Curse

Argen · Aug 07, 2006, 02:24 AM // 02:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

Ok, I wrote some majorly huge essay then deleted it .... 6 times in a row.

Not a bad idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

I'm going to keep it short.

Woot! Unluckily, I disagree with this being solved by anything short.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

1. This problem did not exist (at such a huge level) among clans (or players) in the early days of clans.

There were plenty of clans in the early days that were rude to newer members and who were quite verbally "competitive". Additionally, there has always been an "elite" crowd across the internet. I also remember in sports since I was a wee lad that there always somebody talking smack... nothing new in the competitive world there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2. This problem started occurring EVERYWHERE ever since education, worldwide, was getting modernised.

The education system... or at least the curriculums have been being consistently and constantly modernized since basically the Renaissance. I'm a bit confused, are you pointing to the fact that schools no longer teach morality like you would want? Glad you were able to lump all of the blame for basically every societal problem firmly into faults in the education system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2.3. I've researched this and came to the conclusion that newgens (new generation of players who are aged 22 or less on this day) have had absolutley zero education in school. They learned nothing. Or wait...

Great, now that we have a name for them, let's discriminate against them. You are shrink wrapping every one less than 22 years old into a cookie cutter mold of ignorant oxygen consumers. I think that is bigoted and disciminatory, no different than racism or sexism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2.4. They learned how NOT to do things. Individualisation, pride, sloth, gluttony, it's all in there. These people are incapable of cooperating with anything.

Well, if they learned not be vain and prideful, full of sloth, and smitten with gluttony; that doesn't seem to be too bad. But, if you are implying that it is a generation that is laden with gluttonous, slothful, vain people I'm afraid that you will find yourself sadly mistaken. I'm not about to say that there are not many examples of people like this in every post WWII generation, but they do exist across the span of generations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2.5. This affects the aged 22+ humans who are overwhelmed by the amount of stupid people in democratic countries where problems are often handled "democratically" as in, the morons who are in the majority, will win (not talking about usa or only usa, i'm global here) (I'm not against democracy, I'm only against it in small groups where a 2 vs 1 equals in the 1 killing the 2 because they're assholes)

Ummmm... Wow, I know that you have done tons of research on this... This moronic majority is actually an average age of between 37-61 years old. There is a slight spike in the voting ages between 21-27 since the year 2000 but, it is still only a small percentage of the actual voting population.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2.Fixes:
1. Revert to "oldschool" education.
2. Introduce a single or up to three years forced armyduty.
3. Introduce uniforms EVERYWHERE (I mean, jobs, school, those things, or at least dresscodes)

1. I'm not sure what "oldschool" education is, but if you are referring to children receiving beatings by school officials (US), sexual harassment and molestation (very global), and other failed aspects of the education systems around the world and having the children gaining a higher morale imperative somehow, I find myself shaking my head and dismissing it.
2. I have never been against military service... but, a reinstitution of the Draft in the United States, and most other democracies seems to be a bit of a knee-jerk reaction. Nowhere does any evidence actually support that military service lowers the service members' chances of committing violent crimes. I do think that the self-discipline taught by the basic training or "boot camp" is excellent and rewarding, but I cannot say that this is a fix for the problems that you have cited to being so prevalent. Additionally, my spinal cord was damaged in a sports injury in high school, according to the United States Navy, they won't even let me captain a desk. I am not eligible for the Draft nor being commissioned nor enlisted. Would I be stripped of my citizenship for this health condition?
3. I believe that many jobs have a dress code. I work in a professional environment that has a standing policy of ties and suits. McDonald's has a uniform, Microsoft has dress codes, Wal-Mart has dress codes. Schools have dress codes as well. I don't have any issue with uniforms in school, but I do have a problem with that for general living. Imagine if everyone was required to where the same clothing... kinda odd in my mind. I think if we'd all be issued red armbands, we'd be in the world you're talking about.

I do think that this was tried once before with the young men and women... I believe that the name of this organization was called the "Hitler Youth."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

2.Why does that work?
Explaining that would require me to keep typing for a few days but I've done enough research to be 9384835983757735% sure that I am correct.

I'm curious as to why does that work. Humor me and put a bit more statistical and empirical information here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Zardeone

Problem?
It is dangerous to be right when everyone else is wrong ='(

You're asking a rhetorical question. Driving above the posted speed limit is illegal... but I live outside Chicago. The average speed on the highways is approximately 75-80 miles per hour. The speed limit is 65 miles per hour. It is far more dangerous to be going the 65 miles per hour and impeding than it is the 75 miles per hour in that traffic.

Anyways, back to the original poster... some of the problems you associate with elitism have more to do with efficiency than with elitism. I have a limited amount of time to play Guild Wars during the week. A smiting monk, though viable is not as valuable to me in most situations as a healing monk. I normally group with a tank or two to hold aggro and deal some damage, a monk or two to maintain my digital life as I do my assigned task, and three or four damage dealers. The skill selection goes along with this, in a low level non-elite skill area, I don't expect the group to be laden with the best elite skills. But in the "elite" areas of the game, I do expect the party and their skill sets to be within a certain criteria of builds. If I ask for an elementalist, I normally expect a nuker. If I ask for a monk, I normally expect a healer. If I ask for a necro, I expect an SS/Echo or Minion Master. If I am looking for something beyond this, I ask for specific builds. There is nothing wrong with an odd build, never kicked anyone out of a group before for being an odd or experimental build, but I normally double up on their class to make sure that we have our bases covered. Sometimes those odd or experimental builds are the next generation of cookie cutters.

You are right that certain classes or professions excel in certain situations, as do skills, builds, and attributes. When I am going into the UW, I am either looking for a 55 point or a SS/SV necro to accompany me, I personally don't have the time for it.

I think that the specialization of the classes is a good thing, but many players are too close minded about taking along some profession playing a different role.

Rera · Aug 07, 2006, 02:30 AM // 02:30

The original argument seems to be based around a few major points:

1. People should be allowed to play how they want, and this should not prevent them from finding groups.
2. Stereotyping classes as fiting certain "rigid roles" is unreasonable.
3. Either a) classes and builds are all equally effective in all situations, or b) classes and builds are not all equally effective, but that doesn't matter.

It would certainly be nice if any of the above three points were actually true.

Your own exception effectively outlines the reality of the situation:

Quote:

Kicking excludes when you ask for a specific role to be filled, and they come with skills not able to fit that role. I.E., a smite monk claiming to be a healer to get in a group. On the other hand, kicking someone for carrying a skill you disapprove of is wrong.

If you believe that it's okay for a group to demand a healer and kick the smite monk (which I agree with), then it should similarly be okay for groups to demand any other class and build, and kick anyone who doesn't meet those requirements.

Elitism exists because there *are* differences in player skill and differences in build effectiveness. Some people only want to play with veteran players using the proven builds. There's nothing wrong with that. The catch is that there often isn't a reliable way to determine skill until you've actually played with them, so their build is substituted as the relevant metric.

Vermilion Okeanos · Aug 07, 2006, 02:55 AM // 02:55

There are elitism even in games like CS and Halo, which means that the level cap is not the problem.

I believe the main problem come from how party require "recruits", where the leader have to search for party member day after day, mission after mission.

In places that is random, no one got much chance to be elitist, as luck own us all. While in place where you can find team mates, there will always be good and bad players, and that's where elitism shine. (Majority of the loud mouth elitist really aren't that good to begin with) This should be why we see more elitist here.

Basically, this game grind in party finding. While some lucky elitist got lucky and found a group of decent players before you.

It is a problem of human society, not games. Even communist countries have elitist... as some are "more equal" than others. Although generally I say that far eastern countries' people are generally more disciplined toward such elitism. White people need to beat their kids

(a joke commet, but with some regard)

One should be glad he/she met these kind of people in games, so they can handle them in real life too.

shardfenix · Aug 07, 2006, 03:31 AM // 03:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Because lvl 20 can be reached so quickly, people instead examine your skills to see how 'experienced' you are.

I can win random arenas with a level 15. According to you, I am less experienced. This game isn't about your level, it is about your skills.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

People become 'experts' on areas by farming them repeatedly, and therefore certain skill standards are upkept by portions of the GW community for certain missions.

HA! Farming an area over and over doesn't make you good at it. Better than the first time? yes. However, you still suck if you use the same skill bar each time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Kicking someone for carrying a skill you disapprove of is wrong. If I bring healing breeze, its probably for a reason. If you think that I'm wrong don't yell or kick me. Just ask why I bring it and make a suggestion for a better skill.

People don't like healing breeze for this reason:
It's a delayed heal.
Nobody wants to have a "healer" with a skill that heals 27 per second (at +9 regen), and is unstackable. Spamming it is the best way to use it, but it costs 10 energy. In pvp, it gets removed before it does anything significant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

In PvP ...you can jump in at level 20 and start fighting, there is less skill vs. time involved. Yes (to be good at it) you have to practice and/or read up on builds.

What game are you playing? PvP isn't about skill. It's about who has the most abusable and broken builds. Rank is a measurement of time. Reputation is a measurement of skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Due to the limited number of skills you can bring, the Community chooses to define character classes by specific rigid roles. If you're not a healer or a 55, then switch to one. If you're a mesmer in a mission where people don't think they 'need' a mesmer, its gonna be tough.

Yes, monks are for healing, warriors are for tanking and protecting casters. Mesmers are 99% useless in pve.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Should necros be told to mm when they don't wish to?

Now, I play a lot of pve, and this is what I have to say to necromancers. If you're trying to beat a mission/quest, and you aren't a minion master, you need to uninstall guild wars because you are just plain stupid. Minion masters are the most easily abusable and powerful build to put in pve groups.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

I don't know how to fix this. There will always be people who think they know better because they use some special build to beat this mission 50 times, or obviously played longer/better cause you're such a noob

If you don't like elitists, [n]YOU[/b] lead the group. Make them do what you want them to do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

If I want to play PvP, should I have to sit for hours attempting to get into a group because I don't have rank?

Unfortunately, because so many people have high ranks, new players have a much harder time than I did getting up to rank 3 and beyond. This is why I am a strong supporter of ranked districts (r3+ districts, r6+ districts, etc.)

However, in pve, you just have to look for a group who will let you run whatever build works for you. Just remember that most of the players in GW are immature 12 year olds, don't let them get to you because they think they're "leeter" than you.

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

I can win random arenas with a level 15. According to you, I am less experienced. This game isn't about your level, it is about your skills.

If you're beating those arenas at level 15, then you just supported the argument you quoted, that Level means so little that people decide instead to see how well you use your skill bar.

Quote:

HA! Farming an area over and over doesn't make you good at it. Better than the first time? yes. However, you still suck if you use the same skill bar each time.

It may not make you good at it, but any farmer with a decent amount of sense can begin to notice patterns and trends in an area. Therefore they have more experience with that region than someone who has never been there before. If all they know is that I should bring hex removal instead of condition fixers, than thats still more than I would know if I were completely new to the area.

Quote:

People don't like healing breeze for this reason:
It's a delayed heal.
Nobody wants to have a "healer" with a skill that heals 27 per second (at +9 regen), and is unstackable. Spamming it is the best way to use it, but it costs 10 energy. In pvp, it gets removed before it does anything significant.

Which is why it doesn't get used in pvp. It does have significant uses in PvP. Lets say I brought hex removal to that new area I mentioned above. What happens if someone gets hit with bleeding or poison? I'll use that ten energy spell to stabilize his health until it wears off. I can always hit him with another heal afterwards. Course the divine favor from both those spells doesn't hurt either. This spell is just my personal preference. I find it versatile while I've got the energy to use it.

Quote:

What game are you playing? PvP isn't about skill. It's about who has the most abusable and broken builds. Rank is a measurement of time. Reputation is a measurement of skill.

That is a matter of opinion, I suppose. Because what differentiates two teams with the exact same builds facing each other on the field?Skill, and a bit of luck.

Quote:

Yes, monks are for healing, warriors are for tanking and protecting casters. Mesmers are 99% useless in pve.

Did you happen to read what my post was about? Thats the type of attitude that ruins games for a lot of people. All true, but for the last. Any class can be used to great effect by the right player. Its sorta like my team build example above. You simply have to know how to use the tools you've been given.

Quote:

Now, I play a lot of pve, and this is what I have to say to necromancers. If you're trying to beat a mission/quest, and you aren't a minion master, you need to uninstall guild wars because you are just plain stupid. Minion masters are the most easily abusable and powerful build to put in pve groups.

They are the most powerful build to put in pve groups, its always fun to watch a small army of minions sweep across the landscape. But to believe that someone who is not playing minon master is stupid, is well...childish. Did you ever consider that maybe they might be beating the mission a second time, for the challenge? Or maybe they simply have a preference for another build-type of necro.

Quote:

If you don't like elitists, [n]YOU[/b] lead the group. Make them do what you want them to do.

Thats a viable option. I can alway simply take command of a group. I have at times, during pve. And its rather fun. But try applying that situation to pvp, and you're still stuck with a long wait if you're new.

Quote:

Unfortunately, because so many people have high ranks, new players have a much harder time than I did getting up to rank 3 and beyond. This is why I am a strong supporter of ranked districts (r3+ districts, r6+ districts, etc.)

Glad to hear something come out of your mouth other than cynicism and derision.

Quote:

However, in pve, you just have to look for a group who will let you run whatever build works for you. Just remember that most of the players in GW are immature 12 year olds, don't let them get to you because they think they're "leeter" than you.

The most mature statement in your entire post. The only part of it that I can possibly disagree with is when it is applied to higher end missions. And then only because its difficult to find enough people for a group sometimes, let alone a group who would allow a healer to get away with being a smiter.

Without those final 3 quotes I would have pegged you as the very type of person that this thread is about. You've chosen your side of the fence, which is your right. But when you're leaning on that fence, talking to the neighbors on the other side, could you at least be a bit politer?

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 04:47 AM // 04:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argen

Anyways, back to the original poster... some of the problems you associate with elitism have more to do with efficiency than with elitism. I have a limited amount of time to play Guild Wars during the week. A smiting monk, though viable is not as valuable to me in most situations as a healing monk. I normally group with a tank or two to hold aggro and deal some damage, a monk or two to maintain my digital life as I do my assigned task, and three or four damage dealers. The skill selection goes along with this, in a low level non-elite skill area, I don't expect the group to be laden with the best elite skills. But in the "elite" areas of the game, I do expect the party and their skill sets to be within a certain criteria of builds. If I ask for an elementalist, I normally expect a nuker. If I ask for a monk, I normally expect a healer. If I ask for a necro, I expect an SS/Echo or Minion Master. If I am looking for something beyond this, I ask for specific builds. There is nothing wrong with an odd build, never kicked anyone out of a group before for being an odd or experimental build, but I normally double up on their class to make sure that we have our bases covered. Sometimes those odd or experimental builds are the next generation of cookie cutters.

You are right that certain classes or professions excel in certain situations, as do skills, builds, and attributes. When I am going into the UW, I am either looking for a 55 point or a SS/SV necro to accompany me, I personally don't have the time for it.

I think that the specialization of the classes is a good thing, but many players are too close minded about taking along some profession playing a different role.

First off I'd like to thank you for your comments to the political poster. I considered doing it myself, if for no other reason than its on the wrong website, but I thought I'd rather let somebody else do it. And you did much better than I would have.
Back to your post, thanks also for putting a different spin on things. I don't often get the right perspective from, say, a warriors angle. I do understand automatically that people asking for monks want healers. But I'm hoping in the coming chapters that may change. Even if its simply because the ritualist becomes the more oft used healer, or some new class helps out.

Also I bolded a portion of that post. For all the people that love to dictate builds to their PvE pugs, take a look at those bolded words. If you PvP and do that, even better to read it. I understand if you have time constraints, or some specific, difficult goal you don't want jeopardized. But be careful if you kick someone for the reason of their build. Cause if it can do the job its designed for, it might be kicking your ass next week.

Morganas · Aug 07, 2006, 04:52 AM // 04:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

What game are you playing? PvP isn't about skill. It's about who has the most abusable and broken builds. Rank is a measurement of time. Reputation is a measurement of skill.

Agreed about rank, but pvp isn't about rank. Rank is a broken game mechanic that applies only to the broken gametype that is HA. Creating "abusable and broken" builds takes skill, and their execution, at least in GvG, also takes skill. All but the lamest of ranger spike teams add at least some dash of creativity and thought to their builds.

Quote:

Yes, monks are for healing, warriors are for tanking and protecting casters. Mesmers are 99% useless in pve.

Mesmers are as good as anything else in storyline pve, and with a well planned group (not a pickup) they can do just as well in high end pve as well.

Quote:

Now, I play a lot of pve, and this is what I have to say to necromancers. If you're trying to beat a mission/quest, and you aren't a minion master, you need to uninstall guild wars because you are just plain stupid. Minion masters are the most easily abusable and powerful build to put in pve groups.

There are plenty of other necromancer builds that are effective, not AS effective in pve, but they work, and are usually more fun. PvE is not competitive, so I don't see why "fun" shouldn't be the primary metric of whether a given pve group should be used.

Quote:

Unfortunately, because so many people have high ranks, new players have a much harder time than I did getting up to rank 3 and beyond. This is why I am a strong supporter of ranked districts (r3+ districts, r6+ districts, etc.)

Rank encourages farming with PUG's, which is addictive in a masochistic sort of way, but hardly fun, so it doesn't belong in the game at all, not to mention it creates elitism on the basis of time invested. Some sort of true ranking system should be implemented for HA, such as what exists for GvG, but I have no idea if that can be implemented on the basis of individual players. A system like wc3 uses for random team, which rates individual player skill based on performance in a team format might work.

**cosyfiep** · Aug 07, 2006, 05:02 AM // 05:02

whoa this is getting to sound more like a college level debate class.....so I will keep my answer short.
I play mesmer and smiting monk.....and when I do so, it is with henchies since they dont gripe about my build.....most of GW can be henched except a few elite areas .....I dont go to the FOW or UW very often, and have only done the elite factions missions this weekend when they were open to all....so no long term solution nor a solution on how to deal with the elitism of other people other than to just ignore the wholelot of 'em.

short and bitter, but so is lemonaide and I like lemonaide.

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rera

1. People should be allowed to play how they want, and this should not prevent them from finding groups.
2. Stereotyping classes as fiting certain "rigid roles" is unreasonable.
3. Either a) classes and builds are all equally effective in all situations, or b) classes and builds are not all equally effective, but that doesn't matter.

1. Yes, as long as it doesn't interfere with someone elses game. Just like the law. You're allowed to do certain things, but the illegal things are usually(I say this because someone may call me on a technicality) the ones that interfere with someone else's life, liberty or pursuit of happiness.
2. Should a monk do nothing but heal? If so, then why bother giving him the skills to smite?If mesmers are only wanted for interrupting, why give them domination? If Eles only nuke, why bother with other elements? These are obviously generalizations, but I hope you see my point.Smite is a 'subclass' of monk. Thats why we're called monks, not "healers' or 'protectors'.
3. I'll go with b on that one, keep on reading and you'll see why I believe so.

Quote:

If you believe that it's okay for a group to demand a healer and kick the smite monk (which I agree with), then it should similarly be okay for groups to demand any other class and build, and kick anyone who doesn't meet those requirements.

True, to some extent. Are you then going to kick that healer because he uses an odd build? What if you ask for a nuker, but you don't like his build? I'm a more casual player, and I have lots of time to burn, so I'd let him come if he said it worked. If you have some good reason to kick him, that is entirely your choice.

Quote:

Elitism exists because there *are* differences in player skill and differences in build effectiveness. Some people only want to play with veteran players using the proven builds. There's nothing wrong with that. The catch is that there often isn't a reliable way to determine skill until you've actually played with them, so their build is substituted as the relevant metric.

Also true. And its always fun to play with someone who knows what they're doing, or is on the same level. But because there are differences in player skill, a good player can make that ineffective build work to greater effect than a bad player can make an effective one work. Because it is an effective build its easier to learn to do damage with, compared to that ineffective build the creator had to fine tune. A shorter learning curve if you will. But you can't judge a player by their build. They might just be testing one they saw on Wiki.

Unfortunately skills seem to be the only measure of strangers at the moment. Any ideas on a better one?

OMFGimCUTE · Aug 07, 2006, 06:05 AM // 06:05

Hmm latley ive been seeing ''elitisim'' alot now, when i first started this game about 13 months ago,there was more freedom in what builds people can use and there wasent really that much cookie cutter builds and as long as you had a healer you were ok. Now thats all change and you can hardly get in a group if your a mesmer or smiteing monk or not rank 3 or above.
Oh and people dont know how GOOD mesmers are in pve. Some of my guildies are primary mesmers in pve and they beat missions like hells, ring of fire, or THK with henchies on thier 1st try.
Any ways, maybe its better if all of us stayed as noobies. Or maybe take out the rank emote, people think thier all uber leet when thier rank 3 and that they just iwayed it so i would be suprised if they were any better than you.

Alleji · Aug 07, 2006, 06:20 AM // 06:20

What you are describing is not elitism, it is prudence. And the cause of it is difficulty (or lack thereof) of PvE and co-operative nature of the game.

To put it in other words, about 80% of this game is too easy. People can get through it with no skill and a terrible skill bar. This is compounded by the fact that for every mission or quest you take a team. Sooner or later, without rigid control, a bad player will get through a given mission on the back of his team. In some cases, even a team of henches. In fact, for an average mid-game mission, five bad players can get through on sixth's back. Case in point: I soloed "The Wilds" with a)MM, b)Smiting monk, c)IW Me/W.

Running is a seperate issue. I'd bet at least a third of the players today don't even know where "The Wilds" is.

So, let's take our hypothetical bad player, who took three weeks, playing every day, to get to... Thunderhead Keep (with a run from LA to Sanctum, failing most missions multiple times) He's playing the game for fun. I don't see anything wrong with that, but I do *NOT* want him in my group for Thunderhead Keep. When I'm taking a N/Me, I expect him to do something useful - SS, MM, Well Spam... if his build starts with chaos storm, conjure phantasm, ether feast and animate bone horror, I don't think I even need to hear the rest of that bar. I would first ask him to change to a build that works. If he can't do anything remotely intelligent, better luck next time.

Granted, some offbeat builds work almost as good as the cookie-cutter ones. A virulence/epidemic necro can spread 8-10 degen across the mob. As long as you're not fighting... titans, for example. But I think I have more than enough experience to recognize what will work and what will not.

So, excuse me for being elitist, or practical, as I would put it, but for the 10% of the game I can't hench, I'm going to handpick a competent team.

EDIT: Shard, mesmers are not useless in PvE (although inferior to an interrupt ranger) and MM is not the most powerful necro build, kthx. At least not the post-nerf MM. If you don't need to be a tank (or, rather, your minions don't need to tank for incompetent warriors), SS is going to do far more damage than minions. You haven't played through both campaigns with a necro :P

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 06:44 AM // 06:44

@Alleji
There is a big difference between prudence and elitism. Elitism involves a certain level of disrespect when you tell someone to change their build/kick them/kill them. If it were me accepting that N/me into the group I probably wouldn't even bother asking his bar. Not because I don't want to kick him. I just don't know enough about those skills to know their theoretical effectiveness. But then I only play casually as well. If we failed the mission, oh well. Try again with different tactics. Sometimes its more fun to lose than win, but then I'm in it for fun. I enjoy playing a game to escape a certain level of practicality.
Also, though admittedly easier than the pvp where the competition is always changing, PvE is not 'too easy' each level is crafted for the level of your character. What may be 'too easy' for you and I may be just right for someone else. It takes a wammo a lot less time to get through missions than it does for a smite monk. We have to worry more about taking damage, but that just makes it a challenge. I'm in for fun, not speed runs.

shardfenix · Aug 07, 2006, 07:10 AM // 07:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

But to believe that someone who is not playing minon master is stupid, is well...childish. Did you ever consider that maybe they might be beating the mission a second time, for the challenge? Or maybe they simply have a preference for another build-type of necro.

If I offered you either a million dollars or ten dollars (both in a legal manner), and you took the 10 dollars, yes, you would be stupid. Minion master vs [insert second-rate necro build here] is no different. The ONLY reason you would play a non-MM in pve is if you were 55 farming, or if someone else was playing MM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Glad to hear something come out of your mouth other than cynicism and derision.

Once you get to know me, I'm a pretty understanding guy. The problem most people have with me is I understand more than them, and it makes them mad...or jealous, i'm not sure which.

As for backing up the thing about classes playing specific roles. It's fine for a monk to play smite in pve if he wants to...if there are other monks on the team. My experience is that if you don't bring healing, you die. Tanks are for tanking because they don't have the energy capabilities to do anything more "magical" than an occasional self heal. I'm perfectly fine with eles, mesmers, and necros sporting whatever builds they feel like. On the hardest missions (THK, some fire island, dragons lair), I always ask the monks for their skill bar. I've played with monks with firestorm, symbol of wrath, life bond, and healing breeze onb the same bar.

One more thing @ alleji, I deleted my necro at level 7

so youre absolutely right.

Alleji · Aug 07, 2006, 07:10 AM // 07:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sli Ander

Also, though admittedly easier than the pvp where the competition is always changing, PvE is not 'too easy' each level is crafted for the level of your character. What may be 'too easy' for you and I may be just right for someone else. It takes a wammo a lot less time to get through missions than it does for a smite monk. We have to worry more about taking damage, but that just makes it a challenge. I'm in for fun, not speed runs.

Ah, exactly. If mission X, early in the game is "just right" for our hypothetical N/Me with chaos storm, then Thunderhead Keep is going to be too hard for him. I'd go as far as to say impossible to do relying on his own abilities.

I'm in this game for fun as well. Why would anyone play a game for something other than fun? (Chinese farmers aside) Except I do not find doing THK for the 20th time fun. (7 characters that got through it + capping + helping friends) Sure, if I'm playing a new class, it's fun to some extent because doing THK as a monk and as a warrior are different things, but for me fun is getting a pretty set of armor, capping eviscerate (which is why I needed to get through THK), picking up a good axe and going to HA. Or farming fissure. I used to solo fissure with a 55 N/Mo, but that was way too stressful. Hit a wrong button once and you're done for. With a warrior is nice and easy, so I find that fun. And, of course, it's something new.

Basically, doing new things is fun. For our hypothetical N/Me improving his build and getting new skills, and improving his personal skill might be part of that fun. (Or maybe, he would just copy the cookie-cutter MM from the necro standing next to him and ignore the "personal skill" part) For me, having him in my group is not fun because I'm working towards a different goal. I would not gloat in his face that I am better than him, but I would not have him in my group nonetheless.

Alleji · Aug 07, 2006, 07:17 AM // 07:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

The ONLY reason you would play a non-MM in pve is if you were 55 farming, or if someone else was playing MM.

Compare 9 bone fiends hitting for 10-15 damage + flesh golem for 30-50 vs 2 copies of SS aoe'ing the mob for 37 + 4 degen from rotting flesh + chain putrid for 107 once stuff starts dropping. (numbers on MM from memory, on SS from 16-11-10 split)

The ONLY reason you would play a MM is to provide tanking or if you haven't played a necro enough in PvE. (Which most people haven't. Same reason fire nukers aren't extinct, considering the build I mentioned does about 2-3x more damage than a fire nuker, depending on mobs.)

Quote:

Once you get to know me, I'm a pretty understanding guy.

Once you get to know him, you'll realize that's sarcasm :P

Quote:

On the hardest missions (THK, some fire island, dragons lair)

Unless you mean Glint, ROFL. Dragon's Lair itself is a pathetic excuse for a mission. I remember the first time I went through the game, I was thinking "WTF is this, am I back in ascalon?" after elona reach and thirsty river.

Quote:

One more thing @ alleji, I deleted my necro at level 7

so youre absolutely right.

If that applies to your MM argument, I'm happy. Otherwise, stafoo noob. :P

shardfenix · Aug 07, 2006, 07:23 AM // 07:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morganas

Creating "abusable and broken" builds takes skill, and their execution, at least in GvG, also takes skill. All but the lamest of ranger spike teams add at least some dash of creativity and thought to their builds.

Iway, touch rangers, smite, thumpers, vim, and CG rangers take no skill to run. They win (all but vim anyway). Noobs play them, with no skill, and they win. Creating a build takes little skill. The most inventice broken build is the CG ranger, which leeloof perfected, but regardless, takes no skill.
It didn't take skill to look at air of enchantment and say "you can spam enchants on this target."
It didn't take skill to notice that when vamp touch/bite cost 5, they are broken.
It didn't take skill to look at iway and think about pets.
It didn't take skill...vim sucks.
Bunnythumpers were inventive. Regardless, it takes no skill to run. I'll stop pointing out so many examples of why you're wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morganas

Some sort of true ranking system should be implemented for HA, such as what exists for GvG

HA! GvG does not use a good ranking system. You can be a top 20 guild as long as you have more wins than losses. Look in any ladder archives, there is ALWAYS at least 1 silver trim guild with a win:loss ratio of 2:1. 1 loss for every 2 wins is horrible. But when you have a record of 300-150, you're gonna have tons of points racked up.

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 07:29 AM // 07:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

Basically, doing new things is fun. For our hypothetical N/Me improving his build and getting new skills, and improving his personal skill might be part of that fun. (Or maybe, he would just copy the cookie-cutter MM from the necro standing next to him and ignore the "personal skill" part) For me, having him in my group is not fun because I'm working towards a different goal. I would not gloat in his face that I am better than him, but I would not have him in my group nonetheless.

Which is why you fall under the 'prudence' category. Though I say 'elitism', I'm mainly using it as a broad term to describe a bunch of jerks. If I were that N/me, and I knew my build worked(which I don't know mesmer skills well, but I'll trust that it probably wouldn't) and had tested it, I'd be offended, but there's always another group when you're in an area like THK. Southern Shiverpeaks tends to have a higher population than some other high end areas.(But then its been awhile since I've been back there.)

Sli Ander · Aug 07, 2006, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

HA! GvG does not use a good ranking system. You can be a top 20 guild as long as you have more wins than losses. Look in any ladder archives, there is ALWAYS at least 1 silver trim guild with a win:loss ratio of 2:1. 1 loss for every 2 wins is horrible. But when you have a record of 300-150, you're gonna have tons of points racked up.

I don't know much about PvP, but I'm pretty sure that everybody has lost more than once. In comparison: How many tries did it take Edison to make a lightbulb?Can you deny that most of our modern inventions are based off his work? How about Babe Ruth? Struck out (I'm no sports fan, so please accept this generalization)what, twice as much as he hit homers? They didn't lose 150 matches, maybe they just learned 150 ways not to win...

floppinghog · Aug 07, 2006, 07:43 AM // 07:43

such a bunch of nonsense, all of it

lets see:
your single character is only 1 piece of a group which can get things done, IF all characters have reasonably useful skills for the particular area they are attempting to travel in.
a monk is usually who must heal, why? they are supposed to.
warrior is usually the big guy who must take all the dmg so casters dont, why? they are built to. they "CAN" nuke like an ele, oh wow so original, so interesting, it can be done, but its retarded.

do what works best and stop being noobs.

its like some monk thinking,
hey ill bring a pet just so i have another tank
(keep in mind this pet would not be lvl 20, not be tided to high attributes either)
so whats that pet going to do? ok he'll tank, until it dies, locking the monk's skill bar for 8 seconds, making him totally useless for the team. see the problem? if you wanna be experimental do it alone, on your own. and quit being a dumb ass, yes DUMB ASS with people. no one wants your "inventive builds" cause they dont work efficiently. you cause unnecessary problems for groups.

when people want a group of people, they want people who can play the roles hench play, only with some what more brains (god forbid humans think intelligently). if they wanted people to be dumb as dirt and have monks tank, then they would bring mhenlo INSTEAD OF YOU. Thats Your Example.

elitism my ass..

CorstedPirate · Aug 07, 2006, 07:54 AM // 07:54

In PvE(which is what I mostly do) builds don't matter all that much. Sure, certain skill sets can make things easier. The thing I generally look for when I am forming a group is the ability to read. It is more important for people the read the instructions and say "yes I can do that," or "can we try it this other way instead." It is perfectly alright for people to experiment when I am the group leader. Rude or impatient people are kicked imediately no matter what. Perhaps some people may see that as elitist, though it is just avoiding the likely occurance of over aggro(in my opinion anyhow).

Oh well, this thread kind of evolved so I am not too sure if what I have said fits in very well.