Curse

karunpav · Oct 27, 2006, 01:39 AM // 01:39

/signed, would be loads of fun when you have nothing else to do.

xiao1985 · Oct 27, 2006, 06:01 AM // 06:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cybah

monks can smite.

/signed

QFT

want wait to smite

/signed

it's not 1on1... which means it usually will breed cowards... wait till everyone's on low hp / high dp, then score easy kills...

lacasner · Oct 28, 2006, 02:33 AM // 02:33

D/p wouldn't be included probably...

Balan · Feb 09, 2007, 04:20 PM // 16:20

GW greatest flaw -- no persistent evolving Battlefield environment, which allows Lone Wolf style play and PuG (pick up group) accessibility. Factions is poorly implemented for PuG, Lone wolf (solo) style play. Elitism makes GW inaccessible to most new players playing GWs for the first time, new players need a MMO style feel to cut their teeth on, and a way to meet other players, in combat while playing the game. Arena battles are lukewarm for this, and too team dependent, as when new players do not pull their weight, the battle is lost; then you are thrown into another random encounter, with another random group. PuGs that last beyond the few minutes of button mashing tend to help develop friendships among players, as you learn their names, playstyle and abilities.

Perhaps this is a server load issue, or just thematically counter to GW design principles.

For example, Alterac Valley in WoW (earliest version, when the map was much larger.) Having an environment where players can simply join a battle without looking for a group, guild etc. And fight an objective based battle Much like Aspenwood/Jade Quarry, but on a much, much larger scale. Instancing these will limit the player load to a manageable amount, but with NPCs etc, you will not need a full group to participate VS. an enemy. -- even if a few players join in, Unlike the current state of Jade Quarry were no one can get in. I joined the GW community looking for the AV/boarderland/outland Epic style battles, but they don't really exist, for new players, casual players like myself.

Could have mounts, outpost, in the instance, places with tactical advantages, ways to gain territory. Factions Alliance battles are to restrictive and inaccessible, for many, many reasons. Especially for the casual player, who does not have time for guild relations. Or to sit around in the starting area spamming LFG.

One button is all you need, "Enter Battle", there does not need to be tangible gains beyond the Battlefield, just fun within. There could even be Instance specific skills for fast travel, either with mount(ground or flying) or on foot, that would in increase the skill bar beyond the limit of 6.

Anyway, PvP balance and gameplay is excellent in GW, but for all the imbalances in WoW, I'm still drawn to AB, WSG, AV battles, and having a hard time finding traction in GWs PvP.

P.S.
I checked in the PvP section of listed suggestions and did not see anything similar, if there was already a suggestion then, I apologies before hand.

Wingless_Warrior · Feb 09, 2007, 04:44 PM // 16:44

why are you trying to bring WoW stuff into my GW soup =(

Wingless_Warrior · Feb 09, 2007, 04:45 PM // 16:45

and sorry for the double posting but there is more Lone wolf style in WoW than GW

Balan · Feb 10, 2007, 04:13 PM // 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wingless_Warrior

and sorry for the double posting but there is more Lone wolf style in WoW than GW

Correct. This is why WoW is so much more popular with casual players who PvP, or players with limited time. Casual players make up the majority of WoW, what's the player base currently? 15 Million?

Casual PvP in GW does not hold interest as well as WoW. I'd much prefer to play GW as it is so much better in so many ways compared to WoW, but casual PvP seems too limited. Maybe I've just not found the right avenue in GW. . .

ericdanie · Feb 10, 2007, 04:31 PM // 16:31

Yep, casual players which can't waste from 15 minutes to hours to find a group are really negatively affected by this in GW. I really wish there was a mode like this one you described, as it would add more versability for the player that doesn't want to spend time looking for a group that will break up in half the time it was wasted to form it.

lacasner · Feb 10, 2007, 04:36 PM // 16:36

/signed, im gonna find a link where i already started a topic like this, its a good idea though i love it.

lacasner · Feb 10, 2007, 04:38 PM // 16:38

here it is:

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...r+all+arena%21

some1 try tell me if it connects.

Balan · Feb 11, 2007, 02:35 PM // 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

here it is:

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...r+all+arena%21

some1 try tell me if it connects.

Link works, nice idea. And it has a win condition and the mixing of player base so Leet teams would not always roll pugs.

I'm kinda thinking that a persistent, objective (random team) base battlefield, where players enter/leave at random, Win conditions are only holding a certain primary objective for a time, which, over time, becomes more and more difficult to defend, thus breaking long sieges. The time a keep is held could be a badge of honor etc. I guess it's like Factions, but accessible and playable even when a few players are available.

Players could set up a hero priority order, and when not enough players enter, heroes will auto join along side the players, everyone getting one hero as needed to fill the ranks, or two heroes if more team members are needed. etc, heroes de-spawn when more players enter, or don't re-spawn when killed. . . Much like Quake and other FPS Bot systems.

Like Lahtendi Bog for example, (and other Beautiful Maps) where LoD is not to high in any one area, but the map is very open to many avenues of approach, players can set up ambushes etc. at key choke-points, use foliage for cover, if the "Display Name" feature were disabled, use strategy/tactics and NPC deployment throughout. Could even capture Flying Mounts (skills) for air assaults.

These maps do not need to be balanced as there would be no real side, only player spawn points, 2-3 teams, and conquest points. I'm guessing Age of Conan will be much like this.

These Battlefields could even introduce underwater environments, and swimming, for stealth ops from below.

Many of the existing instances could be used as new battlefield environments, a menu can tell players where there are currently battles under way, thus you'll always know where the action is. Player killing is the method of gain, award points for New instance specific skills to be unlocked. Swimming, Flying Mounts, Underwater Breathing, Climbing. . . .Even introduce climbing; skills to be captured (or earned) to help players scale walls shear landscape . . . There could be instance specific skills within that are added to, on top of, your existing 6 skill-set. Even class specific skills for the new Epic battles.

Anyway, lots could be added to an Expansion of such scope, and it would help revolutionize an already solid game.

I guess it would be much less a Guild War game, and more a Total War (Conquest) game. . . maybe a stretch, and I should be posting in another game forum.

GW has an excellent Game Engine, it would be nice to see it flex a bit more.

lyra_song · Feb 11, 2007, 05:20 PM // 17:20

This idea is completely contradicting the GW PvP concept.

GW PvP is organized and setup to give teams equal opportunities.

The synergy of skills in the game engine works better for teams, not individuals.

Even in Random Arena, you are still part of a team, albeit randomly formed, and only those randomly formed teams that mesh well together will win.

I really HATE to say this, but this isn't WoW. Stop trying to turn GW into a free WoW.

drakun01 · Feb 11, 2007, 05:33 PM // 17:33

/signed for huge amounts of PvP insanity!

I think we should make this like a zone where the combat never ends. You leave Outpost X, and you enter into one of the battlefields. Let them have districts too, so you can own with a friend. Also, make the limit 40 people, so there are enough people for some random ganking if you are pissed. And because there are no parties here, even if people make a Deadly Alliance, it won't matter, because you could mistarget and kill your ally(shovesin combo anyone?) This idea rocks though.

Saige · Feb 11, 2007, 05:48 PM // 17:48

Like Lyra Song said your just wanting to turn Guildwars into a free World of Warcraft(WoW)

Guildwars is diffrent than WoW and has completely diffrent ideas
If you want a free WoW go without playing WoW Haha

Next time don't try to turn a game into anouther game just for your own gain

/not signed

Shuuda · Feb 11, 2007, 06:02 PM // 18:02

As Saige and Lyra have said, this goes against the idea of GW, you want WoW, pay for it. And as for the whole "Lone wolf" Thing, doesn't that pretty much go against the idea of an "Online game".

Noose · Feb 11, 2007, 06:22 PM // 18:22

I'm all for this kind of thing, great way to pass the time in between GvG's/whatever, or just when bored.

/signed

Ashleigh McMahon · Feb 11, 2007, 08:43 PM // 20:43

/signed.

Before you read the following please take note - By referring to allies and alliances, I am referring to temporary alliances set up within that specific game - not the guild and alliance system

Monks could be loved again with the addition of an 'ally' system within the match. This will make it possible for monk spells and other friendly spells to be cast on people who you are allied with. Could also save allies from AoE damage.You can break the alliance by choosing 'kick from alliance' if your the alliance leader- - or 'leave alliance'. If you are the victim of a kick, you get a brief warning like 'You have been booted from the match alliance'. You then have say; 10 seconds before you are removed from the alliance. This gives the kick victim time to run if he fears he is getting double crossed.

For instance, 2 players could agree to a temporary alliance within that match. Each become allies to each other and this alliance can be broken whenever. I think that the allianceship should be limited to about 12 people to prevent mass swarming.

Hey- I'd love to play the lone ranger and take down groups....boom head shot

Just a thought that could possibly be worked on.

I think this idea is fab. It's the one main thing GW is missing imo..world PvP(In sense)
DP shouldn't be added. This 'system' should have several districts, alike alliance battles. (More than one at once). These should be continuously open games which expand into more games if there is alot of people on at once. Clicking 'enter mission' should have a 'random' option - or a choice of match for people to select ; eg: Game 1, Game 2, Game 3.

I think my latter comment would add alot of fun to the game. You would be able to say in the mission outpost(s) things like 'We need help in Game 2 - theres alot of people allied and it's hard for us to kill them! Join game 2 now and let's roll them

'
Obviously there should be quite a high player cap per game. A low cap would make it much easier for full guilds to team and join forces with each other. I would think about 80-100 player cap per game? This is about the same cap as a town.
When you enter I think there should be say 3 or 4 teleports which lead into different stages of the maps. This should be a safe zone with say a 'zone defender' - alike alliance battles. The zone defender should instantly kill anyone who commits any hostile activity within the safe zone. The latter, and the teleporters would prevent ganking.

Heck, why not even add some 'PvE' element to this? Random groups of monsters could patrol the map/s...or even there could be multiple game/map types such as 'PvP + PvE-Game 1 /2/3' or 'PvP only - Game 1'

A scoreboard would be fun for each individual match- listing player names and deaths/kills + alliance (if they are in one-It will will say the alliances name) This scoreboard could be accessed by clicking a signpost in the safe zone - or by pressing some form of hotkey.

I think the OP's idea has great potential..and you definately have my signature on this.

Absolutely fantastic idea!

/signed

@ Blue Man..You got your mod input - not that it will make any difference though

I'm just as special as you guys :P

divinechancellor · Feb 11, 2007, 08:55 PM // 20:55

/signed

FFA pvp would be fun, but the fotm builds would dominate. However, assuming my guild was able to get in at the same time (you can do this in RA with careful communication), we would team up and gank the loners.

-.- · Feb 11, 2007, 09:06 PM // 21:06

Lovely idea. I approve.

/Signed.

Bankai · Feb 11, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

Free for all is aweful. The game just isn't based around it.

-Since people will want the least dp possible, they will go with high survivability. Throw 20-30 people with high survivability together and there'll be no kills.
-These groups of people will appear:

-Invincimonks
-Stance warriors with no attack skills
-Grenth's and Melandru's dervishes who destroy them both
-Necros with huge minion armies and vamp gaze to kill the invincimonks
-Sins killing the necros and Grenth's (and Melandru's out of form)

Anything else would probably fail.