Curse

Shortyafter · Nov 18, 2006, 05:41 AM // 05:41

Lately the amount of time I can/want to invest in GW has been fading. With that, it's becoming increasingly harder to get in any worthwhile playtime at all. As implied, my only real interest is GvG.

Okay, so to start off I'm just going to tell you that I havn't been in a real, stable, and/or active guild for about 4-5 months. Before then, I was in one guild for around 8 months, and I have been in a few other "real" guilds that didn't last quite as long. Since then I've just not been happy with any guild. Call me bad, picky, whatever, just stating the facts. Anyway, since then I've mostly been PUGing.

In the past, when I was off school, I had plenty of time to help organize PUGs. But now I don't. I don't have time to wait around for PUGs to form or to start my own. It just takes way to much time and it's very sporadic as to when they will form.

One problem, IMO, is the current 4 member system. My proposal is to remove the 4 member requirement all together, or at least reduce it to 2 or something. The reason it takes so long to form PUGs, imo, is because you have to find people willing and able to member. Finding guests is usually the easy part. As of now, the only solution to the, member problem is to have large PUG guilds with dedicated PUG members, but at the moment there seems to be only a couple of these open to the community/#gwp. On top of that, the larger one is becoming less active by the day. By removing the member requirement, you can have anyone at any time forming PUGs.

Now obviously the 4 member system was implemented for a reason, to stop smurfing. But with such short seasons, is smurfing even an issue? Some also might argue that removing the 4 member requirement would allow real guilds to guest excessive amounts of top-class players. Could this be an issue? Sure. But on the other hand, a competitive guild would want to field the same core 8 daily, rather than guesting everyone.

A second fix I see would be to remove the ridiculous 100g guesting price. Personally, I never PvE. All my money comes from winning a sigil from Halls and selling it (which is even worse now with the new HA, but that's a different issue). Or I can just beg for some. Either way, why should I have to do something I don't want to do just go GvG? If the 100g cost for membering someone is to prevent invite spamming in Ascalon AD1, I can understand that, but come on, what's the point of it costing money to guest someone? What's gonna happen, I might invite 20 people to my guild hall? Oh no.

On the issue of gold/GvG, having to buy/win/beg for sigils just to change halls is quite annoying. The idea of the sigil is alright for PvE guilds, but for people who really need halls (GvGers), it's dumb. Maybe we could compromise and make the sigil a 1-time purchase. After you buy your first hall with a sigil, you can change your hall at will, for free. By removing the cost of guesting/changing halls, PUGing becomes a whole lot easier.

Coming from someone who has been PUGing for the past 4-5 months, I think that easier PUGing is a good thing. However, I understand that some think otherwise. PUGs full of high-ranked players could tank guilds at a similar/lower rank of the PUG guild. I don't really know much about this issue, so if anyone has any input on it please post.

Maybe I'm going about this the wrong way. The point is, GvG needs to be made quicker and more accessible. I don't care how, these are just my suggestions. I didn't want to start this off all emo, but yes, I am quitting Guildwars because I'm putting way to much in for to little reward. If you want to know why I bothered posting this if I quit, it's because 1. I'm bored, 2. I want this issue to be raised so that it might finally be addressed by Anet.

So any thoughts or comments, please post.

Byron · Nov 18, 2006, 06:01 AM // 06:01

I see and almost agree with the main point of your argument. But, I definitely think some sphere of play needs to be held above the rest, and I am very glad that it is GvG. I'm afraid to say that PUGing is for the other arenas of play, not for GvG, IMHO. I very much know and understand the pains of both finding a steady GvG guild and acquiring a core spot on it, but it's part of the hierarchy of PvP.

If that hierarchy were to change so dramatically that you could effectively PUG GvG, I think everyone in this forum would up and quit GW. (isn't that right, JR?)

Thom Bangalter · Nov 18, 2006, 06:10 AM // 06:10

People already do effectively pug gvg. I'm pretty sure gwp was ranked like 8 at the beginning of the season, but things die off for pugs once the cut off date for tournament eligibility springs up.

And GVG is already accessible. If you suck you play other teams that suck. If you're good you play other good teams.

i love pugging, it's fun. especially if it's for champ points.

thecoanrtist · Nov 18, 2006, 06:11 AM // 06:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

I see and almost agree with the main point of your argument. But, I definitely think some sphere of play needs to be held above the rest, and I am very glad that it is GvG. I'm afraid to say that PUGing is for the other arenas of play, not for GvG, IMHO. I very much know and understand the pains of both finding a steady GvG guild and acquiring a core spot on it, but it's part of the hierarchy of PvP.

If that hierarchy were to change so dramatically that you could effectively PUG GvG, I think everyone in this forum would up and quit GW. (isn't that right, JR?)

The problem is that the other forms of pvp are PEICES OF RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOING SHIT. GvG is the only worthwhile one, and it needs to more accessible.

I mean c'mon, look at the facts:
RA: LUCK or cheat by spike join
TA: BUILD WARS + LUCK no matter which way you spin it
hero arena: WORST IDEA EVER
HA: GIMMICK TIME - quick reaction and metagame knowledge at most
GvG: substantive; better than a good game of chess (if you don't find chess boring)

not a flame, just quickly putting out my opinion.

Shortyafter · Nov 18, 2006, 06:22 AM // 06:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

I see and almost agree with the main point of your argument. But, I definitely think some sphere of play needs to be held above the rest, and I am very glad that it is GvG. I'm afraid to say that PUGing is for the other arenas of play, not for GvG, IMHO. I very much know and understand the pains of both finding a steady GvG guild and acquiring a core spot on it, but it's part of the hierarchy of PvP.

If that hierarchy were to change so dramatically that you could effectively PUG GvG, I think everyone in this forum would up and quit GW. (isn't that right, JR?)

I understand the argument here. If GvG is really to be above all other forms of PvP, then I think Anet at least needs to implement some other arena/system for more casual play but in a similar manner. The old 8v8 Tombs/HA was a start. It was still a joke, but the change to 6v6/heroway wasn't exactly a step in the right direction. If they improved HA signifigantly, or made a form of PvP similar to it, then I'd be happy with that. Specific changes to HA should be discussed elsewhere, however.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

People already do effectively pug gvg. I'm pretty sure gwp was ranked like 8 at the beginning of the season, but things die off for pugs once the cut off date for tournament eligibility springs up.

I disagree. I've been pugging with Black (the leader of gwp, owner of #gwp) for 4-5 months, in TLA, IDK, Purp, and GWP. As I said, lately, I don't have time to play when GWP does. More recently, Black's becoming less active on GW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

And GVG is already accessible. If you suck you play other teams that suck. If you're good you play other good teams.

Here's the problem. It's nearly impossible to find 11 other players who are good and active. There's plenty of active guilds that just aren't good. If I've been in high ranked guilds, I'm not going to join a crappy guild just because they play actively. It's not fun.

I'm not new to GvG either. I've been in decent guilds, I've been in the PvP hierarchy, so I know what's its like. It's just an issue of having less time to devote to GW now.

Wasteland Squidget · Nov 18, 2006, 07:51 AM // 07:51

PuG GvG is great fun. You can play any build you like and roll people over. You don't have to care about having counters to every gimmick because if you run into a build counter you can /resign and get into the next match. You can release a lot of the tension and worry you inevitably build up playing real high-level GvG.

That said, playing against PuGs pretty much sucks. They normally have a lot of people going through them, which means they tend to be low-ranked. As a result, you can play a challenging game against a PuG of top players and only gain +5, or even take -25. PuG guilds that constantly change members breaks the ELO system and causes people who are playing seriously to lose inordinate amounts of rating.

I completely agree that PuGing should be encouraged - it's a really fun way to play the game and complements real GvG extremely well. However, I think what we really need is unrated GvG, so people who want to PuG or screw around can play their way without damaging other people's ratings. PuGs don't usually give a crap about their rating anyway, and it would allow people to GvG in a relaxed environment.

There are issues though. If you don't give champ points for unrated GvG people will just continue doing rated PuGs, and if you do give champ points it will devalue the title. I don't think the devaluation of champ points is particularly important though - they're already a symbol of PuG grinding and I don't really see why that needs to change.

Patrograd · Nov 18, 2006, 10:45 AM // 10:45

Sorry to hear you're not playing so much these days Cid, one of the best players I ever had the pleasure of playing with.

I dont know the solution to the PUG issue, I can see both sides of the argument. A tournament style format perhaps, on random GvG maps, with the fourth consecutive win being for some physical reward like a sigil, or a nice skinned weapon or armour so you could pimp your PVP toon against another team that had won three in a row?

stueyman2099 · Nov 18, 2006, 10:49 AM // 10:49

I think an unrated random opponent button would be cool. Could take the 4 member req. out of it even.

Lews · Nov 18, 2006, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Unrated random opponent would be cool

Shortyafter · Nov 18, 2006, 04:14 PM // 16:14

The problem with unrated GvG/PUGing is the lack of a reward. There has to be some kind of tangible reward, not just playing for the fun of it. Black (leader of [gwp]) actually took the rank of the guild seriously. It makes you feel as if you're achieving something when you're climbing up the ladder, PUG or not. Even in HA/Tombs, the fame system, as broken as it is, made you feel as if you were getting somewhere everytime you won. Not to mention the chance of winning halls.

Basically, if they implement unrated GvGing, they need to include some kind of reward system. If there's no motivator to get people to play it, then people will just continue to PUG on the rated ladder. Something like Patro said would be a step in the right direction (hey Patro, thanks).

Ec]-[oMaN · Nov 18, 2006, 05:12 PM // 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lews

Unrated random opponent would be cool

Always wanted this feature.
Signed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

That said, playing against PuGs pretty much sucks. They normally have a lot of people going through them, which means they tend to be low-ranked. As a result, you can play a challenging game against a PuG of top players and only gain +5, or even take -25. PuG guilds that constantly change members breaks the ELO system and causes people who are playing seriously to lose inordinate amounts of rating.

Yea, this can be a pain.

Drewfense · Nov 18, 2006, 08:18 PM // 20:18

It would be fun to have more PuG GvG (by lowering the requirement), but as Squidget said, it would only further distort the ladder. I do think they should add a monetary reward for GvGing. GvG can be very expensive having to send out guests and purchase Sigils. PvPers shouldn't have to HA or PvE just to play (the reverse of that arguement is PvEers have to HA to play...but thats somewhat of a shitty retort and is flawed). I was initially glad to hear about the candy cane weapons, thinking they would actually bring gold into gvg, but it sounds like they will be personalized so QQ.

The only way to make money in GvG is selling pretty capes =/

Wasteland Squidget · Nov 18, 2006, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Candy Cane weapons won't be personalized, but you can get them in GvG anyway.

Cid - what if you could keep getting Champ points for unrated GvG? Would that be enough?

Farin · Nov 18, 2006, 09:00 PM // 21:00

It would. But Cid is just a w**** imo <3.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shortyafter

A second fix I see would be to remove the ridiculous 100g guesting price. Personally, I never PvE. All my money comes from winning a sigil from Halls and selling it (which is even worse now with the new HA, but that's a different issue). Or I can just beg for some. Either way, why should I have to do something I don't want to do just go GvG? If the 100g cost for membering someone is to prevent invite spamming in Ascalon AD1, I can understand that, but come on, what's the point of it costing money to guest someone? What's gonna happen, I might invite 20 people to my guild hall? Oh no.

I agree so much.. Plus to fix the invite spamming issue A.net could give players the ability to disable invites directed towards them at will. Simple and effective if you ask me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shortyafter

Coming from someone who has been PUGing for the past 4-5 months, I think that easier PUGing is a good thing. However, I understand that some think otherwise. PUGs full of high-ranked players could tank guilds at a similar/lower rank of the PUG guild. I don't really know much about this issue, so if anyone has any input on it please post.

Although being tanked by a r100/200ish PuG Guild is pretty upsetting, it's basically practice and experience you're adquiring. It'll eventually get to the point where a PuG (which by no means should be as organized as a guild) will NOT be able to beat you. And honestly, I'm already used to it so meh.

Shortyafter · Nov 18, 2006, 09:18 PM // 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

Candy Cane weapons won't be personalized, but you can get them in GvG anyway.

Cid - what if you could keep getting Champ points for unrated GvG? Would that be enough?

If they remove the member req. then yeah, I guess. But if you require that they be 1200+, then they have to farm the rated ladder first anyway. If you don't, then champ points become even easier to obtain then they already are. It'd have to be implenented differently I think, but yeah, it's a start.

Byron · Nov 19, 2006, 07:05 AM // 07:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by stueyman2099

I think an unrated random opponent button would be cool. Could take the 4 member req. out of it even.

Q.F.F.T.

xipe · Nov 19, 2006, 10:35 PM // 22:35

Well i think the PUG should over, for example a guild it's starting in gvg and they are getting to rank 150-200 for example and then they get a match vs a PUG guild 2000 and they lost, ouch -25 it sucks so if Anet really cares the ladder they should over with it because is not fun at all.

Novita · Nov 20, 2006, 12:01 AM // 00:01

Resigning is also nice. But only WM players do when 'pugvging'. Theyre lovely, aint they?

Fanta · Nov 24, 2006, 06:06 AM // 06:06

If anything, they should increase the members to 5 or 6, not reduce it. Pugging may be fun for the people doing it, but not for those playing against them. A pug has nothing to lose while a full rostered guild can potentially lose 20 or more rating. If anything, just do the unrated random thing.

Program Ftw · Nov 24, 2006, 11:06 AM // 11:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shortyafter

Maybe I'm going about this the wrong way. The point is, GvG needs to be made quicker and more accessible. I don't care how, these are just my suggestions. I didn't want to start this off all emo, but yes, I am quitting Guildwars because I'm putting way to much in for to little reward.

QQ more? GvG is fine, nothing wrong with it. If you need money to guest some one, go earn it.

[QUOTE=Shortyafter]
If you want to know why I bothered posting this if I quit, it's because 1. I'm bored, 2. I want this issue to be raised so that it might finally be addressed by Anet.
QUOTE]

So quitting Guild Wars will make them change this? It's like jumping off a bridge and dying in protest because theres too much salt in your Hotdogs, no one will really care (apart from the people who could get the money from insurance).

Thanks,
Program~