Curse

Mr Seph · Jan 21, 2007, 10:18 AM // 10:18

Quote:

HA is full of arrogant fame farmers anyway and rarely does fame mean anything anyway so truthfully only GvG really matters and since RA and TA are designed for faction farming... HA is pretty much pointless.

Yea, it takes so much skill to farm rating in american times vs henchguilds.

Quote:

I say all that to get to this: I, as a person who prefers gvg, think these changes are a step in the right direction because these are the types of changes that were suggested which would promote the domination of skill rather than build. That is all we want: a competitive alternative that makes skill king (mostly). Ideally, this won't fully take place (by nature, the game requires build to have some factor in determining the victor), but these changes seem to promote a change in the right direction.

Why would you say that skill gets dominating again?? All these changes do is make all the altar maps into 1 big pure chaos, pretty much based on luck who gets the points.

Julen · Jan 21, 2007, 10:29 AM // 10:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

HA should not be changed to what GvGers want, it should be the way the people who actualy liked it want it, end of story.

Gimmicks are present and can be very effective in gvg, IWAY has got to #3 on the ladder.

I think Random was a bit harsh here, but what he is saying isnt incorrect.

Lots of people used to play HA back in the 8v8 days, there were 4-10 ID's almost constantly (10 being weekends though). Sure HA wasnt perfect, but if that many people are playing it the concept cant be that bad.

Then all of a sudden we get a change to 6v6 which nobody but people who never set foot in HA asked for. ANET said they did this to make HA more accessible to newer players due to the lower amount of players. I can understand they wanted to do that, but this wasnt the right way to do so. We also get heroes and overpowered NF skills. The PvE crowd loves this (i'm quite sure no self respecting HA player actually liked these days). After 2 months (way too long imho) they nerf some stuff and get rid of heroes. After this nerf the amount of teams is like a quarter of what it was before, cause the pve people can no longer compete.

At this time both the pve-ers and HA-ers are both complaining. The PvE guys complain they cant win halls anymore, and the HA people just want their beloved 8v8 back.

A poll was held on this forum, the result couldnt have been more clear. Anet gives us some hope by sending Gayle over to this forum, (no disrespect, but someone who knows jack about the pvp aspect of this game) and by telling us they are considering to revert to 8v8. So people have hope once again.

Anet then announces some big changes, including a highly needed skill update. But they didnt say anything bout what was infact changing.

Now during the weekend it turned out that they didnt change anything that the loyal HA community asked for. Instead they made changes to please those who don't HA that often at all. Doesnt sound fair to me. Doesnt it sound more fair to actually listen to those that spent 1k+ hours in there? Don't you think those people actually know what they're talking about?

Anet should just be honest and say what they intend to do with HA. People are just hanging on hoping everything will revert to what it once was. If Anet would just say they wanna revamp HA completely and make it more of a pvp arena for the casual player, fine, most people will accept that. Some will stay, others wont. But at least your being honest that way.

suiraCLAW · Jan 21, 2007, 10:29 AM // 10:29

First of all: Every discussion becomes irrelevant when the main argument becomes 'but that's my opinion'...

I'll quote every sentence I disagree with...

Quote:

I think the changes being tested right now are complete BS, it's like ANET has taken all these ideas from the Guild Hall, and PVEers, they have turned HA into an AB style kill them all scrubfest, taking none of their advice from active HA players.

1) What's wrong with an "AB style kill them all scrubfest"? This type of HA certainly encourages more types of builds: people can now take less defense and more offense, and we all know that there are way more viable offensive tactics/skills than defensive skills thus leading to a higher amount of creativity.

2) What is wrong with a GvG'er who wants to change HA because he doesn't like the current one?

3) What's the difference between 'a HA player' and 'a PvP player' (you call this person a GvG'er)? If the answer is 'none', your point is irrevelant. If there is a difference, why shouldn't a GvG player be able to enjoy playing HA?

Quote:

Many people constantly QQed about holding builds, but when asked which supposedly uber defensive indestructable holding build was dominating HA they can't answer, or they make a reference to a build that has since been nerfed.

1) Why do you think that nobody can give a example of a holding build?

2) If a huge group of people don't like a certain kind of build, why shouldn't they ask to create an environment where those builds are less effective?

3) Actually, atm you're QQ'ing about not being able to use/to play against holding builds. Please give a clear argument...

Quote:

I think this is because people feel that they should be able to win halls every time they get to it, they feel the only reason they are unable to cap the altar and win is that they have been cheated by an uber defensive holding build. The same thing happened with other strategies of holding as well, when people were unable to cap because of interupts, or bodyblocking, they QQed about how halls had become a lame interuptfest, yet these same people couldn't be bothered to interupt seeking arrows, or put guardian on their ghost.

1) First of all, it's completely nonsense to think that ANY chance will give somebody an advantage. because every overpowered build can be used by everybody...

2) Why do you think that everybody who complained about interrupts/holding builds never used them?

3) In the current HoH, there is no real build that can win every time, because of the several objectives (does somebody disagree with this?) while in the old HoH the only thing a build needed was a way to keep his ghost alive (I bet nobody disagrees with this either). In your post you state that you (and all those other 'HA'ers ') prefered using holding builds, can you explain this statement?

4) What's wrong with people that feel that winning HoH is more balanced with the new HoH?

Quote:

Some of these people think any build they cannot kill is a lame holding build.

1) And some people (like you) think that any build that cannot kill isn't a holding build. Why is your group better than the other group?

Quote:

What I'm afraid of is the permanence of this weekend event. They've put time and effort into the new mechanics for HA, and I doubt they're going to simply scrap all that and revert HA back to the old days, no matter how loudly we complain. I'm glad that the devs are making an effort into improving HA, but the fact is, the changes are not what HAers want.

1) Why do you think (*sigh*) that all the HAers disagree with that change?

2) Whats wrong with the change?

Quote:

Myself, along with many others I've talked to, would prefer a simple reversion to the old 8v8 HA, complete with Blood Spike, IWAY, interruptfests, and you know, that balanced build thing too, given that the current meta is properly balanced (SF, Sandstorm, Jagged Bones, etc).

1) Why?

Quote:

HA should not be changed to what GvGers want, it should be the way the people who actualy liked it want it, end of story.

Exactly, what do ALL people who like it want?

BTW, I pretty much agree with gladiator888, and most statements I didn't quote...

Sab · Jan 21, 2007, 12:24 PM // 12:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

1) Why do you think (*sigh*) that all the HAers disagree with that change?

2) Whats wrong with the change?

Take a look at the HA weekend event's forums. Talk to people who do HA. Take a look in the HA outpost itself. The single biggest problem that most agree on is the new altar mechanic. There are plenty of threads about this in the other section of the forum already, but I'll sum up the issues of the new altar match system:

- It promotes all-damage builds. SF, Sandstorm and all that trash reigns supreme. The HA meta really doesn't need even more of those builds.

- Kill-stealing is a major problem. Not only is this unfair, it means pressure builds are at a major disadvantage in those maps, as a team with the aforementioned all-damage build can come in and claim the kills for themselves if you degenned everybody to 10 health.

- Altar matches are now even more of a gankfest - yes, even more than before since the objective now is to score kills. If the other two teams spontaneously decide to gank your team (with high-damage builds, of course), there's not much you can do except die. This means a lot more luck is involved in winning altar matches now, as you have to hope that the two teams don't gang up and wipe you sometime in those ten minutes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

1) Why?

Why do people want 8v8 back? I was hoping that would be clear to anyone who has seriously played both 8v8 and 6v6. Everybody has their own reasons, but one undeniable reason that has been repeated over and over again is that 6v6 does not allow enough build variety.

Matafleur · Jan 21, 2007, 01:50 PM // 13:50

I will admit that I wish 8v8 would return, but that probably will not happen.
About the whining that Anet is catering to more PvE, and GvG? Well, there are simply more of them than HAers. Anet, from a business stand point, would be stupid to cater to handful and not the masses.

phasola · Jan 21, 2007, 02:31 PM // 14:31

Quote:

I will admit that I wish 8v8 would return, but that probably will not happen.
About the whining that Anet is catering to more PvE, and GvG? Well, there are simply more of them than HAers. Anet, from a business stand point, would be stupid to cater to handful and not the masses.

How many PvE or GvG people do you think play HA on a regular basis ? 10 ?

suiraCLAW · Jan 21, 2007, 02:47 PM // 14:47

Thanks sab, finaly some reasons

Quote:

Take a look at the HA weekend event's forums. Talk to people who do HA. Take a look in the HA outpost itself.

Please don't take this personal, but I followed your advice...

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8...inion029cj.jpg

Tbh, 70% of the people I saw found the new hoh better. Offcourse, I didn't saw enough people to make a real statement about this...

Quote:

- Kill-stealing is a major problem. Not only is this unfair, it means pressure builds are at a major disadvantage in those maps, as a team with the aforementioned all-damage build can come in and claim the kills for themselves if you degenned everybody to 10 health.

- Altar matches are now even more of a gankfest - yes, even more than before since the objective now is to score kills. If the other two teams spontaneously decide to gank your team (with high-damage builds, of course), there's not much you can do except die. This means a lot more luck is involved in winning altar matches now, as you have to hope that the two teams don't gang up and wipe you sometime in those ten minutes.

These are indeed serious issuses, but AFAICT, such problems don't exist at the relic/shrine map. But I need to agree that until these issuses (wich I wasn't aware of) are somehow solved the KC map is a bit problematic...

Still, it's a testing event thus anet might be able to find a solution to the problemn with killsteals (and the problem with picking up the relic first). In other words, we shouldn't conclude things too fast...

Quote:

- It promotes all-damage builds. SF, Sandstorm and all that trash reigns supreme. The HA meta really doesn't need even more of those builds.

I don't really see how those over offensive builds have an advantage above normal balanced builds at shrine/relic maps. Besides, I'm sure some people like those 'trash builds' more than holding builds...

Quote:

Why do people want 8v8 back? I was hoping that would be clear to anyone who has seriously played both 8v8 and 6v6. Everybody has their own reasons, but one undeniable reason that has been repeated over and over again is that 6v6 does not allow enough build variety.

Hmm, I guess I'll read some other threads about the 8v8 vs 6v6 discussion, before reacting to this one...

Quote:

How many PvE or GvG people do you think play HA on a regular basis ? 10 ?

I see several top-100 GvG teams on observer mode every day...

Legendary Shiz · Jan 21, 2007, 03:14 PM // 15:14

To be honest, a lot of the top HA teams decided to try their hand at gvg because HA isn't completely worth playing. That's why you see guilds in the top 100 doing HA a lot. Because they are an HA first guild that decided to GvG because Anet ruined HA for them.

Tea Girl · Jan 21, 2007, 04:47 PM // 16:47

I hate being a little whiney cake... but I have to do this:

This weekend's skill testing doesn't attempt to (semi-) nerf some over-powered necro & warrior FoTM builds (spiritway, fear me) in HA. Instead, they nerfed nice skills that are useful to counter these builds (DH, SoA, SV/AV). If new HA is going to favor dmg builds then there should be a buff on monk skills. Otherwise HA is going to turn into a boring AB-alike "kill-then-run" gameplay in the game.

Oh please don't let me started on 8v8. 8v8 or mall, enough said

Oh... I thought we are suppose to get NEW maps instead of MAP ALTERATIONS. GG Anet :T

Badboy Thrasher · Jan 21, 2007, 04:48 PM // 16:48

just looking forward to the day they nerf balanced builds cuz there are no gimmick builds left for those nerfhorny programmers to nerf...

elektra_lucia · Jan 21, 2007, 04:51 PM // 16:51

Wow you guys write a lot considering no one has answered the question. To answer the question :

Quote:

Does ANET care at all about the views of the HA community

-

If caring about the HA community gives (or will give) ANET more money; then yes, they do.

If not caring about the HA community but caring more for another community gives (or will give) ANET more money; then no, they do not.

So basically, if care for whatever it might be == more money (present/future); then yes, they will care =).

Randomway Ftw · Jan 21, 2007, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

1) What's wrong with an "AB style kill them all scrubfest"? This type of HA certainly encourages more types of builds: people can now take less defense and more offense, and we all know that there are way more viable offensive tactics/skills than defensive skills thus leading to a higher amount of creativity.

The problem with this is that all offense builds (IWAY, VIMWAY) dominated for most of the time in HA, we all know how creative those builds are.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

3) What's the difference between 'a HA player' and 'a PvP player' (you call this person a GvG'er)? If the answer is 'none', your point is irrevelant. If there is a difference, why shouldn't a GvG player be able to enjoy playing HA?

The difference between a HA player and a GvG player is that a HA player spends most of their time ingame playing HA while a GvG players spends most of their time playing GvG, which group should Anet listens to when it comes to HA, I think the answer is obvious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

1) Why do you think that nobody can give a example of a holding build?

Because the simple fact is that the holding build issue has been greatly exagerated, and that holding builds are not succesful in a balanced environment. Most people are not aware of what a holding build actualy is, a build designed only for altar maps, a balanced build with a large amount of utility is not a holding build.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

2) If a huge group of people don't like a certain kind of build, why shouldn't they ask to create an environment where those builds are less effective?

This is because the so called "holding build" issue is greatly exagerated, holding builds have never dominated HA without the use of unbalanced skills and therefore Anet should not make changes based on anti-holding build hysteria and hype.

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

3) In the current HoH, there is no real build that can win every time, because of the several objectives (does somebody disagree with this?) while in the old HoH the only thing a build needed was a way to keep his ghost alive (I bet nobody disagrees with this either). In your post you state that you (and all those other 'HA'ers ') prefered using holding builds, can you explain this statement?

It was never build winning in either case, player skill was always more important then build. Some builds can win many consecutive in halls, however a build is only the tool by which this happens The changes to HA currently being have made are based on unfounded anti-holding build hype. The objective of Halls was to prevent the other teams ghost from capturing the altar, you could do this by way of interupts, bodyblocking, edenial, killing other ghosts, or keeping your ghost alive. Your statement proves that you know very little about HA.

conjurer · Jan 21, 2007, 06:57 PM // 18:57

I think the main problem with the changes is the increased random factor, more randomity in halls, less build variety (due dmg demands of current altar maps) & tbh it's fun in the 1st 2 hours, but on the second day, it's fboring. Removing scarred for burial was a good change & rotation of objectives in halls is also something which can be good, just not like this way, need more serious goals there, at the current form of that it's like alliance battles, not even close to serious.

WTB old 8v8 with some minor changes, Angelic Bond NERF xD (majority of the players want 8v8 back, so it would mean more money to anet at the next expansion, if they would make the change => would be good for everyone, for players, for anet, nuff said)

Sab · Jan 21, 2007, 08:05 PM // 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by suiraCLAW

Please don't take this personal, but I followed your advice...

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8...inion029cj.jpg

Tbh, 70% of the people I saw found the new hoh better. Offcourse, I didn't saw enough people to make a real statement about this...

Come to think about it, the people who are still left in HA one day after the event are the people who actually enjoy the changes.

Legendary Shiz · Jan 21, 2007, 08:41 PM // 20:41

One thing IMO they should do is switch around the map order a bit. Just like scared was, broken tower is now a lot more time consuming than it's worth.

It should be UW, burial, dark chambers, uholy, borken, etc

Maybe that's just my opinion. But that would aslo make the quality of the times in broken much better making a much more interesting game.

suiraCLAW · Jan 21, 2007, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

The problem with this is that all offense builds (IWAY, VIMWAY) dominated for most of the time in HA, we all know how creative those builds are.

1) IWAY and VIMWAY were overused in the old HA (but tht doesn't mean they 'dominated').

2) Are you really saying that the only kind of offensive build contains 4 warriors with 'I will avenge you' on their bar? If so, your point is irrelevant, otherwise please eleborate...

Quote:

The difference between a HA player and a GvG player is that a HA player spends most of their time ingame playing HA while a GvG players spends most of their time playing GvG, which group should Anet listens to when it comes to HA, I think the answer is obvious.

Point granted.

Quote:

Because the simple fact is that the holding build issue has been greatly exagerated

I agree. But this isn't an answer to my question.

Quote:

a balanced build with a large amount of utility is not a holding build.

Indeed.

Quote:

Most people are not aware of what a holding build actualy is

OK, there might be people on this world that don't know what a holding build is, but why do you think that those people who asked for those changes don't know it?

Quote:

holding builds have never dominated HA without the use of unbalanced skills

But they did 'dominate' HoH even without real unbalanced skills. I, for example, can remember several groups that were trying to get a hoh jump with their 5 monk/1 sin build. Some of these did cap and hold hoh for a rather long time.

Quote:

It was never build winning in either case, player skill was always more important then build. Some builds can win many consecutive in halls, however a build is only the tool by which this happens.

1) Has this changed?

2) Actually, a lot of people* wanted a change because they found that some builds (ie. builds wich were made solely for altar capping) determined the winner too much and/or made holding too easy. What's wrong with that?

*) and a lot of them play HA on a regular base.

Quote:

Originally Posted by me

the only thing a build needed was a way to keep his ghost alive

Quote:

The objective of Halls was to prevent the other teams ghost from capturing the altar, you could do this by way of interupts, bodyblocking, edenial, killing other ghosts, or keeping your ghost alive.

I'm certainly aware that you can win hoh by preventing the other 2 heroes from using the skill 'Claim rescource' (5 energy/5 sec activation time/no recharge and can't be disabled). My statement was that a team could win every hall match if they kept their hero alive.

Quote:

Your statement proves that you know very little about HA.

No, it doesn't (see above)...

Quote:

I think the main problem with the changes is the increased random factor, more randomity in halls

Sadly, I need to agree with you about this. Still, this might improve (it's just a test weekend after all).

Quote:

less build variety (due dmg demands of current altar maps)

Actually, I'm sure that if this change is permanent, a lot more builds will be invented. Especially because there are a lot more skills/ways to kill something (there are +10 decent spike skills, +20 decent degen hexes, +20 decent condition applying skills, +30 skills that can cause decent pressure) than decent skills that prevent something from dying...

phasola · Jan 21, 2007, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Quote:

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/8...inion029cj.jpg

That's about as relevant as the 6v6 poll on GHall.
You should ask the people that left

.

Infectious · Jan 21, 2007, 11:29 PM // 23:29

Quote:

Actually, I'm sure that if this change is permanent, a lot more builds will be invented. Especially because there are a lot more skills/ways to kill something (there are +10 decent spike skills, +20 decent degen hexes, +20 decent condition applying skills, +30 skills that can cause decent pressure) than decent skills that prevent something from dying...

Yes because pressure builds thrive in this new alter map environment don't they....

jai311 · Jan 21, 2007, 11:43 PM // 23:43

Agreed they should bring back to 8 vs 8.

The Silver Star · Jan 22, 2007, 10:40 AM // 10:40

Ofcourse they care but not they dont change it for the good of the people that play it! They should just give us what we want sure there were problems with 8v8 but all these changes arnt going to stop problems only going to create new ones.