Curse

Rent · Jul 10, 2006, 03:28 PM // 15:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paperfly

This is demonstrably insufficient. The demonstration in question: The Common Whammo.

I've seen some great damage warriors in GW PVE. I've seen some exceptionally competent W/Mo stance tanks in full 15K Glads. It doesn't change the fact that the single most common archetype in the entirety of serverdom is the Whammo who begins every new area by casting Mending on himself. Then lets us all know benevolently that he can help the monk out a bit, you know, if it's needed.

It's cookie-cutter, by every possible measurement.

It's also lousy.

Popular opinion about PVE is not an idealised form of darwinian capitalism that unerringly produces the most efficient builds.

Repetition in PvE does indeed produce the most efficient builds for those areas. If you have enough people playing a specific mission/area builds will , without fail, arise as the most efficient methods to complete these areas. This is efficiency, this is getting the job done.

However, people begin to see efficient builds as "cookie-cutter", and this completely baffles me. So what if everyone's running the same kind of thing in one area? More often than not, this is because it works. I do not understand this overwhelming need to be different or unique--sure, you can do it with other builds, but these "cookie-cutter" (oh god i hate that phrase so much) builds became popular for a reason: they work.

Your "mending w/mo" example has nothing to do with the topic at hand; a negative stereotype is completely unrelated to popular builds.

Surkon · Jul 10, 2006, 04:04 PM // 16:04

Rent

This is what I thought also it was getting the mission done killing the bad guys and saving the girl and the kingdom from slaughter and winning the game for your GW world.

How you did it was not the answer and most groups I have been with are out for themselves to see what they can get and not there to help complete the mission.

Also just lately another guild mate and I finished ThunderBay Keep with just me and him and henchies, By working together and using our heads to complete the mission not running around picking up drops and getting the job done. Niether one of us died in the mission once we did lose a henchie healer once but she was resed and we moved on. I did this with a standard build W/M with just res on the monk side.

I do not consider this a "cookie Cutter Build"

I would like to know how you feel about the Rt/N build I mentioned earlier.

Thanks in advance

Surkon

Nexus Icon · Jul 10, 2006, 04:06 PM // 16:06

I think the worry is that if the majority are using so-called "cookie-cutter" builds, it discourages original thinking and therefore it will take longer for interesting and effective builds to come to the surface.

Of course, the worry isn't really justified as the player base is so massive, even if a high percentage of players are using cookie cutter builds (say 99.9% of 2,000,000 for the sake of argument), there would still be a couple of thousand players out there trying to come up with the next Wammo or 55er build.
And that's a worst case scenario. As it stands, I would say that the silent majority are experimenting with builds and very rarely visit forums to get a "cookie-cutter" build.

Standardised builds work fantastically well until someone creates a new standard.

eudas · Jul 10, 2006, 04:41 PM // 16:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreamhunk

As a rpg player cookie cuter builds does hurt rpg! RPG player want to play their favrite class! when you force a class out then rpg players get pissed. Un like pvp players who will reroll their charactors. Rpg players will must likely quite the game.

Anet should really start looking into skills and cookie cuter builds because it does effect the game. In rpg all classies should be in important!

you're an idiot. i swear to god, every post of yours that gets made lowers the collective IQ of the human race.

RPG players "just want to play their favorite class" -- you're absolutely right. it's those "RPG players" who are the ones cookie cuttering everything in sight, because they *DON'T* want to think, they just want to WIN. they want to log on, play their cookie cutter indestructible warrior or super evil minion master, beat the game in 30 minutes because they're a "casual player", and log off victorious and feeling happy-shiny-feel-good about themselves. they don't want to *WORK* for something! why the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO would they want that? That would take EFFORT! OH NOES! RPG players will be the ones who whine when you force them to play something new or "think outside the box", not your so-called hated "PVP players".

you can't force diversity. all you can do is enable it, and encourage it.

and, besides, you know what? some of your so-called "non-cookie-cutter" builds are just BAD. there are things that work, and things that don't work. sure, you can play builds that are "different" -- but "different" is *not* synonymous with "good", or even with "effective".

eudas

MDeshame · Jul 10, 2006, 04:48 PM // 16:48

In GW #3, I want to see the PUGs abolished. PUG's are horrible, the people playing in PUGs are horrible, in fact from what I have witnessed, only 1 out of every 2500-3500 players of any class, have some kind of idea of what they are doing.

In GW #3, improve on the pittifulness of PUGs by entering a mission and make it work like the random arenea's. What you get is what you get.

No more Mezzer's, Rangers, Rits standing around for 8 hours begging for a group. I've even seen a mezzers offer 20k per person in the group, and still no invite.

Believe it or not, you ACTUALLY CAN complete the missions without having to have Leeerrrrrrooooy Jenkins, MM, and/or a Nuke.

Assassins don't count... don't look over there it's one of those... those... assassin things, pretend you can't see it, maybe it will go away.

Although I will say this, I could not get my assassin in a group for Vinzunah for anything. So an all Assassing party was formed. We plowed that map, I mean plowed it like Farmer bob plows his field as fast as possible to get back to some personal time with his barnyard sheep. Except we all died at the end.

What you thought there would be a happy ending for an all assassin team....right....

eudas · Jul 10, 2006, 06:57 PM // 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDeshame

In GW #3, I want to see the PUGs abolished. PUG's are horrible, the people playing in PUGs are horrible, in fact from what I have witnessed, only 1 out of every 2500-3500 players of any class, have some kind of idea of what they are doing.

In GW #3, improve on the pittifulness of PUGs by entering a mission and make it work like the random arenea's. What you get is what you get.

wouldn't work. what you'd get is people entering the mission, then mapping out when they see they don't have 2 monks, 1 ele, 2 warriors, and 1 MM, so they map out and leave the rest of them even more fscked than they were to start with.

so the whole party maps out and tries again...

sure, it solves the "LFG" spam problem but it doesn't *solve* the issue, it just changes the point of failure. Instead of people bitching about lame PUGgers, they'd bitch about lame randomized groups and not enough monks. This would be *even worse than it is now*.

eudas

Russell.Crowe · Jul 10, 2006, 07:18 PM // 19:18

Not another one of these... seriously, if you are a good player you will have no problem finding a group no matter what class you are. Some classes are not as effective in PvE as other classes in general, and that's why they are not specifically looked for, but that doesn't mean they won't be accepted into groups.

BunnyMaster · Jul 10, 2006, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by MDeshame

In GW #3, I want to see the PUGs abolished. PUG's are horrible, the people playing in PUGs are horrible, in fact from what I have witnessed, only 1 out of every 2500-3500 players of any class, have some kind of idea of what they are doing.

Hmm, have to say I can't agree with you on that. I've been playing for some time now (yay for 5 minipets) but somehow my mesmer always gets into a PUG. Same with my Rit. I take pride in showing ppl what a Mes or a Rt can do, like how a Rt can heal and decrease dmg or how a Mes can stop a monk completely.

The standard PUG (wammo, MM etc.) will always be there and I can imagine why ppl want to stick to what they know (Paladin-types are spread over most of the RPGs). But if you're smart enough you can always get a decent PUG and well, 1 out of 100 times a GOOD PUG.

/OT
I agree with Nexus, I did most of Tyria with a Henchie-group and my 16dom Mesmer. Some monsters (and nowadays ppl in AB) just like to stand inside my Chaos storm while I'm busy slapping on some empathy/esurge on them. Mesmers are scary.

Kern Wolf · Jul 10, 2006, 11:05 PM // 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell.Crowe

Not another one of these... seriously, if you are a good player you will have no problem finding a group no matter what class you are. Some classes are not as effective in PvE as other classes in general, and that's why they are not specifically looked for, but that doesn't mean they won't be accepted into groups.

Definitely agree with this....
I don't think anyone should worry about if cookie-cutter builds are going to ruin the game. People will play what they want to play; simple as that. If you want to play a pre-made build, more power to you. If you want to experiment with your own build, again, more power to you. No one can MAKE you play a build against your will.
I've played both Prophecies and Factions (PvE); I've done a good 70-75% of the game with PUGs. I've had more good PUGs than bad, and I've NEVER been forced to play a build. That doesn't mean I can't be flexible; if someone suggests a particular build, we discuss the pro's and con's of it for a minute. Sometimes I'll change it (believe me, it's no big deal); sometimes I don't. And if the PUG leader has a problem, guess what? I always have the option of leaving, and forming my own PUG.
I'll admit that, when I'm forming a PUG, I have a certain preference for a PUG build, but I'm not adverse to taking an assassin, or rit, or any profession in a group at all. If other members have a problem with me taking an assassin, they're free to leave; they're enough people in most places (I say most places; I'm not including some of those ghost town areas that we're all familiar with) where you can put together a group for a PUG. And if you like the results of that group, put those people on your friend's list, and go for the next mission...and the one after that (that's how some Guilds are formed).

The choice of playing cookie-cutter builds is up to each and every one of us. You don't like what you're hearing, or being directed to do...well, you know what to do (I hope)....

Paperfly · Jul 11, 2006, 03:45 AM // 03:45

Quote:

Your "mending w/mo" example has nothing to do with the topic at hand; a negative stereotype is completely unrelated to popular builds.

Stereotype? You may as well ask why the trees waving branches cause the wind.

Seriously, I just did a finger poll of Hell's freaking Precipice. Whammo central, and a nasty percentage of them used both Mending and Healing Hands. This is the tank cookie cutter build. It's also inefficient for virtually all areas, and is popular because it doesn't involve changing builds to match the mission - precisely the opposite of what you're claiming.

There are some good examlpes of certain areas generating teams (after some trial and error) that are optimised for them: Tomb of Ancient Kings spawned the b/p group, Furnace forged the 5-man Oro and so on. Ironically, these are both the kind of missions the OP is calling for and the kind of build he presumably dislikes... But that's actually not the issue.

The issue is the prevalence of demand for the same archetypes only accross missions. PuGs demand Minion Masters in areas with no available corpses. PuGs demand bonders in areas with massed mesmer mobs. PuGs usually refuse an offbeat character build that's custom-designed for that specific mission until they've read of some successful farming runs on the internet somewhere.

This splits the PuG player base three ways:
(a) The genuinely optimised team, which is pretty much only going to happen in farming spots. Why would anyone go to the effort of assembling something as specialised as an Orders necro if Tombs was a regular mission to be "completed" once and forgotten?

(b) The modular PuG that insists on archetype builds. To be honest, I find as a pretty competent player that these "just work" a lot less than it's claimed they do, and then that's often because I'm carrying the team - there's simply too many idiots finding slots on the grounds that they have a desired build. However, they're popular because (a) there's a lot of said idiots, and they tend to congregate in gangs, and (b) they have a ~70% chance of success in any given area (which is kinda low for my tastes!).

(c) The modular PuG that's willing to experiment. Because this attracts imaginative players who have put some genuine thought into their builds, these groups are often a lot more powerful than the prejudiced PuGs. However, because it's hard to screen for flair in advance, these groups have an unfortunate lottery chance of picking up some total incompetents. Experimenting PuGs tend to either win more easily (and have a more relaxed time in the process, I note), or bomb out utterly.

(I'm not going into (d) the desperate PuG or (e) the joke PuG

)

One last note: I had an incriedible run with a B/P party that consisted of 100% top-class players yesterday. Watching the way we scythed through Tombs of the Ancient Kings, and comparing it to some bad wipes I've seen in the past with the same team build, an opinion that has been buzzing around the back of my mind for ages has now set rock-solid:

The difference made by individual skill is more than 100% greater than the difference made by optimised skill selections

...to the point that I now ask people in my PuGs to play the builds they're most comfortable and competent in. I'd rather people were good at what they do than do what we supposedly "need" but do it badly.

inscribed · Jul 11, 2006, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paperfly

One last note: I had an incriedible run with a B/P party that consisted of 100% top-class players yesterday. Watching the way we scythed through Tombs of the Ancient Kings, and comparing it to some bad wipes I've seen in the past with the same team build, an opinion that has been buzzing around the back of my mind for ages has now set rock-solid:

Not really related to the OP, but I haven't been in a bad group in Tombs in a long time. The run has been around long enough that a pretty large number of players have had a chance to get some experience doing it, so that I rarely see more than 1 or 2 people who are utter newbies to the run.

Kook~NBK~ · Jul 11, 2006, 06:15 AM // 06:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russell.Crowe

Not another one of these... seriously, if you are a good player you will have no problem finding a group no matter what class you are.

I disagree. All anyone (Guildies & friends aside) knows about you when you're LFG is your level & professions. That's It!!!

Quote:

Some classes are not as effective in PvE as other classes in general, and that's why they are not specifically looked for, but that doesn't mean they won't be accepted into groups.

I disagree again. This is the attitude of people who won't give Mesmers a second glance in PvE. It's really rather unenlightened. It's like the W/X who spams "I've got Sympathetic Visage on me!," looking for someone to get it off them!!! It's NOT the class determines the character's effectivness, it's the person playing it. I've ran into bad players in each profession, but I've also came across awesome players in each profession.

SparhawkJC · Jul 11, 2006, 02:19 PM // 14:19

Think of guild wars like an elementary school playground. If you're picking teams for dodgeball who really wants the fat kid or the nerd with glasses the size of his face? Chances are you'll be taking the athletic people so you have the best chance to win. This is why people only stick with cookie-cutter builds. Even if the athletic people don't know how to play dodgeball you have a good chance that they at least won't bring the team down. Conversely if you never pick the fat kid or the nerd with glasses you'll never find out that the fat kid has hands with grip like glue and can help keep all the balls on your side, or that the nerd is a freakin sniper taking out all the stragglers on the other side. But at the same time there's a greater chance that the fat kid is just a sitting duck waiting to be knocked out by the first throw and that the nerd is just going to give all your balls to the other side by making weak off target throws that are easily caught by the opposition.

Play the way you want to with people who enjoy playing with you. You're luckier than the fat kid or the nerd in that you can change your playstyle on the fly. The game isn't forcing you to play as a meteor shower casting warrior. At the same time suggesting that the game force others to play with your meteor shower casting warrior is just wrong.

felinette · Jul 11, 2006, 03:16 PM // 15:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudas

wouldn't work. what you'd get is people entering the mission, then mapping out when they see they don't have 2 monks, 1 ele, 2 warriors, and 1 MM, so they map out and leave the rest of them even more fscked than they were to start with.

It would be an interesting option for those who want it, though. However, what GW *really* needs are tools to help people form parties. Yeah, it's been suggested over and over again, and the lack of support for forming groups is a huge oversight in a game that supposedly wants to encourage grouping. I just read a review of Factions in a print mag and that's one thing the reviewer singled out--the fact that we're on chapter 2, and there is still no in-game support for forming groups. If there was, it would be easier to find players who want mesmers, rangers, assassins, etc. I find most people are willing to go out with a non-cookie-cutter group. It's only the real tightasses that won't, and they generally aren't a whole lot of fun to group with, anyway.

Nexus Icon · Jul 11, 2006, 03:45 PM // 15:45

When I've been leading groups before, I've kicked people who have complained about us not having such-and-such a build, even monks.
People like that are just going to be rude and demanding throughout the whole mission anyway, and would probably rage-quit at the first sign of trouble.

And you know what? Quite often I'll get complimented on it by other group members.

I think one party-forming tool that would be a GREAT addition to the game would be a "Random Join" button where you just get thrown together as a group as soon as there are enough people to make a team.
Yes, there's no guarantee you'd get a monk, but that would force people to think about self-preservation and fiddle with their build accordingly.
You could have great fun trying to find new ways to do missions that diverge completely from the norm.
It would have to come with a warning attached saying that you really should bring a self-heal or 2, but I think it could be great.

felinette · Jul 11, 2006, 04:36 PM // 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nexus Icon

I think one party-forming tool that would be a GREAT addition to the game would be a "Random Join" button where you just get thrown together as a group as soon as there are enough people to make a team.

That would be awesome. For people who don't want to hench for whatever reason, or for missions where henching is difficult, it would cut down on hanging around towns trying to get into or put a group together. It would also provide another reason to replay missions you've already completed. Some of the funnest times I've had in PUGs have been when the group has been "weird". Two notables: Hell's Precipice with six warriors and two monks, and one of the jungle missions (The Wilds, I think) with four elementalists, a monk, and a necro. Great times, great times. Much more fun than blowing through a mission with everyone on automatic pilot.

Blackhawk · Jul 11, 2006, 05:08 PM // 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by felinette

Some of the funnest times I've had in PUGs have been when the group has been "weird".

Some of the best groups I've been in have consisted of weird player setups but still great fun and always finished the mission as it actually involved some thinking about the best combo of skills to bring in relation to the classes in the team

eudas · Jul 12, 2006, 04:44 PM // 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by felinette

Two notables: Hell's Precipice with six warriors and two monks, and one of the jungle missions (The Wilds, I think) with four elementalists, a monk, and a necro. Great times, great times. Much more fun than blowing through a mission with everyone on automatic pilot.

Yeah, I did that, too. 5 W/mo (including myself), 1 W/R, and Mhenlo & Lina rocked out through Hell's Precipice.

eudas

eudas · Jul 12, 2006, 04:47 PM // 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by felinette

It would be an interesting option for those who want it, though. However, what GW *really* needs are tools to help people form parties. Yeah, it's been suggested over and over again, and the lack of support for forming groups is a huge oversight in a game that supposedly wants to encourage grouping. I just read a review of Factions in a print mag and that's one thing the reviewer singled out--the fact that we're on chapter 2, and there is still no in-game support for forming groups. If there was, it would be easier to find players who want mesmers, rangers, assassins, etc. I find most people are willing to go out with a non-cookie-cutter group. It's only the real tightasses that won't, and they generally aren't a whole lot of fun to group with, anyway.

I've pondered a menu that looks like something of this sort:

Code:

I'm looking for 
[ ] Groups
  [ ] With at least [_____]
    ( ) PC's
    ( ) members
[ ] Additional Party Members
  Who have the 
    [ ] Primary Class
    [ ] Secondary Class]
      of
        [ ] Warrior
        [ ] Necromancer
        [ ] Mesmer
        ...
        [ ] Ritualist
  [ ] are at least level [_____]
...
...
...
[INVITE]

Legend:
[ ] = checkbox
( ) = radio button
[_____] = input box

You could check-mark and/or fill in the desired parameters, click 'INVITE', and it sends out invites to all characters in the current zone/district who match the parameters. Repeat it a couple times for various configurations, and you should be able to find people quickly.

eudas

felinette · Jul 12, 2006, 04:47 PM // 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by eudas

Yeah, I did that, too. 5 W/mo (including myself), 1 W/R, and Mhenlo & Lina rocked out through Hell's Precipice.
eudas

Cripes, for a moment I thought maybe we'd been in the same group (I was a W/R, and the other warriors were W/Mo), except that we had two live monks with us, not henchies.