Curse

Sleeper Service · Feb 26, 2008, 02:01 AM // 02:01

This is the part where Anets version of "balance" came and bit them in the ass.

A build in GW is NOT the equivalent of a deck in magic. It approximates a 7 card hand in magic (+ one drawn), the "perfect" hand if you will.

the colours went more or less like this i think:

White: Monk

Blue: Mesmer, Ranger

Red: Elementalist

Black: Necromancer

Green: Ranger, Warrior

The problem is that in MTG althought there is no stronger colour, they are not equal. Black is NOT better than Green. Its just better at destroy and playing from the graveyard. Green on the other hand can produce mana and lay out the pain in the form of gargantuan creatures.

Its impossible to predict whether mono Black VS mono Green will win just by basing yourself on the colour, yet they are in no way EQUAL.

the advantage of playing muticolour decks in MTG is obvious, in a Black/Green deck you can for example create a strong mana curve coupled with huge creatures that just keep on coming back from the grave while adding some decent creature control as well.

Problem is in GW it dosent really work that way.

One of the big issues is the fact that we cant use sec prof runes on the toons i feel.

The other huge issue is artificial imposed metagame stemming from constant never ending skill balancing. Lets take a look at why:

In MTG its not the player who can slam down his card onto the table first that wins the fight, Its the deck construction as a WHOLE and a small measure of luck (a good "balanced" deck needs very little luck indeed).

In GW it seems that the build is not nearly as important as who clicks on the skills first, fastest, and most consistently, the famed "player skill". Typical Anet reaction to outrage that a build dominates the meta is to nerf it, but....in MTG the fact that a deck or a given hand wins the match consistently just means its BETTER and that the player has done a good job in making those skills work together.

Result? if its all about "player skill" and not "build skill" then all classes become ultra specialized in niche build types, then its the player that clicks best that wins. Its not a dig at the PVP community, its too late for that anyways it IS a critique on Anets take on "balance" a take that has taken hold of PVE in the form of Ursan i might add.

Its not ALL bad though.

Heroes have opened up some new possibilities in the form that instead of just one "hand" we can have 3 more. This means that each Hero takes the place of a colour (secondary profession) and its the end result that counts not the single individual builds. The downside is that they are TERRIBLE players and lack scripting capabilities, it could be somewhat compensated with 7 Heroes but hey...

Numa Pompilius · Feb 26, 2008, 02:07 AM // 02:07

I think maybe you guys need to consider the difference between "somewhat inspired by" and "an exact clone of".

And MtG not being based on luck? Please. Even Poker is about 60% luck, MtG is like 95% luck.

arcanemacabre · Feb 26, 2008, 02:10 AM // 02:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

...

Guild Wars is a team game, not a 1 vs. 1. Biggest difference, IMO. Your 'hand' is technically all 64 skills. It's like having your whole deck playable at your leisure, rather than luck of the draw.

ogre_jd · Feb 26, 2008, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Ah, I remember MtG (started about a week after Legends had come out, and thus about 2 days after it disappeared from the local shops

) - balance thrown out of whack every expansion, constant errata, nerfs (Trample, for example), and card bannings for tournaments, rules simplified to the point that a 5 year old could learn the game, etc., etc... Glad I gave up on it back 'round Mercadian Masques...

Winterclaw · Feb 26, 2008, 02:15 AM // 02:15

The purpose of secondaries originally was to allow more archetypes. I think the problem in the current system is the lack of skill points. You need 12 ranks at least for a skill line to be effective. That means you've maxed out by the time you've picked two lines from your primary. There are a few times that a 11/10/10 build will work, but not always. Even then, you are running the risk of being gimmiky.

In MtG your constraints are land cards (mana) and what's in your hand. In GW you have 8 skills, but they have verying degrees of effectiveness in order to use them. If every skill had a set stat (meaning no skill points) or if you have 200 att points for primary skills and 100 for secondaries then the secondary professions would probably become more easy to use. Until then, only a signet of illusions mesmer can approach free use of secondary classes.

That's my opinion, now the people in IRC will probably call be a n00b because of it.

undeadgun · Feb 26, 2008, 02:26 AM // 02:26

i want to use my muti-colored cards, so i have to go 2 or 3 colors deck

i think the mana fix in MTG is easier than in GW,reason:in MTG, 60% time is luck of the draw, if you get land host or screwed, no matter how high your skill level is, you lose. However, in GW, there just that 8 skills on your screen, everytime you play it, they will be there, no matter what.So imo the secondary professions in GW is quite important since the choice is limited to only one secondary(MTG u can go mono white,bule white, black white,red white,green white or even 3 colors 4 colors 5 colors deck).

Cacheelma · Feb 26, 2008, 02:37 AM // 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetdoc

In order to use 90% of the cards of another color, you have to have enough land cards in your hand that have that color. That's the same concept of the attribute investment in GW, IMO.

Not really, no.

You see, in MtG, when you play a monocolor deck, you will have a solid mana supply. But, your deck will not be as versatile as a multicolor deck. But nevertheless your deck will still be strong enough to beat other decks.

If you play multicolor deck (2 colors, 3 colors, 4 colors, 5 colors), the ONLY problem you will have is resource management. If you can fix that, your cards from any colors you use will be as strong as though you're using a monocolor deck; there's no such thing as "this is my primary color so the cards from this color are stronger".

With that said, I'd say that the concept of "Primary attribute" in GW makes the whole "similar to MtG" premise to go downhill and never really reach the point it should be. I'm not saying it's bad to have the primary attribute, but that it creates an imbalanced profession (color) combination you won't find in MtG.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nyktos

Cards of your second colour in Magic take up deck slots just as much as second profession skills take up skill slots in GW.

Yeah. But cards from your so-called second color in Magic never get "weaker" because you think of it as "second color", unlike in GW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

This is the part where Anets version of "balance" came and bit them in the ass.

A build in GW is NOT the equivalent of a deck in magic. It approximates a 7 card hand in magic (+ one drawn), the "perfect" hand if you will.

the colours went more or less like this i think:

White: Monk

Blue: Mesmer, Ranger

Red: Elementalist

Black: Necromancer

Green: Ranger, Warrior

The problem is that in MTG althought there is no stronger colour, they are not equal. Black is NOT better than Green. Its just better at destroy and playing from the graveyard. Green on the other hand can produce mana and lay out the pain in the form of gargantuan creatures.

Its impossible to predict whether mono Black VS mono Green will win just by basing yourself on the colour, yet they are in no way EQUAL.

the advantage of playing muticolour decks in MTG is obvious, in a Black/Green deck you can for example create a strong mana curve coupled with huge creatures that just keep on coming back from the grave while adding some decent creature control as well.

Problem is in GW it dosent really work that way.

One of the big issues is the fact that we cant use sec prof runes on the toons i feel.

The other huge issue is artificial imposed metagame stemming from constant never ending skill balancing. Lets take a look at why:

In MTG its not the player who can slam down his card onto the table first that wins the fight, Its the deck construction as a WHOLE and a small measure of luck (a good "balanced" deck needs very little luck indeed).

In GW it seems that the build is not nearly as important as who clicks on the skills first, fastest, and most consistently, the famed "player skill". Typical Anet reaction to outrage that a build dominates the meta is to nerf it, but....in MTG the fact that a deck or a given hand wins the match consistently just means its BETTER and that the player has done a good job in making those skills work together.

Result? if its all about "player skill" and not "build skill" then all classes become ultra specialized in niche build types, then its the player that clicks best that wins. Its not a dig at the PVP community, its too late for that anyways it IS a critique on Anets take on "balance" a take that has taken hold of PVE in the form of Ursan i might add.

Its not ALL bad though.

Heroes have opened up some new possibilities in the form that instead of just one "hand" we can have 3 more. This means that each Hero takes the place of a colour (secondary profession) and its the end result that counts not the single individual builds. The downside is that they are TERRIBLE players and lack scripting capabilities, it could be somewhat compensated with 7 Heroes but hey...

Hear, hear.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

And MtG not being based on luck? Please. Even Poker is about 60% luck, MtG is like 95% luck.

He stated CLEARLY that it's based on luck, just that if you make a good enough deck, you can negate the need of "lucky draw" most of the time. It's different from Poker, clearly, as you make your own deck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ogre_jd

Ah, I remember MtG - balance thrown out of whack every expansion, constant errata, nerfs (Trample, for example), and card bannings for tournaments, rules simplified to the point that a 5 year old could learn the game, etc., etc... Glad I gave up on it back 'round Mercadian Masques...

Yay, let's bash that other classic and more popular game so that we can feel better about ourselves and the game we play, eh?

It's pathetic. Please stop it.

You left Magic during the old era where each set was more broken than the ones before. And let me tell you; unlike MtG where the dev can't go back in time and fix the previous sets which are broken (so instead they have to use restriction rules to fix them), GW's dev HAS ALL THE TIME IN THE WORLD to fix the game. And look at how balanced GW is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by undeadgun

i want to use my muti-colored cards, so i have to go 2 or 3 colors deck

i think the mana fix in MTG is easier than in GW,reason:in MTG, 60% time is luck of the draw, if you get land host or screwed, no matter how high your skill level is, you lose. However, in GW, there just that 8 skills on your screen, everytime you play it, they will be there, no matter what.So imo the secondary professions in GW is quite important since the choice is limited to only one secondary(MTG u can go mono white,bule white, black white,red white,green white or even 3 colors 4 colors 5 colors deck).

As I said earlier; the only problem you will face with multicolor deck is the resource management. And the more colors you use, the more severe the problem. But if you can overcome such problem, every single card in your deck would be as strong as though you're using a monocolor deck. In GW, however, skills from your secondary profession will NEVER get as strong as when they're from your primary profession (due to runes).

Snow Bunny · Feb 26, 2008, 02:38 AM // 02:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

ArenaNet said that the secondary skill system was originally implemented to parallel Magic: The Gathering and its tendency to feature deck using two colors of mana. However, unlike MtG, in GW you need to invest a lot of resources into a secondary profession, specifically attribute points and skill slots. (in MtG, usuing a second color takes no more effort than only using one)

99% of the builds I make (and also see) use only skills from the Primary profession. You only have 7-8 skill slots; you have to make them count.

It was somewhat innovative back in 2005, but now, a secondary profession merely justifies bad builds and exploitive class interaction.

What's the difference between running Zergway and a Suicide Black deck?

Most successful decks are mono-colored, and for good reason. They often splash in some other colors for a specialized addition.

Twiddle Desire used black for Tendrils, Wake used blue for counter spells, Opposition splashed in green solely for the Hermit and a bit of mana acceleration.

Now think about GW.
Splash some /mo for mending touch or Aegis, splash air magic for shock/gale, splash 10 blood for a boonprot, etc.

Very few competitive decks balance out 2+ colors together; as I said previously, one color forms the foundation, and the other color provides useful bits.

<----- quit after Mirrodin block, none of that Japanese samurai animal baloney for me.

Sleeper Service · Feb 26, 2008, 02:38 AM // 02:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

Guild Wars is a team game, not a 1 vs. 1. Biggest difference, IMO. Your 'hand' is technically all 64 skills. It's like having your whole deck playable at your leisure, rather than luck of the draw.

1vs1 is just one way of playing mtg. Teams, emperor, 2 headed Giant, ffa.... heck you can even do Wow style "raids" if you can be bothered.

it can be a team game no problem, and OC decks can be modified (have to be really) accordingly.

As for the hand, it would be as you describe if we could modify our bar while in combat.

@Numa. if your basing your deck on 95% luck something is wrong.

arcanemacabre · Feb 26, 2008, 02:45 AM // 02:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

1vs1 is just one way of playing mtg.

But GW is only a team game - the competitive side, at least, considering M:TG doesn't have "PvE." Even Hero Battles are a team game because it's not just your build, but your heroes as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleeper Service

As for the hand, it would be as you describe if we could modify our bar while in combat.

No, by "your," I mean "your team." The team acts as one with 64 skills (or 32 for 4v4).

Cacheelma · Feb 26, 2008, 02:51 AM // 02:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

What's the difference between running Zergway and a Suicide Black deck?

Most successful decks are mono-colored, and for good reason. They often splash in some other colors for a specialized addition.

Twiddle Desire used black for Tendrils, Wake used blue for counter spells, Opposition splashed in green solely for the Hermit and a bit of mana acceleration.

Now think about GW.
Splash some /mo for mending touch or Aegis, splash air magic for shock/gale, splash 10 blood for a boonprot, etc.

Very few competitive decks balance out 2+ colors together; as I said previously, one color forms the foundation, and the other color provides useful bits.

<----- quit after Mirrodin block, none of that Japanese samurai animal baloney for me.

If you look at the decks used in CHAMPIONSHIP matches (aren't those where you'd find "competitive decks"?) during Odyssey-Onslaught-Mirrodin era, you'd have seen that most of them ARE MULTICOLOR DECKS.

Blue-green madness? Goblin-bidding (red black)? Astral Slide (multicolor)? Modular (artifact-based multicolor)?

Please do some research before posting something as though you know about it. No offense.

undeadgun · Feb 26, 2008, 02:55 AM // 02:55

http://cards.mtgnews.com/Cards/LW/Do...ege_Tower.html

3 color, but simply amazing

Voltaic Annihilator · Feb 26, 2008, 02:56 AM // 02:56

without 2ndarys, no solo farming etc

Snow Bunny · Feb 26, 2008, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cacheelma

If you look at the decks used in CHAMPIONSHIP matches (aren't that where you'd find "competitive decks"?) during Odyssey-Onslaught-Mirrodin era, you'd have seen that most of them ARE MULTICOLOR DECKS.

Blue-green madness? Goblin-bidding (red black)? Astral Slide (multicolor)? Modular (artifact-based multicolor)?

Please do some research before posting something as though you know about it. No offense.

Ravager splashed 3 colors - Red for shrapnel blast, black for Disciple of the Vault, and Blue for Thoughtcast.
Slide splashed red for Lightning Rift, Slice and Dice, and Starstorm.
You are correct about madness, it was blue/green.

Type 1, which is the main TOURNAMENT format with the highest rewards, had very competitive decks mono-colored with a little splashing.

Black Reanimate
Twiddle Desire
Sligh
Ravager
Suicide Black (AGAIN)

I could go on, should you wish.

I competed at the west coast regionals 4 years straight. I have much more experience in this discussion than you.

Kakumei · Feb 26, 2008, 03:01 AM // 03:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

(in MtG, usuing a second color takes no more effort than only using one)

Congratulations, you've never played Magic.

undeadgun · Feb 26, 2008, 03:03 AM // 03:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Type 1, which is the main TOURNAMENT format with the highest rewards, had very competitive decks mono-colored with a little splashing.

Thats not true,PTQ are only for Type 2 and Extended

Snow Bunny · Feb 26, 2008, 03:08 AM // 03:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by undeadgun

Thats not true,PTQ are only for Type 2 and Extended

The Grand Prix (3?) years back was Extended and Type1.

Otherwise there's no use for P9.

I could give you the links for all the Type1 tournies in California if you'd like

Edit: It's not the most important format, this is true. My mistake in previous posts

Zinger314 · Feb 26, 2008, 03:10 AM // 03:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kakumei

Congratulations, you've never played Magic.

I should clarify, that if your deck uses 24 lands of one color, for example, splitting the lands 12 of one color and 12 of another won't dramatically affect the efficiency of either color (except maybe in the case if your deck uses cards which require 3x of one type of mana, which is extremely rare)

Even then, there are tons of mana fixers for 2 colors. Painlands, Duals, Fetchlands, etc.

It was just an example, chill.

Sleeper Service · Feb 26, 2008, 03:10 AM // 03:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

But GW is only a team game - the competitive side, at least, considering M:TG doesn't have "PvE." Even Hero Battles are a team game because it's not just your build, but your heroes as well.

No, by "your," I mean "your team." The team acts as one with 64 skills (or 32 for 4v4).

ah yes, in that case I fully agree. I misunderstood you.

in hero battles as well the team acts as one. In some cases the "fingers" may act on their own, but what you really want is a hand...or a fist.

azizul1975 · Feb 26, 2008, 03:15 AM // 03:15

what's the point of secondary ?

sometimes u don't have to invest anything in the secondary, and yet u can be effective in a team.

[skill]echo[/skill][skill]arcane echo[/skill][skill]aegis[/skill]

(not sure why people wanna echo mending)