GuildWars Poll - Page 2

Nerull · #16 04-08-2003, 11:37 PM

hello ....

sorry for posting here .... but ....

I'm a poor coder .... and sadly I dont have time to make a good server ....

but I have a good machine ... and agree to have a server on it ....

so .... if you noeed another server ....

cheers

IAdangerous · #17 04-09-2003, 12:10 AM

Image, I think a lot of people are "spread out" due to just traveling from zone to zone. I would like to request some more TL npcs which TL you to more zones to help solve some of this problem. I have spent a lot of time traveling from one place to another and have noticed that there are a bunch of zones which people are only in them to get to the next zone. This isnt so much of a problem at lower lvls, but is a must at higher levels.

A suggestion I have for the TL npcs would be to put maybe 4 or 5 in EC all next to one another and in order to use one of them, you need to do a certain quest (like for the velious portal quests). Once the quest is done, you can use the npc in which you did the quest for as many times as you want. This would really help cut down the number of players in "wasted" zones. I have never seen anyone hunting in Rathe Mountains, Lake Rathe, West Karana, or Everfrost, so maybe making a TL to Qeynos and Permafrost would cut down the number of people traveling in these zones.

I hope my suggestion helps.

Beabman · #18 04-09-2003, 02:29 AM

I think someone should make a server like Forever Hacking that was the best non legit server but now its going legit so everyone has left it and moving on....to better servers the #zone command dont work you cant make pets...i tried to make a server but i keep getting a error when i do....

killspree · #19 04-09-2003, 03:32 AM

TLers at the major spires would probably cut down on people having to travel through the zones to get to a TL npc probably, yah.

var1ety · #20 04-09-2003, 05:08 AM

adding abilities for current translocators to take you to Feerrot (or Innothule), and Qeynos Hills would aid in keeping people less spread out - maybe think about adding a translocator to take you to Kithicor or Misty Thicket, also, for ease in travelling to Runnyeye. It is a pain to travel to Guk or Cazic when the server is full for the sole fact that you have to walk throug nro, sro, innothule, and finally feerrot, when most zone servers are already full. Similarly, I don't go to any of the Karanas except to get to the Qeynos/Everfrost area..North and West are so barren of mobs to make it futile to even try to hunt there.

However, I'm hesitant to suggest adding any more static translocators - just the ability for existing translocators to send patrons to new spots.

Also, please add a permanent Translocator in Halas or Everfrost =0

viroodiemzero · #21 04-09-2003, 05:49 AM

Eliminate Mboxing right off. Isnt the whole idea of guild wars getting back to the basics of the game?

Inactivity time outs would be the most logical next step.(although this will get me just as bad as it will anyone, as i have a tendancy to swap between EQ&aim.) Just set it at a fair ammount, say 30 min inactivity.

If these 2 things dont eliminate the problem, then utilize limit player numbers. I mean this is the last thing you wanna do really, cause with a legit server like this, isnt this the whole point, to group with friends. This is prolly why the server has gained so much popularity , Word of mouth.

Im still voting none, cause i dont wanna see any of the limits, But at least ive given feedback, and ideas.

agentlogun · #22 04-10-2003, 12:44 AM

yeah i have seen aabout 4 pairs of poeple running around usally melee+cleric thats 8 spots taken up right there and thats only ones i've seen, there could be more so 1 login per ip would help alot and give others a chance.

Manchukwo · #23 04-10-2003, 02:41 AM

I think that time limits are a bad idea. Idle time limits are definitely okay, however. 50 players might be too few (think about 5 players in 10 guilds, or 5 guilds with 10 players... doesn't seem like enough on at once.) 65 ought to do the trick.

Also, about the last post... Definitely. 1 account per person with 1 character allowed at any given time is indeed a good way to go. It's not that hard to find a decent person to level with or transfer items with, anyway. I think that is a good idea.

^^ Although this wouldn't singlehandedly solve the problem of everyone being spread out, because usually the people who have 2 chars on simultaneously are in the same zone... Usually.

The translocators having an option for Qeynos Hills would more or less strike out the need to ever set foot in N or W karanas, and the other TL suggestions are good too. I guess the thing about TL's is, the GW Devs are weighing the intended dificulty of getting around the world versus the number of zones that should or can be open at once. The Karanas are empty anyway so all it is is a hassle to walk through em.

- Doobies / madsniper

IAdangerous · #24 04-10-2003, 04:56 AM

I like the inactivity suggestion. Also to add to my TL'er suggestion, since this is Guild Wars, how about making single TL'ers available for purchace once you take over a city and this TL'er could only be used by the guild that purchased him? This way there would be more guards in cities making them harder to take over and it would make cities even more important to take over and control. Making it so that the guild who purchased the TL'er could only use him would keep noobies from accidently TL to higher level areas.

This should definatly help people from being spread out and should keep the ideas and principles of the GW server intact.

Manchukwo · #25 04-10-2003, 07:15 AM

The main problems with that are:

1) Newbie characters can't get around

2) Some guilds suck and don't have the manpower to takeover cities now or later or ever (or their members just plain never log on)

3) I don't think that there exists an actual problem with newbies "accidentally TLing to higher level areas" ...

4) Say a guild that doesn't control any cities wants to take over a city on another continent... They're screwed.

- Doobies

IAdangerous · #26 04-10-2003, 07:49 AM

I guess I should have stated that my suggestions were geared more towards the higher lvl crowd. After all noobs tend to hunt near city zones thus not getting so spread out.

Manchukwo responding to your points:

1: Newbie characters can still run from zone to zone the normal way. They shouldnt be hunting to far from their starting city anyways.

2: Some guilds do suck. Taking over cities is very easy, and if these guilds cannot take over a city, they shouldnt be hunting in a higher lvl zone. They should just stick to hunting in a more appropriate zone suitable for their skills. If someone is in a guild and that someone plays a lot when the rest of their guild members dont, then I would say they just joined the wrong guild.

3: True most people arent stupid to get a TL to a zone they dont want to go to, but im sure people have done it before. I just wouldnt want to listen to a noobie complaining and keep asking for help to get out of a higher lvl zone he accidently TL'ed into though.

4: That guild could always run to a non-guild controlled TL'er such as the one in oasis to TL to another continent.

Manchukwo · #27 04-10-2003, 08:01 AM

Yeah I see what ya mean, but a lot of those factors are what people "should" or are "supposed" to do, and stuff never works out like that. As for saying that people can just walk long distances ... That still opens unneeded zones for no good reason, which is what we're trying to avoid, eh? Just seems to cause more problems than it solves, in my mind.

- Doobs

IAdangerous · #28 04-10-2003, 08:49 AM

Very true Manchukwo. I think everyone should be able to use TL'ers to a zone like Qeynos Hills as someone metioned before, but I wouldn't like it everyone could use a TL'er to get into a higher level zone. Everyone would just be lazy and bind near those npcs.

Having extra TL'ers in cities for guilds would help for a few reasons:

1. Lets say a guild is in Permafrost trying to kill Vox. If a member signs on late and their guild controls a city, having a TL'er to port to Perma or close to there would be extremelly convienient for that guild, and it would help keep single people just running through zones.

2. I dont think the problem is having all of the zones up, its mainly just with having 1 or 2 people in each zone.

3. Guilds could always ally with other guilds to let that other guild use their npcs.

4. Yes this wont eliminate having people spread out completely, but my guess is that 30% or even more of the time that people are running through a zone is because they are just trying to get to where their guild is hunting in.

5. If anyone had fast access to get to a higher lvl zone, you would see a bunch people trying to take out mobs they shouldnt thus making guilds that can take out that mob wait. Or that guild may just not feel like waiting and kill those people.

6. Epics seem to be too easy to get once you find the npc for your class. Having more guarded cities would make it so that you would need your guild to help you get your epic. It would make it tougher yet it would be a funner experience.

The ability of taking over cities is the #1 thing that makes GW stand out over the other servers. Right now it just seems that taking over a city really isnt a big deal other then to get your epic. By having more TL'ers in those cities, imo it would make the purpose in which GW was designed stand out a bit more.
Yeah people will still be running in useless zones, and this wont solve the problem completely, but I think it would help cut it down.

My_account · #29 04-14-2003, 01:42 AM

I think having a second GW server would be a great idea. I would gladly help GM it if the need be. I have no life and would gladly be fair and help.

a_Guest03 · #30 04-14-2003, 01:54 AM

I think the real issue is that Image doesn't want to buy new hardware and bandwidth to add another server. It really shouldn't be his responsibility.