Curse

yum · Nov 03, 2007, 05:26 AM // 05:26

It sux. Now I have to adjust builds just in case I run into one of those HB craps

GG Anet.

Ps: please add kill count matches to GvG maps and replace Guild Lord with Mallyx. It creates great diversity.

Lykan · Nov 03, 2007, 05:50 AM // 05:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by yum

replace Guild Lord with Mallyx. It creates great diversity.

I LOL'd
/signed

jk.. and yea TA sucks now

Legendary Shiz · Nov 03, 2007, 06:19 AM // 06:19

It's literally to the point where I think I'm done with TA until they get rid of these trash maps.

And that says a lot, because I've been a frequent TAer for much of my PvP time. I've put up with bad metas, bad players, and lack of attention from Anet. But this, this seriously crossed the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing line.

TA is unplayable for me atm.

Vickie · Nov 03, 2007, 06:28 AM // 06:28

Had these maps in RA and think they're kind of fun, even though they do take a bit long to play. That said, I don't think they should be in TA maps.

So... I vote for keeping them in RA, but removing from TA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yum

Ps: please add kill count matches to GvG maps and replace Guild Lord with Mallyx. It creates great diversity.

LOL

Sab · Nov 03, 2007, 07:01 AM // 07:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Shiz

It's literally to the point where I think I'm done with TA until they get rid of these trash maps.

And that says a lot, because I've been a frequent TAer for much of my PvP time. I've put up with bad metas, bad players, and lack of attention from Anet. But this, this seriously crossed the RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing line.

TA is unplayable for me atm.

Pretty much my thoughts.

I TAed for a bit today with several groups, and we played maybe 10-15 HB maps and won all except one (I went afk at the start and came back too late). I don't care if it "takes more skill" or "more tactics", it's simply not a fun game mode for me. The builds, the strategies and the gameplay in HB is entirely different from annihilation, and it warrants its own arena for people who enjoy that sort of stuff.

I know for sure that if it weren't for the double-glad thing, most of the TAers on my list (myself included) wouldn't be playing. We just don't like the HB format.

Leave TA as it was, and make a Human Battles arena. plox.

Greedy Gus · Nov 03, 2007, 07:27 AM // 07:27

Can't believe there is so much QQing here, though I guess it's to be expected. I haven't played the maps, but just in principle it seems like a good change to me (maybe I'm not seeing something). TA was fairly problematic as it was one of the most 'buildwars' type pvp in GW, based on it being all zero tactics deathmatch games. Isn't being able to split around on a few maps a good tactical alternative when you're outbuilt 4v4, still giving good players the ability to gain an edge?

Ekelon · Nov 03, 2007, 07:31 AM // 07:31

Here's where the real TA map discussion is:

http://www.teamquitter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3415

moko · Nov 03, 2007, 08:12 AM // 08:12

yes, they quite clearly know a lot about TA, speaking about variety with 32 skills.

lol

hai wanna see a failure?

HERE

do i seriously need to say more?

Kenru · Nov 03, 2007, 08:24 AM // 08:24

HB maps are not a good way to increase interest in TA. It's disappointing that the title was changed, and will be VERY wrong to keep HB in TA.

I think that the only way to truly demonstrate to ANet our disappointment, is a week long boycott of TA.

Robster Lobster · Nov 03, 2007, 08:26 AM // 08:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mokone

yes, they quite clearly know a lot about TA, speaking about variety with 32 skills.

lol

hai wanna see a failure?

HERE

do i seriously need to say more?

If that build can win on annihilation maps now, then it could win on annihilation maps before. The addition on HB maps doesn't change that. Also, Izzy has said he's looking at the teleporting mechanism in Hero Battles here.

Zui · Nov 03, 2007, 08:51 AM // 08:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

Can't believe there is so much QQing here, though I guess it's to be expected. I haven't played the maps, but just in principle it seems like a good change to me (maybe I'm not seeing something). TA was fairly problematic as it was one of the most 'buildwars' type pvp in GW, based on it being all zero tactics deathmatch games. Isn't being able to split around on a few maps a good tactical alternative when you're outbuilt 4v4, still giving good players the ability to gain an edge?

(Allow me to preface this by saying I have not played Team Areans in 6 months, and having only played Guild Wars once during that time. Pretty much all of my information here is from talking to various people who usually know what they're talking about.)

In principal, I think it could be a good change. However, I have only heard one player who I believe knows what he is talking about it support the change after seeing it in effect, and I've spoken to at least twenty people who generally know what they're talking about regarding this change.

From what I understand, the big problem is that because both styles are different, you're ending up with some "buildwars" type PvP as well. Some teams are speccing almost entirely for the HvH maps, and as such are more difficult to beat by teams that are trying to compete on both map types. Additionally, some teams are speccing entirely for the annihilation maps, which ends up with them being much stronger opponents than they normally would be, as you're running a slightly altered build so you don't fail at the HvH aspect of it. I honestly think this kind of thing could be greatly discouraged by increasing the amount of HvH maps in the rotation, as right now I'm mostly hearing something like 1 in 9 to 1 in 20 maps are HvH maps. (I also think the people only speccing for HvH style maps will just go away after the newness of them wears off, because those people are playing to loose, and not even getting gladiator points for it.)

Essentially, what allows some tactical diversity, also ends up with teams that are playing to win all their matches ending up at a build disadvantage to teams that just want to win a few (usually just enough to get a gladiator point), and because most of the maps in the rotation are Team Arenas maps, a lot of people (mostly your zomgiwantgladpoints people) are still getting gladiator points off of just running annihilation builds. Since most of the good teams have switched to builds that can also work in the HvH format, they're having some trouble against teams that they would otherwise roll.

An OK GvG analogy for what's happening is you playing a balanced build, and then being forced to play a spike team on pre-fix imperial isle, or pre-fix jade isle. Gay, yes? This is basically the same thing that's happening in Team Arenas, to my understanding. A lot of people are playing only to win on TA maps, because they can get gladiator points easier than usual that way, since most of the good teams are playing to win on every map. The good teams just get frustrated because they're being forced to pick between gimping themselves against the specialized teams if they land on a certain map, and just specializing themselves and loosing if they face a team that didn't if the land on a certain map. Which I think you can agree is pretty lame, as the way it is now, they're going to end up gimping themselves for about 90% or more of their matches, just so they can have a chance in the 10% or less of matches they play.

If you eliminate people being able to win enough to get a gladiator point with an annihilation only build, I think you've fixed the problem. Sure, some idiots still might run such builds, but they'll be a minority, and they'll also probably be bad players who will just instafail anyway. (Glad farmers would be encouraged to run more balanced builds, as would anyone who is playing to win--leaving only the people who are playing to loose running builds that only work on one map style. Which basically leaves us with only bad players running builds that work exclusively on a certain maptype, which is obviously not a problem)

You also have some players who are just angry that it takes more time to get gladiator points now, as opposed to when it was all annihilation type maps, but I think they'll eventually get used to it and stop complaining. Then again, if they continue to complain and are a sufficient majority, the number of points needed to win the HvH maps could be altered to reduce the time.

Posts I write at 4:30 AM generally suck, so I'm not going to go on anymore. Hopefully, I haven't failed at explaining what I understand the problem to be, or failed to address any major points but if I have, I'll just write a post that doesn't suck tomorrow/edit this post...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mokone

yes, they quite clearly know a lot about TA, speaking about variety with 32 skills.

We all know ANET doesn't know a whole lot about their game. However, I do think you can get a bit of 'variety' with only 32 skills, even if you only a have a few builds with small varition that people end up playing. Essentially, you'll end up with 'tactical variety'. You'll only get that if you can get teams to both bring the tools needed to kill other teams, and bring the tools needed to not fail at the HvH maps, though. All in all, it could even end up with less build variety, as I'm sure it will force people to take even more 'must have' skills.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robster Lobster

If that build can win on annihilation maps now, then it could win on annihilation maps before. The addition on HB maps doesn't change that. Also, Izzy has said he's looking at the teleporting mechanism in Hero Battles here.

Why would anyone run something like that before now, though? There would be no reason. You could run a build that just kills stuff fast, and doesn't suck, and win a lot if you were good. Oh, and that build is mostly a joke. I think it's pretty obvious...

[scarcasm]Well, as long as Izzy is looking into it, I'm sure it will be fixed. After all, Izzy gets to make all of the balance changes he thinks are appropriate, and the balance changes he wants to make are always well thought out.[/sarcasam] Come on. Izzy clearly doesn't understand the game very well sometimes, as has been demonstrated countless times by changes he has made. This is evidenced whenever he makes a change that everyone goes 'wtf is that change? that's terrible!' when they read the update notes, and then the skill is re-nerfed into oblivion after it has caused problems (just in a different way than it was before, so it's not admitting it was a bad change), or when he buffs a skill that just shouldn't ever see the light of day, and won't until it's made imbalanced (see Flare). We also all know he does not have final say over what gets changed, and what doesn't get changed (so yeah, maybe he fails less than everyone thinks? who knows). So even if he looks into it, determines it is a problem, and proposes a fix, it doesn't mean anything will be done about it.

kvndoom · Nov 03, 2007, 09:36 AM // 09:36

All these maps do is further promote assassins and assassin skills. Teleporting, running, insta-gibs. There's a reason people renamed Hero Battle to Assassin Battle. Very bad idea.

TheGame · Nov 03, 2007, 09:41 AM // 09:41

I think this update didn't really fail that bad.. Me myself, and r5+ glads i talked with mostly love it.. it brings a new flare to TA.... and no, a whole lot of escape rangers or shadow melds wouldnt work because there are still much more old maps, and in a rotation, HB maps are rare... this allso introduces TA to normal voice comunication (aka. Ventrilo and TS)

Well, though the bad side of this.. TA was allways high paced... And if two teams both start capping, the 10minute matches are a bit too slow for TA

I Personally like this update from the point of wiev that TA is now more than "kill them fatser than they kill us"... but if you wanna introduce capping to TA, it's gotta be faster and not 10mins....

EDIT: allso these maps need to be removed from RA... now it's too much of a random win there...

Sab · Nov 03, 2007, 10:14 AM // 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

Can't believe there is so much QQing here, though I guess it's to be expected. I haven't played the maps, but just in principle it seems like a good change to me (maybe I'm not seeing something). TA was fairly problematic as it was one of the most 'buildwars' type pvp in GW, based on it being all zero tactics deathmatch games. Isn't being able to split around on a few maps a good tactical alternative when you're outbuilt 4v4, still giving good players the ability to gain an edge?

Zui covered it pretty well, but to give some specifics (having played TA almost daily for the past six months...):

Buildwars really only existed if you were playing something gimmicky or something leaning towards a gimmick (WoR/Smite, dual hexers, R/P-Warmonger's, etc.). The standard Melee/Ranger/Inep Mes/Monk build could beat almost all of the gimmicks if played well. Now? Probably not so much. Not only do you have to deal with the usual 4v4 gimmicks, you now have to consider spirit camping, defensive builds, Sin ganks/shadowstepping and the like in an HB format. To gain an advantage in HB against those builds, you have to sacrifice some utility you need in 4v4, like Purge or Rend, or drop a Res Sig for run buffs and self defense. This in turn weakens your build in 4v4 against gimmicks where that utility is needed. So by that, I'd say adding HB maps to the usual TA rotation increases buildwars rather than other way around.

With that said, I made the point earlier that adding tactical depth by introducing a new mode of play isn't necessarily a good thing. Most TAers I've talked to simply don't like the HB format. They enjoy tactically simple annihilation matches, where the focus is on individual play, as opposed to communication and movement. I don't see how it's fair to impose a fundamentally different, more "tactically interesting" style of play into TA, as TA play is unique in its simplicity. Seeing as some people enjoy these new maps, would anyone be against releasing a Human Battles arena, separate from TA? In any case, it's not because TAers are "bad at the game", as most TAers I've played with are decent at the HB maps too. (former comment not directed at you specifically, Gus)

BlackSephir · Nov 03, 2007, 11:04 AM // 11:04

http://s49.photobucket.com/albums/f2...rade/facepalm/

This change in short

Shuuda · Nov 03, 2007, 11:42 AM // 11:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

Zui covered it pretty well, but to give some specifics (having played TA almost daily for the past six months...):

Buildwars really only existed if you were playing something gimmicky or something leaning towards a gimmick (WoR/Smite, dual hexers, R/P-Warmonger's, etc.). The standard Melee/Ranger/Inep Mes/Monk build could beat almost all of the gimmicks if played well. Now? Probably not so much. Not only do you have to deal with the usual 4v4 gimmicks, you now have to consider spirit camping, defensive builds, Sin ganks/shadowstepping and the like in an HB format. To gain an advantage in HB against those builds, you have to sacrifice some utility you need in 4v4, like Purge or Rend, or drop a Res Sig for run buffs and self defense. This in turn weakens your build in 4v4 against gimmicks where that utility is needed. So by that, I'd say adding HB maps to the usual TA rotation increases buildwars rather than other way around.

With that said, I made the point earlier that adding tactical depth by introducing a new mode of play isn't necessarily a good thing. Most TAers I've talked to simply don't like the HB format. They enjoy tactically simple annihilation matches, where the focus is on individual play, as opposed to communication and movement. I don't see how it's fair to impose a fundamentally different, more "tactically interesting" style of play into TA, as TA play is unique in its simplicity. Seeing as some people enjoy these new maps, would anyone be against releasing a Human Battles arena, separate from TA? In any case, it's not because TAers are "bad at the game", as most TAers I've played with are decent at the HB maps too. (former comment not directed at you specifically, Gus)

That's all true. Prehaps they should keep the HB maps in, but make them into kill count maps, instead of cap fests. (maybe turn the shrines into extra res shrines or flagstands like in the Kaineng map etc) It would still keep the basic TA idea of fighting, but add some variation to the kill count idea. Or do you people not like the the kill count maps like the krag as well. Just another retarded idea, tis all.

As for Human Battles, with a few skill balances, could be potenially made of win.

Draikin · Nov 03, 2007, 01:12 PM // 13:12

What I don't understand is how some people think adding those maps to TA will solve all the problems with them. They're totally broken in HvH where the current strategy consists in running around for 10 minutes with Recall monks and Mystic Regen tanks and/or ganking your opponent with instagib assassins, but in TA those problems are going to disappear? If only it were that easy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

So by that, I'd say adding HB maps to the usual TA rotation increases buildwars rather than other way around.

Indeed it does.

Greedy Gus · Nov 03, 2007, 01:39 PM // 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zui

Some teams are speccing almost entirely for the HvH maps, some teams are speccing entirely for the annihilation maps

Ah, gotcha. So essentially, the change has a lot of merit in theory (if everyone is playing to win for long win streaks in the format), but is having issues based on meta reasons rather than strictly mechanic problems.

In my experience though, it's actually primarily the people complaining about change (like almost everyone in this thread) that tend to run the extremely one dimensional stuff, whether it's to prove their own point (they don't like the new addition), or they got trashed by running their standard heavy 4v4 instead of adapting (pissed off and want to try the other extreme), or whatever other reason. So I'd say that meta (running heavily focused builds for either style) is the TA players' own fault, and it would likely die down if the change is kept. Or do you really think it's a bunch of RA griefers or HB players coming in running 3 teleporting sins & a monk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

Buildwars really only existed if you were playing something gimmicky or something leaning towards a gimmick (WoR/Smite, dual hexers, R/P-Warmonger's, etc.). The standard Melee/Ranger/Inep Mes/Monk build could beat almost all of the gimmicks if played well.

I guess we just have different definitions of buildwars. I consider TA buildwars because tactics have almost no place there. I think of course player skill factors into every aspect of GW, but when you don't have any ability to adapt your tactics based on the enemy's setup (just lock up 4v4 every single match), then build plays a huge part in the format (more so than any other format in GW).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

Most TAers I've talked to simply don't like the HB format. They enjoy tactically simple annihilation matches, where the focus is on individual play, as opposed to communication and movement. I don't see how it's fair to impose a fundamentally different, more "tactically interesting" style of play into TA, as TA play is unique in its simplicity. Seeing as some people enjoy these new maps, would anyone be against releasing a Human Battles arena, separate from TA? In any case, it's not because TAers are "bad at the game", as most TAers I've played with are decent at the HB maps too. (former comment not directed at you specifically, Gus)

Yep, that's definitely a good point. I was also in favor of 6v6 tombs, but understood & stated that my opinion should count for less because I don't regularly play other formats than GvG.

Legendary Shiz · Nov 03, 2007, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

I guess we just have different definitions of buildwars. I consider TA buildwars because tactics have almost no place there. I think of course player skill factors into every aspect of GW, but when you don't have any ability to adapt your tactics based on the enemy's setup (just lock up 4v4 every single match), then build plays a huge part in the format (more so than any other format in GW)..

Then you're simply not playing with good people. Probably more than 60% of my PvP time has been spent in TA and let me tell you what, you are very badly mistaken if you think there are no tactics being called. It might not always be movement based tactics, but there is ALWAYS tactics being called in vent if you're playing with a good team.

Seraphim of Chaos · Nov 03, 2007, 02:22 PM // 14:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Shiz

Then you're simply not playing with good people. Probably more than 60% of my PvP time has been spent in TA and let me tell you what, you are very badly mistaken if you think there are no tactics being called. It might not always be movement based tactics, but there is ALWAYS tactics being called in vent if you're playing with a good team.

It's true. ^