It's doing new and unique things that no other video game website is doing, like having a dumb obnoxious site layout.
makari's forum posts
Considering how wildly inconsistent integrity can be in Quick Looks you should never really look at them as reviews. As much as I don't get butthurt at how badly Quick Looks can represent a game, the knowledge or lack thereof of the individuals doing the Quick Look (by no real fault of their own considering the time spent at time of recording) can make a game look better or worse than an eventual review will tell. This is fine, because the majority of Quick Looks recorded pre-review or early in the review process aren't necessarily meant to be representative of having a qualified opinion of the games overall worth and quality but rather a place to show initial thoughts and reactions.
If Quick Looks were ever going to be used as a stand-in for reviews then they would all have to be recorded post-play rather than pre-play like many Quick Looks are and basically become a video review where the reviewer plays and shows you the game to reinforce their final opinion, which obviously allows the viewer to match their own impressions against a reviewer much better than with a text review that you must take at face-value.
@jesterroyal: The point of contention is that you are assuming the dynamic of one day matches will translate over to one and two week matches without much difference. Sure, if you're matched up against other disorganized worlds it might work for everyone to remain zerging any capture point they feel like, but in competitive matches this just isn't going to fly, sans the 'everyone is sleeping so we can all-cap'. 'One person not wanting to be bitched at by a self proclaimed leader and tactician turns WvW into a graveyard where nobody plays' is not so far from reality as you might think. When you take a world that is organized and knows strategic importance of certain locations and spends money on siege like they mean it, and a world that runs one or two zergs trying to cap whatever they feel and sometimes don't even carry any supply around let alone blueprints, given equal populations, the zerg is going to lose. And it is going to lose badly. You already see a zerg snowball effect in matches where if the zerg is stopped and counterattacked they don't know what to do and lose half their stuff before they can regroup. Or they will be stuck at throwing a zerg of dead bodies at a defended keep while everyone else caps all around them. And that's against other zerg teams, no less. When you fall ~50k points behind in a 2-week match you just aren't going to make that back with a disorganized zerg against a coordinated world given the same population and playtimes. You're only going to get more behind, and the more behind you get the less people will bother to show up. The less people show up, the more chance the 2-week dynamic of your world going to be 'harass the organized guild we don't want to win' rather than holding claims and winning yourself. It is a little naive to think that, of the hundreds of people required to participate in WvW at a competitive level, that all of them are going to stomach constantly losing and won't consider jumping ship.
Small groups are already rewarded. If you're the one constantly disrupting supply lines and hit-and-run'ing supply camps you are doing your world a huge service, even if they don't realise it. Supply is a HUGE deal in close fought matches and people will be forced to take notice and coordinate beyond the zerg mentality to win against other dominant worlds. I will concede that if all three worlds aren't very good at WvW then the dynamic probably won't change, but already you are seeing discrepancy in scores based on organisation when populations are equal, and as people get better at the game it is only going to become more important. One person not wanting to 'be an ego-trippers pawn' and doing something constructive for their world with a other than run with a zerg with a smaller, tighter group is perfectly fine. One person complaining loudly in team chat that they shouldn't have to coordinate with their team because they are a special snowflake is just not a mentality you want to put out there, because it is contagious. There are good leaders and bad leaders but you won't get anywhere if half your world feels like leadership and team game-plan is not required or a hindrance to their experience. That's the point I'm trying to make.
I play on Yak and the amount of whining by some of the self proclaimed "leaders" is getting really annoying. Yes, a lot of people are not being strategically optimal but if this continue people will just stop playing wvw or move to another server. If winning is that important to you then form a guild of like mined people and work together. Or just give orders and hope the zerg follows but don't cry about it forever when they don't.
This 24h thing makes everything very fleeting, why invest a ton of time, gold or effort into defense when it's being reset every 24h.
This isn't the train of thought you want in a mode that requires your entire world working together to win. If you lash out at people trying to help you by giving you direction then you're going to find that when the matches do start to matter, people still won't follow any directions or leadership. When the matches are two weeks long and your world is ~200k points down after two days because you're a world of headless chickens building rams on walls and firing trebs at pinesouls you are simply going to become a world that gets demoralized and eventually just doesn't bother to show up to WvW and spoil it for everyone on your world that really wants to try to win.
The overall rankings don't mean much. They're just for figuring out who will be matched up against whom. There are too many population/timezone discrepancies that will land servers that can field a full 24-hour force above servers that cannot. Eventually the brackets will be as such as those strong consistent high-pop worlds will face each other, and from there you will start to learn your own worlds brackets from who you consistently face. So don't be overly demoralised if your server is below the top 5 or 6, but if you keep losing consistently against the same opponents a few months from now you should worry a little about your worlds performance in wvw.
Character slots > Bank slots > Bag slots, in terms of coin -> slots value. Some people can't stand making mules, although if GW2 is anything like GW1 with character birthday presents you should probably have all your slots filled with idle/semi-active characters anyways.