Curse

lightblade · May 16, 2006, 11:19 PM // 23:19

/signed

increase award, and make it influence faction boundary.

Tuoba Hturt Eht · May 18, 2006, 02:28 AM // 02:28

Thank you for all the replies.
Your feedbacks are invaluable and is much appreciated.

SpeedyKQ, Loquetus brought up a good point regarding the "individual faction rewards" which will be quite unfair to support characters.

Hence, I believe that idea will need to be revised.

Let's look at what I wrote previously:
Indiviual Faction rewards:
- 5 Kurick / Luxon faction for each Luxon / Kurzick NPC killed
- 10 Kurick / Luxon faction for each Luxon / Kurzick PC killed
- 15 Kurick / Luxon faction for each Luxon Turtle / Kurzick Juggernaught killed
- 20 Kurick / Luxon faction for each Luxon / Kurzick strategic point you helped to capture

Instead of being "individual rewards", make these accumulative towards the total team factions rewards?

For example:
1. Fort Aspenwood
2. Kurzick vs Luxons
3. Luxon failed to kill architect in time, Kurzick won
4. Standard 600 Kurzick faction awarded, plus bonuses
5. Kurzick team killed 100 NPCs, +500 Kurzick Faction
6. Kurzick team killed 50 PCs, +500 Kurzick Faction
7. etc...
8. Total Kurzick faction awarded: 1600+
9. Total Luxon faction awarded: ....

Well, get the picture?
The numbers can be adjusted to be deemed "balanced".

Now, instead of those "rewards" being "individual", why not let them add up to the total faction awarded to everyone when the round has ended?

Discuss.

Feedback, in any form, be it positive or negative, is much appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
Cheers.

P/S: There are 4 polls in this topic, please indicate which poll you are voting for Yes or No.

I think I need to revise the "individual faction rewards" poll and replace it to become "individual actions add up to total team faction rewards awarded at end of battle".

Undivine · May 18, 2006, 03:40 AM // 03:40

My votes: A big fat yes to increasing the faction rewards. I'd say a win should gain you 2000 faction. People farm easy faction with Amatz Basin. Also, there's the repeatable quest outside of Brauer Academy which trapping teams have been farming recently. During the preview, people didn't think of this build yet, and Amatz wasn't even available. These missions should be somewhat comparable and have added faction to compensate for the fact that you actually need to win something to get the rewards.

I'm on the fence with allowing PvP characters. The equipment arguement doesn't concern me, as weapons generally don't make that much of a difference. Nor does the arguement that PvPers would overpower the PvEers. I know PvPers are always thinking about PvP and use words like "metagame" that us PvEers don't even care about, but really, during the preview it became apparent that the enemies you have to worry about are the NPCs, not the PCs on these missions. But the idea of these missions is to get PvEers interested in PvP by bridging the gap somehow. Allowing PvPers here may just take away that effect. Also, PvPers couldn't care less which faction owns which town. But all-in-all, I guess I don't really see the harm in it. I think my vote is yes.

Individual factions rewards is a no-no. It would encourage people to fill only those roles that gain rewards and not those that the team needs. Although since you are suggesting the rewards are very low, its no biggie... but then, why go to the trouble of putting them in if they're not going to amount to a lot? Vote: no.

If you're going to allow PvP characters to use them, then sure, make them unlockable to your account for your PvP characters. Vote: yes.

Wyvern King · May 18, 2006, 07:07 AM // 07:07

/signed for:

1 increase faction rewards (particularly for jade quarry) - but if they implement 3, then not as much

3 implement individual faction rewards

2 Access for PvP chars? Maybe - put a yes for me, but I don't think they should get L/K faction for it, just balthazar (or else someone could unlock the stuff needed for a great build using faction, with perfect mods, and use it to get lots of cash)

Loquetus · May 18, 2006, 12:15 PM // 12:15

/sign for the team based accumalative rewards aswell

cause atm it's hard enough to find a monk in aspenwood (i'm normally the only monk @ the kurzick side)
(besides that one time where this awesomely useless smiting monk joined us)

mqstout · May 18, 2006, 01:41 PM // 13:41

But A.net insists that these areas (gasp) aren't PvP areas in their bid to try to force PvEers into PvP. Allowing PvP-only characters in would nullify that argument.

*sigh*

WasAGuest · May 18, 2006, 01:46 PM // 13:46

Since this is alive again and with new ideas (cool):

/signed for more and higher rewards
/signed for being able to choose party members
/not signed for PvP only characters for access

Some issues I have come across:

The low population on these areas: Why so few people in these missions? I asked in a few zones if people had played these missions (Jade and Aspenwood) and the answers I got were pretty blanket. I ask others to ask around as well and see if you get similar answers:

Jade is unbalanced towards the Kurzick side.
Rewards are too low and not worth the time.
Not interested in PvP gaming.
Can't select my own team and RA is lame.
Don't like getting stuck with people who may just go afk or rage quit.

Those were some of the answers I got, though some were questionable towards the topic of the question. I was careful not to load the question and I worded the question like this: "Has anyone tried Jade/Aspenwood? And do you enjoy it? and why or why not?"

KESKI · May 18, 2006, 02:49 PM // 14:49

/signed
The current balance in faction earning is pathetic
Alliance leader ask ppl to be a farmer so they can earn faction quick and have a chance in owning city.
It suck hell, but how can you blame him...the fact is those repeatable side mission is the fastest, easiest way to earn massive faction.

Don Zardeone · May 18, 2006, 03:15 PM // 15:15

The low population can be explained in other ways.

I've played those missions as a monk and warrior and every time one of the 2 sides would be really crappy.

Reasons for aspenwood:
1. Kurzicks/luxons send "spies" to the other side. Then these spies go afk and then the fight is 4 vs 8 which will guarantee a 600-700 faction reward for the cheaters.
2. Nobody knows what they're doing. Rarely does kurzick gain control over an amber mine and when it does, nobody runs amber back and forth.
3. Kurzick never has monks unless I monk myself. But if I monk then nobody runs. And if I run, then nobody monks.

This leads to frustration and that's why I don't like playing this mission anymore.

Not only that, the luxons have a MUCH EASIER job. They only need to kill stuff. They don't have to worry about repairing gates, taking over key positions or anything.

I was running amber as a chargewarrior yesterday, keeping the luxons out. After a while, the luxon warriors start calling me noob because "I don't fite like a worior, a worior is suppsed to fite, not run away al time" (nobody speaks english either X.x)

It pisses people off and then they don't play it anymore...

Mtank325 · May 18, 2006, 03:27 PM // 15:27

I agree with raising the Factions rewards as many people have said. It'd encourage more people to play those missions opposed to just doing Alliance battles where it's easily accessible and everybody is a winner and gets Faction.

Tuoba Hturt Eht · May 20, 2006, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Thank you all for your replies.
The feedback you have all provided are invaluable and is much appreciated.
Together, we will strive to make Guild Wars a better game.

Right now, my main concern is the low amount of Kurzick / Luxon factions awarded at the end of these missions, I am sure many people would agree with this fact.

Comparing the repeatable "faction farming quest" - "The Luxon Supply Lines" with either of these "Competitive Missions", I can earn 2,000 experience points, 150 gold and 400 Luxon faction in 2 minutes with the "The Luxon Supply Lines".

A battle in Fort Aspenwood could drag on for say, 10 minutes or more.
If we win Fort Aspenwood as the Kurzick's side by defending the Master Architect, the Kurzick Faction awarded at the end of the battle is only 600, even if you spent like more than 10 minutes in the game.

The very same 10 minutes or more can be spent "faction farming" the "Duel of the houses" quest for Kurzick faction, plus experience points and gold.

ANET really needs to increase the Kurzick / Luxon factions rewards in these competitive missions outposts significantly.

PvP means of getting factions should offer way higher amount of factions compared to PvE, because you are competiting against other live players.

I've updated the original post to include the recent votes.
There are now 5 polls, but please do ignore the 4th poll, which is about "invididual faction rewards", that idea is broken.

Instead, take a look at the 5th poll.

Keep those feedback coming!

Tuoba Hturt Eht · May 20, 2006, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Thread revival since there is demand.

Yanman.be · May 20, 2006, 02:23 PM // 14:23

/signed

TheGuildWarsPenguin · May 21, 2006, 02:29 PM // 14:29

Poll 1:Yes
Poll 2:Yes
Poll 3:Said to disregard
Poll 4:Depends on how you unlock, if its money like the GH npcs, NO.
Poll 5:Yes

Tuoba Hturt Eht · May 22, 2006, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Updated original post to include 2 issues and polls, in which I believe are relevant to this topic regarding these competitive missions.

Remove the "Random Arena" concept of these competitive missions, replace with "compulsary enter mission in teams of 4 players" like the current way Alliance Battles work
Why this? Recently I saw a thread with a heated arguement regarding this issue. I believe this implementation would resolve the issue of leechers or AFKers (people who join the mission but do nothing) in these competitive missions.

Why teams of 4 and not teams of 8? Well, if it is to be teams of 8, the time required to form a team might be longer. Forming teams of 4 ought to be much quicker.

If the leechers still dare to join in as a team of 4 leechers or AFKers, I believe ANET will need to make necessary adjustments to the Rules of Conduct, and other players would have the right to report these abusers (leechers, AFKers).

NOTE: Party screen will have 8 players, unlike the current Alliance Battles which only shows 4 players.

Revise the Rules of Conduct, give players the right to report abusers (leechers, AFKers)
The "Random Arena" or "ability to click 'Enter Mission' as a single individual " concept of these competitive missions need to go. In its current state, it simply invites leechers aka AFKers into the games, ruining the gaming experience for others.

I say drop the current "enter mission as 1 person" system and change it into "enter mission as a 4 player team". I believe this method could actually help stop the leechers aka AFKers from doing what they are doing now to these competitive missions.

If them leechers aka AFKers still persist in joining these competitive missions as a 4 player team of leechers aka AFKers, I suggest that ANET revise the Rules of Conduct and allow players to report these abusers (leechers aka AFKers)

http://www.guildwars.com/support/leg...sofconduct.php

Quote:

1. While playing Guild Wars, you must respect the rights of others and their rights to play and enjoy the game. To this end, you may not defraud, harass, threaten, or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players.

Questions:
1. Did the "leechers aka AFKers" respect the rights of others?
2. Did the "leechers aka AFKers" respect our rights to play and enjoy the game?

Feedback, in any form, be it negative or positive, is much appreciated.
Thank you for your time.
Cheers.

P/S: If you voted Yes or No, perhaps you could let us know why you voted Yes or No? Thank you.

Undivine · May 22, 2006, 07:18 AM // 07:18

Reporting leechers is a tricky business. For one thing, there are so many that I doubt ANet would be able to keep up. For another, people can appear to leech due to lag. Some people may think 30 seconds is enough to detect a leecher from a lagger, but that really isn't the case.

I've known people to lag so badly they were able to move about 1 or 2 steps every 10-40 seconds. This is especially bad on missions where there are lots of connections and new patches streaming through at the same time.

Plus, there are plenty of people that have no patience at all. I wouldn't be surprised to see people report leechers after only 20 seconds. After all, I've seen people leave the game for such retarded reasons.

Unfortunately, there just isn't a good way to deal with leechers.

WasAGuest · May 22, 2006, 01:16 PM // 13:16

The only way to stop or lessen the afker is too make alternate quests more rewarding and more inviting to them. This of course would mean fewer people wanting to do these missions. This is due to the flawed system at play though, time over skill to gain faction points.

The question on the afk issue is really what do we want: Do we want more rewards thus having more afkers? Do we want a more pure PvP game and less rewards? Can't have both as the system at work wont allow it.

I think that by giving more rewards to the PvE quests the Jade/Aspen missions will have only those that desire to play those missions there. Therefore they would have less people leeching. By lessening or making the PvE quests more difficult* Anet is creating a griefing situation where the leeching is more profitable to the players.

*By more difficult, I mean in terms of time spent to gain, ie making the gain slower. Factions is backwards in that it is time over skill in the way it is built. Hence I say "a flawed system".

A possible solution would be to add more repeatable PvE quests and a more dynamic rewards system to PvE. New idea for PvE faction gaining and Dyanmic rewards quest rewards. Input on both ideas would be wonderful.

Undivine · May 22, 2006, 01:24 PM // 13:24

Perhaps the best way to deal with AFKers is to let the player decide by allowing them to kick them. Here's a thread on that.

WasAGuest · May 22, 2006, 01:41 PM // 13:41

Kicking opens up too much room for abuse. Especially if they are too add the ability (eventually and hopefully) to group before entering. With the kick in place, groups of friends can kick a player when a good drop falls so the "friends" can get it and not the person that got it.

There are also issues where someone is being a jerk and has friends in the group and they just opt to kick someone so they don't have to hear a response back.

And then, worst of all, someone trying to learn the mission (a noobie) gets kicked by elitest jerks with no patience for those trying to learn.

Kicking also doesn't serve any point but to further slow the faction gain. It would simply create yet another form of griefing elsewhere (remember, the players are pretty ingenous when it comes to working around the system to get what they want).
If Kicking is added, it's really a moot fix, here's why: You kick someone they don't get the rewards. So, they just enter again and repeat. It's still faster than some of the quests out there. It also does nothing for your team in the mission, you are still down that person (whether they sat there or they get kicked). So the "fix" would be to make them not want to enter to begin with unless they are validly wanting to play the mission.

I'm not defending afkers at all, they bug me to no end in PvE missions. You spend 20 minutes getting a PuG together and some fool goes afk at the start then leech through the mission. There's nothing that can be really done that can't be abused other than know who you are grouping with and when that can't be done, make the reasons for afking worth less than playing through.

Undivine · May 22, 2006, 01:50 PM // 13:50

Frankly I think when people say kicking will be abused, I think they are being alarmist. But that's really a discussion for a thread about kicking.

For the immediate mission, no it does nothing to help your team. But people hate AFKers and they would kick them if they were able, just out of spite.
AFKers would surely get kicked every single time they tried doing something that inconsiderate. If that's the case, it isn't worth trying to do it, since you will only be kicked by your teammates.

There's your incentive.

So eventually people will know they cannot get away with it, thus it will stop.