Curse

just call me jimmy · Sep 08, 2007, 11:59 PM // 23:59

Hey Neo, your post is almost as long as the chart!!!!!

That is so obnoxious!!!!!!!!!

Also TY to Blame The Monks and Vanquisher for giving some great insight!!! I also apologize for being completely wrong about COW being sold. My bad

v o i d · Sep 09, 2007, 01:59 AM // 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

Maybe it's because you've personally had so much success since the vast majority of past top players have left that you're being ignorant as to how much more skill intensive the game was before, or maybe you honestly think it was, but I'm pretty sure sitting in a Ward ball with Aegis chain, Shield's Up, Watch Yourself, Defensive Anthem, and maybe just for kicks a B-Surge Ele and calling from 3 down to 1 in reverse doesn't really take anywhere near as much skill as the coordination required way beforehand, from a defensive standpoint at least. From an attacking standpoint, coordinating an interrupt on Ward is just something pretty regular, and with only 2 tactics at the moment really seeing a reliable amount of play (split and spike), I don't think it's anything like it was before.

I'm fully aware that a lot of our success is based on the fact, that the number of top players vastly decreased (which is gay, because competition makes games fun).

However, i simply disagree with your statement that GW was more skill intensive than it is now. Teams had very similar defensive tools back then (Aegis, BFlash, Wards, Crip Shot, Blackout, Shield's Up, Distortion, water snares, nec hexes etc.) and this stuff just has to be effective, otherwise everyone would bring a bunch of physical damage dealers and roll shit. On top of that, nowadays people make much better use of their interrupts to disable these defensive layers. I've observed tons of high end replays and videos from the Prophecies/Factions era, but i can't remember a single moment where an ele got interrupted on his ward by an enemy mesmer (and these mesmers anyway only had PDrain for energy or - most of the time - no 0.25 interrupt at all). In the GWFC people had finally discovered PLeak, but just check the number of wards and Aegis which got interrupted - it's a joke compared to todays matches.

Yue · Sep 09, 2007, 06:12 AM // 06:12

People who play get better.

Vaga · Sep 09, 2007, 08:21 AM // 08:21

Teams didn't really have the same defensive tools as they do now. Eles were the only people who could afford aegis and generally had to stretch their attributes a ton to fit it in. Distorsion was very good but at least there was some kind of drawback from using the skill in that you needed to stretch your attributes on monk or else -3 energy per swing. Pretty much all the skills you listed all had reasonable counters, costs, or could be removed. You had to think about how another team might split and make sure you have splittable characters rather than running a flag runner that can just heal everything in your base.

That said, it's a complete joke to think that the old top teams were a lot better than todays top teams or that it took more skill to play back then. The top teams before were definitely ahead of the curve but todays top teams have easily caught up.

However these comparisons between now and then don't really work, pleak wasn't on mesmer bars before because they were packed full of better skills at the time. P-leak wasn't buffed til sometime this year and the reason why people took pdrain was because it acted as an interrupt + e-man so a lot of the time it might not have been worth the risk to waste the skill thats going to let you cast other dangerous skills on a ward which might be faked out.

In response to the OP I don't think AT's have done GW any favors because it doesn't encourage teams to play. The ladder at the time didn't really do a lot though, the old top teams basically just farmed rank 200-300 guilds that had little idea what they were doing (not a lot different to now). In terms of the medium powerful caster spikes, teams know that the majority of opposing teams will be good enough at disrupting their spike for it to not be worth running it, it's not that Anet nerfed these to oblivion. There are still quite powerful hex builds that guilds who aren't so great at the game can inflate their rank with, the only problem is you can't abuse the blindness of the ladder like you could previously so teams can't shoot to the top like Rifts and Deer did.

Passive defense is the only real major problem in guild wars at the moment, there needs to be proper costs put on these skills. At the same time something needs to be done about paragons and how you need to run extra physical defense in order to defend against them.

Seamus Finn · Sep 09, 2007, 08:59 AM // 08:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vaga

Passive defense is the only real major problem in guild wars at the moment, there needs to be proper costs put on these skills.

I don't know what cost you could really put on most of the skills to make them "balanced." I don't think any of the common party wide prot skills are bad/overpowered in themselves(DA, Aegis, Wards, etc.); the problem is simply that they all exist so why just bring one?

Vanquisher · Sep 09, 2007, 11:11 AM // 11:11

There are plenty of ways to balance those skills. Make them have a more limitted effect, make them single targetted, long recharge, higher cost, different functionality, longer cast time, negative effects, etc.

For example, now you have "Shield's Up!" at 5...10d, 10e, 30r, and party members in earshot gain +24 armor vs projectiles and a 50% chance to block incoming projectile attacks. This could quite easily be changed to something like 4...9d, 5A, 2r, and +40AL vs. Projectiles and 75% chance to block, target ally (maybe Party Member due to GL at VoD). That's just a quick example idea off the top of my head, would have to think about consequences and such, but hey, it's an example of what you could do.
The skill would take more micro-management to use with that kind of setting, rather than just "hay dis is recharge i cn use it agn!"

Edit: Skills with scaled duration and recharge balance generally promote the bringing of additional copies for chaining. You can see the same in effects of skills such as Searing Flames, which was a big balancing mistake also. You weren't really rewarded for bringing one copy (the skill is terrible if you're only using 1), but taking more gives an exponential increase in effectiveness.

P.P.S - void, the problem I have with saying Mesmers can just interrupt things is that when there are so many layers of defense it is an impractical argument. The same can be said about Diversion, eg. "nah that's fine just diversion it" when in reality you'd probably need to Diversion about 20 skills out of the 60 orso they're running (4 sigs taken as average). Oh, and there were several times when Kriegar took P-Leak. I'm also pretty sure that Trex used to run P-Spike and P-Leak (if not both at least one). Mind, back then P-Leak wasn't as good as it is now, so again it's a pretty unfair comparison to use).

selber · Sep 09, 2007, 11:37 AM // 11:37

Void, there was no need to bring much interrupts really. Boonprots had nothing except Guardian to Pleak, Ward Melee was not run as much as today, there was maximum 1 Aegis, the Blindbitch was shutdown via Shatter/Drain and so on. You forced kills with Gale, Blackout and Shock. There was not much defense, but on the other hand there was no need really.

The problem is that the skills and mechanics got buffed on both ends - you simply have to bring that much defense nowadays, because of stronger offensive options. Powercreeping and ultracompact bars are the reason you have to have alot more micromanagment nowadays comparad to the past. And you can't nerf all the defensive skills without toning down the offensive ones. It's too late anyways, noone at Anet could care less.

One of the reasons guilds like EvIL or WM were so good back around the first Championship was because they had a great headstart and most european players were still interested in Tombs. They just knew the game way better than everyone else, there were dimensions between those topguilds (Uni, ZPZG, Te, Val, iQ, EP, EW included) and the rest. The whole thing changed for me when iQ was winning vs. EvIL in the GWFC. It was the the start of this new era.

If you are objective you can only say the whole micro-skill has increased alot, the field is much more closer and everybody in the top 200 (if not top 500) has at least a slight clue about what to do in which situation. The thing with macromanagment such as splitting is - all those strategies & tactics have become pretty standard and people have learned the standards. You don't react anymore or force your enemy to react, you just uncoil you schematics and he uncoils his to counter yours. That's it.

The sadest thing for me is that GvG has lost all it's glamour as the "Kingsize-PvP-arena". The GvG-ladder is quite hidden on the official site now, Herobattles get more love than GvG (ATs just don't work for GvG) and you have those automated tournies every month noone except the players taking part care about. Back then Playoffs or Championships were EVENTS. Now it's more like: Guild X won the Playoffs! - O rly?

Whatever.

v o i d · Sep 09, 2007, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanquisher

There are plenty of ways to balance those skills. Make them have a more limitted effect, make them single targetted, long recharge, higher cost, different functionality, longer cast time, negative effects, etc.

The problem is, you just need those effective party-wide blocks since there are Paragons who attack with constant IAS. Whenever we go in without having at least one or two Aegis and fight a decent heavy physical team, we get raped in 8vs8 and have to outplay them with split. Paragons don't care much about single target blocks, because they can instantly swap to the next target. Until you reduce the dps of those guys (e.g. by somehow hitting Aggressive Refrain), i don't think you can afford nerfing party blocks.

Quote:

P.P.S - void, the problem I have with saying Mesmers can just interrupt things is that when there are so many layers of defense it is an impractical argument. The same can be said about Diversion, eg. "nah that's fine just diversion it" when in reality you'd probably need to Diversion about 20 skills out of the 60 orso they're running (4 sigs taken as average).

Well, if i would play mesmer, this would be my rough (!) battle plan against another balanced build:

- PLeak the ele's ward or the mesmer's Diversion (coordinate with Ranger).
- PDrain the prot's Aegis or the Paragon's DA (coordinate with Ranger).
- Surge/Burn the LoD or on spikes.
- Shatter on spikes.
- Revealed on spikes and against Attunements.
- Diversion on BSurge or SoD on spikes.

Of course you can't do everything all the time, but imo a good player should be able to execute enough of those at the right moments and own the enemy team quite hard.

I'm still convinced that if the beast called SoD would get nerfed, killing would be a lot smoother again. Izzy doesn't wanna nerf it to give a tool to punish physical builds, but against those SoD isn't enough anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by selber

One of the reasons guilds like EvIL or WM were so good back around the first Championship was because they had a great headstart and most european players were still interested in Tombs. They just knew the game way better than everyone else, there were dimensions between those topguilds (Uni, ZPZG, Te, Val, iQ, EP, EW included) and the rest. The whole thing changed for me when iQ was winning vs. EvIL in the GWFC. It was the the start of this new era.

If you are objective you can only say the whole micro-skill has increased alot, the field is much more closer and everybody in the top 200 (if not top 500) has at least a slight clue about what to do in which situation. The thing with macromanagment such as splitting is - all those strategies & tactics have become pretty standard and people have learned the standards. You don't react anymore or force your enemy to react, you just uncoil you schematics and he uncoils his to counter yours. That's it.

The sadest thing for me is that GvG has lost all it's glamour as the "Kingsize-PvP-arena". The GvG-ladder is quite hidden on the official site now, Herobattles get more love than GvG (ATs just don't work for GvG) and you have those automated tournies every month noone except the players taking part care about. Back then Playoffs or Championships were EVENTS. Now it's more like: Guild X won the Playoffs! - O rly?

Signed.

Vanquisher · Sep 10, 2007, 05:47 AM // 05:47

Heavy Physicals were always a matter of rolling teams 8 vs. 8, it's just how they're designed. Beating them by splitting, dual/tri capping, pushing Flaggers, etc. is just the way you're meant to beat them. The game isn't fun when you just go in and play every match 8 vs. 8 because you can. It needs some Builds to be better in certain circumstances than others. That's the whole point of build selection - you take something more geared towards split but sacrifice the ability to match certain builds 8 vs. 8. It also makes the more front-loaded Builds require a decent amount of skill in order to prevent or react to the split you send.

And when I do call for nerfs to defensive skills (mainly the passive ones), I really don't expect them to get touched without certain offensive options getting toned down also.

v o i d · Sep 10, 2007, 10:12 AM // 10:12

Quote:

Heavy Physicals were always a matter of rolling teams 8 vs. 8, it's just how they're designed. Beating them by splitting, dual/tri capping, pushing Flaggers, etc. is just the way you're meant to beat them. The game isn't fun when you just go in and play every match 8 vs. 8 because you can. It needs some Builds to be better in certain circumstances than others. That's the whole point of build selection - you take something more geared towards split but sacrifice the ability to match certain builds 8 vs. 8. It also makes the more front-loaded Builds require a decent amount of skill in order to prevent or react to the split you send.

Already the case with four physicals (W/W/R/P), and these guys can respond to pretty much every type of split.

Quote:

And when I do call for nerfs to defensive skills (mainly the passive ones), I really don't expect them to get touched without certain offensive options getting toned down also.

Okay, should have said that earlier. If you tone down the dps of Paragons, it's indeed possible to nerf passive defense.

Edit:

Was already suggested before, but why not start like this:

- Aggressive Refrain gives you -20 armor while attacking.
- Blocks are capped at 50% (means like Melee/Aegis/Shields Up/DA doesn't stack).
- Misses are capped at 66% (means one 50%/25% does stack).

I bet this would already help a lot, tell me if i missed sth.

Bio-Flame · Sep 10, 2007, 06:55 PM // 18:55

How about toning down GoLE, the thing which is powering all the overpowered stuff?

Andrew Patrick · Sep 10, 2007, 07:35 PM // 19:35

To address the original concern about guilds that no longer play staying on the ladder, personally, I don't see it being an issue. It's essentially the same as when a retired sports athlete currently holds a title. You still need to perform better than they did to surpass them, but you don't need to worry about them improving to make that task more and more difficult.

Not to mention, a lot of teams come and go based on any number of things. I have known entire guilds to take 2 months off at the start of a school year because they were all college buddies. Short of a guild contacting us and saying "We are retiring, please remove us from the ladder" I don't see how guilds just taking a break wouldn't be getting the short end of the stick.

As for a discussion on the pro's and con's of the new system, I would love to hear everyones input on that. You may want to make a separate thread for that, though.

yesitsrob · Sep 10, 2007, 07:56 PM // 19:56

Andrew, GVG Guilds don't come and go. They just go.

Burton2000 · Sep 10, 2007, 09:00 PM // 21:00

I dont know a few guilds disband and just reform under new names a lot

just call me jimmy · Sep 10, 2007, 10:18 PM // 22:18

Andrew, Ty very much for adding your insight to this post!! Your day mush be a hectic one to say the least so I for one really appreciate it.

I agree whole heartedly with your statement in every way except one. When a player retires from a certain sport (I will use cycling as the example) When Lance Armstrong retired from the sport he kept his titles but he is not #1 anymore.

Also I do not know if this question have ever been put to you in this way so I will give it my best shot. I would say when these completely inactive guilds stay on the ladder they DO effect the game in an indirect way. For example say you have 20 inactive guilds in the 900-1000 rank there is more of a chance a rank 1000-1100 team will play teams with a rank higher than 900. Also for the other extreme if there are 20 inactive guilds between 1-100. The top ranked teams have a higher likely hood of having to wait a long time for a team close to their rank to play. This goes to what someone said earlier about top guilds making pug guilds so they do not have to wait. This also adds to more guilds going inactive in the lower ranked area of the ladder. Increasing, (in my opinion) the problem at the top of this paragraph. I hope I put these points across in a good way

( An Idea that just popped into my head writing this. What if after a certain period of inactive play a team looses their rank, but not their rating. That way if they do start playing again after the 1st match due to their rating they should be close to where they left) Just a thought.

Seamus Finn · Sep 10, 2007, 10:59 PM // 22:59

[QUOTE= The top ranked teams have a higher likely hood of having to wait a long time for a team close to their rank to play. [/QUOTE]

Matchups are based off of rating, I believe, and not rank. So if 1200 rating got you rank 100 or 10,000, it should still take the same amount of time to match you up with the 1700 rating #1 ladder team(I think). The only thing that moving inactive teams off the ladder might do is make obs mode more busy, which isn't a bad thing. Would it be worth the effort of recoding the ladder so teams move in an out of the ladder depending on activity? I don't know.

wuzzman · Sep 11, 2007, 01:03 AM // 01:03

Players thinking pressing shatter enchantments on 1 is skilled played is nuff said on meta.

tricolorsp · Sep 11, 2007, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

To address the original concern about guilds that no longer play staying on the ladder, personally, I don't see it being an issue.

1 month without gvg and still r7....something is wrong.

should make that you lose x rating after 1 week or something like that.

another think is that waiting 20minutes for a +0 is lame....should be at least +1 since you wasted at least 25minutes(20for the match, 5 to beat the scrubs) in that match.

Blame the Monks · Sep 11, 2007, 01:04 PM // 13:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

Andrew, GVG Guilds don't come and go. They just go.

win 56789101112

Razz L Dazzle · Sep 11, 2007, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Many guilds create smurfs purely because 30 minute wait times for matches is too much. I'd like to see a more active ladder kicking out teams for inactivity, then find a closely ranked opponent for quicker matches.

Currently in the AT system if we get a first round forfeit we try to enter ladder GvG and almost never get a match before our timer is under 20 minutes so, then we decide to HA for 2 matches because of boredom. Then if the 2nd round or 3rd round is a forfeit, our circumstance just repeats.

Keep a historic ladder going if you must and allow if to be hidden between many layers of clicking on the GW website. But then put an active guild ladder or AT ladder on the frontpage that determines playoffs, championships or actual standing better than the current system.

If the goal is to make Rank/Rating and ladder standing useless then keep the current system as i felt no achievement getting into the top 20 for the first time since i started PvPing a year ago. The argument that it is no actual achievement can be made quite easily but, i think there should be some significance if GvG and pvp are to continue for a few more months.