Curse

Asplode · Mar 16, 2009, 07:13 PM // 19:13

Split, pressure, and spike are archaic terms which attempt to pigeonhole the game, and to be honest only serve to constrict the way people understand how gvg works.

Just about every modern build has the capacity to tackle all 3, or at least draw from each strategy's strengths.

You won't often find a build running pressure without at least attempting to coordinate their damage output into a killing spike once in a while

On the flip-side, you'll see some spike builds that will pressure in-between in order to keep bars below 100%.

You'll see splits collapsing into temporary pushes of harmonious 8-man play, just as often as you'll see some teams losing their initial 8-man strategy and begin to use split as a Plan-B (a la rawr vs BOSS Feb mAT)

Pressure teams in particular have the capacity to use split as an initiative to augment their damage output by muddying up enemy positioning, but will have a disadvantage vs spike while employing this technique, as spike is very front-loaded in their offense.

Anyway, my point is that you can't use those words to describe modern builds, most of the time.
There are certain things that are actually quintessential in their category, like "pure" spike builds, dedicated sinsplit, and some long-extinct degen-heavy edenial pressure with near-zero spike capacity.
If there's anything that's truly, viably pure it's spike, and guilds like NOW/BOSS have really pushed it to the next level, mainly because it's nearly impossible to "hard"-counter it.
Pressure can be countered with partyhealing and offmonk defense, split can be countered with a hardy runner, snares and movement speed, but the few things you can try and bring to counter a predictable spike opponent are quite inviable in GvG.

ANYWAY, about the OP, I feel that WE isn't quite as huge a deal as you make it out to be; it's an elite which by itself doesn't do anything.
It takes up that skill slot and despite being able to power a great number of energy-intensive bars, it is still counterbalanced by the fact that you can't make use of that fast adren gain beyond being able to dismember and rush (but probably dash) more often than normal because of -1 skill slot.

It sure beats crappy [Eviscerate] though. >_>

zling · Mar 16, 2009, 10:26 PM // 22:26

is this a serious post?

it seems to be long and detailed, which makes me think it's serious however it's so full of false information that it's not even funny...

first of all when I was reffering to the "rock paper scissors" mechanic I was implying it for individual skill bars not just the entire team build.

now, since you're talking about team builds lets take this slowly...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

Wrong. This game is very much rock paper scissors, and always has been. Incidently, it should always continue to be so if there is to be any form of what you're defining as 'balance'.

see my first point above, now to add onto it, a BALANCED build is able to handle most threats being thrown at it, be it spike, pressure or splitting. how's that for your "rock paper scissors" neccessity?

Quote:

Think about it - you are playing a split build. You come across a team spike build. You gain an advantage the longer the match goes on (as is with split builds), but if the spike build can beat you quickly enough you lose (as should be the case). Similar split vs. pressure. Pressure vs. spike is the odd one out, because what actually happens with spike builds is one or two slots dedicated to the kill objective, with 5 or 6 dedicated to staying alive. This is where one of the fundamental problems with spike comes into play (should require more slots on the bar than it actually does, a la old Obs Flame, which dedicated 3 slots to the spike). One of the problems with Obs Flame however, was the ability to add in Wards and over team-preservation skills with no real sacrifice. While self-preservation is/should be/should have been required on caster spike builds more than it is/will be/was used, the trade-off wasn't effective enough, hence the incredibly thin line between 'overpowered' caster (or even normal template) spike characters and the more kindly looked upon 'balanced' template characters.

a split build, wait did I miss something? since when is "split" an actual build type?

splitting can be done both offensively and defensively, both on spike and pressure builds, and are usually the result of the battlefield. some builds split better than others but it's still the battlefield that affects the splitting decision not the build itself. I'll reffer to your other points on your last paragraph, with that summary list of yours as it's easier that way.

Quote:

In short;

Spike should:

Have an initial advantage vs. split.
Have an initial disadvantage vs. pressure.

Pressure should:

Have an initial advantage vs. split.
Have an initial advantage vs. spike.

Split should:

Have an initial disadvantage vs. pressure.
Have an initial disadvantage vs. spike.

Problems therefore occur as follows;

One style has skills that give it too much of an advantage.
Victory or Death needs to be re-introduced with a makeover to make split more attractive in terms of the end-game, which can be reached with good play, but not to easy to stall for and abuse.
Bar composition allows for oe style to be too powerful in terms of countering others (ie. imbalance in skills and the use in conjunction with one another).

ok so let me make a summary of my own:
there are 3 types of builds(I'll go along with that):
Spike
Pressure
Balanced

there's no such thing as a split build, just builds that are better suited for it than others.

also, your pathetic attempt to prove your point by showing a "rock paper scissors" scenario for build vs build type is just wrong...
spike>pressure early on if it can actually get the kills to get the match rolling. if not pressure>spike.
so, "rock paper scissors"? hardly, more like how capable is your defense...

now lets actually talk about splits, but not as a build but as battle scenarios.
if your team splits the other team can either react to your split by splitting themselves or they can remain at the flag stand or wherever the battle is taking place and crush the remainder of your team. if they split than it's split on split action, if not it's a race on who can kill the other's guild lord faster. so the splitting team will have a head start time wise the other team will have more players to power through your base. of course the first team can call it's split back to help defend, if they find it neccessary. so I'll ask you again, is this really "rock paper scissors"?

so my conclusion is that you really need to get your facts straight, thanks for reading this post

Vanquisher · Mar 16, 2009, 10:50 PM // 22:50

I've made the argument before that the terms are heavily dependant on the style in which builds are played, and you are right in saying that the term is too rigid, but the fact remains that builds will always have a bias towards one side. If they attempt to accomplish several goals, they can be loosely defined as "balanced", though again, the playstyle determines the build, probably more than the build in most cases. With that in mind, a build that is specifically geared towards splitting, pressuring, or spiking should thus be at an advantage in that capacity, while at a disadvantage in others.

The fact that people attack and switch between spiking is irrelevant. People always did that unless they were playing casterspike builds anyway, and people have consistently improved to such a standard anyway. What I'm talking about here is the way in which teams are pressured. Just because bars are at ~80%, or hell, they can be a lot lower, doesn't mean the other team is actually under pressure. Granted, with the potency in spikes it does help success rates a lot, but it's not comparable to the way bars looked when teams like DF, iQ, iB, Fish, KGYU, etc. were all running heavy condition based physical pressure (when bars were looking to be around 50-60% average)... spikes being called to finish players off isn't the same as it being the only true method of killing against other top calibre teams.

Likewise with split - collapsing is part of the playstyle. Effective collapses are what seperate teams that are well coordinated in their splits from those that are ineffectual (outside of awful game balance).

As for WE, make it a stance, lower the energy gain, and give it an IMS. Also, remove the ability to keep it up constantly.

Edit;

Quote:

there's no such thing as a split build, just builds that are better suited for it than others.

also, your pathetic attempt to prove your point by showing a "rock paper scissors" scenario for build vs build type is just wrong...
spike>pressure early on if it can actually get the kills to get the match rolling. if not pressure>spike.
so, "rock paper scissors"? hardly, more like how capable is your defense...

now lets actually talk about splits, but not as a build but as battle scenarios.
if your team splits the other team can either react to your split by splitting themselves or they can remain at the flag stand or wherever the battle is taking place and crush the remainder of your team. if they split than it's split on split action, if not it's a race on who can kill the other's guild lord faster. so the splitting team will have a head start time wise the other team will have more players to power through your base. of course the first team can call it's split back to help defend, if they find it neccessary. so I'll ask you again, is this really "rock paper scissors"?

My statements aren't fact - they're my opinions on the way in which the game should be balanced. However, split is in fact a build type. The fact that most commonly used builds will have an ability to split built into them is nothing new, but split has always existed as a build structure in this game. In Prophecies, this was most successfully demonstrated by EP, with their stall at Flag stand massive energy denial strategy (E-Drain Hammer Warriors), employing a Fragility ganker to go round the back. Rank 1 metagame! Factions brought Assassins and Shadow Stepping to the table, and while a broken mechanic, this just reinforced the structure. WM and EvIL both heavily profitted from this, before other teams managed to start adapting and playing their game also. We also had WM's (5 or 6?) Warrior Iron Mist build, which focused on splitting and collapsing, slightly before Factions. We ran our own split in QQ with dual Assassins with great success, as did many other teams.

The fact people are running characters that can split (defensively or offensively) isn't new. It's been around forever. Uni, for instance, used to split with their Crip Shot, as did teams like Te, well before Observer Mode. Defensive splitting often came from the standard E-Prod template. Unfortunately (in my eyes), we now have this far more defensive flag runner template that is happy to sit in the base and defend.

Also, I should stress that good split builds will contain threat on both sides, so that if/when a reactive split occurs, the team built to be at the stand should have the ability to score kills. Good coordination in collapsing, fake collapsing, and timer-spikes are also required in this situation.

But your statement that splits don't exist is wrong. The fact may be they don't exist as they may have, but just because teams aren't running dedicated splits or good enough splits, it doesn't mean it's not a build structure. Likewise, the fact that teams are incorporating a couple of characters that can split doesn't mean it's not a build structure. As I said before (and have a few hundred times over the last couple of years), builds are just as defined by how they are played as by the skills they utilise. If a team splits from the outset, and collapses, and consistently uses this as their strategy for that match, they are playing the match as a split team. Their killing comes through splits, and their and gameplan is to split. It's not really a hard concept to understand, and having been involved in plenty of matches both on and against teams that do it, I know it's there, even if not as prevalant as it once was.

Ex Death · Mar 16, 2009, 11:22 PM // 23:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

[*]Victory or Death needs to be re-introduced with a makeover to make split more attractive in terms of the end-game, which can be reached with good play, but not to easy to stall for and abuse.

I wholeheartedly disagree with reintroducing VoD or any other makeover pertaining to a focus on non-guild lord NPC damage. The current tie breaker is perfectly balanced and any form of tie-breaker abuse or weaker discrepancies of certain playstles are ENTIRELY the product of skill imbalances rather than problems with the game mechanics. You're absolutely right though that splits in general are overshadowed by super spikes with overloaded defense and lingering curse (note that the entire notion of 'pressure' can effectively be defined by this skill at the moment). Any 'VoD makeover', assuming it worked, would simply be a lazy makeshift resort which would fail to address the problem which this game has always had which is massive skill imbalances and a sloppy relationship between offense and defense.

It is also my personal opinion that the playstyle of spiking should simply not exist in the sense of using your skill on '1' because this playstyle takes absolutely no skill whatsoever. Rather, it should involve a far greater focus on exploiting windows of opportunity via shutdown in a limited time period with weaker coordinated damage than we have at the moment. That is of course if everyone's definition of 'balance' pertains to upholding a high level of player skill within all playstyles - which I hope it would.

Kaon · Mar 16, 2009, 11:36 PM // 23:36

WE is ridiculously overpowered and degenerating.

The removal of vod and guild thieves was the best thing that happened to this game since... well... reconnects basically. I could say Mats but that also included ATs which suck.

Apok Omen · Mar 16, 2009, 11:55 PM // 23:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

As for WE, make it a stance, lower the energy gain, and give it an IMS. Also, remove the ability to keep it up constantly.

So...

[warriors endurance]
Elite Stance
5e 15r
For 1...12...13 seconds, you move 25% faster and gain 2 energy with every successful hit.?

I don't know bout that. Seems more like a whammo's [sprint] more than a spike utility. And ultimately, that's what [warriors endurance] is: a spike utility used to power energy based melee skills. I honestly see the problem in [power attack] and [protectors strike]. If they simply recieve a recharge nerf of 3s -> 8s, then no other template that uses those skills will be harmed.

Still Number One · Mar 17, 2009, 12:34 AM // 00:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apok Omen

So...

[warriors endurance]
Elite Stance
5e 15r
For 1...12...13 seconds, you move 25% faster and gain 2 energy with every successful hit.?

I don't know bout that. Seems more like a whammo's [sprint] more than a spike utility. And ultimately, that's what [warriors endurance] is: a spike utility used to power energy based melee skills. I honestly see the problem in [power attack] and [protectors strike]. If they simply recieve a recharge nerf of 3s -> 8s, then no other template that uses those skills will be harmed.

it is a spike skill now because of how it is used. That doesn't mean when changing it they need to make sure it is still a spike skill. Turning it into a battle rage that gives energy rather than double adrenaline isn't really a bad idea. It still makes it playable, whether people use it or not is a whole different story. Eviscerate is still a playable skill, but people don't use it because it is not as efficient as other warrior elites in doing what people want to do. [power attack] and [protectors strike] are not overpowered in any build besides when used in conjunction with warrior's endurance. Why nerf two skills that are perfectly fine otherwise when the real problem is the overpowered elite.

Whenitrainsitpours · Mar 17, 2009, 01:04 AM // 01:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apok Omen

So...

[warriors endurance]
Elite Stance
5e 15r
For 1...12...13 seconds, you move 25% faster and gain 2 energy with every successful hit.?

I don't know bout that. Seems more like a whammo's [sprint] more than a spike utility. And ultimately, that's what [warriors endurance] is: a spike utility used to power energy based melee skills. I honestly see the problem in [power attack] and [protectors strike]. If they simply recieve a recharge nerf of 3s -> 8s, then no other template that uses those skills will be harmed.

= Death to Protector's Strike and Power Attack.

We should make a new thread titled "Which Warrior Skills To Completely Kill?"

IMMORTAlMITCH · Mar 17, 2009, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Whenitrainsitpours

= Death to Protector's Strike and Power Attack.

We should make a new thread titled "Which Warrior Skills To Completely Kill?"

Power Attack only sees play on WE bars anyway, Prot Strike since last update also sees play on Hammer Bars, although I very much doubt any recharge change will change that (unless the recharge becomes >10 seconds).

Basically the choice Izzy has to make is wether he wants to nuke WE (I don't see many options to tone it down properly without simply making it unviable) or keep it playable by adressing Power Attack and Protector's Strike.

jaximus · Mar 17, 2009, 09:03 AM // 09:03

i play second war for my guild (so im usually hammer or sword in the off-chance they want to run a bar with a sword warrior) and they recently asked me to play a warriors endurance bar with smite buffs (the nH build). i was disgusted on vent with how pathetically skill-less the bar was. basically hit the energy skills as they lit up and just make sure to have warriors endurance up. when it was time to spike, hit dismember. targets would just blow up without actually having to think, cuz my energy never really fell low enough i had to manage it (i sat on zealous cuz the other wars were packing sentinels). the real part that bugged me was that i didnt have to knock offspike to get a kill, we could just double team the target and watch him explode. i felt skill-less, ick...

the best way to tone endurance down would be to make it battle rage for energy as was suggested.

5e 15r for 5..15 seconds you gain 2 energy with melee hit and move 25% faster.

id say dock the energy gain to 2 because the 25% faster would pretty much give you auto prot strike and you wouldnt want that kind of damage to be overly spamable as it is now, but with zealous you gain 3 back. at 15 seconds youd need to refresh it relatively frequently and if you werent able to land hits while holding a zealous, your energy pool would dwindle. plus if you wanted to combo off of bulls ->(frenzy-> dismember->power attack-> prot strike? risky cuz youd need to pack a cancel for frenzy other than endurance?) youd be out of energy relatively quickly. plus without the double damage problem that primal had, you wouldnt be forced out of endurance so the 15 recharge wouldnt be that large of an issue. also with a scaling of duration based on str, the bar would be difficult to add in a conjure without perhaps deteriorating the damage output.

ChopChop · Mar 17, 2009, 10:03 AM // 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaximus

i was disgusted on vent with how pathetically skill-less the bar was...

5e 15r for 5..15 seconds you gain 2 energy with melee hit and move 25% faster.

Firstly you call the WE play style skill-less, which is silly there is plenty of skill on any melee character, you need to realize that playing melee is not really about how you hit things, but about where you are, who you hit and when you hit them.
Just because a certain template makes how easy does not take much of the skill away.

What I'm mostly poking fun at is how you called it bad for the game and then suggested the biggest buff possible to it, your WE + frenzy > primal ever was

Don't take offense at my post though, just trying to help you not make the mistake most warriors make, which is only think about how they use their skills and forget about if using their skills at the current moment is even helpful, or if they should even be using them on that side of the map.

I am not really trying to defend WE, I could care less about how skills in GW are balanced, I do however want to suggest that the reason a guild such as yours see more success with that type of build is that you did not play your old build as effectively as could be done thus you now have a build which better fit teams who are less experienced at coordinated plays (splits, spikes and flag play).

IMMORTAlMITCH · Mar 17, 2009, 10:37 AM // 10:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChopChop

Firstly you call the WE play style skill-less, which is silly there is plenty of skill on any melee character, you need to realize that playing melee is not really about how you hit things, but about where you are, who you hit and when you hit them.
Just because a certain template makes how easy does not take much of the skill away.

Have you ever even played warrior's endurance warrior? Maybe for you it's harder than a non WE shock varient because you'll actually have to hit a bull's strike, but seriously, the template is about as brainless as an LoD smiter.

Quote:

What I'm mostly poking fun at is how you called it bad for the game and then suggested the biggest buff possible to it, your WE + frenzy > primal ever was

I'm pretty sure his suggestion was making it a stance and the adding the changes he wrote..

Asplode · Mar 17, 2009, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Take the flaming back to QQ if you will, Mitch.

Anyway, more to the point: even if it were a stance with a speedboost, you essentially work to free up a skill slot by overwriting your run stance with it, which in turn ends up functioning as a buff.
Theoretically this would mean that you'd barely be able to maintain protstrike + power attack on recharge, but let's be realistic here: you cannot practically use those skills on recharge to begin with, anyway, so it's a very minor loss in exchange for an open skill slot.

Is it just me or has the general attitude of the pvp community made an obnoxious shift from "How can we change our strategy and general approach to GvG in order to win?" to "How can we try and change the game to suit our desires?"
It's hardly productive, rarely ever well thought out, and inevitably ends in a clash of opinions which cannot be resolved anyway.

Divinus Stella · Mar 17, 2009, 02:18 PM // 14:18

Lowering to 2 energy gain would mean people just sit in a zealous weapon set, i dont think that would hinder the build at all.

Making it a stance would make the skill useless unless it gave IMS, but then i think we just come back to it being overpowered.

A duration reduction wouldnt be so bad either that or a recharge increase.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asp

Is it just me or has the general attitude of the pvp community made an obnoxious shift from "How can we change our strategy and general approach to GvG in order to win?" to "How can we try and change the game to suit our desires?"
It's hardly productive, rarely ever well thought out, and inevitably ends in a clash of opinions which cannot be resolved anyway.

People aren't complaining about these skills because their euro honour forbids them to take advantage of it, infact almost everyone is playing some sort of [nH] style keyboard smashing build or atleast using these broken skills in a balanced format but they still want them changed because they feel the game would be better for it.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Mar 17, 2009, 02:24 PM // 14:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinus Stella

People aren't complaining about these skills because their euro honour forbids them to take advantage of it, infact almost everyone is playing some sort of [nH] style keyboard smashing build or atleast using these broken skills in a balanced format but they still want them changed because they feel the game would be better for it.

^This. 12345

jaximus · Mar 17, 2009, 02:25 PM // 14:25

i feel pretty special cuz the big boys are talking to me

@ chop chop, i guess i forgot to mention it was a stance, as is battle rage, rather large important detail, please forgive me it was 4am. (thanks mitch)

i am very aware about positioning and who to hit and when is highly important. i was saying that with endurance where your skills can be used pretty much as your bar lights up, that the who to hit and when part is becoming less important. there isnt a need to build adrenaline and converge on a target to score kills because you can cycle your attacks and bring down targets quickly. players at the level of you chop chop, would use this as a team helping experience just as i did for my guild. i had to pay less attention to the charging of skills and being in perfect position for a spike, so i was able to watch the field much more observantly and call even more of the enemies actions.

at the comment about how the build gives my guild more success, you are pretty close to dead on. of our core, we have ~5 that want to take it very seriously and work up the ladder, the other 3 however dont seem to want to invest the time : /

another point i would like to add was that (no offense to anyone), but [rawr] seems to be becoming secretly more interested in the skill for maybe its bringing guilds with less skill/experience closer to their level and its threatening their #1 status??

Neo-LD · Mar 17, 2009, 08:15 PM // 20:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

The spike vs. pressure one goes both ways. The reason I place emphasis on pressure having an initial advantage is the fact that, as you say, spike builds generally can be more selective in their targetting, ie. spiking the same person out over and over far more easily than pressure builds, where you look to kill whoever is most vulnerable at x moment.

However, the concept of pressure is that of quick wins, while spike allows more utility and defensive measures in builds, which, from a balance perspective, puts forward that pressure should be most efficient early in matches. Unfortunately, it does take some time for that pressure to develop, so maybe it should be more spike > pressure > spike, all in a very quick period of about 2/3 minutes, before spike > pressure once again due to the lack of defensive allowances in pressure-centric builds.

But then again, most pressure focused builds will look to have disruptive measures to stop spikes destroying them before they can get any solid pressure foundation going, as well as using them to unlock the other teams defensive measures, which gives them windows.

In terms of build structure I stick by my initial point that pressure should have the beginning advantage over spike builds, due to the longevity spike builds have incorporated into them that pressure builds do not.

Remember though, this is purely an opinionated 'should', and is by no means reflected within the game

I don't agree. Assuming you don't run out of energy, a team's defensive tools, whatever they may be, are constant through time. And theres no reason to run out of energy versus a spike unless you're bad. Therefore a team's resistance to a spike is the same at the first moment of contact as it is several minutes later, neglecting effects of DP. Since a spike's threat level remains constant and a pressure team's threat level only escalates as opposing defenses experience net energy losses just to keep up, I think its obvious which team holds the long-term advantage.

Does this always play out this way in reality? Not always, but often. Disparities in skill level can skew observable results. Also spikes retain a certain level of a comeback threat, as a single lucky kill after several minutes of futility can facilitate several more spikes on the dped target.

ChopChop · Mar 17, 2009, 08:39 PM // 20:39

Why bother spending code time on functionality if you make it an energy stance? it wont see play regardless.

Also skills changing type is very unlikely to happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Divinus Stella

People aren't complaining about these skills because their euro honour forbids them .. they still want them changed because they feel the game would be better for it.

This is the GW players in a nutshell (if only this or that skill is nerfed the game will be good/better) .. GW been out for 4 years now and still we have this argument used over and over again, we are now at the point were we are nerfing skills that have been int he game untouched since 2005.

Every time anet finally spends some dev time on the game and gives us some cool new toys the community reaction is to stamp its feet and the ground and keep demandding that anything that is 'better' gets nerfed back to where it eitehr cant be used, or is so weak that it can be beaten by the old skills.

And where have that brought us? Certainly haven't brought us any fun, GvG is just the same people using the same small skill pool, playing out the same match ups on, yep you guessed it, the same maps.

I consider new playable skills free value its like an expansion of the game I dont have to pay for, keeps it interesting.
Why most other people are so afraid of skills that are stronger than what they had before I will never now. I can't really get myself to care much about how the game is balanced, I just want to see some meta shifts coming from buffs, rather than a constant reduction in the skill pool through the constant nerf cycles.

As far as the people who complain about factions and NF skills, they should come play the game instead of whine on forums, the constant nerfs have pretty much made every factions and NF class unplayable in GvG, and you barely see a few rit skills on the flaggers only because the only important skill to nerf (koala pot) have been left untouched.

At least I have the decency to to actually use the skills I call overpowered, why do I see KMD not use it in obs mode if this skill is so broken?
Personally I don't see what there is to get so worked up about, maybe it will get a nerf but who cares, I'd much rather see dev time be used for something constructive like buffs to make more skills playable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaximus

another point i would like to add was that (no offense to anyone), but [rawr] seems to be becoming secretly more interested in the skill for maybe its bringing guilds with less skill/experience closer to their level and its threatening their #1 status??

You sir win a cookie, if some skill helps people play at a higher level my immediate reaction is 'good, maybe it can help them learn some GvG tactics and be fun to play against' .. whereas it seems that the community reaction is to call things which makes mediocre players better for 'brainless'.
Take your pick, personally I'm excited for new competition.
But the thing is, new players often need to ride some meta evolution or build change to get into the higher tiers of play and learn new tricks, and given that Guildwars is artificially prevented from evolving like ordinary games, by nerfing skills as soon as they see play, it is next to impossible new new players to break in.
This is perhaps what the community is really afraid of, losing ground to new blood.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Mar 17, 2009, 09:09 PM // 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChopChop

This is the GW players in a nutshell (if only this or that skill is nerfed the game will be good/better) .. GW been out for 4 years now and still we have this argument used over and over again, we are now at the point were we are nerfing skills that have been int he game untouched since 2005.

Your argument would hold more water if Izzy didn't spend the last 7-8 months making ridiculous buffs to certain elites that (completely) change the meta and then spend the next few months nerfing mainly the same skills again to bring them back in line (or in most cases make them unusable again).

Out of the 70-80 Elites that got buffed, of how many can you honestly say they made the game better/more enjoyable?

Melandru's Shot maybe, Blinding Surge perhaps (although atm it's next to useless with everyone running a FF/PS necro) and that's really all I can think of.

And for that we've had to endure Incendiary Arrows, Expert's Dexterity, Warrior's Endurance, Primal Rage, Peace and Harmony, Mark Of Insecurity, Lingering Curse, Hidden Caltrops, Palm Strike and Pain Of Disenchantment.

Pretty much all of these skills are extreme examples of dumbing the game down and they should never have been implemented.

And don't even start about build variety, there's about 2 different builds that see play atm and both of them rely heavily on some of the above mentioned Elites.

Still Number One · Mar 17, 2009, 09:52 PM // 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChopChop

You sir win a cookie, if some skill helps people play at a higher level my immediate reaction is 'good, maybe it can help them learn some GvG tactics and be fun to play against' .. whereas it seems that the community reaction is to call things which makes mediocre players better for 'brainless'.
Take your pick, personally I'm excited for new competition.
But the thing is, new players often need to ride some meta evolution or build change to get into the higher tiers of play and learn new tricks, and given that Guildwars is artificially prevented from evolving like ordinary games, by nerfing skills as soon as they see play, it is next to impossible new new players to break in.
This is perhaps what the community is really afraid of, losing ground to new blood.

Being a lower tier player myself I can tell you that a stupid overpowered skill does not make me a better player at all. Does it make it easier for me to do damage? Yes. Does it allow me to multi task better? Yes. Am I learning new and exciting tactics that make me a better player because I'm using a brainless build? Absolutely not.

I learned this game from obsing matches, listening to vent recordings of top tier guilds that I could find on various forums, reading posts on strategies and guides (Yue and Chiizu's guides on warrior and ranger probably being the most helpful things I could ever come across), and playing the game with more experienced players. I got better as I played more, and learned tactics through losing hundreds of matches and winning hundreds. I learned what worked and what didn't.

However I never truly got what I'd deem as "good" until I got an extremely lucky break and joined a guild (Diablo Ill [DIII]) with some very experienced players. For whatever reason they were willing to take me in as basically a 9th guy to fill the role of someone who couldn't make it on a certain gvg night and took the time to look over my play and help me learn from my mistakes.

You won't get any "new blood's" appearing in gvg if their guild consists of all new bloods (except on very rare occasions). It is up to the old players to fill the voids of players who have left with newer players willing to learn and improve their skill level and be dedicated to this game. I got an extremely lucky break that very few players get. That is why the american GvG scene is dying or dead (however you want to view it). Very few guilds will take the time to look at some up and coming players who have the ability and the resolve to become great players at this game. They want people with a proven track record, leaving the new bloods to play with new bloods and really get no where because there is only so much you can teach yourself in this game.