Curse

DutchSmurf · Aug 29, 2008, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Why all that focus on splitting? I would rather have 8vs8 fights where things actually die. As in, make pressure viable again in one way or another. The current VoD situation, with npcs that don't matter, is how it should have been from the start. I still think most of them should be removed anyway. Somehow Izzy seems to be afraid that more early ganks will happen that way. I don't see why that is a problem tho. If the goal is to kill the lord, making a move on it right away should be encouraged, not made impossible as it is now.

Kain666 · Aug 29, 2008, 11:12 PM // 23:12

Do that and the teams will camp in their base. The best solution is to get something if you kill a NPC. Before the update, if you killed the NPC you were in advantage at VoD. Now you kill them only because they bother you, and that if you kill them. Most teams ignore them. After a few mins of fighting they go and tank the knights while they spam Wastrel's Worry on the GL. Keep the mesmer bullet-proof with SoD and there you go. This is not how it's supposed to happen. But by giving you an extra something for killing the NPC, you won't do that kind of play anymore. It will be a whole more interesting that the boring shat that is right now.

Ec]-[oMaN · Aug 29, 2008, 11:22 PM // 23:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by DutchSmurf

Why all that focus on splitting? I would rather have 8vs8 fights where things actually die. As in, make pressure viable again in one way or another. The current VoD situation, with npcs that don't matter, is how it should have been from the start. I still think most of them should be removed anyway. Somehow Izzy seems to be afraid that more early ganks will happen that way. I don't see why that is a problem tho. If the goal is to kill the lord, making a move on it right away should be encouraged, not made impossible as it is now.

Pretty much, it's quite amazing how even back in the LOD days with b surge wards, DA you could still crack teams, maybe the players were better back then. Anyways if Izzy in the future once again puts an increased value on NPC's like handing out anything per kill, all that happens is once again people play more defensive characters to hold their own base, and an increase in split builds, both of which in the past have shown the worst of GW. I'd say things right about now are as close as they're going to get aside from the tiebreaker.

DutchSmurf · Aug 30, 2008, 10:40 AM // 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain666

Do that and the teams will camp in their base. The best solution is to get something if you kill a NPC.

Camping your base in the current situation is stupid. Camping your base if most npcs are removed is even worse. You can't win if you camp your base, so I see no reason why anyone would do that. Against a smart team, any try to send 2-3 people to gank will quickly result in 2-3 dead people. Unless you stop camping with the rest of the team of course. So either way it isn't an issue.
About the rewarding for killing npcs, I'm completely against that. If you want rewards for killing something, make it a reward for killing players. We are talking about the main PvP format, why should there be a reward for PvE in it? As Ec]-[oMaN says, it will only encourage defensive play and lame things like Ineptitude mesmers running around the map just so their 2 warriors get an insane damage boost.

The only issues I currently have are the tiebreaker and some skill balance issues. The tiebreaker needs to be different OR needs to be visible. I would rather have the tiebreaker be something like the team who made the most kills on players wins. Use team morale if you have to. But if Izzy wants to keep the current one, then at least make it visible who is leading. Or add a second win condition like the first guild to do 3000 damage to the lord wins. That way you can have a damage bar so you can see how you are doing.

Greedy Gus · Aug 30, 2008, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkdreamr

I like the points idea. 5 points for NPC kill

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain666

Uhm, maybe for each NPC u kill the lord gets an extra 50hp or smth like that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burton2000

Sure why not, its somet small that doesn't matter much but at least gives some nps that are useless atm a bit more vaule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

For each NPC your team kills, you do an additional 1% damage at VoD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kain666

The best solution is to get something if you kill a NPC. Before the update, if you killed the NPC you were in advantage at VoD.

Please, do us all a favor and go play PvE for a little while every time you feel like being rewarded for each NPC you kill. And stop thinking in terms of building an advantage for 'the endgame', and use your time wisely trying to actually win the match before the game kicks you back to your guildhall for failing at offense. Did you guys all sleep through the travesty which was ViO?

IMMORTAlMITCH · Aug 30, 2008, 03:09 PM // 15:09

NPC kills shouldn't give any bonuses with the current situation (lord not walking), I wouldn't mind to see an NPC reduction though, I feel it's a big part of the reason so many matches go to 28 minutes atm, another big part is that people refuse to play to win, but rather play not to lose.

We haven't had a single match yet that went to 28 minutes, in fact our matches rarely go past 18 minutes.

Kaida the Heartless · Aug 30, 2008, 10:34 PM // 22:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

Please, do us all a favor and go play PvE for a little while every time you feel like being rewarded for each NPC you kill. And stop thinking in terms of building an advantage for 'the endgame', and use your time wisely trying to actually win the match before the game kicks you back to your guildhall for failing at offense. Did you guys all sleep through the travesty which was ViO?

Too bad the whole current problem is finding the balance between 8v8 builds and split builds. Stack NPC importance and you get basecamp 2008. Remove NPCs and its a gank-o-palooza. Why don't you try PvE'ing instead of posting in big kid threads.

DutchSmurf · Aug 30, 2008, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

Too bad the whole current problem is finding the balance between 8v8 builds and split builds. Stack NPC importance and you get basecamp 2008. Remove NPCs and its a gank-o-palooza. Why don't you try PvE'ing instead of posting in big kid threads.

No, it isn't about a balance between 8vs8 builds and split builds. It is about making games exciting and moving forward instead of being a stalemate. I doubt Izzy cares if it is 8vs8 or split, as long as things are moving.
Anyway, what is wrong with ganking from the start? Everyone seems to somehow think it is a bad thing that should be discouraged at all costs (which is why the amulet). But what is wrong with a guild trying to win the game in the first minutes instead of the last ones?

Burton2000 · Aug 31, 2008, 11:44 AM // 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by DutchSmurf

No, it isn't about a balance between 8vs8 builds and split builds. It is about making games exciting and moving forward instead of being a stalemate. I doubt Izzy cares if it is 8vs8 or split, as long as things are moving.
Anyway, what is wrong with ganking from the start? Everyone seems to somehow think it is a bad thing that should be discouraged at all costs (which is why the amulet). But what is wrong with a guild trying to win the game in the first minutes instead of the last ones?

Because if theres no amulet you would have the return of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRDvS-mZWbc

Greedy Gus · Aug 31, 2008, 12:51 PM // 12:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

Too bad the whole current problem is finding the balance between 8v8 builds and split builds. Stack NPC importance and you get basecamp 2008. Remove NPCs and its a gank-o-palooza. Why don't you try PvE'ing instead of posting in big kid threads.

How many times do I have to say that the problem is all of you having false perceptions of what splitting is, mostly because people posting on Guru now started GvGing when splitting was simply a "VoD strategy". If you have been playing since the beginning of GvG, you have no excuse for pushing this nonsense.

I have no problem with trying to find a fun balance and letting people choose what style to focus more on in GvG, be it split, spike or pressure. In fact I'd love to hear a good discussion on that. However, when you think that you promote splitting by adding bonuses for killing each NPC (adding up over time or received at some 'endgame phase'), then you're completely misguided.

The interesting aspect of splitting as a tactic or strategy involve attempting to fight your opponent in small skirmishes hoping that you'll have an advantage based on your build or your player skill, where it wouldn't exist (or you'd be at a disadvantage) in a large-scale 8v8 fight. It also rewards good communication, team movement, and spontaneity to change a situation until the opponent fails to respond correctly.

The interesting part of splitting is not, under any circumstances, making kills on archers in the opponent's base, and should not be promoted or made too important, lest you end up with dull gameplay and confused new players. NPCs in a base are a game design tool used to slow down the ability for a team to aggressively and quickly gank the guild lord to end a match, and to provide a benefit to fighting on your home area of the map (at the risk of losing flag control and leaving the enemy near your lord). NPCs like knights and archers should simply be tools to utilize in a PvP skirmish, but should never be an end goal themselves.

DutchSmurf · Aug 31, 2008, 01:39 PM // 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burton2000

Because if theres no amulet you would have the return of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRDvS-mZWbc

There is a difference between removing the amulet and what I said. I've more problems with the fact that the amulet changes. There is no reason for that and it actually a bad thing in my opinion. It should be at the end level at the start of the match and stay there.

And Greedy Gus, completely agree with you. Biggest problem with splitting tho is that warriors are ineffective in it. By the time they have their adrenaline ready for use, the other team has had time to regroup already.
Spike, except the balanced build with a warrior spike, has been mostly dead except for one build showing up at times. Currently it is rangerspike. Which is good, there should always be a spikebuild available.
Pressure has been dead since hexes got killed and Vz had an err7. Before that edenial was killed too already. I don't think there is any viable pressure build out there. Nobody is using one for sure. Which is a shame, pressure always has been the most fun kind of metagame to play in.

Biggest question is tho: Are things just not viable, or are people to concerned about losing to try them out? As Izzy has said a couple of times before, just because people think a skill got nerfed made them stop running it. While still being viable. And if things aren't viable, how to change things so they are?

Akaraxle · Aug 31, 2008, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

How many times do I have to say that the problem is all of you having false perceptions of what splitting is, mostly because people posting on Guru now started GvGing when splitting was simply a "VoD strategy". If you have been playing since the beginning of GvG, you have no excuse for pushing this nonsense.

I have no problem with trying to find a fun balance and letting people choose what style to focus more on in GvG, be it split, spike or pressure. In fact I'd love to hear a good discussion on that. However, when you think that you promote splitting by adding bonuses for killing each NPC (adding up over time or received at some 'endgame phase'), then you're completely misguided.

The interesting aspect of splitting as a tactic or strategy involve attempting to fight your opponent in small skirmishes hoping that you'll have an advantage based on your build or your player skill, where it wouldn't exist (or you'd be at a disadvantage) in a large-scale 8v8 fight. It also rewards good communication, team movement, and spontaneity to change a situation until the opponent fails to respond correctly.

The interesting part of splitting is not, under any circumstances, making kills on archers in the opponent's base, and should not be promoted or made too important, lest you end up with dull gameplay and confused new players. NPCs in a base are a game design tool used to slow down the ability for a team to aggressively and quickly gank the guild lord to end a match, and to provide a benefit to fighting on your home area of the map (at the risk of losing flag control and leaving the enemy near your lord). NPCs like knights and archers should simply be tools to utilize in a PvP skirmish, but should never be an end goal themselves.

*

Splitting is about:
- forcing mispositioning;
- getting boosts;
- killing the lord;
and should be nothing else.

Kaida the Heartless · Aug 31, 2008, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Pressure is too slow nowadays; only stresses your monks. E-Denial is dead. Condition pressure is stupid next to RC/FF. Hexway has been dead for ages. Splits are too slow/can't hold the stand. Guess the only thing left to do now is make things explode, rather your running some gimmicky class-spike (theres 1 left?) or your standard balanced. The only need for splitting, given the current VoD, is if you cannot win 8v8 and need to try something else. By then, your probably screwed. Also, last resort VoD gank.

I blame the whole make-the-monk-heal-and-mitigate-all-damage-for-everyone mentality:
Characters drop thier selfheals and mitigation for more damage. Monks have to take care of these for them. Monks can no longer heal all the pressure. Izzy makes retard skills like a 5 energy 3/4ths bar heal (WoH) which makes all pressure useless and spikes the only way to go. Spikes with tank def become awesome. NPC's buffed to counter fortressway. Gank builds become useful (too useful). VoD becomes retarded. NPC's nerfed, ganks gone, 8v8 is where were at now.

I think the meta will be better when monks can finally place blessed light back on thier bars. Or maybe I'm just nostalgic?

Greedy Gus · Sep 01, 2008, 10:15 AM // 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaida the Heartless

Pressure is too slow nowadays; only stresses your monks. E-Denial is dead. Condition pressure is stupid next to RC/FF. Hexway has been dead for ages. Splits are too slow/can't hold the stand. Guess the only thing left to do now is make things explode, rather your running some gimmicky class-spike (theres 1 left?) or your standard balanced. The only need for splitting, given the current VoD, is if you cannot win 8v8 and need to try something else. By then, your probably screwed. Also, last resort VoD gank.

I blame the whole make-the-monk-heal-and-mitigate-all-damage-for-everyone mentality:
Characters drop thier selfheals and mitigation for more damage. Monks have to take care of these for them. Monks can no longer heal all the pressure. Izzy makes retard skills like a 5 energy 3/4ths bar heal (WoH) which makes all pressure useless and spikes the only way to go. Spikes with tank def become awesome. NPC's buffed to counter fortressway. Gank builds become useful (too useful). VoD becomes retarded. NPC's nerfed, ganks gone, 8v8 is where were at now.

I think the meta will be better when monks can finally place blessed light back on thier bars. Or maybe I'm just nostalgic?

I'm definitely in agreement with you here. My personal view of the problems described is that power creep is to blame. Flaggers are too good at defending bases (because they don't have to do as much as pre-NF flaggers and have better skills to do it with), snares + damage are too good at killing opposing splits (when they're trying to split with balanced templates as a tactic rather than a pre-game split strategy), backlines + midline templates are too good at defending pressure (WoH means that damage doesn't properly equate to energy pressure anymore), etc. etc.

I posted my prescription at the beginning of this year here on guru, with a focus on pulling back on key power-creep skills and returning to a balance between min/max powerplay and toolbox utility. It seemed like a crossroads where blockway was an obvious target for balancing but it was hard to tell where to take things in order to make the game fun again. However, for every skill that's been fixed, another 10 are pushed up in effectiveness. Essentially we've seen new power creep attempting to fix other power creep problems, which can sometimes give temporary reprieve to a dull meta but not really a return to playstyle effectiveness balance.

Until you address this issue, I think it's going to be very difficult to allow for a variety of fun playstyles that are viable in even the top level of play. Izzy is trying to balance a see-saw by putting random weight anvils on each side hoping for a perfect match eventually, instead of removing them until you have just one on each side weighing the same amount.

shoogi · Sep 01, 2008, 10:22 AM // 10:22

I haven't gvged in a long time, but I observed several matches in the last monthly and the way matches went on is just retarded. Players were actually kamikazing the guild lord, doing as much damage as possible before killed by npcs. That tiebreak should really be changed to something else.. I don't have a better idea though.

Greedy Gus · Sep 01, 2008, 10:36 AM // 10:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by shoogi

That tiebreak should really be changed to something else.. I don't have a better idea though.

I think this is the most widely held view: need something better but don't really know what. Any straight up tiebreaker is going to be a bit silly, but it's been shown that an end-game phase will just incentivize people to play only for it. It seems to me that the winning team at 28 mins (or any other arbitrary time when the match has gone on too long) should be whoever has the highest morale or team status. In case of a tie, let both teams lose, because they need to stop playing not to lose and actually try to win.

I don't know the formula used for determining the team status value, so if it needs tweaking that's an option, but it seems like it takes into account a wider variety of benchmarks and could be more interesting to reward than morale. Mainly I don't like that with the current system, a team can still play highly defensively, defend split attempts, and still have a chance at winning at 28 by the current tiebreaker if they support some damage into the enemy's base.

suiraCLAW · Sep 01, 2008, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Quote:

It seems to me that the winning team at 28 mins (or any other arbitrary time when the match has gone on too long) should be whoever has the highest morale or team status. In case of a tie, let both teams lose, because they need to stop playing not to lose and actually try to win.

Then give a team X% more boost whenever they do Y damage to the enemy lord. With X and Y being balanced in such a way that splitting is viable. I'm thinking around 5% for 500 damage - but I'm not the best person to determine such numbers.

Of course, doing that would not make all skills rechage because - which would be another exception on a rule.

So to resume the team with highest morale wins as tiebreaker, and there are 3 ways to do that:
- kill the other team (repeatedly)
- get a morale boost
- split and damage the guild lord

Kaida the Heartless · Sep 01, 2008, 07:34 PM // 19:34

A moral based victory almost seems like a good idea at this point. The only problem I see with this, however, is teams merely stacking defense and holding the stand (fortressway). Though, that does give me an idea for the following:

This may seem crazy, but I'm just throwing something from outside of the box here:
Suppose the team with the highest total moral wins after a set duration. Also, you can win if you kill the Guild Lord. Remove all NPCs except for the ones directly around the Guild Lord (this prevents Zergway). Now, Ganks are viable to win by killing the GL but are more susceptable to DP. At the same time, pressure and spikes still hold an advantage in the moral catagory, due to thier stability, but would really have to make a strong push for the GL. This forces teams to:
1) Gain kills
2) Push for the Guild Lord
3) Camp the flag

How does this improve the current situation?:

VoD would no longer exist, as the team with the immediate highest moral wins. No more worrying about balancing that bad game mechanic.

Fortressway, who would still be playing for the endgame moral win (old VoD), could be countered by moving around to the enemy backdoor, either causing a split on thier part, or a dual-team Guild Lord rush. Either way, thier plan of holding the flagstand is disrupted.

Ganks don't hold any more of an advantage than a balanced team. As mentioned above, a single gankwipe could cause them the game if they can't snag the GL, since DP would build up rather quick.

Spikes hold a strong advantage again. At the same time, they are a one trick pony. Wipe them once and you can usually force a win. Should be about the same situation as it currently is in the meta.

Teams would no longer be able to pack insane damage on all skill slots, as they can easily be outmaneuvered. Even if they are using the roll or be rolled method, you can split offensively and defensively to hold them while moving for thier GL at the same time.

Generally, while this is an extreme change, I feel that it may better the GvG experience. Perhaps some constructive criticism on the part of the high end players? Almost anything seems better than whats going on now.

tnyp · Sep 01, 2008, 11:38 PM // 23:38

My favorite would be not to have any tiebreak: both team lose if none win before the end time.
My second choice would be moral tiebreak.

victorian · Sep 02, 2008, 08:40 AM // 08:40

Don't know if this works, but i have a simple suggestion.

Remove some perimeter archers and in exchange give back the Bodyguard's damage skills. what this does: opens up splitting early (don't have to go through the trouble of the runner camping at the perimeter archers) and maybe lessen kamikazes on the lord (if the knights+guard can kill before he reaches melee range of lord) but rewards teams who split and are able to hold up against the Bodyguard's pressure (can damage the lord even with the runner there).