Curse

LockerLoad · Nov 03, 2006, 04:36 AM // 04:36

I've been playing Guildwars since Prophecies release. I've played fps games since Doom. I played MTG(competitively) for many years. Guildwars PVP was touted as a "skill based" game.

Many of the posts I read here are critical of certain player or team builds as being "skilless" or "gimmicky"

So, aside from the blatant equivocation of the term "skill" (meaning a spell attack or ability) where is the skill (ability, mastery, aptitude) in playing GW?

Is it in clicking the buttons at the correct times in the correct sequence?

Is it in selecting the correct "skills" for a synergistic build?

In truth I can't accept either as skills, the builds are all posted and button clicking is a meager skill at best(and one I'd not be so proud of) particularilys since there are but eight at a time

Do some click buttons better than others? If so is that grounds for such hubris?

*uses Mantra of Flame*

nightrunner · Nov 03, 2006, 06:46 AM // 06:46

It's using the right skill at the right time, in the right place, and on the right target. Sounds simple, but you can say "all soccer is is kicking a ball into a big net," too.

Bankai · Nov 03, 2006, 07:18 AM // 07:18

I'll give an example.

Let's take two guilds. One is in the top hundred. One is at rank 1000.

They're in a battle, and one player is using a shock warrior. They're both using the same build. They both start by attacking the monk. However, the opponent notices the enemy is attacking their monk, and retreats. The top hundred will notice that he's overextending, and will retreat. The one at 1000 will keep attacking.

Then they both have their adrenaline up. 1000 immediately unloads his chain. top hundred will preserve his adrenaline to the moment it's right.

The top hundred will use his healing sig when he has taken 70 damage. The 1000 will use it when he has 25% of his hp left.

These kinds of differences are the true meaning of skill. And since when is an FPS NOT clicking the shoot button at the correct time?

Thom Bangalter · Nov 03, 2006, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bankai

I'll give an example.

Let's take two guilds. One is in the top hundred. One is at rank 1000.

They're in a battle, and one player is using a shock warrior. They're both using the same build. They both start by attacking the monk. However, the opponent notices the enemy is attacking their monk, and retreats. The top hundred will notice that he's overextending, and will retreat. The one at 1000 will keep attacking.

Then they both have their adrenaline up. 1000 immediately unloads his chain. top hundred will preserve his adrenaline to the moment it's right.

The top hundred will use his healing sig when he has taken 70 damage. The 1000 will use it when he has 25% of his hp left.

These kinds of differences are the true meaning of skill. And since when is an FPS NOT clicking the shoot button at the correct time?

This post wins the thread.

Patrograd · Nov 03, 2006, 10:15 AM // 10:15

if there is no skill, what differentiates teams running identical builds, and most GvG builds are at the least very similar concepts, and given the current searing flames abuse almost identical in construction

And yet, some teams win, all the time or near enough, and some teams lose, all the time or near enough, and some teams are somewhere in between. The only difference between these teams is skill and experience

JR · Nov 03, 2006, 12:20 PM // 12:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

So, aside from the blatant equivocation of the term "skill" (meaning a spell attack or ability) where is the skill (ability, mastery, aptitude) in playing GW?

This page has been open in a Firefox tab for most of this morning, whilst I pondered on the best way to put it.

The simplest way to explain it (possibly too simple) is just knowing how to play against a particular opponent to punish them for weaknesses. Knowing how to play around situations where they have Rock/Paper/Scissored your build. And by this I am not in any way talking about the skills on your bar, or your team mates bars, but what you actually do.

For example, a GvG we played last night. We fought a team at the stand and due to the defensive 'sponge' nature of their flag team we were unable to get kills initially. At the same time they had a split in our base that was killing NPCs. We reacted badly to the split at first, losing Knights and taking a team death, but shortly after recovering and pushing them out. It was still fairly early on in the match we had the time to recover and regain position.

However, the match was drawing on and things were looking grim with VoD on it's way. Neither side had any particular advantage in morale, but they had a definate NPC advantage with Archers and Knights down in our base. We do not run a VoD oriented build, so this was a problem.

So at this point we were looking seriously at how to push them into making a mistake and capitalizing on it. We thought about the split they had made up untill now, banking on it being a static split that they would be used to, and decided to proactively split on them at a time that would be critical. We run a very flexible build that can split in a number of ways, so we could put them in a position where their usual split would not be effective and they would be forced to make a rushed decision which often leads to mistakes.

We held off at the stand for a while, as we wanted to leave the split late enough that they would have as little time as possible to correct any mistake they made. It seemed our assumption was correct as they split badly and we got the advantage as planned. Ended up breaking them in both places at about 18 minutes in and finishing the match shortly afterwards.

moriz · Nov 03, 2006, 02:42 PM // 14:42

here's another example involving arguably the most skilled players in GW: The Last Pride (aka EvIL).

they were fighting on the Druid's Isle. they were testing out a new build (I still don't know what it actually was, but that's not the point), and their opponents were running a mass degen build. by VoD, EvIL was down massively on morale, but still had most of their npcs. so what did they do? they made a full 8-man push into their opponent's base via the vine bridge. obviously, their opponents chased them. EvIL then set up a 3-man bodyblock on the vine bridge, trapping most of their opponents in a deadly crossfire between the 3-man bodyblock and EvIL's NPC's, while EvIL's warriors made a bee-line towards their opponent's guild lord. they wiped their opponents, who were holding a massive morale advantage, in about 10 seconds, and proceeded to easily take down their guild lord. by the 22 minute mark.

if you do not consider that pure skill, i don't know what you actually believe then.

Byron · Nov 03, 2006, 03:19 PM // 15:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightrunner

It's using the right skill at the right time, in the right place, and on the right target. Sounds simple, but you can say "all soccer is is kicking a ball into a big net," too.

Very much QFT. Broad strategies and ingenuity play a role as well, IMO.

Wasteland Squidget · Nov 03, 2006, 09:36 PM // 21:36

The thing to understand about Guild Wars is that everything major that happens in a match is a chain of events. There were a lot of little plays and events leading up to it. For example:

We broke their team at the flagstand. Why? Their monks ran out of energy. Why? Because we had heavy degen and D-shotted their Heal Party. Why? Because our ranger could extend up to hit their ele who had been spamming in the back. Why? Because we'd been able to play agressively and drop their footmen so our ranger could move around freely. Why? Because we double-ran a flag so our runner could stay at the stand and help in the offensive push. Why? Because their offense was weak enough that we were able to lose a man from the stand long enough to double-run. Why? Because their build was set up to only get kills through adrenal spike, which we could counter through defensive play and coordinated blackouts. Why? Because...and on and on and on. The largest events in the match inevitably come down to a bunch of small plays that the players barely notice, and observers never do.

On another level, there's a lot of individual decision making that goes on. Say you're a mesmer and your team makes an offensive push - you have to decide how and where it will be most effective to use your skills. Should you Surge their monks to try to spread more damage and deny crucial energy? Should you throw Diversion on their warrior hate to try to take out Blinding Flash and give your warriors an easier time? Which member of their team is most vulnerable to shutdown? When is the best time to use Blackout? These aren't easy questions, and a mesmer player has to answer them correctly within a split second for his team's push to be successful.

Thus, calling a team skilled really means three things:

-The individuals on their team have excellent decision-making and know what to do in any given situation.

-As a whole, the team is good at creating quick and effective offensive
chains that become major threats quickly. The sooner a chain of events becomes a major threat to the other team, the sooner it becomes dangerous, doubly so if it makes them lose permanent resources (like morale boosts and NPCs.)

-The team is equally good at disrupting the opponent's attack chains before they become threatening. When you play against a much better team it feels like they're always countering anything you try, before you even think of it. What they're really doing is countering the beginnings of your strategies before they ever become anything threatening. You might not even realize that double-running the next flag could lead to an offensive push that drops their footmen, but they will and they'll nip it in the bud before you can get anywhere.

Edit: Adds - This is also the reason why people say that spike doesn't require any skill. Spike doesn't involve attack chains or individuals making decisions or minor events being chained into major ones. You get the target and you press a button, and then the person dies. While a balanced build is setting up their chains and strategies over time, a spike team is just getting kills by counting down from 3 with no other preperation. The vital importance of res sigs (and DP to a lesser extent) in GvG makes this strategy incredibly powerful, but it's also pathetically easy to take part in. 7 monkeys + caller = top 20 guild as a result.

The one downside to all this is observers. Guild Wars is a really skill-based game, but the nature of plays make it almost impossible for a casual observer to have any idea what's going on. I'm often don't manage to identify plays much before they become major events when watching observer mode, and I'm a fairly experienced GvGer. Someone in the lower levels of play would watch those matches and have a hard time figuring out anything that was going on, beyond "This team just took a death, and this other team just boosted."

Symbol · Nov 03, 2006, 09:39 PM // 21:39

Speaking of individual skill, I'd have to say the biggest component can be summed up in two words. Situational awareness.

Player skill in GW is all about being able to take in a lot of information at once and making fast, accurate decisions based upon that information. Of course that's not something that's apparent while watching in observer mode, so it leads people to believe that GW play is all about pushing buttons.

shardfenix · Nov 03, 2006, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

I've been playing Guildwars since Prophecies release. I've played fps games since Doom. I played MTG(competitively) for many years. Guildwars PVP was touted as a "skill based" game.

MtG for the freakin win!

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

So, aside from the blatant equivocation of the term "skill" (meaning a spell attack or ability) where is the skill (ability, mastery, aptitude) in playing GW?

Obviously in the elite missions. Those are like really hard to do with less than 3 people in the group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LockerLoad

In truth I can't accept either as skills, the builds are all posted and button clicking is a meager skill at best(and one I'd not be so proud of) particularilys since there are but eight at a time

Do some click buttons better than others? If so is that grounds for such hubris?

*uses Mantra of Flame*

I guess flaming from me is 50% less effective against you and gives you energy :/
The "Skill" you speak of used to be in Guild wars, somewhere between when spirit spamming got nerfed and when GW:F was released. Between then, the only builds that saw play were a few spike builds, a lot of balance, and old IWAY. Each had its counters, and none really won significantly more than the others. Fire eles kept getting buffs because nobody used them.

Then came Guild Wars Factions, with its 1-man spiking assassin and its 2X aggro-range prot ritualists. Iway became godly with its ability to ignore enchantments, smite became invincible by giving its monks infinite energy and constant 60 dps, touch rangers got a second vamp touch, and fire eles got a buff (again).

GW:F paved the way for many builds which take as much skill as it takes to put a water-bird above your keyboard and making it peck your keyboard. Fire eles also got yet another buff.

However, with the release of nightfall, all of those builds have been nerfed to the point where nobody plays them anymore (in addition to HA being 6-man teams.) Fire eles got another buff...they can now do 119 DPS with 3 skills.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that a build which requires "skill" requires each player having a different, non-brainless job in battle. It's easy pressing 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2 or C+spacebar over and over again, and it pissed people off because it allowed complete morons to beat people who were actually trying to play the game. I blame the fame system. All people want to do is farm as much fame/rating they can as quickly as they can, as easily as they can. PvP isn't fun anymore because nobody wants it to be.

TheOneMephisto · Nov 04, 2006, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Wasn't shard and his ideas that everything is overpowered banned already?

As others have said, there's many things like knowing what to do, what skills to use, when/on what to use them. Then there's other things like knowing how to strafe, position yourself correctly, use LOS, kite, etc. Then you also have to be able to know all the aspects of strategy that go into a successful game, how to counter splits and send off your own splits, counter/control movement, when to push and when to fall back, and many other things.

Teh Mighty Warrior · Nov 04, 2006, 02:39 AM // 02:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by shardfenix

MtG for the freakin win!

Obviously in the elite missions. Those are like really hard to do with less than 3 people in the group.

I guess flaming from me is 50% less effective against you and gives you energy :/
The "Skill" you speak of used to be in Guild wars, somewhere between when spirit spamming got nerfed and when GW:F was released. Between then, the only builds that saw play were a few spike builds, a lot of balance, and old IWAY. Each had its counters, and none really won significantly more than the others. Fire eles kept getting buffs because nobody used them.

Then came Guild Wars Factions, with its 1-man spiking assassin and its 2X aggro-range prot ritualists. Iway became godly with its ability to ignore enchantments, smite became invincible by giving its monks infinite energy and constant 60 dps, touch rangers got a second vamp touch, and fire eles got a buff (again).

GW:F paved the way for many builds which take as much skill as it takes to put a water-bird above your keyboard and making it peck your keyboard. Fire eles also got yet another buff.

However, with the release of nightfall, all of those builds have been nerfed to the point where nobody plays them anymore (in addition to HA being 6-man teams.) Fire eles got another buff...they can now do 119 DPS with 3 skills.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that a build which requires "skill" requires each player having a different, non-brainless job in battle. It's easy pressing 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2 or C+spacebar over and over again, and it pissed people off because it allowed complete morons to beat people who were actually trying to play the game. I blame the fame system. All people want to do is farm as much fame/rating they can as quickly as they can, as easily as they can. PvP isn't fun anymore because nobody wants it to be.

Why are you whining in all of your posts?

LockerLoad · Nov 04, 2006, 02:54 AM // 02:54

Thanks for voicing your opinions peeps.

Such a tolerant crowd here today. Although I really wasn't trolling I expected to be char-broiled by angry GW fanboys for my irreverent question.

Allow me to preface my remarks by saying I truly do enjoy(mostly) GW PVP despite the blatant play balance problems. I play several PVP games Including various FPS and RTS titles, all have their flaws.

I agree that some teams dominate GW PVP as related in several anecdotes in this thread and yet I suspect it has more to do with communication, organization and planning than ought else.

To relate one of my own anecdotal experiences, when I began playing again after an absence of 6 months I owned a whole team in R/A solo with my troll farming W/Mo build which I forgot to change... It took little skill. Just dumb luck that I faced a 4 warrior team. I'm sure they clicked their buttons on time. A friend who plays WoW exclusively happened to be watching and consequently purchased GW since I seemed to be having so much fun.

On another occasion in an unranked guild match I survived until respawn alone and grievously outnumbered in the enemy base after my whole team died to a trap/nuke team. Additionally I killed several opponents solo while doing so. Ya gotta love plague touch, iway and wild blow

As much as I'd like to claim my 1337 skillz were to thank I know better.

Sure I didn't make any blunders on either occasion but it was just the right combos both times. My rock to their scissors.

I'll concede a modicum of skill for clicking the right buttons in the right sequence at the right times as stated in my initial post.

To clarify some points.

Skills required for GW:
Basic manual dexterity
Visual acuity
Identification
Correlation
Anticipation
Reflex

IMO, no different from WoW NWN etc.

These same skills are required to play MtG excepting reflex.

For FPS one also requires: Hand-Eye coordination

I've chosen to omit strategy as this is an element of any game, although as JR points out this is a crucial component of Guild matches.

Appropriate reaction has also been omitted as this seems to go w/o saying as this is situational and can't really be called a skill, can it?

Methinks GW is no more skill based than any other RPG with PVP, and somewhat less skill based than any FPS with manual aiming.

GW hardly compares to soccer(or any other sport) which requires a plethora of physical skills in addition to all those stated above.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightrunner

It's using the right skill at the right time, in the right place, and on the right target. Sounds simple, but you can say "all soccer is is kicking a ball into a big net," too.

And I must question this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bankai

And since when is an FPS NOT clicking the shoot button at the correct time

please re-read my post as I made no such claim.

Legendary Shiz · Nov 04, 2006, 06:44 AM // 06:44

One thing I didn't see get overly mentioned is character position.

GW is tough to really explain what skill is. But you can tell the difference between a good player, and a poor player. And the way to tell isn't their bars, but the way they use said bar.

Thom · Nov 04, 2006, 06:55 AM // 06:55

Guild Wars is a great game mostly due to strategic depth. An interesting fluxuating meta-game that forces people to be somewhat fresh in the decisions they make. Watching Guild Wars or playing it at a low level is like watching football or playing it at a low level. You really don't know how much you are missing, until you've spent significant time with the game.

As far as tactical skill goes, team coordination and communication is huge. Getting everyone on the same page is the hardest thing for a young team. Sometimes you'll have a leader with a brilliant strategic call but some young monk will be standing back picking his nose. A good team will automatically know what to do in "normal" situations and a team leader will anticipate "big moves".

Guildwars can be played on two dimensions, skill play/micro and objective play/macro. Top teams are good in both dimensions. Often you'll get pugs or spike teams with great micro, yet horrible macro. Many of my guild teams have had mediocre micro, but great macro. That is to say, we'd lose heads up most of the time, but we'd throw three different splits over the course of a match, manufacture morale boosts and win in VoD. There are also meta-game strategies, come in both varieties taking advantage of skills and movement inflexiblities in the meta-game.

I really want to know what the blatant play balance problems are. I know some skills suck, but no one is forcing you to use those skills. Some classes are more useful than others, but there are remains a huge array of potential builds. Spike and super pressure really isn't imbalanced, it just rather tedious and require some awareness to beat. If you're entering PvP without knowing how you're going to approach a spike team or pressure heavy build, you have already lost the battle. Once you wrestle control of the match aways from those types of builds you can win. Notice that a spike team has yet to make a major impact in tournement play and normally post lower winning percentages than top balanced teams (iQ, TE, WM,...).

Dragannia · Nov 04, 2006, 07:16 AM // 07:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

Notice that a spike team has yet to make a major impact in tournement play and normally post lower winning percentages than top balanced teams (iQ, TE, WM,...).

I wouldn't say so. EvIL, for example, at least for a lot of their seasons, were pretty much pure spike.

shardfenix · Nov 04, 2006, 08:04 AM // 08:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

Wasn't shard and his ideas that everything is overpowered banned already?

I like the most recent balance update. I don't really see anything overpowered except the retarted searing flames build, which can't touch you if you bring barriers or mantra of flame or QZ or extinguish or a ritualist or...
I am pleased with the GvG metagame anyway, HA is gonna be stale no matter what because of the 6-man teams. It's just good to see that the only build that is considered gimmick right now is recognizable because it is so blatantly obvious that it takes no skill whatsoever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Mighty Warrior

Why are you whining in all of your posts?

Why are you bringing edrama to a good thread?

Riotgear · Nov 04, 2006, 08:13 AM // 08:13

The whole "skill" campaign is basically there to contrast against things like World of Warcraft where the outcome is ultimately determined by one of two things: Whether or not it's a guild premade versus a PUG, and who's spent more time killing raid bosses.

I thought that much should be obvious. What's left is really just two things: Tactics (preparation and choices, including build/character setup) and skill (reaction and execution).

Things like spike teams and IWAY are an occurance in practically every competitive game. There is always SOMETHING you can leverage which works very well on inexperienced players and doesn't require very much experience itself to execute. But realistically, there are team setups that can beat ALL of the gimmick builds, and when a gimmick build becomes too powerful for that, it chews on the nerf bat at the end of the ladder season.

Thom · Nov 04, 2006, 08:21 AM // 08:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragannia

I wouldn't say so. EvIL, for example, at least for a lot of their seasons, were pretty much pure spike.

Yeah, EvIL is a noob spike team. Way to ignore the substance of the post.