Curse

twicky_kid · Dec 23, 2006, 08:20 PM // 20:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

I'm not sure I get this "cannot schedule our lives around anet" thing.

My job requires me to change my schedule every month or 2. On the current ladder that really means nothing because I can always find another guild when my schedule changes and still be competitive.

Now my schedule changes. I'm forced to change guilds. Now I can't play in tournaments for 30 days. 30 days past my schedule changes. Oh, look now I have to wait yet again another 30 days.

This will be a never ending cycle for me. For mature gamers over the age of 18 the is a very hard compromise.

Greedy Gus · Dec 23, 2006, 08:26 PM // 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

My job requires me to change my schedule every month or 2. On the current ladder that really means nothing because I can always find another guild when my schedule changes and still be competitive.

Now my schedule changes. I'm forced to change guilds. Now I can't play in tournaments for 30 days. 30 days past my schedule changes. Oh, look now I have to wait yet again another 30 days.

This will be a never ending cycle for me. For mature gamers over the age of 18 the is a very hard compromise.

It's unfortunate for you, but you have to suck it up and accept the fact that your guild hopping negatively affects the integrity of the ladder, and therefore you wont' be allowed to affect the outcome of daily tournaments when you keep changing guilds. You are absolutely not the target audience for this new additional format, but can still play ladder gvg like always.

twicky_kid · Dec 23, 2006, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

It's unfortunate for you, but you have to suck it up and accept the fact that your guild hopping negatively affects the integrity of the ladder, and therefore you wont' be allowed to affect the outcome of daily tournaments when you keep changing guilds. You are absolutely not the target audience for this new additional format, but can still play ladder gvg like always.

I fail to see how my guild hopping affects the ladder when I am in the same guild during the entire ladder season. During ladder lock if my schedule changes I simply ask friends if they are recruiting for the next season. People hopping guilds during the ladder is a problem and could have been prevented under the existing system.

The ladder is suppose to be about who is the best of the best. That means against pugs as well. If you cannot beat a pug then you do not deserve to go to the playoffs or be champs.

There are only a handful of real guilds that play the ladder to win and go to the playoffs. The rest are pugs or really bad teams that never had a chance in the first place. So now you've taken a format that has been open for anyone to join and enjoy to something that is only going to be available to a select few.

That is not a way to promote growth and longevity. Anet we play a game to have fun not dedicate my life to it.

Free GvG with no real rewards is not what I call fun. Free GvG will be for testing new builds, new players, and pugs. It will basicly not have any real affect on the ladder ranking thus no rewards.

I'm not a doom sayer. I have been supportive since day one of Anet and GW. I've been playing since beta 04. This is by far my favorite game to play. With this change I know have to weigh my options of continuing to play and that saddens me greatly. I cannot support a system that is going to exclude new players and casual gamers that don't have 8 hours a day to play.

With the time restraint on tournaments basically who ever plays the most matches will win. This will promote even more roll or be rolled gimmick builds.

I know more details are coming and I understand there are things I do not know about that may address these issues. Of course I will wait to see how it plays out but with Anet's past history of poor implementation my faith is rather low.

tomcruisejr · Dec 23, 2006, 09:20 PM // 21:20

with prized money at stake, GvG tourney is a serious business and it's about time to implement this strict rules. you wanna have fun and farm points, join non - tourney gvgs.

Seeing serious competitive guilds which play for like the whole day (WM) just to practice and play with full roster whenever they compete facing a pug guild just hanging out wanting to have fun is like say spectating LA Lakers facing the East coast all star team or some basketball team in your neighborhood. It's not a fun watch ( not a fair match up ) and it's unfair for those who prepped for the game. Moreover, finding fillers for spots that are taken by disqualified guilds or smurfs who made it to top 32 is a waste of time (coz you have to determine if the filler can play on that day or somethin). Smurfing and pugging are only possible if players leave a guild and join another one - aka guild hop.

these changes imho promotes better and more quality competition.

Patccmoi · Dec 23, 2006, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deep Sea Diving

Now, that being said, this change could turn out for the better, but arenanet did a horrible job of evaluating the consequences of this announcement AT THIS TIME, while they were supposed to be balancing the skills that made the ladder and the guilds on it one dimensional & possibly working to make tombs fun again, and were being incredibly optimistic if they didn’t expect backlash from the pvp community.

You know they also announced a whole new system to rebalance skills and get more feedback, etc. (my guess being an open beta server before patches, but that's just a guess). They just didn't give as much detail on that part yet.

They also just made a change to HA and said they were still discussing on what else they can do to improve it.

So at least don't say they 'should be balancing skills and look at HA'. They ARE! It's just not all they do. You know, i'm pretty sure the guy taking care of the ladder mechanics isn't the same that's in charge of skill balance.

twicky_kid · Dec 23, 2006, 09:56 PM // 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomcruisejr

with prized money at stake, GvG tourney is a serious business and it's about time to implement this strict rules. you wanna have fun and farm points, join non - tourney gvgs.

Lets been honest you cannot make a living off of GW pvp. GW is no where close to professional gaming and never will be because they do not license their game to outside tournaments.

Until that happens and are multiple tournaments every month with high cash prizes (team based game so purse is split) GW pvp will never go pro.

Hopefully with the tournaments every month they will offer cash prizes. The current trend in prizes is silver, gold trim, and in game prizes. Even if you broke their current budget of cash prizes down to monthly it would still be chump change.

This has been discussed on WoC before. I'd suggest players go listen to that episode to see why GW pvp is really a marketing tool.

Zeldawind · Dec 23, 2006, 10:12 PM // 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

You know they also announced a whole new system to rebalance skills and get more feedback, etc. (my guess being an open beta server before patches, but that's just a guess). They just didn't give as much detail on that part yet.

They also just made a change to HA and said they were still discussing on what else they can do to improve it.

So at least don't say they 'should be balancing skills and look at HA'. They ARE! It's just not all they do. You know, i'm pretty sure the guy taking care of the ladder mechanics isn't the same that's in charge of skill balance.

As far as im aware off Izzy is more or the less a big person in skill balancing.

But that there are multiple teams working on different things seems very logic to me. Because they have 2 teams working on bringing out new chapters every 6 months. Then there is a pretty big chance to me that they got multiple teams for multiple tasks for the PvP environment of GW aswell.

O and @ twicky_kid:

Could you stop the endless rand about something you first dont know everything from yet.
You got 2 choices now which everyone is already more or the less telling you:

1. Wait till Anet decides to bring every single bit of information out. Because there might be set times but who says that they aren't going to change that time for each day to reach a more variety of players aswell because some euro/american/what ever there's more out there.
Work in the evening have evening school and what else you can think off.
So if the tournaments are going to be at set times it would be wise to make times like 6 PM GMT 7 PM GMT 8 PM GMT 9 PM GMT in the phrase of that during midweekdays and in the weekend around 1 PM GMT and 2 PM GMT.
(im using euro times examples because im euro myself so its easier for me) So they have a wide reach of ppl who can play and this way DONT HAVE TO SCHEDULE around arenanet wishes. I Gues there has to be at least 1 oe 2 times that are reachable for you otherwise maybe send some suggestions to Anet so that they can try to statisfy a wider reach of their customers then just a few people.

2. Quit GW now and find a new game and stop whit the endless rand.

But my opinion about these changes. They come as a big surprise to me.
A positive surprise though these changes are really looking interesting to me but the time might be some issue problems to me. But like i already said i hope Anet will vary times for the daily tournaments so that i can play aswell. But this might be a really good thing for my guild to happen we usually can't field our core players enough during a whole ladder season to be able to reach really high things. Whit this change we might be able to field just enough times to be competitive at a somewhat higher level then we have been able before.

tomcruisejr · Dec 23, 2006, 10:41 PM // 22:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

Lets been honest you cannot make a living off of GW pvp. GW is no where close to professional gaming and never will be because they do not license their game to outside tournaments.

even without the prized money, an easy to run, firm and solid sanctioned tournament is an inevitable and necessary change. as pointed out in the article, the current chop suey tournament structure is giving everyone, serious competitors and a.net alike, major problems. maybe its the first step that will make gw pvp go pro? who knows.

twicky_kid · Dec 23, 2006, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeldawind

AO and @ twicky_kid:

Could you stop the endless rand about something you first dont know everything from yet.
You got 2 choices now which everyone is already more or the less telling you

I am simply pointing out flaws that will be an issue for many GvG players. I know there will be more information coming I've said that myself.

This is a fansite where you can voice your opinion freely. When a dev comes here and tells me I should not be voicing my concerns I have a major issue with that. What that tells me is "we don't care about your concerns." That is not the GW devs we know and love. Don't get me wrong I do respect Alex. He's the one that tried to gather info on beast mastery weapons and suggestions.

I have talked to many people that play gvg including some in the top guilds. Everyone I've talked to in lower 100 or below guilds are not liking this. From the top elite guilds some are loving some are hating it.

We do need more information that is why I'm going to wait to see what happens. I am posting so much on this because GvG is something that is important to me and sole reason for playing GW for the past 2 years.

dansamy · Dec 24, 2006, 12:26 AM // 00:26

Just a friendly reminder: Spam (ie: I agree/disagree), multiple posts, flaming, etc will not be tolerated and will be deleted on sight. I will not weed through a flame-filled post to edit out flames and keep useful information. I'll delete without prejudice.

Alex Weekes · Dec 24, 2006, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas.knbk

While I think declaring this the death of GvG is a bit early indeed, I do see a few problems I'd like to adress. For example: In the past I've been in GvG guilds that only had 12 members, or even less. In one of those guilds at one point, 5 members stopped playing. Mostly due to real-life issues. In the new system this would mean our entire guild could not play GvG for 30 days. At least, not participate in the tournaments. And the tournaments seem to become the 'real' GvG. It also means switching guilds for totally legit reasons other than smurfing is made almost impossible. It would once again mean I can't GvG for 30 days.

The 30 day period is only a lockout for the tournaments, and has always been in place in tournaments we've run (indeed, in some tournaments it's been longer than 30 days that you need to remain in a single guild for). It *does not* lock you out from ladder play. In this respect, it is no different from previous policy.

I will concede, however, that the lockout will now have a more immediate impact. Take the time to consider, though, that the new system will see the opportunity to access competitive tournament play vastly increased. Last year there were a few Fun Seasons of varying length that required dedication to a single guild if you wanted to participate. There were also the major tournaments, and these absolutely required at least a months dedication to a single guild ... while only allowing a limited number of the top guilds to eventually participate in the end-of-season tournaments.

Next year will see a system that allows players to play in a structured tournament on a daily basis - scheduling permitting, granted - and even with the 30 day lock I expect that player accessibility to GvG tournaments will be vastly improved.

For those who requested more details: I'm really sorry, but we're simply not ready to provide those yet. The nitty-gritty will need to be tested, changes may be made ... heck, at the detail level the entire system could conceivably go through several different versions before it gets launched. Your comments here may have an infuence on that, and with that I'll point out why I made my earlier post in this thread:

The design team implementing these changes will get far more out of well-thought, reasoned discussion than they will out of complaints based on assumptions made on limited information. We get much better information from you if you discuss how you would *like* (and not like) the system to work than we do out some of the posts seen in this thread.

We'll certainly pass on your concerns about the 30 days. It may be that the new system does not need a 30 day lockout. It may also be that once the system is in place you'll see why the decision was made.

What I'm really trying to get across here is that we value your constructive criticism. You don't need all the details to provide that ... Well thought constructive criticism can make all the assumptions it wants to, as long as those assumptions are not being used as an excuse to claim the system will fail. This new system is a response to your feedback about the tournament systems used last year. It's intended to address many concerns players raised, and improve tournament accessibility for all players. By giving you some information about it now, the team have given you the opportunity to be a part of the process of making this system as robust as possible when it goes out. Instead of complaining that 'ArenaNet are telling us when we can play' ... how about suggesting how the system of automated tournaments could be flexible enough that the assumed problem doesn't arise in the first place

.

dansamy · Dec 24, 2006, 01:42 AM // 01:42

Well, Alex, I tried. You may have been reading some BS even as I was deleting it.

dgb · Dec 24, 2006, 03:08 AM // 03:08

Alex, you're going round in circles here. First (or second, I can't tell, it's all circles) you say that you need constructive criticisim, not whining. That's fair enough, makes a lot of sense. Then you say we can't tell you much now because it might change. Lastly you say if you wait until it's released we might see why some things were done certain ways.

You can't have constructive criticism if you don't release a reasonable ammount of information. So far everyones given you the best idea they have, that is that standard ladder play will become basically irrelevant and tournament play will be where it is at. The net result of this is for serious play, it's a 30 day lockout.

You want something more constructive than that? Give us more information. You can say make assumptions, but really I'm not going to engage in some hypothetical shadow-fight with you or anyone else. It's just not worth my time. Could it be done? Sure, I could make assumptions, but can I be bothered to get into a discussion based over assumptions that COULD be validated or invalidated by you now? Hell no, I've got better things to do than to play your stupid forum guessing games.

There is such a dis-parity of information here that I may as well not bother. Give us the base information about what's planned, or don't ask for anything serious. You guys really need to get it into your heads that release of information is not something to be afraid of

Tortoise · Dec 24, 2006, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Nowadays noone was locked from ladder play and that was still valuable. You could join a guild for the last week and still be a tremendous asset to them. You could help them gain the rating they needed and eventhough you could not play in the tourny you still had the ability to accomplish something meaningfull. In this respect it is vastly different from the previous policy.

Whilie I will respect the fact that 'doom-saying' is a bit too much I will not sit here silently and not express my concerns simply because I do not know all the specifics. I have 'some' detailed information and it scares me.

- No guests,
- 30 day lock
- Fixed tournie times

They all scare me, no matter what the implementation. Noone is going crazy over some speculation about the tourny system. We're going crazy over the most concrete info that was given in the info.

A 30 day lock SUCKS. No matter how you implement it.
The guests and fixed tourny times still vary alot according to the implementation but you cannot blame us for fearing the worst. I can imagine some scenarios that could be a blessing for GW, and I have expressed that in my previous posts. I also can imagine alot of scenarios that would prove a huge burden for me and well... that's all I'm saying. We're not asking you to bend over backwards here. We're asking you to think things through and consider some of the concerns here. Heck, I figured the main reason to post the article was precisely so some of us could come up with doom scenarios so you guys could be sure to avoid them...

In any case: I am looking forward to the changes. Both with anticipation and anxiety, but looking forward.

twicky_kid · Dec 24, 2006, 03:52 AM // 03:52

I really don't understand why all the information isn't released at one time. That basically tells me that the final rules have not been set in stone yet. It would help the community more to know all the information up front rather than say stop complaining and wait. Letting us have the information does not hurt you in any way. Since you have your great streaming technology that Anet is so proud of (and they should be its great) you can change whatever you need to when ever. With that said......

30 day lock is no good as it prevents new comers and lower guilds that do not have a core rooster and trying to fill those spots. I think a week is good but I am still unsure if that will make a difference since many pugs have 2nd accounts.

Times for tournaments should be very small windows. That way many guilds that can play 2-3 games per day don't get put out because they cannot play 8-9 matches a day. Maybe a 2 hour window would be good.

Former Ruling · Dec 24, 2006, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Quote:

30 day lock is no good as it prevents new comers and lower guilds that do not have a core rooster and trying to fill those spots. I think a week is good but I am still unsure if that will make a difference since many pugs have 2nd accounts.

Do New Comers or "lower guilds that do not have a core rooster [sic]" have a place in Tournament play is a better question? Are these the ones worried about making it to the Championships? If I were new I certainly wouldn't care about tourneys...IE: about getting creamed in the first round of tournaments every day...

They still have the free play ladder to compete on, and practice on, and get better on, which they should do if they are smart. Then maybe one day they will grow to the calibur of the tournament play.

There are potential things they have to work out - of course - but thats why they are keeping shut about it and fixing it up...

Teh Mighty Warrior · Dec 24, 2006, 06:12 AM // 06:12

If this wonderful and exciting idea is implemented I won't even blink when I quit Guild Wars. I am not going to schedule my life around Anet's little "mini" tournaments that way they can cover up their mistakes. Fix the damn skills for f*cks sake not the ladder.

30 days...what if for some reason my guild breaks up...great I can't do shit in Guild Wars for a month, oh wait I can always go /roll in HvH battles!

I mean this is really the last straw. I supported Anet for changing HA, now I'm kicking myself in the ass. Don't f*ck up GvG too.

Riotgear · Dec 24, 2006, 06:51 AM // 06:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Mighty Warrior

Fix the damn skills for f*cks sake not the ladder.

Fewer, shorter "seasons" means potentially more frequent skill updates.

I'd be most concerned that this sounds like this is going to be very broad in effect, i.e. ladder is basically being deprecated in favor of tournaments. The problem is that free play is a very flexible system (guests, pick-ups, no schedules, no 30-day limit, etc.) while tournament is not. As should be obvious from the rest of this thread, some people are going to love the tournament format, some are going to hate it.

This wouldn't be a problem if both were an option, but it sounds like they're trying to phase free-play out. Why?? Is there a reason for trying to kill off a format that most people like in spite of its faults?

Bankai · Dec 24, 2006, 08:27 AM // 08:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Mighty Warrior

If this wonderful and exciting idea is implemented I won't even blink when I quit Guild Wars. I am not going to schedule my life around Anet's little "mini" tournaments that way they can cover up their mistakes. Fix the damn skills for f*cks sake not the ladder.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guildwars Article

We will schedule automated tournaments to run two or three times a day starting at beneficial times for players in all times zones.

Do you really think Anet would screw up that bad?

Patrograd · Dec 24, 2006, 10:34 AM // 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bankai

Do you really think Anet would screw up that bad?

here's the issue as I see it with running only a very limited number of tournaments per day, or at least running them at limited start times

There a whole raft of players who play what might be called "late" EU hours - EU guys with jobs and families like me and East Coast US students who play after school rather than in the evening - there are a whole group of guilds made up of mixed region teams like this who typically play sort of 9pm GMT-midnight GMT or later. These hours are later than Eu "Peak" times (say 6-9pm GMT) when most of the Euro guilds are on and presumably when the tournaments will be played. These non peak guilds exist for every time zone - I know of several West Coast US/Australian guilds for example.

It seems to me that these players who make up a sizeable chunk of the community are suddenly left with playing for 2 or 3 points a game and never being able to take part in the games that mean anything substantial. I am struggling at the moment to see how these guilds are ever going to be even vaguely competitive and the players that this applies to, regardless of how good they are, are never going to get onto the roster of a good team as they cant play tournaments. I can play before 9pm GMT perhaps 4 days a year, if I'm lucky. Does this mean that no matter how hard I practise, how well I play, how good I become that I am condemned to scrub GvG forever? I hope not, and I hope that Anet implements this in a way that can include everyone and exclude no-one