Curse

FoxBat · Jul 14, 2007, 02:07 AM // 02:07

Change glad points to 12-15 point win streak.

Xenex Xclame · Jul 14, 2007, 03:30 AM // 03:30

And that accomplishes what exactly Fox?

Sentience · Jul 14, 2007, 03:42 AM // 03:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenex Xclame

And that accomplishes what exactly Fox?

Makes a lot of people call him an idiot and solves nothing.

Just go with what people have said before to fix the leaving problem, add some sort of cooldown if people leave prematurely (Obviously with consideration to previous leavers/dc's/etc.

Funk · Jul 14, 2007, 03:51 AM // 03:51

Just remove Gladpoints from RA. Problem solved.

Zinger314 · Jul 14, 2007, 04:26 AM // 04:26

I resent the fact that my name is used in the original post. I only complain about things which can be controlled; people who suck can never change...

Kakumei · Jul 14, 2007, 04:57 AM // 04:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenex Xclame

Let me start with saying, you dont know Zinger.
No need to post a name of someone that people know to attract attention to your post.

While I agree namedrops tend to be pretty annoying, you don't have to know Zinger to know what kind of threads he tends to post.

Relambrien · Jul 14, 2007, 05:07 AM // 05:07

EDIT: After posting I realized how ridiculously huge this is. This is a long post even for me. I would appreciate it if you wouldn't just go "tl;dr" and ignore this. Also, due to the size, there's probably a lot of typos and such I missed. Try and understand my intent if you see one that confuses you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

It's not my style to make Zinger-esque threads, but PvP is completely ruined by people who are leaving. It's absolutely ridiculous. If there's no monk, they will leave. I'm getting this more than ever. It happens 50% of the time.

The fact that you believe PvP in its entirety is being ruined by RA leavers makes me laugh. I'm completely serious.

In reality though, think of this. RA is a part of the competitive aspect of the game (sadly), which means that you are going to get a lot of people who want to compete. They don't want to just goof around and relax by playing, they want to have fun by being competitive. And in RA, there are two ways to be competitive. The first is to not suck, but then that applies to everything. The second is to get a balanced or otherwise advantaged team. Having a Monk is just a massive advantage to most RA players, who either don't bring self-healing or are unable to survive for a long period of time without external healing (e.g. they don't kite).

Thus, these people then decide that to have fun, they wish to get in a balanced or otherwise advantaged team. They aren't having fun if they lose, and not having a Monk makes it that much more likely that they will lose. Even moreso with this weekend, when the better players are coming out of the shadows to reap Gladiator points. Thus, in order to have fun, they decide leaving is the best option. After all, in a disadvantaged team, staying just to have everyone lose doesn't make it any more fun for those who stayed. The leaver gets his fun while those who stay are unaffected.

After all, would you rather spend 30 minutes having no fun and being completely frustrated, or spending five minutes hopping in and out until you can get a team you can have fun with? Besides that, in those 30 minutes of you staying, almost all of your games are going to be losses or 1-win streaks. It doesn't even help those you decided to stay for, since they lose anyway.

Let me wrap this up with this. People have fun in different ways. Leavers have fun by being competitive and winning, not merely by playing. They leave because they want to have fun, and staying in a disadvantaged team detracts from that fun. It's just a case of people enjoying the game in different ways. If you enjoy the game by playing, and don't particularly care about whether or not you win, then you would be annoyed with these people. At the same time, these people, who enjoy the game by winning and not merely by playing, would be annoyed with you for not taking the game seriously enough.

I know it's cliché, but putting yourself in the other's shoes really does help to understand their position. The casual player can think, "Well these guys must have fun by winning, so I can see why they wouldn't want to take a risk with a team like this." The leaver can think, "I know they want to play, but I would have to make things miserable for myself in order to entertain that. Besides, they can still play if I leave; it's not like they care about winning."

What I'm trying to get at is this. Leavers are not some inconsiderate group of people who take pleasure in making you lose. They take pleasure in winning, which causes them to leave parties which they do not wish to take a risk on. If a bank refuses to give you a loan on account of bad credit, you don't think, "Well they can't use my credit history to judge whether I'm worthy of a loan!" The bank didn't want to take a risk with a person they didn't feel they could trust. Leavers are the same. They leave because they don't want to take a risk with a team they don't feel they can trust to possibly get a nice win streak.

If participating in something hindered your ability to have fun or achieve your goals, would you participate in it? No, you wouldn't. This is what happens when people repeatedly leave.

But then you might say, "But we don't need a monk to win! I've done it plenty of times!" Perhaps, but even if you've succeeded that many times, how many times have you failed? A -lot- more, I'd assume. Considering the general skill level of an RA player, if you throw a monk onto one of two teams, that team wins the majority of the time. You can't say, "Well I've beat a team with a monk before" as proof that leaving is wrong. Look at all the times you've -lost- to a team with a Monk, and that will tell you something.

And before anyone calls me a noob leaver who's trying to ruin the game, try to use some common sense. I'm not supporting leaving; just the individual's right to do so. They aren't trying to ruin the game for others; it's just that when the leaver's objectives conflict with the teammates', then someone is going to be dissatisfied no matter what happens. It just so happens that in such a situation, the leaver has the power to forcibly work towards his objective, whereas the other teammates are forced to rely on each other's actions to achieve theirs. Thus it is the teammates who are left dissatisfied, rather than the leaver.

Instituting a "lock-out" mechanism just reverses the tables so that the leaver is dissatisfied when the teammates are not. Either way, someone's going to be dissatisfied.

There is no way to solve this sort of problem, because neither side is at fault. Each is trying to have fun in their own way, but it just so happens that doing so occurs at the expense of the other side. You could only solve it by forcing everyone onto one side, but it's impossible to force everyone into thinking they can only have fun a certain way. As long as different objectives exist, so will this problem.

And so I have a message for everyone.

To the players against leavers, try and deal with it. You are the unintended victims of the leaver's objectives, so try and achieve yours by working around the leaver. You obviously don't care as much about winning, or else you would be doing the same. Try and have fun just by playing, as you are much more likely to be able to do that than the leaver.

To the leavers, a Monk isn't the only gauge of a team's competency. Look at how well-balanced the team is, check for self-heals, and see if the other team has disadvantages (for instance, a leaver of their own). You may have no chance at victory with 2 Mending wammos and a flare spamming elementalist, but a Necro hexer, a Bsurge, a Shadow Prison sin and a Burning Arrow ranger have an excellent chance of winning.

To sum it all up, no one is at fault for the leaver problem. It's the result of conflicts of interest, and is unavoidable. Don't think that just because the other side is causing you problems, that they need to be punished (e.g. lockout timer) or left out of consideration (e.g. those who care less about winning and more about playing).

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Jul 14, 2007, 05:21 AM // 05:21

Well I only skimmed your post, but you sir, win the thread.

Gli · Jul 14, 2007, 07:41 AM // 07:41

I realize RA isn't exactly the PvP flagship of this game, but let's not forget that everyone who didn't start playing before the Battle Isles has to win 5 consecutive games in it to advance to TA and eventually HA. Having a really crap game mode as a speedbump to reach other game modes isn't a good thing at all.

Oh, and Relambrien, you're wrong. Leavers are at fault for the leaver problem. They're bloody idiots to play RA at all if they wish to only play in winning teams. If you want to play a game, stick to its rules and be committed to the people you play with or don't play at all. I used to play 'Risk' a lot when I was a kid. If I'd given up and left everytime as soon as the countries were dealt and I didn't like my chances, I wouldn't have been playing much at all, because I'd be 'locked out'. No one would've wanted to play with me. Something should be done to clean up the RA disgrace, and the leavers should be the ones to suffer. If they don't like it, no one is making them press the 'Enter Battle' button.

upier · Jul 14, 2007, 07:52 AM // 07:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relambrien

snip

Because you support common sense:
How much different is the thinking of the players who will leave a RANDOM arena from a person that grabs a gun - shuts his eyes - and points it into a random direction HOPING he'll not shoot himself?

Guys - if you want a game that you can control (by having the team you want) then RANDOM arenas AREN'T what you are looking for!
The players who leave because they don't get a team they WANT in a random arena ARE dumb.
Do the math - 10 classes, 4 party slots. What are the chances that you'll get the team you want?
Are they bad players?
As much as I want to say yes to that question - who knows!
All we can say is that these players are unable to understand the concept of what "random" is.

And please - do not insult us by saying that the leaving-problem isn't caused by leavers!
If you advocate the right to leave - i wish to advocate my right to have a party without a parson that would leave. That means the person that feels that they have the right to leave a match shouldn't be allowed to enter a game if there is a chance that they will ran into me. AND because this is a random game - there is ALWAYS a chance they will ran into me.
Hence - the person that advocates the right to leave - SHOULD never be allowed to enter a game.
Hows that for a twist on your right?
(this of course is only possible since you are exercising your right in a way that hurts other people THUS I am allowed to do the same since we obviously have some sort of selfish-land rules active in GW!
I am the king of the world baby! At least in my instance!
But wait - what is this?
I need to share my kingdom with 7-15 additional king and queens?
Danger Will Robinson, Danger!
Can't compute!

once again - the need for a roll-eyes emote is more then obvious!)

lutz · Jul 14, 2007, 08:05 AM // 08:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

I realize RA isn't exactly the PvP flagship of this game, but let's not forget that everyone who didn't start playing before the Battle Isles has to win 5 consecutive games in it to advance to TA and eventually HA. Having a really crap game mode as a speedbump to reach other game modes isn't a good thing at all.

Oh, and Relambrien, you're wrong. Leavers are at fault for the leaver problem. They're bloody idiots to play RA at all if they wish to only play in winning teams. If you want to play a game, stick to its rules and be committed to the people you play with or don't play at all. I used to play 'Risk' a lot when I was a kid. If I'd given up and left everytime as soon as the countries were dealt and I didn't like my chances, I wouldn't have been playing much at all, because I'd be 'locked out'. No one would've wanted to play with me. Something should be done to clean up the RA disgrace, and the leavers should be the ones to suffer. If they don't like it, no one is making them press the 'Enter Battle' button.

If you played in a team where you knew you were going to lose (e.g. Domain of Anguish with a full team of W/Mo and A/W who have just started to play GW), would you continue?
If you say yes, you're lying.

DreamWind · Jul 14, 2007, 08:14 AM // 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

How much different is the thinking of the players who will leave a RANDOM arena from a person that grabs a gun - shuts his eyes - and points it into a random direction HOPING he'll not shoot himself?

Completely different. So different that I think the comparison is ridiculous and I won't even go near it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

If you want a game that you can control (by having the team you want) then RANDOM arenas AREN'T what you are looking for!

Sure they are what I'm looking for. I enjoy RA because I can play them how I want. And the teams will always be random.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

The players who leave because they don't get a team they WANT in a random arena ARE dumb.

No...I think the people who stay on worthless teams are dumb.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

All we can say is that these players are unable to understand the concept of what "random" is.

Random means you don't know what is going to happen. For example: you don't know when I'm going to leave. I win. Its still random.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

And please - do not insult us by saying that the leaving-problem isn't caused by leavers!

Its not. Its caused by bad players taking away from why I play the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

If you advocate the right to leave - i wish to advocate my right to have a party without a parson that would leave. That means the person that feels that they have the right to leave a match shouldn't be allowed to enter a game if there is a chance that they will ran into me.

Then I advocate my right to say you shouldn't play there if you don't like it. You can't handle how it is set up and only want to complain. I see no problem with RA as it is and never have after 2 years of playing it (and probably more than 90% of the posters here).

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Hence - the person that advocates the right to leave - SHOULD never be allowed to enter a game. Hows that for a twist on your right?

You haven't shown this at all. For a twist on your postion...don't enter the arenas if you don't like them. Simple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

This of course is only possible since you are exercising your right in a way that hurts other people THUS I am allowed to do the same since we obviously have some sort of selfish-land rules active in GW!

If this hurts you there is some serious problems with how you play games and you need to leave the arenas as soon as possible. Personally I don't leave teams much because I monk alot, but I don't mind leavers in the slightest. I don't even think its that big of a problem. I played warrior all day today and didn't see an excessive amount of leavers at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gli

If they don't like it, no one is making them press the 'Enter Battle' button.

Thanks for clearing this whole situation up. Don't like=Don't enter.

lutz · Jul 14, 2007, 08:15 AM // 08:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Because you support common sense:
How much different is the thinking of the players who will leave a RANDOM arena from a person that grabs a gun - shuts his eyes - and points it into a random direction HOPING he'll not shoot himself?

Guys - if you want a game that you can control (by having the team you want) then RANDOM arenas AREN'T what you are looking for!
The players who leave because they don't get a team they WANT in a random arena ARE dumb.
Do the math - 10 classes, 4 party slots. What are the chances that you'll get the team you want?
Are they bad players?
As much as I want to say yes to that question - who knows!
All we can say is that these players are unable to understand the concept of what "random" is.

And please - do not insult us by saying that the leaving-problem isn't caused by leavers!
If you advocate the right to leave - i wish to advocate my right to have a party without a parson that would leave. That means the person that feels that they have the right to leave a match shouldn't be allowed to enter a game if there is a chance that they will ran into me. AND because this is a random game - there is ALWAYS a chance they will ran into me.
Hence - the person that advocates the right to leave - SHOULD never be allowed to enter a game.
Hows that for a twist on your right?
(this of course is only possible since you are exercising your right in a way that hurts other people THUS I am allowed to do the same since we obviously have some sort of selfish-land rules active in GW!
I am the king of the world baby! At least in my instance!
But wait - what is this?
I need to share my kingdom with 7-15 additional king and queens?
Danger Will Robinson, Danger!
Can't compute!

once again - the need for a roll-eyes emote is more then obvious!)

You're talking about a team we can control, as in HA - you can control everybody by having them get on Ventrilo, coordinate their builds, synergize skills, and everything. With RA, it's significantly different; all you're looking for is a source of healing (notice I didn't say monk), and pressure. You can't make your perfect Rit Spike team, or your IWay - you instead depend on people you don't know. It's not so much the builds but rather the people.

Gli · Jul 14, 2007, 08:23 AM // 08:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by lutz

If you played in a team where you knew you were going to lose (e.g. Domain of Anguish with a full team of W/Mo and A/W who have just started to play GW), would you continue?
If you say yes, you're lying.

The issue wouldn't never rise, I don't do PvE with strangers, haven't after the first few weeks I played.

Now you will ask, "Why don't you play with strangers?"

A) Because I don't have to, I have a guild full of RL friends.
B) Because it's the only way to avoid the situation you're painting.

RA leavers are lazy anti-social jackasses. I'll repeat: lazy, anti-social jackasses. Bold for emphasis: lazy anti-social jackasses They don't want to play RA, they want to play a subset of that game mode: the subset of games where they have a good team. Guess what, that's actually another game mode! It's called Team Arenas! Amazing, isn't it? But they're too lazy to bother with building an actual team apparently, so instead they ruin another game mode for everyone else. Hence: lazy anti-social jackasses.

In addition, they're often also pathetic mewling children, as witnessed by their penchant for making up excuses for their behavior, as pathetic mewling children are wont to.

zwei2stein · Jul 14, 2007, 09:11 AM // 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relambrien

snip

You would have point is TA did not exist.

But it is here giving anyone who wants to be competitive in 4-man teamplay actuall chance.

Besides, you hop team couple of times before you get asnything decent, dont you? You ruined game for DOZENs of people - either by taking their chance for gg or by dperiving them of decent oposition.

Really, temporary block of RA for leavers is way to go.

aka "go to TA, noob"

DreamWind · Jul 14, 2007, 09:18 AM // 09:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

RA leavers are lazy anti-social jackasses. I'll repeat: lazy, anti-social jackasses. Bold for emphasis: lazy anti-social jackasses They don't want to play RA, they want to play a subset of that game mode: the subset of games where they have a good team. Guess what, that's actually another game mode! It's called Team Arenas! Amazing, isn't it? But they're too lazy to bother with building an actual team apparently, so instead they ruin another game mode for everyone else. Hence: lazy anti-social jackasses.

TA sucks. The TA argument is a waste of time. I only play RA for some quick games when I HAVE NOBODY ELSE on to TA with. And even if I did have people to play TA with, I'd gather a couple more and GvG instead. I only play RA when I don't feel like organizing a team and don't have time for anything else. Your point is invalid. TA is worthless anyways...it needs additions to be worth anything (like a ladder or tournaments or some other thing).

Quote:

Originally Posted by gli

In addition, they're often also pathetic mewling children, as witnessed by their penchant for making up excuses for their behavior, as pathetic mewling children are wont to.

And you calling people lazy anti-social jackasses is mature? Lol. Actually my arguments are logically undisputed so far and I'm not even spewing names around. The only argument against is "its selfish" which really isn't an argument an all. The arenas were designed for people to do as they will. Take it or leave it. Stop complaining.

Pwny Ride · Jul 14, 2007, 09:24 AM // 09:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

This is what I mean. People think the problem isn't big. Bla bla bla play as monk. Are you crazy? When I'm finally on a team that won't leave, the opposite team will, and I'll miss out on the action and balthazar faction. Give me a damned break. Do you even play PvP?

And? You get an instant win. How is that a bad thing?

Gli · Jul 14, 2007, 09:43 AM // 09:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

And you calling people lazy anti-social jackasses is mature? Lol. Actually my arguments are logically undisputed so far and I'm not even spewing names around. The only argument against is "its selfish" which really isn't an argument an all. The arenas were designed for people to do as they will. Take it or leave it. Stop complaining.

I never laid claim to any pretense of maturity.

And as far me calling people lazy anti-social jackasses: if the shoe fits...

Here's logic for you: if everyone played it 'the leaver way' there wouldn't be any point to RA. We'd have 99% of all games aborted, 0.99% of games would immediately be awarded to a 'good' team for no more effort than just showing up and triggering the leavers on the other side. The remaining 0.01% would be actual battles. Just random percentages but that's the general way it would break down. If that's how they were designed, fine. It's about time they redesigned it into something worth playing. I'd expect ANet to put a bit more thought into these things.

upier · Jul 14, 2007, 10:43 AM // 10:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Completely different. So different that I think the comparison is ridiculous and I won't even go near it.

RA situation:
You enter a random game, hoping for a team that is worthy of you.

Firing a gun with eyes shut:
You fire the gun, hoping for the best.

If you'd want the best chances - you enter a game with a team setup you can control OR open your eyes.

BUT if you don't care about what team you get NOR the result of the firing - you enter RA or shoot with eyes shut.

Otherwise one is just dumb to be working against the odds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Sure they are what I'm looking for. I enjoy RA because I can play them how I want. And the teams will always be random.

If the teams are what you are looking for - then this:
"If you want a game that you can control (by having the team you want) then RANDOM arenas AREN'T what you are looking for!"
doesn't apply for you.
Are you just trying to bitch for the sake of bitching then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

No...I think the people who stay on worthless teams are dumb.

And if I feel that YOU are the worthless part of the team?
And everyone but you leaves?
Every time?
Will you still enjoy RA?
Will you enjoy 4v1?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Random means you don't know what is going to happen. For example: you don't know when I'm going to leave. I win. Its still random.

The random isn't connected with the events that will happen. The random in "random arenas" is connected to the party formation.
Or are you saying that GvG is a "random arena" also?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Its not. Its caused by bad players taking away from why I play the game.

Or in the case of players who dislike leavers - by leavers.
Your point?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Then I advocate my right to say you shouldn't play there if you don't like it. You can't handle how it is set up and only want to complain. I see no problem with RA as it is and never have after 2 years of playing it (and probably more than 90% of the posters here).
You haven't shown this at all. For a twist on your postion...don't enter the arenas if you don't like them. Simple.

I never said I don't like them the basic premise of RA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

If this hurts you there is some serious problems with how you play games and you need to leave the arenas as soon as possible. Personally I don't leave teams much because I monk alot, but I don't mind leavers in the slightest. I don't even think its that big of a problem. I played warrior all day today and didn't see an excessive amount of leavers at all.

What makes your right objectively stronger then mine?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lutz

You're talking about a team we can control, as in HA - you can control everybody by having them get on Ventrilo, coordinate their builds, synergize skills, and everything. With RA, it's significantly different; all you're looking for is a source of healing (notice I didn't say monk), and pressure. You can't make your perfect Rit Spike team, or your IWay - you instead depend on people you don't know. It's not so much the builds but rather the people.

That's my point.
If one is unable to understand that and they will rage-quit everytime they enter RA and don't get the team they want - they just dumb for even presuming that this will happen often enough to make it worthwhile.

DreamWind · Jul 14, 2007, 11:32 AM // 11:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

Here's logic for you: if everyone played it 'the leaver way' there wouldn't be any point to RA. We'd have 99% of all games aborted, 0.99% of games would immediately be awarded to a 'good' team for no more effort than just showing up and triggering the leavers on the other side. The remaining 0.01% would be actual battles. Just random percentages but that's the general way it would break down. If that's how they were designed, fine. It's about time they redesigned it into something worth playing. I'd expect ANet to put a bit more thought into these things.

Except that scenario will never happen because the people who do it with any regularity are "spikes" if you will (they play to win), which is a small minority. And most people do not play the "leaver way". This problem is grossly overstated.

As for Anet redesigning RA, I disagree as I still see not enough problem. Besides, Anet has a lot of bigger more important things they need to fix that they haven't touched in ages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

RA situation:
You enter a random game, hoping for a team that is worthy of you.

Firing a gun with eyes shut:
You fire the gun, hoping for the best.

If you'd want the best chances - you enter a game with a team setup you can control OR open your eyes.

BUT if you don't care about what team you get NOR the result of the firing - you enter RA or shoot with eyes shut.

Otherwise one is just dumb to be working against the odds.

Exactly...why work against the odds? RA is not a case of I HAVE to fire the gun with my eyes closed. I care about the result of the firing...I don't want to get shot. Thus, if I am put in a situation where I need to fire a gun at my head, and I have a CHOICE of doing with my eyes closed or open, I am going to do it with my eyes opened.

Continuing with this, why would I bother to fire the gun with my eyes shut? If you are going by this logic, than technically you are arguing that if people have to fire a gun at their head and have a choice of closed or open eyes, they should choose closed because its the way everybody else should be doing it.

And even farther, you shouldn't even be pointing the gun at your head in the first place if you are afraid people who opened their eyes will do better than those who kept them closed. Don't play the arenas altogether and you definately won't get shot.

Ok enough with this analogy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Are you just trying to bitch for the sake of bitching then?

No. I am a fairly regular RA player who enjoys it how it is now, and doesn't want to see it changed with very little evidence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

And if I feel that YOU are the worthless part of the team?

Then leave? Although that rarely happens as I monk a lot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

And everyone but you leaves?

Then I leave as well. This rarely happens though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Will you still enjoy RA?

Yes. I enjoy RA now and all these claims you say "could happen" actually happen very rarely.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Will you enjoy 4v1?

No I left already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

The random isn't connected with the events that will happen. The random in "random arenas" is connected to the party formation.

Yes, and if I leave my team and join another team it is still random party formation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Or are you saying that GvG is a "random arena" also?

No because its not random party formation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

Or in the case of players who dislike leavers - by leavers.
Your point?

My point is this entire argument is caused by people with highly exagerrated complaints.

Besides, the "leavers" aren't complaining.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

I never said I don't like them the basic premise of RA.
What makes your right objectively stronger then mine?

The basic premise of RA is intact. Randomly formed teams. As for my right to play there being stronger than yours? It isn't. But I'm not the one complaining about the arena. Its as simple as not playing what you don't like. There are a lot of players who currently enjoy RA as it stands, why would we change it and alienate the current players based on a few people complaining?

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

If one is unable to understand that and they will rage-quit everytime they enter RA and don't get the team they want - they just dumb for even presuming that this will happen often enough to make it worthwhile.

I'm not looking for a well organized team if I leave. I'm looking for a team that is competent as opposed to a team that is going to get smashed in about 2 seconds. I have been playing long enough to judge the two. That being said, I am not a habitual leaver. But I don't want to see the arenas I like changed on complaints from a few people with an extremely small amount of evidence.

EDIT: I just realized that Relambrien won this thread ages ago. I should probably stop posting now I can't compete with that at the moment.