Curse

yesitsrob · Feb 27, 2008, 07:54 AM // 07:54

I still find the game to be a lot of fun as long as I don't play it for too long at once. I find it very difficult to take seriously as a competitive game, it had the potential to be one at one time but it's really quite a joke when it comes to it now. It's still fun to win at times, but then you'll face sin splits and derv spikes (or other gimmick of the month) reminding you why it is actually bad competitively.

Akaraxle · Feb 27, 2008, 09:05 AM // 09:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

If they don't scatter, they die, and their pressure goes away. Plus, the NPCs have extra attack skills now so that makes up for the lost time, no?

~Z

Think about it: if they scattered like in that infamous PvE update, then they'd stop attacking. Then you could toss a long-lasting PBAoE on them, or just splinter them, and suddenly they would turn into nothing but useless butter. Now they don't scatter, but they still have time to pewpew your face and force prots from your side until you beat them into Troll Unguent mode.

They could only scatter once, but at this point you might as well have them come to the stand scattered already. You could disable their aggro until they get to their proper positions so you can't ball them up, but what if you can push with your team and your cripshot/water ele just snares the shit out of them while they're doing nothing? Or a split jumps on them as soon as they start moving and kill them with no risk at all?

You could add an NPC that helps healing them and remove their troll/healsig so they don't stop attacking, but wasn't the second bodyguard removed to prevent turtling games? Even so, you'd have to carefully tweak the NPC skillbars so they don't become too fragile or too good.

Dealing with AI is not as trivial as it sounds. My opinion, once again, is that for ANet it simply isn't convenient to invest any significant amount time into analyzing such issues and they go for quick workarounds instead.

Warskull · Jul 14, 2008, 09:33 PM // 21:33

How many other MMOs have you played? How many other competitive RPG style games have you played? At most one, because Guild Wars was the first. Yes, there are a lot of issues that emerged throughout Guild Wars. Many of them did stem from A.net kow-towing to PvErs at the expense of PvPers. However, no other game until WoW has had remotely competitive PvP and the reason WoW's Competitive environment has surpassed GW isn't because of better design or balance, but because of better support. Outside of WoW and Guild Wars no other RPG style game I can think of has even attempted to have competitive play.

Furthermore, Guilty Gear XX is a freaking work of art. It has its flaws (the timings of FRCs are nothing short of insane), but it is easily one of the greatest 2D fighters ever made in a genre that has been all about competitive play since Street Fighter II.

Guild Wars was a great first try. A.net didn't pay proper respect to the competitive environment and the PvP until the damage was already done. Balth faction came too late, balth faction became reasonable too late, Factions was balanced too late, Nightfall was balanced too late, the new PvP character system came too late, the ladder was frozen too early, ATs came too late, a real balancing schedule came too late. With every one of these mistakes the highly competitive player base whittled away and even if you have the perfect game the competitive game lives and dies off its competitive community.

The thing is, if you look at the game over time, they have moved towards where the game needed to be. If the game was released in the state it is now, it would be hailed as a work of genius. Guild Wars itself is too far gone and has collapsed under its own weight. Fixing the game would essentially require a massive redesign that essentially would be making GW2. Even if you fixed the balance so many base mechanical problems exist (the game can realistically go on forever without VoD, it doesn't end naturally so you always play for VoD.)

For a low grind compeitive RPG Guild Wars is still the only game in town.

Syntonic · Jul 14, 2008, 11:08 PM // 23:08

Not to speak against Warskull's experience, there have been several other MMOGs and lesser formats that have attracted a PvP crowd. UO was the first modern MMOG and featured PvP ganking at it's worst which did include some aspects of group based combat. Diablo II also attracted somewhat of a duel styled PvP but it wasn't team based and thus really shouldn't be too considered. Asherson's Call was also touted around for it's PvP system but I thought there was far more flaws in that when compared to GW. Granted, I think there is the same underlying issue in WoW PvP when compared to GW. Guess it all comes down to the whole low grind and competitive comment Warskull made...

The Fallen One · Jul 15, 2008, 02:03 AM // 02:03

So, basically the original post's thread of argument boils down to: "I don't like Guild Wars PvP anymore." Many people don't. I don't think that the DESIGN has anything to do with the lack of serious competitive play in this game. It has to do with designer decisions, but who needs redundancy? I'd just like to input on top of everything else here that I tried Fury. For 3 days. It wasn't worth the 5 gigs of space on my hard drive. WoW takes a bunch of grind. FPS games vs. MMORPGs = Chess vs. Monopoly. They don't really even look the same when you think about it.
If you want a more balanced game, why don't you start designing it? Tell me when you're done, and why don't we make it together. Then, why don't we see how imbalanced players can make it in 6 months?
This isn't in a flaming way. Peace.
~Fallen

Warskull · Jul 15, 2008, 06:25 AM // 06:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syntonic

Not to speak against Warskull's experience, there have been several other MMOGs and lesser formats that have attracted a PvP crowd. UO was the first modern MMOG and featured PvP ganking at it's worst which did include some aspects of group based combat. Diablo II also attracted somewhat of a duel styled PvP but it wasn't team based and thus really shouldn't be too considered. Asherson's Call was also touted around for it's PvP system but I thought there was far more flaws in that when compared to GW. Granted, I think there is the same underlying issue in WoW PvP when compared to GW. Guess it all comes down to the whole low grind and competitive comment Warskull made...

Many games have had PvP, but there is a huge difference between PvP and Competitive PvP. Competitive is like FPS where players have an organized system to play against each other, rise and fall in rank based on their player skill, and compete in tournaments in a test to see who is the best.

Using counter-strike as an example, you have pub play where anyone can join a server and teams don't tend to be highly organized. You get to play against whoever is on. While competitive counter-strike you have your Clan of players and field a set six players in a match. You are placed against other highly organized teams and how you perform affects your placing in the season.

World PvP in MMOs is on the same level as pub play. Furthermore it tends to be a test of who gets bored first, who can get the most friends, or who gets the jump on the other person.

Guild Wars had a strong ladder and strong tournaments.

NightOwl · Jul 15, 2008, 01:00 PM // 13:00

Threads like this make me sad. When it first came out it was all about the pvp, or so it seemed to me. Balance updates were frequent and effective.

Things seem to have changed considerably since then and now, most evident by the completely retarded pve/pve skill differences. Whoever thought that up needs a swift kick in the woohoo, and whoever authorized that to go live needs a few of those kicks.

Deleet · Jul 15, 2008, 08:49 PM // 20:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by C2K

To achieve perfect balance is impossible by any standards as nothing can ever be perfectly balanced. ...

This is false. Perfect balance is not impossible. Having identical sides helps a lot. A typical scissor-stone-paper game is perfectly balanced.

kvndoom · Jul 15, 2008, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Anet forgot what made skills balanced when they made the expansion skills. Any skill that was "too good" had a drawback. Energy cost, recharge, cast time, or maybe it was made an elite. Some had other serious drawbacks.

I still believe [Frenzy] is the most balanced skill in the game. It epitomizes perfect balance. The reward is evened out with the risk. I still feel that Frenzy should have been the only IAS the game ever had.

So many skills now are all-reward, no-risk. Compare [wild blow] and [wild strike] when used on their respective professions. The skills accomplish the same thing. One has half the recharge of the other, and absolutely no drawback whatsoever. The other severely punishes its primary class and is thus never used by its owning class. I'd consider Wild Blow semi-balanced, since its recharge got nerfed. Wild Strike is not a balanced skill.

That's just one example, but we've all seen many such cases in the last couple years. The more powerful a skill is, the greater its drawback must be. Prophecies was not perfect, but it had much better balance because the focus on skill design was risk vs. reward. Now all I see is reward without risk. Non-elite skills get buffed to be stronger than elites, and have no drawbacks at all.

Iko · Jul 16, 2008, 12:55 AM // 00:55

Quote:

Anet forgot what made skills balanced when they made the expansion skills. Any skill that was "too good" had a drawback. Energy cost, recharge, cast time, or maybe it was made an elite. Some had other serious drawbacks.

I still believe

Core Frenzy

* 4
* 5

Stance. For 8 seconds, you attack 33% faster but take double damage.

is the most balanced skill in the game. It epitomizes perfect balance. The reward is evened out with the risk. I still feel that Frenzy should have been the only IAS the game ever had.

So many skills now are all-reward, no-risk. Compare

Core Wild Blow

* 8
* 5

Melee Attack. Lose all adrenaline. If it hits, this attack will result in a critical hit and any Stance being used by your target ends. This attack cannot be blocked.

and

Factions Wild Strike

* 4
* 5

Off-Hand Attack. Must follow a lead attack. If it hits, this attack strikes for +10..30..37 damage and any Stance being used by target foe ends. This attack cannot be blocked. (Attrib: Dagger Mastery)

when used on their respective professions. The skills accomplish the same thing. One has half the recharge of the other, and absolutely no drawback whatsoever. The other severely punishes its primary class and is thus never used by its owning class. I'd consider Wild Blow semi-balanced, since its recharge got nerfed. Wild Strike is not a balanced skill.

That's just one example, but we've all seen many such cases in the last couple years. The more powerful a skill is, the greater its drawback must be. Prophecies was not perfect, but it had much better balance because the focus on skill design was risk vs. reward. Now all I see is reward without risk. Non-elite skills get buffed to be stronger than elites, and have no drawbacks at all.

Spiritspam, Smiting, Rangerspike, IWAY, Chainlightningspike, Galeknocklocking, Orders/Aegis even past radarrange were not balanced builds. And they did not promote the afforementioned "risk/reward" formula either, just plain gimmicks. It took several months to fix these builds, balancing was not fast at all. But furthermore there were numerous issues with every single pvp mode in the game* and the support for the competative side of the game was never as good as it should have been (reconnects anyone?).

*-it took 2 years and three months to implement dishonorable into ra. -Teamarena did not get any kind of competative support at all.
-Hall of Heroes featured the most degenerative defensive gameplay for 1 year and 8 months (that is altar capping). At one point you were almost always killed at the end of a Hoh match by Edge of Extinction and were not ale to get your rewards. The current implementation of Heroes ascent is still bad although Anet tried a lot of different efforts (6on6, current hoh, new maps)
- GvG.. Maps not being 100% symetric which led to flag disadvantages of more then 15 seconds on Wizards (or Hunters? Not sure). Catapultmaps being unsuitable for competative play because the catapult is hitting a random location. Catapults are really interesting for competative play. Numerous mapissues (jademap, imperial with guildthief, chokepoints on burning/ backsplitroute, the amount of archers on uncharted is not balanced, highground on corrupted, one gate on frozen can be controlled without moving up that ramp, teleportskills on druids, the effect on weeping stone if retarded (50% chances should not be in a competative game), VoD archer farming.

Riotgear · Jul 16, 2008, 02:03 AM // 02:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iko

Spiritspam, Smiting, Rangerspike, IWAY, Chainlightningspike, Galeknocklocking, Orders/Aegis even past radarrange were not balanced builds. And they did not promote the afforementioned "risk/reward" formula either, just plain gimmicks. It took several months to fix these builds, balancing was not fast at all.

The difference is that after some rounds of balancing, things were at a pretty balanced point. Then Factions came, a few rounds later it was balanced again. Then Nightfall came, and balance just keeps getting more screwed up via Izzy's decision to fight power creep with more power creep.

PallyKali · Jul 16, 2008, 03:15 AM // 03:15

I just came back after not played since there was only Prophecies, and I'm kinda disappointed at the sharp turn the game has taken towards PvE. You see, I play games for PvP. The storyline and grinding aspects never really appealed much to me. (Woohoo I saved the fake world from eternal damnation. Oh look at me I killed the same monster over and over 500,000 times for a year and I'm one of the few people to reach level 1000 hur hur.) They are just tedious obstacles on the path to the meat of the game, the part that interests me; end-game PvP.

Guild Wars was great because the fuzzy junk didn't last long. The most complex, strategic, and team-oriented aspect of the game was PvP. Now the PvE part is so long with all these expansions. Old skills are obsolete now because of new ones, like the example kvndoom gave. There are many similar circumstances like that floating around, and they all just add up to a grind-like PvP experience. I think you guys called it gimmicks or whatever. PvP is so structured and cookie-cut now. It used to be so flexible back when I played.

Deleet · Jul 16, 2008, 06:04 PM // 18:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by kvndoom

Anet forgot what made skills balanced when they made the expansion skills. Any skill that was "too good" had a drawback. Energy cost, recharge, cast time, or maybe it was made an elite. Some had other serious drawbacks.

I still believe [Frenzy] is the most balanced skill in the game. It epitomizes perfect balance. The reward is evened out with the risk. I still feel that Frenzy should have been the only IAS the game ever had.

So many skills now are all-reward, no-risk. Compare [wild blow] and [wild strike] when used on their respective professions. The skills accomplish the same thing. One has half the recharge of the other, and absolutely no drawback whatsoever. The other severely punishes its primary class and is thus never used by its owning class. I'd consider Wild Blow semi-balanced, since its recharge got nerfed. Wild Strike is not a balanced skill.

That's just one example, but we've all seen many such cases in the last couple years. The more powerful a skill is, the greater its drawback must be. Prophecies was not perfect, but it had much better balance because the focus on skill design was risk vs. reward. Now all I see is reward without risk. Non-elite skills get buffed to be stronger than elites, and have no drawbacks at all.

Your example is flawed because wild strike has a drawback. Read the skill description again: "Off-hand attack must follow a lead attack...". That's draw back.

itsvictor · Jul 16, 2008, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deleet

Your example is flawed because wild strike has a drawback. Read the skill description again: "Off-hand attack must follow a lead attack...". That's draw back.

Except you know...its kills blocking stances which allows the rest of the attack chain (hi assassins get royally buttraped by blocking), that's barely a drawback considering the mechanics of the assassin. I always loved the team aspect of Guild Wars but now I've turned away from it (i log in like once every 2-3 days just to talk now but that's not to say I can't land a bull's) mainly because unskilled played is rewarded so much. A lot of opinions shown here are prime of what I expected, high risk=high reward, therefore when you only face the high reward aspects, you know you're doing something right(skilled play). The expansion's power creep and the direction of Izzy's skill balance makes me sad.

kvndoom · Jul 16, 2008, 06:56 PM // 18:56

[Golden Fox Strike] takes away the presumed drawback. I know it has to follow a lead, but it has an unblockable lead (with an extremely easy to meet condition) with the same recharge.

PallyKali · Jul 16, 2008, 07:04 PM // 19:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deleet

Your example is flawed because wild strike has a drawback. Read the skill description again: "Off-hand attack must follow a lead attack...". That's draw back.

Wrong. That's not a risk or a drawback, it's just a required condition to use the skill. You don't lose anything or risk anything.

It's like saying that having to wield an axe to use Eviscerate is a risk/drawback. What are you risking? What are you sacrificing?

Anyways, there are many different kinds of risks/drawbacks/costs in a game. The obvious mechanical ones that directly and immediately effect you; Energy, Health, Adrenaline, Cast Time, Cooldown Time etc. Then the not-so-obvious ones; opportunity, priority, the element of surprise, the fact that spending 1 second doing one thing denies you the possibility of doing anything else.

The thing that should set the best players aside from the average players is that the best players utilize and take advantage of these not-so-obvious elements. Overpowered skills ruin this concept, and thus the people who indulge on these imbalances are on the top of the PvP charts, so to speak. Not the real skilled players.

Which, in turn, shoos away a lot of the PvP population.

zeal101 · Jul 16, 2008, 07:34 PM // 19:34

can somebody tell me why Scythes have inherent AoE dmg? was that a means to balance the "non existant" drawbacks of wielding a scythe having ZOMFG WTF critical dmg?

makosi · Jul 16, 2008, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by PallyKali

Wrong. That's not a risk or a drawback, it's just a required condition to use the skill. You don't lose anything or risk anything.

It's like saying that having to wield an axe to use Eviscerate is a risk/drawback. What are you risking? What are you sacrificing?

Anyways, there are many different kinds of risks/drawbacks/costs in a game. The obvious mechanical ones that directly and immediately effect you; Energy, Health, Adrenaline, Cast Time, Cooldown Time etc. Then the not so obvious ones; opportunity, priority, the element of surprise, the fact that spending 1 second doing one thing denies you the possibility of doing anything else.

This.

It has often confused me as to why rewards are so great for such little achievements on the battlefield. Take, for instance, pre-nerf Black Lotus Strike. The energy gain and skipping of the lead attack was like a reward for succesfully applying a hex to the target. Applying hexes like Shadow Prison is not hard to do and giving the assassin that much energy and, essentially, another skill slot is far too rewarding for such little effort.

Consider interrupts too. Power Leak and Distracting Shot are far too punishing to the target when you consider how many spells take 1 second+ to cast. 20 seconds disable or -16 energy is too much for playing whack-a-mole, which is a child's game. It inadvertently discourages the use of a whole load of skills because people know and expect that interrupt campers will be on their behind.

Wounding Strike is another one of those skills. "Omg, gz. U has an enchantment... hav sum deep wound covered by bleedingz, k?"

InfernalSuffering · Jul 16, 2008, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Did I read that wrong, or did you just compare dshot and wounding strike?

makosi · Jul 16, 2008, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by InfernalSuffering

Did I read that wrong, or did you just compare dshot and wounding strike?

The similarity is that the conditions/requirements of the skills are disproportionate to the 'bonus' attached to them. Nothing else.