Curse

Kai Nui · Aug 21, 2005, 05:44 AM // 05:44

Completely unbalanced, it won't work. There's no point in arguing this, seriously, let it die in its already pathetic coffee mug AKA it's urn. Too bad I put milk in it and drank it like hot cocoa, it tasted like the true shit it really was.

Eet GnomeSmasher · Aug 21, 2005, 08:16 AM // 08:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kai Nui

Completely unbalanced, it won't work. There's no point in arguing this, seriously, let it die in its already pathetic coffee mug AKA it's urn. Too bad I put milk in it and drank it like hot cocoa, it tasted like the true shit it really was.

Oh yes. Thanks for your valid points. Just because you dont like 1v1 doesnt mean people can't talk about it and make suggestions. It doesnt harm you in any way now does it? And I guess you would know what shit tastes like...it seems that you're full of it.

For someone who has made 4 threads in this section, you'd think you'd be more tolerant of people making suggestions.

neoteo · Aug 22, 2005, 07:15 AM // 07:15

define balanced

ok you are a mesmer ... dont go to 1vs1 or make another char.

misthero · Aug 22, 2005, 08:05 AM // 08:05

What about 2vs2??

neoteo · Aug 22, 2005, 08:36 AM // 08:36

2vs2

/signed

sounds good to me

Stell Pol · Sep 07, 2005, 06:29 PM // 18:29

In the end, if it doesn't use an extra server and people don't get exp, faction or anything from it. There's no logical reason why it shouldn't exist.

Nobody will become bad team player from it. The people who are already bad team players will use it. There's a difference.

Also, if you don't get anything from doing it, does it matter if it's balanced? If you need everything perfectly balanced to have fun, look up "fun" and "anal retentive" in the dictionary.

1v1 would be pleasure only, if the concept doesn't please you than don't use it. If you guys are so interested in having fun, let others have it too.

Schorny · Sep 07, 2005, 07:27 PM // 19:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bloods

1v1 would be a VERY VERY VERY VERY great idea. Ever thought about changing skills to counter your weakness? Sure a mesmer can use backfire on a caster, but doesnt mean u cant interupt it? You can just wait till backfire is gone, OR better yet, just interupt it.

You can't interrupt a mesmer who don't want to be interrupted.
Only hex breaker works - but now we are down to Mesmer any way.

Quote:

You dont always have to bring the same skills you use in team arenas. Bring skills that help yourself.

That, by no means, is an argument why mesmer wouldn't be overpowered.

You see: mesmer is the class that is designed to have a counter against everything. If a mesmer is prepared nothing can beat him in 1v1 except a better mesmer.

but I explained it to all details why it is just luck if you win or loose and has (except when both have the same skills) nothing to do with player skill.

and I know someone will come and insult me on beeing elite because I said 'I'.
We are through a few such threads.

The arguments for a 1v1 is:
* it would be cool
* you don't have to do it
* it doesn't affect the game

If someone has to add something, please do so - i'm interested in a good discussion, but please think about arguments. Thx.

Manderlock · Sep 07, 2005, 07:44 PM // 19:44

Im for it, and Ive been for it since release.

If you dont like ok fine you wont have to participate, but you have no real reason to be aginst it.

THEIvo · Sep 09, 2005, 07:31 AM // 07:31

Did you guys forget there is already a 1v1 battle in the game? I love fighting my doppelganger. I wish I could fight others 1v1.

and another argument for 1v1 to add to that list:
It can be used for testing damage, armor and things like that.

Ex Animo · Sep 09, 2005, 07:42 AM // 07:42

/signed

and bored , why the first comment have always to be negative , this forum sometimes realy sucs

its not that you dont like the idea , but you also dont want others to have it

odd

mortalis doleo · Sep 12, 2005, 07:09 PM // 19:09

i have read all the other posts about 1v1 arenas, and i got this so far:

it will have very different builds from other pvp places, due to the 1v1 factor (it will be rare to find a necro, or a ranger). those classes will feel in a disadvantage. I DONT WANT TO START FIGHTING ABOUT THAT! PLEASE DONT REPLY SAYING THAT THOSE CLASSES WILL BE OVERLOOKED.

people dont want there to be faction or exp rewards for this, because of the reason above.

so here is my idea:
no faction
no experience
you can challenge or you can do a random fight

you can gamble on whever or not you win:
this will only be available in challenges, both players see the other guy's proffesion and sec profession, and decide if they want to fight.
then, they decide on a certain amount of money that they both put on the line (you can fight without money). the winner wins the pot, its that simple.

i think there should also be a limit to the amount you can fight for (500 maybe?).

tell me what you think

Shadow Devil · Sep 12, 2005, 07:25 PM // 19:25

I dont really have much faith with 1v1 pvp, because certain builds are just too powerfull against one person.
For example: why the hell did you exclude ranger? they would certainly own with all kinds of distractions, the other person wouldn't have a chanse with a good distraction build. If the enemy can't do anything, its not a fighting arena but a practise shooting range. (incendairy arrows+frenzy, and a hell lot of other distraction skills when that ends would do the trick). I agree that Necro primary would be useless though, soul reaping will have no effect whatso ever.
I can only immagine the dullness of 2 mesmers that hexed each other with whatnot, both using the denail kind of hexes.
Other than that there is spellbreaker/obsidian flesh+blinding flash(or whatever spammable blinding skill) and of course the 'at the beginning not use but after a few succesfull builds you see them everywhere you go' smiting builds that would make any mellee build completely useless.

I think that if you are going to create, it should be warrior primary only with no use of elite skills with a time limit of 1 minute. Even though there with those nasty elite defence skills out of the way and limit to the energy suply, I'm sure there will be enough build that make battles last for ever, oh well, if the people want a 1v1 option, they'll get a 1vs1 option!

Rhunex · Sep 12, 2005, 10:31 PM // 22:31

Why do you exclude necromancers and rangers? Necromancers have VERY powerful death magic skills, and in a 1 v 1 match they could smite just about everything. Rangers aren't that bad either, because they would be able to knock down warrios, psn them, knock them down, ignite them, knock them down again, dead. Of course if someone used a W/Mo build with all them secksy buffs, then all you'd need to teach them a lesson is an Earth/Lightning elementalist to slow them down by 90% and knock the crap out of them.

As for the 1 v 1 idea, I totally agree. There's a few people in my guild who I'd like to inform on the powers of water :P

Gerbill · Sep 12, 2005, 11:50 PM // 23:50

I think the main reason they don't have 1vs1 is that a LOT of people will start to cry for nerfs just because they have the wrong build for it.

I think 1vs1 should be done in a friendly way to practice against a certain class.. in fact.. I'd say don't put in a 1vs1, just put in an extra part in let's say the gulid hall, where there's just an area, if you're in that area you can attack eachother.

this way you can also have 1vs2 in example.. if you're practicing as a mesmer to shutdown 2 monks instead of 1.

mortalis doleo · Sep 13, 2005, 06:20 AM // 06:20

as for excluding rangers, i was wrong.
but as for the necros, im a lvl 20 necro with everything unlocked, and i have no faith in them surviving a good player using anything else.

but nvm, i said not to comment about that

i just wanted to bring the idea of cash fights, where the reward isnt faction.

as for the guild area, its a nice idea, but you cant have a 1v2 with what you say, because an aoe spell will damage your team mate.

edit: when i say the necros wont win, im talkin about necros, not N/Me that can hex a warrior like there is no tommorow, becuse a Me/N would be better at that, with fast casting.

One and Two · Sep 13, 2005, 06:58 AM // 06:58

The only purpose for 1v1 should be challenges. No faction, no crap like that. 1v1 is plainly "i'm better than you" between two people. And plainly, it should stay that way.

mortalis doleo · Sep 13, 2005, 11:46 AM // 11:46

i agree, but you should also be able to say "im better than you, and i bet 100 gp i can beat you right now"

thats my opinion anyway

FrogDevourer · Sep 13, 2005, 01:02 PM // 13:02

I don't see the point of starting another thread about dueling. I'm not a fan of 1v1 in GW either. Let's see if thread can provide helpful suggestions.

@Mortalis: could you update your first post (based on feedback from players) so as to compile in one place all the helpful suggestions and features from this thread? Thanks.

Kassad · Sep 13, 2005, 01:05 PM // 13:05

1 v 1 would be gay, Illu mesmer would own it 24/7, And some kinda of Invici crap build would piss you off till you leave.

KanRyu · Sep 13, 2005, 03:48 PM // 15:48

Hi, I don't post here often, mainly just offer some ideas and report in bugs to the devs from time to time. I thought I should drop in to say this though.

It seems people have forgotten one important aspect. Any 1vs1 duel would be voluntary, you would not have to have anything to do with it if you did not want to. Consider the fact that the requested purpose for 1vs1 matches is to have duels where particular players can challenge each other, in the first place.

Also the only reason why you should not gain experience or faction from such a match, is simply because it could be exploited by rigging the matches. Other than that there would really be no reason to take such gains from those who would feel like playing such a match. Nor no reason to not give them the possibility, even if you personally would not use it.

- KanRyu