Curse

Raynedark · May 14, 2006, 06:57 PM // 18:57

/signed
Its not an alliance battle if you cant communicate or team with your own ally.

Obus · May 14, 2006, 07:31 PM // 19:31

/signed

Thailii Monkey · May 14, 2006, 07:31 PM // 19:31

meh /signed

ubard · May 14, 2006, 07:51 PM // 19:51

/signed for sure.

it was great as 12v12.

but... if heal party only affects your group of four... that really... sucks.

i say leave it at radar range, it was fine

JoDiamonds · May 15, 2006, 12:21 AM // 00:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by iridescentfyre

The way to win Alliance battles is to stick with your 3 teammates, not cluster into a huge group that caps shrines one at a time. Having all 12 on one Party window definitely encouraged that kind of play and was a frustration of mine during the FPE.

That's one of the first fair reasons I've heard of to keep it split up, even though I don't agree with it.

Also, your initial comment is certainly talking about the way it is now, but not necessarily the way it should be. Yes, that's a strategy that wins. Sadly, it's because the UI doesn't support other strategies. Just because it's what wins now doesn't mean the game should be crafted to support that winning strategy.

Quote:

Furthermore its a hell of a lot easier to be a monk NOW, where you don't have to try to heal 11 people, you have to heal 3. During the FPE, you might see someone's healthbar go down and went to heal them only to find that they weren't even in radar distance of you.. and while you're figuring that out, others who are closer to you are dying as well.

Its only harder on monks now if you still think its your job to heal your entire 12-person team.

Here's the thing: You don't realistically have the option anymore.

It's always been true that you can't heal 11 people, and smart monks know not to try.

For both points, it seems like it's just a matter of people having experience and figuring things out. On Friday of the PvE, Alliance Battles were atrocious. No one knew what they were doing and they weren't fun most of the time.

By the time Sunday came around, there were few quitters, and the games were a lot more fun and balanced. That's only three days of play. Just like all other games, especially competitive multiplayer, it takes a little while for things to shake out.

If 12-party teams were still fully supported, I'm pretty sure the level of play would only have risen from where it was. Now it's a dumbed-down, less strategic version. It's like like a 3-man Random Arena where each man is a Team Arena team. Bleh.

I mean, it's better than it not being there. It's just a lot less fun and less strategic than it could be (and should be, in my opinion).

pigdestroyer · May 15, 2006, 08:43 AM // 08:43

/not signed

Cyril Aspect · May 15, 2006, 11:19 PM // 23:19

I am intrigued I did not really think that many people liked Ab's the way they are now.

I for my own part will not even play them anymore. I'd like to add to the petition a note that if they choose not to change it to an other sort of format they should drop the title since alliance battle implies using an alliance for it which clearly is not possible wihtout ninja joining.

Alliance battles the way they are promote almost no teamwork and function more on the I hope my allies are idiots so we can kind of have a chance to win.

I'd lov eit if they went one step farther and made it so they have a random vs. random teams version and anothe rversion wiht completely organized teams of 12.

like random arena vs. team arena.

as it stands now its seriously messed up which can be seen by how few people are ABing

this of course seems to be a factions wide problem with al the competitive misisons but thats another issue.

Loch · May 16, 2006, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Quote:

as it stands now its seriously messed up which can be seen by how few people are ABing

The outpost looks pretty full to me.

Cyril Aspect · May 16, 2006, 06:09 PM // 18:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loch

The outpost looks pretty full to me.

most times i've been around i see 1 district and its not often full

Maybe you play at the one magical time when there 3 districts?

its certainly possible i'm jsut unlucky in my choice of AB times

Kybos · May 16, 2006, 06:28 PM // 18:28

/signed

Andro · May 16, 2006, 06:30 PM // 18:30

/signed
It is really frustrating when you ass a monk see your allies die. But almost cant heal them(atleast difficult), even if your team is at full health. It yust dont make sence....

JoDiamonds · May 16, 2006, 06:58 PM // 18:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyril Aspect

most times i've been around i see 1 district and its not often full

Maybe you play at the one magical time when there 3 districts?

its certainly possible i'm jsut unlucky in my choice of AB times

These comments aren't meaningful unless everyone is talking about the same region (American, Europe, etc.).

Arkyn sei · May 16, 2006, 07:10 PM // 19:10

I think it should be exactly how it was in FPE. Or at least have a global team chat...

/signed

Adarklighter · May 16, 2006, 07:31 PM // 19:31

/signed. For sure.

BloodSuicide · May 16, 2006, 07:43 PM // 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

My preferences:

You can join a battle with 1-4 players. I want to be able to get into games quickly. I don't care that much about making a tight, coordinated group of four, because it's not clear that a group of four is a useful unit most of the time during the battle. See following comment. I like that you can't start with a full group of twelve. Chaos is fun.
You can see all twelve players in the party list. If this is broken into subsections it's fine, but not at all required and possibly even detrimental to do so, since staying as a party of four is not, in fact, a particularly useful strategy. It's inane for the game designers to force that particular constraint on players once in battle. Most of the time you will want to be in a group of 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11, or 12, instead of 4. That's simply true.
Team chat goes to all twelve players. To be a bit brutally honest, the current implementation is patently absurd. I hope there are designers at ArenaNet who were foaming at the mouth at this when it was introduced, or who were somehow uninformed and didn't realize that communication with the full twelve person team was missing. Game designers who are making a cooperative team game where players can't speak to each other without speaking to the enemy need to have their head examined. Admit you made a mistake on this, and quickly fix it, please.

Thanks for listening, ArenaNet.

/signed,
this is the best option. 12x12 without 12 members party window = that no fun.

kaos186 · May 16, 2006, 10:21 PM // 22:21

/signed for sure, i sure hope anet looks at this, because it was a lot easier monking when u could see all 12 ppl

DaerunAxis · May 16, 2006, 10:41 PM // 22:41

/signed

bring back the oldschool AB from the FPE!!!

Rebirther · May 16, 2006, 10:55 PM // 22:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zubey

I agree.

I also think they should reinstate the ability to join an alliance battle with a group small than 4 and have the system matchmake you into the group of 12 (like it was in the FPE).

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

My preferences:
[LIST][*]You can join a battle with 1-4 players. I want to be able to get into games quickly. I don't care that much about making a tight, coordinated group of four, because it's not clear that a group of four is a useful unit most of the time during the battle.

Disagree with all of above, in the FPE I hate being put in teams matched with 8 assassins, 1 monk, 1 ele, 2 warriors.
4 man creation team should be enforced and thats the way it should be, alliance battles are about team work and co-ordination. how are you going to co-ordinate effectively if you enter with team of 2 and matched with 2 others that dont compliment your build of 4? how are you going to survive?... (tagging onto your allies and using their build to assist you is not the way to go)
can't form a team of 4? go to random arenas like jade quarry/ aspenwood where team formation is not required.
--------------
Apart from the above points
--------------

Otherwise.
/Signed

Cyril Aspect · May 17, 2006, 03:37 PM // 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoDiamonds

These comments aren't meaningful unless everyone is talking about the same region (American, Europe, etc.).

Wrong they are the only relevant comments as they speak to the only thing that I can reliably report on within a game, my personal experience.

Furthermore if one district is th emost you can muster for a particular map point thats generally an indicator inGW that its a less popular destination

Now I personally feel this is due to it being such a limited and not very fun form of combat but those are only opinions

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rebirther

Disagree with all of above, in the FPE I hate being put in teams matched with 8 assassins, 1 monk, 1 ele, 2 warriors.
4 man creation team should be enforced and thats the way it should be, alliance battles are about team work and co-ordination. how are you going to co-ordinate effectively if you enter with team of 2 and matched with 2 others that dont compliment your build of 4? how are you going to survive?... (tagging onto your allies and using their build to assist you is not the way to go)
can't form a team of 4? go to random arenas like jade quarry/ aspenwood where team formation is not required.
--------------
Apart from the above points
--------------

Otherwise.
/Signed

Just one rather important point. You do know that people can and do just randomly invite each other and make up random 4 man squads before entering right?

I mean sure it might cut dow a little bit on the randomness but as it stands I'm personally not convinced it makes a significant difference.

Loch · May 17, 2006, 05:42 PM // 17:42

Quote:

Just one rather important point. You do know that people can and do just randomly invite each other and make up random 4 man squads before entering right?

Yep. It also happens in Team Arenas and Heroes' Ascent henchway teams.

But many times I've seen people announcing in the AB outpost that they're looking for a coordinated team that focuses on sticking together and capturing points. I'd say the focus on the built self-contained four-player team is helping things a bit. In any case, I don't see how it can harm the strategic level of the mode.

Not to mention that number of ragequitters has dropped dramatically, in my experience.