Curse

Across The Battle · Jul 01, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Because that would be cheating and it would be wrong. I'm not saying that leeching and leaving are not also wrong, but what's the expression, "Two wrongs don't make a right?"

And on the subject of leaving and leeching, I've noted numerous designer discussions this very week about the matter. The problems of leaving and leeching are not dead matters, in our eyes, and as I have said before, I truly do believe that there will be changes made to handle these issues.

In alliance battles, the biggest problem isnt leeching and leaving, its the pathetic reward for the losing team.

vaxmor · Jul 01, 2007, 09:50 PM // 21:50

how do you get the afkers to /resign?

Terra Xin · Jul 01, 2007, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Because that would be cheating and it would be wrong. I'm not saying that leeching and leaving are not also wrong, but what's the expression, "Two wrongs don't make a right?"

And on the subject of leaving and leeching, I've noted numerous designer discussions this very week about the matter. The problems of leaving and leeching are not dead matters, in our eyes, and as I have said before, I truly do believe that there will be changes made to handle these issues.

I've seen people in these threads take every measure they could to resolve this matter in their own hands, and out of all of the things that the community has done, in comparison to what Anet has done, there's a big gap. I'm not sure how difficult it is to find a solution to this problem, but it's been there since the beginning. Just a reminder.

And the phrase "Two wrongs don't make a right" is irrelevant. You can only say that if there were actually a reasonable solution to the problem that's in existence. There isn't. The second purpose of having two wrongs is that someone will take more notice of two wrongs happening, than one wrong happening. I hope that such an effect will come to light, but it wouldn't be the first outcry I've seen against leechers. You should know that, I hope.

At least you guys are taking a step into the right direction. I remember your earlier quotes saying that leeching is not a problem (last year). It is good!

martialis · Jul 01, 2007, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skycluster

...but really theses 24 people on one map...you have to try to convince all of them?

No, you only have to convince one person, then another soon after.

This could work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vaxmor

how do you get the afkers to /resign?

You don't, obviously.

Onarik Amrak · Jul 01, 2007, 10:32 PM // 22:32

3 Wrongs make a Right.

1- Reduced faction for losing.
2- Intolerable wait times.
3- Leechers.

Voltar · Jul 01, 2007, 11:58 PM // 23:58

/shrug
i think playing ab is fun. i guess that's not enough for some people.

i will admit that i've switched my aspenwood to kurzick. i originally did it to play with a friend who wanted to get kurzick armor for his rit, but aspenwood is way easier for the kurzicks so it's easier to win...at least while there's 1 decent prot monk monk guaranteed to be in my group every time.

Bai · Jul 02, 2007, 12:15 AM // 00:15

I agree that the Kurzick/Luxon PvE-only skills are too much of a grind. I spent my whole weekend casually doing ABs and Fort Aspenwood/Jade Quarry, yet I only got faction equal to one title track. I don't know how long it'll take me without the double faction and the urge to quit grinding from boredom..

scrinner · Jul 02, 2007, 12:24 AM // 00:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Ketsu

Really, a simple way to defeat leachers is make it so that anyone who never leaves their starting point and/or doesnt use any skills the entire match, cannot recieve faction.

]

A very good solution though then the leechers most probably will use bots to activate sprint at regular intervals or to move to avoid this system but it'll be one awesome start.

Voltar · Jul 02, 2007, 01:06 AM // 01:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by scrinner

]A very good solution though then the leechers most probably will use bots to activate sprint at regular intervals or to move to avoid this system but it'll be one awesome start.

concerning the kicking of inactives...qft.

there's a lot of problems with any solution...even the devs playing ab with a notepad writing down names...that's essentially making another "leech-like" player. that's why we got this kinda lame update which appears to have had no thought put into it. there was probably a lot of thought put into it however all possible soutions had their downsides. i'm not really sure if this one was the least of all evils and it has the unintended effect of increasing the community hate for leechers.

why are these people ffing? is it to sell jade/amber since bots get banned mo/wing it up? maybe there could be a "bot-friendly" farm town with no rare drops in order to divert people away from pissing off the rest of us. maybe they're just REALLY EXCITED about triple shot.

Shadis · Jul 02, 2007, 01:14 AM // 01:14

I find it a bit disturbing that it's still being talked about considering leechers and leavers have been a problem since Factions was released. These "fixes" did nothing but punish those of us who do fight to the end.

scrinner · Jul 02, 2007, 02:11 AM // 02:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadis

I find it a bit disturbing that it's still being talked about considering leechers and leavers have been a problem since Factions was released. These "fixes" did nothing but punish those of us who do fight to the end.

Seems you haven't read some of the other posts. The problem is there is no good solution. One solution will have many downsides. Alot of ideas have been shot down due to bad side effects

Ensign · Jul 02, 2007, 02:31 AM // 02:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Because that would be cheating and it would be wrong.

Why is it cheating? Where do the rules say that you cannot choose to stay or leave in a given alliance battle based on a random roll, or for any other reason at that? Are there even written rules for Alliance Battle to begin with? What mechanics are you using to punish people for leaving early or reward them for staying? Why is it wrong to use a particular strategy for maximizing one's reward in the game?

Win trading isn't cheating. It isn't wrong. It's the natural response to any game with a badly designed payoff matrix. The Alliance Faction patch changed the payoff matrix from one that sufficiently rewarded honest competition to one that rewarded win trading. If you asked one of your game designers who understands basic game theory, they would tell you the same thing.

The real question at hand is how a reward system that a first-semester game theory student could tell you was going to break messily managed to get onto a live commercial product without being caught by a professional design team.

Series · Jul 02, 2007, 02:56 AM // 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Well, this is what you get when you change motivation from having fun to getting bigger numbers.

It's never too late to remove PvE skills, you know...

I agree, but instead of removing them, make them do max damage at level 2 of the title. That is reasonably reachable without grind. Or heck, level 1 even. I don't care. If everyone has something, it is a good thing, not a bad

Omniclasm · Jul 02, 2007, 03:11 AM // 03:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Series

I agree, but instead of removing them, make them do max damage at level 2 of the title. That is reasonably reachable without grind. Or heck, level 1 even. I don't care. If everyone has something, it is a good thing, not a bad

Agreed, except people will complain that they are uber leet with their title and deserve a stronger Triple Shot.

Navaros · Jul 02, 2007, 03:14 AM // 03:14

I applaud the original poster for his ingenuity. Indeed if everyone followed that advice, it would help reduce the faction grind and everyone would advance in their faction titles way faster across the board, which is good for everyone. I personally don't see that as cheating, it's merely somewhat reducing the ludicrous grind required to max the PVE skills.

Vinraith · Jul 02, 2007, 03:29 AM // 03:29

More and more I just think /roll should be removed from the game entirely. Its legitimate uses are so much more minor and infrequent than its illegitimate ones.

Series · Jul 02, 2007, 04:00 AM // 04:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omniclasm

Agreed, except people will complain that they are uber leet with their title and deserve a stronger Triple Shot.

However, Guild Wars is supposed to be a game that doesn't award ADVANTAGES for grind

Let's see if the team lives up to this. I certainly think pleasing 95% of the community is better than pleasing the 5% with these uberranked titles, but who knows what Anet thinks about it

Ensign · Jul 02, 2007, 04:02 AM // 04:02

Something struck me while I was in the shower.

Unlike Hero Battles and 1v1 systems, even/odd win trading as a strategy in Alliance Battles creates a Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium for sufficient densities.

Omniclasm · Jul 02, 2007, 04:21 AM // 04:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Something struck me while I was in the shower.

Unlike Hero Battles and 1v1 systems, even/odd win trading as a strategy in Alliance Battles creates a Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium for sufficient densities.

People would have to agree on the terms, and agree who rolls. People are incapable of agreeing on which team gets which side.

kooomar · Jul 02, 2007, 04:50 AM // 04:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Two wrongs don't make a right

Yeah, but 3 rights makes a left.