Curse

Pluberus · Nov 16, 2010, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Did some searching, couldn't find anything.

Why can't RA force same classes on each team? I.e. if one team has 2 warriors a mes and a monk, then the other team should have the same team comp.

Your thoughts?

*lemming* · Nov 16, 2010, 08:45 PM // 20:45

Same primaries don't mean same roles, for one.

Tarkin · Nov 16, 2010, 09:17 PM // 21:17

i belive system try to balance teams...

i remember the time i played RA eveyrday, 1 tank... 1 healer and 2 randoms... but sometimes monks are rare, tanks are rare...

Warvic · Nov 16, 2010, 10:00 PM // 22:00

Because it's called: Random Arenas

Shayne Hawke · Nov 16, 2010, 10:10 PM // 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Same primaries don't mean same roles, for one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warvic

Because it's called: Random Arenas

These. Are you eventually going to want RA to force opposing teams to have all the same bars? Perhaps you want them to have the same amount of title points or play time as well. If anything, the organization factor of RA should be going backwards.

chuckles79 · Nov 16, 2010, 10:29 PM // 22:29

Perhaps they should rethink RA. Make it RBA (Random Build Arena). You can choose your teammates, but they'll have a random build assigned.
There is still the chance element (once in a blue moon someone would get a monk with WoH) but for the most part it would require good team work and extensive skill knowledge.
Codex w/ "sealed deck" style is pretty lame. You almost have to research to find which builds do NOT suck that day then stack your team.
Current RA everytime I don't play monk, there is no monk. When I do play monk, I get two others.

Gennadios · Nov 17, 2010, 12:15 AM // 00:15

During some time slots there are only enough ppl total to fill maybe 15 groups at a time. Good luck waiting in line until another group with 2 warrs a mes and a monk form.

Sirius Bsns · Nov 17, 2010, 12:50 AM // 00:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warvic

Because it's called: Random Arenas

I'm willing to bet some platinum you're a syncer, and that you say the above because you're against anything bringing down your odds of winning, especially if Anet forced an algorithm that makes every team have a min/max of one (1) monk.

On-topic though, /notsigned only because there's no relative need to make teams identical, it'd be a waste of time forcing cycles to run a search that matches a team profession-by-profession. It's completely unnecessary, and it'd be a waste... especially when knowing that the game's populace is ever so small!

The most I'd /sign for is a monk-finding algorithm because monks are essential to teams winning or not winning [sadly]. They push red bars up, and if a team's red bars cannot stay up, that team will lose [short and simple]. In a monk team vs a non-monk team, the only way the non-monk team will ever win is if the entire team has damage-mitigating utilities such as knock-downs, interrupts, blind, weakness, snares, and so on... Otherwise, that team's gonna lose over 90% of the time.

thedukesd · Nov 17, 2010, 02:44 AM // 02:44

Ideal it will be to try to see if it can put a monk(healer) in that party, if not then it should try not to make them face a party with monk(healer) if posible. Also if it's already a monk it should not put another monk in that party (even if this means that the monk will have to wait 30 more seconds(*)).

I wrote healer cause in a more complex way i was thinking if in a rits bar there are some restore skills it should consider him similar to monk.

The name of the arena it's Random Arena. It supposed to be random. I don't see random and balance working together. (if the game try somehow to balance the teams even by trying to add a monk in each of them i think it's against the random idea).

(*) I wrote this cause several times when I was in a party with 2 monks they wanted to resign not even trying to see if it works or not and if we won one of them could had left, one of them just quited, one of them afk or went suicidal... I don't say it's always happening, but I saw it happening. I don't really understand why cause if you have 2 healers and 2 damage dealer that party can win, maybe not a fast win but can win. I was in a party with 3 monks (all healers not the "crazy" hammer smiter build) and me the only damage dealer and we won (i managed to kill one enemy, they had a monk too).

The attempt to make a team face another team having the same classes will probably not work. One of the reasons is cause there is no other team with the same classes and another reason is cause with the players are temporarily waiting to get a team you can't always make a team having the classes as your team.

Warvic · Nov 17, 2010, 03:09 PM // 15:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius Bsns

I'm willing to bet some platinum you're a syncer, and that you say the above because you're against anything bringing down your odds of winning, especially if Anet forced an algorithm that makes every team have a min/max of one (1) monk.

On-topic though, /notsigned only because there's no relative need to make teams identical, it'd be a waste of time forcing cycles to run a search that matches a team profession-by-profession. It's completely unnecessary, and it'd be a waste... especially when knowing that the game's populace is ever so small!

The most I'd /sign for is a monk-finding algorithm because monks are essential to teams winning or not winning [sadly]. They push red bars up, and if a team's red bars cannot stay up, that team will lose [short and simple]. In a monk team vs a non-monk team, the only way the non-monk team will ever win is if the entire team has damage-mitigating utilities such as knock-downs, interrupts, blind, weakness, snares, and so on... Otherwise, that team's gonna lose over 90% of the time.

Don't jump to conclusions my friend. It will cost ya platinum

As i got all my RA pts without syncing or playing monk.

All i did was explaining to him why it's not a good idea. And why it doesn't make sense! Hence why i reminded him of the format name... And that's for the simple reason that it's a random arena. You jump in and fight. You always get a different team (wich makes it fun).

Besides that. Changing a format that is actually working and pretty populair doesn't make any sense. Yup that's true. Random arena is exactly what it says, for almost 6 years now. No need to change it.

It's obvious that most of you guys in here wanna change stuff so it favors ya to get some pixels underneath your name. A monk finding algorithm? really? Why just not bring TA back then

RA is random! And it should stay like that.
Anet knows monks r imba and required, hence why GW2 won't have them hehe

Reverend Dr · Nov 17, 2010, 04:29 PM // 16:29

I'm sure everyone sees the current matchmaking system as what is holding them back from getting more wins faster. While such a system (lets just assume one could be created) would relieve the rounds of getting poor compositions, it is also going to do that for all of the teams you face. Remember this is RA you only get glad points for five consecutive wins. If teams are well formed in RA each match is going to be [from a competition standpoint] a much better match and winning streaks are going to be a lot less common.

No one likes getting stuck in bad teams, but its all of those losses that fuel the consecutive streaks needed for Glad points. Put in a good matching system (however that would work) and glad points are going to be much harder to get, rather than easier.

GwOxygen · Nov 17, 2010, 06:50 PM // 18:50

What do you guys wanting to 'balance' RA don't understand about the word RANDOM?

jojoballz · Nov 17, 2010, 07:03 PM // 19:03

There isn't much you can do with the current state of things. Random is Random.

The only thing that could be changed, is to have RA battles at speicific times, and maybe fewer in the day and with greater rewards. To intice more people to sign up.

Then with a 10 min sign up period every one joins in and then the people are sorted out, and based on the number you sign in determines your team. All teams get a monk, a tank and 2 randoms...meaning that if you sign up late you might not get a monk at all.

Maybe even changing RA to 8 man teams too.

Something similar to Border Defense War in Knight Online.

Morphy · Nov 17, 2010, 07:13 PM // 19:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by chuckles79

Codex w/ "sealed deck" style is pretty lame. You almost have to research to find which builds do NOT suck that day then stack your team.

Why is that bad? One of the things I enjoyed about codex before it died was trying to read that day's meta and react to it.

Skye Marin · Nov 17, 2010, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Limiting the number of professions in Random Arena has been a long-time, very bad suggestion to attempt to fix something that is working as intended.

Same professions do not mean same roles. Random is random. It's right there in the name.

Consider if any sort of profession restriction were to happen, and the negative consequences of that:
-certain professions would have to wait in a long queue before playing at all
-all professions would be expected to play one role, stagnating creativity
-many players would still not get a team without a monk/healer
-many players would still get teams with not enough damage/utility
-in cases teams are made more balanced*, they will find it more difficult to get gladiator points because they are facing more other teams who are also balanced. Bad players will still be bad.

*I am not convinced that this desired effect will actually happen. The newly introduced downsides would combine with the still-persistent old ones to make people dislike RA even more.

Casual PvP formats in GW2 will be more accessible because of fewer, better skills (meaning fewer, better bars), and the ability to drop in and out of a match, like playing Call of Duty or Team Fortress 2.