a reference to “shipping” in the fandom sense, which is supporting two characters in a romantic relationship.


02 Feb

Comment

Originally posted by indigo-alien

500, when map max is somewhere around 100?

Small guilds like me and my buddy who have been roaming WvW nightly for the last 4 years are going to be locked out?

We don't need any "alliance" to get shit done in WvW. We don't follow commanders. We do our own thing, and do it really well. What's in this for us?

As far as I can see, nothing. We're going to get tossed around from match to match and never see our fellow roamers again. The people we know we can rely on in a fight for a camp, or to bring supps for sneak tower/keep attack.

For what it's worth, we've taken keeps with just the two of us. We've taken SM with just three. We don't need a crowd and don't like following them, but we like our fellow roamers.

500 players is around 20% of WvW world sizes currently (this is only using active WvW players). Since world sizes are predicted to be similar in size to how they are currently, you will still be able to play.

Moment to moment gameplay should be similar to how it is now for you and your friends, except now that matches are more balanced, the objectives you take, and points you earn for your world will have a bigger impact on the match. When the worlds are balanced anything anyone does matters a lot more, because it is not going to be made irrelevant by the much bigger world.

If you want to guarantee playing with other roamers that you are friends with, then you can make a guild. If you do not want to do that, then there should still be plenty of roamers on the new worlds.

I’ve seen some roamers worried about this system, and I’d be interested in hearing what in this system could change to make it better for roamers in their opinions. If you could mark your a...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by RaphaelKoyomi

the preset buffs thing that's already implemented is very nice, would be great for it to work ^

Could you be more specific? Is it currently not working the way you'd expect in the live environment?

Comment

Alacrity changes will be reflected in the Special Forces Training Area alongside the patch that introduces them.

Comment

Originally posted by reverendsmooth

Worlds have an impact on which shard you get sorted into, and a lot of roleplayers choose TC just to help add to the weighting. If we lose that, some ability to pick shards (like in GW1) would be nice.

This is something we hadn’t fully considered and we’ll start looking into possible solutions.

Comment

Originally posted by rude_asura

how about the number of worlds in each region?

Are you planning on adjusting them after each season, if queues get too long or population/participation dwindles for some other reason?

The number of worlds can change every season depending on play hours. It will always need to be divisible by 3, but one season could have 12 worlds and the next season it could be 15.

Comment

Hey guys just posted this link on the forums so here you guys go too. Here are all the worlds in NA and EU ordered by size names have been omitted to protect the innocent: https://i.imgur.com/1uFZPf9.png


01 Feb

Comment

Originally posted by rude_asura

will there still be some kind of glicko rating to determine a worlds performance?

We will still be using 1 up 1 down with this system not glicko.

Comment

Originally posted by MurderousClown

So what happens if an alliance that has reached the cap then has a bunch of players in it's guilds, who had originally selected other guilds outside the alliance as their WvW guild, switch their selected guild to one of the guilds in the alliance? That could be a way of getting around the cap.

If the alliance is capped, they wont be able to join it.

Comment

Originally posted by Zman1719

So this gives the giant shaft to those of us that don't hardcore WvW. This means I'll forever become stuck on a "world" with a bunch of people, like me, that don't play WvW 10 hours a day every day as my only game mode. I play PvE (fractals, raids, open world) and WvW but I only play Wvw maybe an hour or so a day. It's a lot of fun and I get to play with more experienced commanders who teach the ropes. If I'm put on a world with "like minded players" WvW just becomes a completely dead gametype for me.

A world can be made up of "casuals" and "hardcore" WvW players. The system uses stats like play hours in WvW, commander time and squad size, time of day, and participation levels to create worlds that are balanced. Some of the new worlds might have more hardcore players and some might have less but overall the new worlds should have similar play hours.

Comment

Originally posted by Zadah

play hours is my concern. I'll be matched much lower because I don't have the time, which forces me into a guild that may or may not allow me to be as inactive as I tend to be. It's simply a concern of mine.

It works like dzernumbrd explained, except with play hours. So, Alliance A usually has around 700 play hours a week and Alliance B has around 800 play hours a week. A group of players that make up about 300 play hours a week will be placed on Alliance A and a group of players that make up 200 play hours a week will be placed with Alliance B so that both worlds are at about 1000 play hours a week.

It is important to keep in mind that the players that make up those 200 play hours could be a small group of active WvW players, or a large group of more casual WvW players. The system just makes sure that the play hours of each world is relatively the same.

Comment

Love that expression! Sandsharks are the best roller coaster ride in Tyria.

Comment

Originally posted by tigrrbaby

i think the idea is that the individual player metrics are combined to make the alliance metric

^ This is correct!

Comment

Originally posted by moriz0

this is excellent, but one suggestion:

wvw guilds can create wvw alliances (500-1000 players max, still not decided)

this is far too big. an alliance should have a max player cap of 300 and/or a max guild size of 5.

"lack of granularity" is sited as one of the reasons to use this system. if alliances can have 500-1000 people in them, this additional granularity goes right out the window again. you KNOW all those big servers will try whatever method necessary to fit all of their friends into a single alliance, basically creating "Blackgate 2.0" or similar.

anet absolutely need to set the alliance population caps low, or find a way to actively discourage stacking an alliance. otherwise, they might as well keep the current system and not bother.

We started with 500 since 500 is the max size of a guild, but those numbers could change in the future. We are aware that servers will try and form alliances filled with really skilled players, and that there needs to be a limit so that they can't create a "Blackgate 2.0" which is why there is going to be a cap. This is one of the numbers we will be constantly testing and tweaking to make sure the system meets our goals of balanced team.

Comment

Originally posted by -OhAnnie

So if I play the game in Spanish but I always played in international servers (English) Will I still be moved with other Spanish players even if I don't play with them? ...

I think you should add an option to choose "International". If Iplay the game in German/French/Spanish that doesn't mean I wanna play only with people from my country.

An international option is a great idea! I will bring that up with the rest of the team.