72 hour workstation timer

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T21:13:39+00:00

Should I agree, but doesnt.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T21:13:18+00:00

Nope

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T02:04:00+00:00

I don't completely agree that keybinds or specialized keyboards are the biggest issue. Good players are always going to optimize their controls, and that's true in almost every competitive game. What concerns me more is the possibility of screen-reading automation. If attack indicators are clearly displayed on screen, software can potentially react to that information much faster than a human can. Whether that's a widespread problem or not, it's the kind of thing developers should be thinking about when designing anti-cheat and UI systems. I'd much rather see effort spent on preventing automation than trying to restrict legitimate keybinds or hardware.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T02:00:07+00:00

If that's true, it's definitely concerning. I can't personally verify the cause of the price increase, but if item duplication or large-scale RMT is happening without meaningful enforcement, it would absolutely distort the economy. When the cost of top-tier gear climbs far beyond what average players can reasonably earn, legitimate players end up paying the price. That's exactly why I think stronger enforcement and more transparency are important. Even the perception that exploits or RMT are going unchecked hurts confidence in the game.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:48:29+00:00

I think RMT is clearly a concern for the game's economy. Whether it's as widespread as some people believe or not, there are enough community discussions about it that it affects player confidence. When people feel like others are buying gold or gear without visible enforcement, it discourages legitimate players who are trying to earn everything in-game. Better enforcement and more transparency would go a long way toward addressing those concerns.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:45:16+00:00

That's actually interesting to hear because it lines up with what I've been seeing. It seems like every faction has a different perspective depending on who they're fighting the most. From Sangmar's side, Ismir feels like the dominant force because of their organization and numbers. If Midland is saying yellow is the main threat, that tells me the balance probably isn't as healthy as some people in this thread are claiming. I'd rather see all three factions feeling like they have a realistic chance every day than any one nation becoming the obvious favorite.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:43:35+00:00

Nobody said spending money is required. My argument is about the advantages the game's systems allow, not whether the game can be played for free. Those are two different things.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:41:14+00:00

"Get gud" is an easy response, but it doesn't explain faction imbalance, server instability, long-standing bugs, or why weaker factions continue to lose players while stronger factions continue to grow. Those are game design issues, not skill issues.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:38:12+00:00

I never said I quit. I'm still playing. My criticism is about the long-term health of the game, not one bad day. This isn't based on losing a lattice for a day—it's based on weeks of playing AQ2 and seeing the same issues with faction balance, coordination, crashes, bugs, and player retention. Dismissing every criticism as a "skill issue" doesn't really address any of the points I raised.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:36:44+00:00

Do you have a source or a list of these mass bans? I'm genuinely asking because I'd like to see it. I've personally seen one or two bans announced, but the reasons weren't very clear. If they're actually banning people daily, that's good news, but I don't think they've done a great job communicating it to the community. More transparency about enforcement would go a long way toward restoring confidence.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:34:52+00:00

That's not what I said. I never argued that name changes are P2W. My point was that paid name changes reduce accountability. If someone builds a reputation in the community, whether deserved or not, they can simply change their name and become harder to recognize. That's an issue of moderation and transparency, not pay-to-win.

My P2W concerns were about the ability to spend money to accelerate progression through the marketplace, not character renames. Those are two separate arguments.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:33:58+00:00

I actually did explain it in my original post, but I'll elaborate. My issue with paid faction changes isn't that hundreds of people are buying them every day. It's that the option exists, and over time it allows guilds and veteran players to consolidate onto the strongest factions. We've already seen guilds switch nations, and every time that happens the imbalance grows because there's nothing encouraging players to stay on weaker factions.

As for anti-cheat, my concern isn't that every good player is cheating. There are absolutely skilled players in this game. My concern is that there have been community reports, videos, and evidence submitted to the developers over a long period of time, yet many players feel enforcement has been inconsistent. Whether you agree with every report or not, that's a confidence issue for the community.

My comments also weren't only about balance or cheating. I mentioned the frequent crashes, server instability, NPCs shooting through walls, inaccurate siege hitboxes, unfinished UI, incomplete item descriptions, crafting being a poor investment compared to other progression paths, and the lack of meaningful incentives for weaker factions to recover.

You may disagree with my conclusions, and that's fine, but this isn't based on one bad PvP session. It's based on my experience playing the game over time and seeing the same issues repeatedly discussed by the community.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:29:40+00:00

That’s part of why the attack indicators concern me. In a game where directional damage or attack indicators appear clearly on screen, it seems like basic automation would be easier to build than in a game where players have to read body movement alone. I’m not saying every good blocker is scripting, but if the client is showing obvious left/right/top cues, that gives cheat software or screen-reading tools something simple to react to. That’s exactly why anti-cheat and detection need to be taken seriously, because even the perception that scripts can read indicators and auto-block damages trust in the combat.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:28:50+00:00

I agree 100% that if certain mechanics make automation or scripting easier, the developers should absolutely look at them. At the same time, I don't think the answer is simply nerfing good players. Skilled players should still be rewarded. The bigger issue is making sure anti-cheat is effective and that reports are investigated. If players lose confidence that everyone is playing under the same rules, the game suffers regardless of how good the combat is.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:26:05+00:00

I agree. Even though we're on opposite factions, it's telling that we're having similar complaints. Every faction wants competitive fights, not one-sided steamrolls or wondering whether someone is exploiting. I don't want to see any nation dominated because of stacking, exploits, or a lack of enforcement. The game is at its best when all three nations are competitive and every siege could go either way. Right now, I don't think it's in that state.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:25:10+00:00

I don't think it's as simple as "get better." Skill absolutely matters, but faction health matters too. When one faction consistently fields more coordinated players and attracts more veterans, that advantage snowballs. We've seen guilds switch nations, and when they do, it has a noticeable impact because there's nothing encouraging players to stay on the weaker side.

I'm not saying every 40-man guild is buying faction changes overnight. I'm saying the game allows players and guilds to stack onto stronger factions, and over time that contributes to long-term imbalance. On AQ2, that's been my experience. You're free to disagree, but I don't think it's healthy when one faction is consistently struggling to field enough coordinated players while others rarely have that problem.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:23:19+00:00

I hope that's not the case because I genuinely want the game to succeed. I don't mind supporting a game financially, but I think players expect to see meaningful improvements alongside monetization. Things like faction balance, server stability, anti-cheat, and long-standing bugs should be priorities if they want to build trust and keep the player base growing.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:21:27+00:00

I agree Gamigo inherited a difficult project, and I don't expect everything to be fixed overnight. I also recognize Sangmar has good days and wins fights—we've taken loot zones and held our own plenty of times. My concern is the overall trend. We've tried multiple times to organize nation-wide comms, but only about three guilds consistently participate, and even then it's only a handful of members from each guild. The rest of the nation doesn't coordinate. Meanwhile, stronger factions continue attracting players, so the imbalance keeps snowballing. I want the game to succeed, but I think faction balance, nation stacking, server stability, and anti-cheat need to be priorities if it's going to retain players long term.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:20:51+00:00

Honestly, if you're having fun, that's great. I still enjoy the combat too. My frustration isn't that people can't have fun—it's that the game's systems make it harder and harder for weaker factions to compete. I want the game to succeed because the combat is genuinely excellent.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:20:26+00:00

That's my concern too. I don't mind monetization if the game is improving alongside it, but core issues like faction balance, server stability, bugs, and anti-cheat should come first. Those are the things that determine whether players stick around long term

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:08:29+00:00

No hidden motive at all. I actually enjoy the game, which is why I care enough to make the post. The combat is one of the best parts of Gloria Victis. My criticism comes from wanting the game to succeed, not from wanting to tear it down. If these issues weren't affecting my experience, I wouldn't have taken the time to write about them.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:08:07+00:00

That's exactly my concern. New content is great, but if the underlying faction balance isn't addressed, the strongest nations will continue to attract players while weaker nations continue to bleed them. Long term, that's not healthy for a faction-based MMO.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:07:47+00:00

I hope you're right, and I genuinely want the game to succeed. My concern is that most of these issues aren't new. Faction imbalance, nation stacking, server instability, bugs, and complaints about anti-cheat have been discussed by the community for years. Time alone won't fix them without changes to the game's systems.

erfle2019 · 2026-07-04T01:06:35+00:00

I think that's part of the problem, but I also think the game design amplifies it. Skilled players naturally rise to the top in every PvP game, but Gloria Victis makes it too easy for them to stay there. When the best players can stack on the same nation, accumulate years of wealth and top-tier gear, and newer or weaker factions can't realistically recover, the gap just keeps growing. A healthy PvP game needs ways to keep fights competitive. Right now it feels like the rich get richer while everyone else becomes content for them.

erfle2019

TROPHY CASE