Curse

Byron · Mar 17, 2006, 05:24 PM // 17:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

After playing it and thinking about it for a couple days, I'm convinced that the problem is entirely the Hall of Heroes. That map destroys strategy, obliterates positioning, and rewards teams that manage to survive and thrive in the inevitible cluster****s that define that arena.

Because it's the final map of HA, the 'good' teams and players will play for it. They'll bring skills and strategies that are strong there, and what's good there are characters that are position and movement independent because those things don't matter at all when you're tethered to an unmoving ghost. People prepare for that strategy and their build and tactics remain on the other maps even if it doesn't make a lick of sense for them to.

This point is brilliant, as we have come to expect from Ensign, I think.

I've been a HA bum for about a month now, and I always try to observe top guild battles and HoH matches in between runs. So I have some idea of what your talking about, though I lack the real understanding...please bear with me.

I've noticed that very few guilds are capable of making the switch successfully from GvG to HA or vice-versa(iA comes to mind), at least in a timely manner. I've also seen guilds that are amazing in GvG get destroyed in HA, even though they were clearly playing their best lineup and a respectable build, and until you made that clarification I couldn't figure out why.

The maps and "tactics" thereof become a huge part of the experience factor in HA. They are so small in relation to GvG that tactical wherewithal or pre-thought planning becomes secondary to skill chains and bodyblocking, which is something that GvG players don't recognize or understand, I think. Annihilation maps are really just a test of patience and execution, so long as the people in the build know what they are doing. The altar maps are somewhat comparable to GvG, but it still ends up being a chaotic mash of channeling monks and frenzying axe-shocks.

Yeah, so I just restated what Ensign said, and it veers from the topic, but I think the point was worth making.

Schorny · Mar 19, 2006, 12:37 AM // 00:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

Annihilation maps are really just a test of patience and execution, so long as the people in the build know what they are doing. The altar maps are somewhat comparable to GvG, but it still ends up being a chaotic mash of channeling monks and frenzying axe-shocks.

indeed it's the other way round

altar maps are 100% tactic less. that's the whole point. You stand there and beat your enemy or get beaten.

In GvG strategy plays a big part: you don't need to have all skills with you because you can replace a missing skill with good tactics. For example against ranger spike in GvG you can keep moving, hiding behind things, etc. You can try to split or just keep out of LOS and wait for VoD - or whatever. You have the possibilities to try all these things.

In HA you don't. If this is an altar map and you have no skills against ranger spike, you are dead. You can't hide, you can't run - you have to face them in the open and get shot.

That means builds in HA need to fit many more utility skills in than GvG builds. This makes the builds somewhat 'crippled'. For example the famour "sb/infuser" - it's just crap. But you have to bear with it because you need spell breaker.

and even though you fit in every single utility skill you can think of, gimmick builds still win HoH - because you have to have the right skills to fight them...

Luddendorf · Mar 19, 2006, 12:38 AM // 00:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

This point is brilliant, as we have come to expect from Ensign, I think.

I've been a HA bum for about a month now, and I always try to observe top guild battles and HoH matches in between runs. So I have some idea of what your talking about, though I lack the real understanding...please bear with me.

I've noticed that very few guilds are capable of making the switch successfully from GvG to HA or vice-versa(iA comes to mind), at least in a timely manner. I've also seen guilds that are amazing in GvG get destroyed in HA, even though they were clearly playing their best lineup and a respectable build, and until you made that clarification I couldn't figure out why.

The maps and "tactics" thereof become a huge part of the experience factor in HA. They are so small in relation to GvG that tactical wherewithal or pre-thought planning becomes secondary to skill chains and bodyblocking, which is something that GvG players don't recognize or understand, I think. Annihilation maps are really just a test of patience and execution, so long as the people in the build know what they are doing. The altar maps are somewhat comparable to GvG, but it still ends up being a chaotic mash of channeling monks and frenzying axe-shocks.

Yeah, so I just restated what Ensign said, and it veers from the topic, but I think the point was worth making.

The reason why top gvg teams don't own HA is because they don't take it seriously. The skill required to be a top notch gvg team makes you skilled at anywhere in the game because all of them are amazing at adaption.

The reason why these teams rarely win the altar maps is due to that they aren't planning their builds around them or more likely, get 2v1ed because their name is recognized.

Ensign · Mar 19, 2006, 09:26 AM // 09:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

I think the reason why AoE damage is so common in HA, is that many maps rely on bodyblocking, like relict runs or altar maps.

Dais is definitely an AoE clusterf***. Multiple teams, body blocking ghosts, and just what a mess that dais becomes in a typical match makes AoE go nuts.

Relic, I disagree with. It's the only gametype in HA that's really interesting because of the multiple key control points. Unfortuanately because of the constraints of the HoH teams are incapable of playing a tactical game on relic, they're stuck with all of these characters that can't do much more than chaotic gangbangs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

And there are only a few maps where you are able to move around. For example in GvG, you get beaten at the flagstand and you fall back to your NPCs to regroup and gain time to think about a new strategy to beat your opponent.

Falling back to your NPCs (at least anything more involved than the footmen right next to the flagstand on Warrior's Isle and friends) usually concedes morale and isn't a decision to be made lightly. There really isn't a whole lot of time to sit around thinking in GvG until the game is in garbage time. However movement is much more relevant in GvG, mainly because there are multiple important parts of the map for each team to control. When people don't have any incentive to defend multiple locations, or even be terribly picky about terrain, things really can't get all that complex.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

I've noticed that very few guilds are capable of making the switch successfully from GvG to HA or vice-versa(iA comes to mind), at least in a timely manner.

The problem with moving from HA to GvG is that suddenly things like movement and positioning and, bluntly, learning how to play Guild Wars become critically important strategic points. If you don't understand those things you'll get your face smashed by people who do, and it's not pretty. Going the other way, all the time and effort you put into learning strategy and tactics becomes effectively useless, all it really comes down to is individual micro and, moreso, builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

They are so small in relation to GvG that tactical wherewithal or pre-thought planning becomes secondary to skill chains and bodyblocking, which is something that GvG players don't recognize or understand, I think.

What? No, there aren't any skills that are terribly important in HA that aren't important in GvG, except Ghostly Hero care and management. I would assume that HA vets are more familiar with how and when the Hero pulls aggro, for instance, and how to keep his ass on a dais to capture. They're also more likely to know the safe zone to get a perfect block on a Hero that's impossible to maneuver around. Not to belittle those skills when the 'ultimate challenge' is a dumb tacticless free-for-all where your success and failure depends upon your ability to manipulate Ghostly Hero AI and the care and feeding of your own Ghostly Hero...but they aren't something I'd brag about either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

The altar maps are somewhat comparable to GvG

Altar maps have absolutely nothing in common with GvG. Maybe I'm the crazy one here but I don't have any idea where you got that impression. Hell, my hypothesis is that the Hall of Heroes is so much different from GvG, and every gametype besides dais, that playing to win on that map actively makes you worse at GvG, and every gametype besides dais really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

In GvG strategy plays a big part: you don't need to have all skills with you because you can replace a missing skill with good tactics.

I've found the opposite to be true actually. At least at high level, GvG boils down to strong, flexible characters that players can use to execute a variety of strategies and tactics as dictated by the opponent. If you're missing an important tool opponents will recognize it and make you pay.

In HA the strategy is right in front of you and unchanging. You're playing for dais, there's no movement, no tactics, and no flexibility required. You know exactly what's coming, and you bring characters specifically to address the details of that map - for example, the horrendous Spell Breaker monks who exist solely to help with a cap, and otherwise babysit a Ghostly Hero who's captured a dais. That character is an outright liability on the team on every other map, but in the HoH he has a job. Similarly you have the Oath Shot / Fertile Season guy. He gets to junk up the fight in the HoH and stall the game so that the holding team can eventually win (dais is this wonderful gametype where you don't have to beat anyone, just stall long enough and you win), but he's otherwise a sack of garbage that a team drags to the Hall because of his specialized role there.

In GvG you see generalist, toolbox characters who are oftentimes nothing but utility skills. In HA you see super-specialized characters who exist for a specific task in the Hall of Heroes and are utter crap otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

gimmick builds still win HoH - because you have to have the right skills to fight them...

The big strength of many 'gimmick' builds is that they aren't powergamed to win the Hall. Many of them exist to overload a particular aspect of the game and hope an opponent can't deal with it. In GvG, the top builds are very flexible, and between adaptive characters and good tactics they can rip apart all but specialized gimmicks. On the other hand, powergamed HA builds are loaded up with narrow crap for the Hall of Heroes, as previously discussed, which leaves them incredibly vulnerable to specialized assaults. Thus a gimmick will oftentimes have a build advantage in its matchups, and with decent players it'll beat comparable opponents trying to hold the Hall.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luddendorf

The reason why top gvg teams don't own HA is because they don't take it seriously.

In no small part, yes. On first inspection the quality of play in HA is so abysmally bad that all people want to do is laugh at it. As I mentioned there are reasons for that but, seriously, HA teams look terrible even when they're full of good players. More importantly is just how dumb a serious HA build needs to be. The real goal of a build for HA is to pack as much defense into a build as humanly possible, then find a way to squeak by teams, get your Hero on the dais, and go into boring stall mode for several hours with gimmicky Hall characters. When you're used to playing tactically with a toolbox character and suddenly are stuck running a Spellbreaker bitch it's hard to take things seriously.

My guild refers to the Courtyard as "clowntown", and I think it's an apt name for HA in general. Every match feels like a bunch of gimmick clowns pouring out of a clowncar and breaking out the foam bats to get into a drunken melee with. It's fun in its own right, but really, it's that dumb.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luddendorf

get 2v1ed because their name is recognized.

There was a point in time when my guild had that happen to it approximately a dozen times in a row in the Hall of Heroes. Blue team is holding, we're in as the red team...and at 2:30 the yellow team runs past the blue team to attack us on the stairs. I'm sure that every team doing that thought they were being unique and funny but it just gets old. How seriously do you want to take a game when 90% of your losses come from sixteen people double-teaming a stupid NPC that can't maneuver around a single player?

Peace,
-CxE

tafy69 · Mar 19, 2006, 09:46 AM // 09:46

HA definately limits builds

You take Corpse Control
You got Wind Bourne
You got the gale
Who has Ward against Foes?
What monk is taking SB

Yeah it does suck and the IQ of some tombs players is awfull, but there it is and its the only place where you can get any kind of reward(Fame).

With HA maps always a Direct 1v1 most of the time, things like tainted, fire eles, trappers etc actually become usefull.

Byron · Mar 19, 2006, 07:21 PM // 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

indeed it's the other way round

altar maps are 100% tactic less. that's the whole point. You stand there and beat your enemy or get beaten.

Well, that's kind of true of all HA maps. At least in altar matches ghostly management is a factor in the first place. And then there is the whole issue of bringing windborne and SB...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schorny

In GvG strategy plays a big part: you don't need to have all skills with you because you can replace a missing skill with good tactics. For example against ranger spike in GvG you can keep moving, hiding behind things, etc. You can try to split or just keep out of LOS and wait for VoD - or whatever. You have the possibilities to try all these things.

Yeah, that's why some of the best GvG teams only need two monks, but you will rarely see a two-monk balanced team in HA. With efficient hex and condition removal, along with some self-sustainment(ie healing signet, focus swapping for e-denial), a smart team can open up a whole party slot.

And that goes doubly for spike builds. HA teams rarely have the ability to split, and the maps are often too small to make a difference anyway. But I think that point has already been made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Altar maps have absolutely nothing in common with GvG. Maybe I'm the crazy one here but I don't have any idea where you got that impression. Hell, my hypothesis is that the Hall of Heroes is so much different from GvG, and every gametype besides dais, that playing to win on that map actively makes you worse at GvG, and every gametype besides dais really.

I should have clarified. The altar is in some ways like the flagstand, where holding and defending it results in more morale and a tactical domination of the map. You can make the decision to grab it first, or play for the take-away. If you're smart, you will have a pre-designed character to "run" the hero in altar maps. Of course, the differences are obvious, but i wouldn't say "absolutely nothing in common."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

In GvG you see generalist, toolbox characters who are oftentimes nothing but utility skills. In HA you see super-specialized characters who exist for a specific task in the Hall of Heroes and are utter crap otherwise.

Yeah, I would argue all but the monks are super-specialized. Warriors are there to call targets and adrenaline spikes, mesmers are there to deny enemy monks or interrupt spikers, elementals are there to cast wards. Then again, even the monks are specialized to their specific roles: the "sb/infuser," the "Word of Healing and Heal party," etc.

Thing is, if everybody does their role in a balanced build, then they will win. It's only when people screw up,or when teams ally against you, that things get interesting. So I can see why you seem to think HA is pointless and boring. As for me, I need rank for credibility, so I endure.

Ensign · Mar 20, 2006, 10:12 AM // 10:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

Yeah, that's why some of the best GvG teams only need two monks, but you will rarely see a two-monk balanced team in HA.

The difference is actually environmental, it doesn't have much to do with player skill. First off is the obvious HoH factor, where you want as many monks as you can get. The best HoH team is seven monks plus a Fertile Season spammer.

But it's a bit more complex than just that. First off straight 8v8 situations aren't terribly common. Not counting all of the running around craziness, there's usually some flagging going on which makes the main flag fight more of a 7 on 7. One less dedicated offensive character there makes a lot of difference. Positioning is also a huge factor. When you have lines things like prekiting or thinking about range become important defensive tools that save a lot of energy.

But you're right, people build differently in GvG, distributing some self-defense onto offensive characters to take the load off of the backline. Combined with other factors it's enough to keep your team in good shape. But when the real test of your monks is their ability to keep a stupid NPC alive while he stands in one place, you have to throw more guys at the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

HA teams rarely have the ability to split, and the maps are often too small to make a difference anyway.

It's not the size of the maps, it's the number of important control points. When that number is 'zero' or 'one', there is no reason to split whatsoever, and thus no reason to make a build that can split. Only relic maps start to reward teams that can split, due to multiple important control points, but as you said the maps are small enough that it's really hard to actually divide up teams significantly. More importantly your splits don't neccessarily need to be threatening, just durable, which removes a lot of constraints from the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

The altar is in some ways like the flagstand, where holding and defending it results in more morale and a tactical domination of the map.

In very vague ways, sure. The tactics involved in defending a flagstand are virtually alien when compared to a hero on the dais, though. It isn't like you can just go into straight defense mode with Fertile and crap after taking a flagstand, after all. Also, you overstate the importance of the flagstand. The goal of GvG isn't to hold the flagstand, it's to kill the Guild Lord. The flagstand doesn't actually become important until one side has suffered numerous casualties and are running low on ressigs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

Of course, the differences are obvious, but i wouldn't say "absolutely nothing in common."

Well, maybe not absolutely nothing in common. But I will say that extensive time spent in the Hall of Heroes will actively make you worse at GvG. That's how little the two games have in common.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

Then again, even the monks are specialized to their specific roles: the "sb/infuser," the "Word of Healing and Heal party," etc.

Right, the monks are all junked up with specialized roles for the Hall, just like every other character really (perhaps another reason why you need more monks in HA). You don't really get punished for inflexibility though. You're always going to be fighting 8v8, so you can build a team with lots of 'moving parts', so to speak.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byron

So I can see why you seem to think HA is pointless and boring. As for me, I need rank for credibility, so I endure.

I don't think it's pointless or boring, I just can't take it seriously. After getting griefed out on several dozen altar maps, being able to not take it seriously is the only way one can keep going.

Peace,
-CxE

Rey Lentless · Mar 20, 2006, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

I don't think it's pointless or boring, I just can't take it seriously. After getting griefed out on several dozen altar maps, being able to not take it seriously is the only way one can keep going.

It's a shame that the final map in HA can be reduced to a popularity contest. I don't think it's always griefing however. Teams want to win themselves, but they may go out of their way to eliminate a team they consider to be a much higher threat. I know I've never been apart of just 'screwing over' a team on purpose, but I have gone after a team (that wasn't holding) because they had a strong holding build and I didn't want them holding for hours. If you plan on playing for a while, then you don't want to let a team get the hall that has a very strong defensive build. But just screwing over a team because of their name is crap, and I can understand why guilds would want to smurf or just not bother with HA.

There's no way to avoid that though, it's the nature of having multiple teams play at once. Teams are going to get ganked and screwed over.

Quote:

Not counting all of the running around craziness, there's usually some flagging going on which makes the main flag fight more of a 7 on 7. One less dedicated offensive character there makes a lot of difference.

After doing a lot of gvg, this was a big difference. Having that 8th slot available in builds was a very welcome change to me.

Quote:

When you're used to playing tactically with a toolbox character and suddenly are stuck running a Spellbreaker bitch it's hard to take things seriously.

I found that to be the opposite. Flag running is worse IMO, and people in my guild really didn't want to do that. While monking with SB might be annoying, it's still better than flag running.

Quote:

But I will say that extensive time spent in the Hall of Heroes will actively make you worse at GvG

I think this is pretty far fetched. GVG and HA are definitely different, and being good at one doesn't make you good at the other. I can't see how it would make you worse though.

The biggest thing I liked about tombs was being able to get a team without having 8 people in the guild available. I was also not in a top guild, so getting 8 people to fit a particular build was rather hard at that point (last summer) and most builds were really based around what was available (not a very competitive situation). But you could go to tombs and round up people to fit a particular build and at least have a little help in choosing new people with the help of rank. You can still get horrible people who are highly ranked, but it's still better than nothing.

I think being able to invite people outside the guilds to participate in gvg, along with the increased rate of unlocking things.. has made HA less attractive. Your average guilds are more likely to have a lot of people with more content unlocked (so you aren't hamstrung into certain builds), and you can invite people if you don't have 8, so that's more flexible as well.

Ensign · Mar 20, 2006, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bugeater

Getting a little back on topic I've been doing a little experimenting and looking at ele's in general. As far as damage goes, right now the only thing they've got going for them is AoE.

Well, besides spike of course. Eles are still a spike threat.

But yes, AoE is a great tool. It is situationally very strong, potentially the strongest damage in the game. It is similarly situationally very weak. If a team is splitting up or spreading out AoE quickly starts underperforming.

Thematically that's one of the big problems with the fire line. If enemies are bunching up in the AoEs, great, they do some pretty good damage. But if they aren't bunching up your character really isn't all that impressive. Fireball is still OK against a single target, and Meteor has a strong effect despite the nasty cooldown...but that's it really. Everything else you'd want to run gets its power from hitting lots of guys.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bugeater

By far the biggest issue with the current AoE spells is casting time. A slow casting time is really a two-edged sword for AoE spells.

The longer a spell's casting time, the more time opponents have to move and the battlefield has to change, and the larger a nuke's AoE needs to be to compensate. I'm personally willing to invest 3-4 seconds into a single spell if I'm going to get a lot of milage out of it when it lands, of course, but the AoE/cast time scale isn't high enough right now, IMO, to really make any of the AoE options attractive.

Except Energy Surge, of course.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

It's a shame that the final map in HA can be reduced to a popularity contest. I don't think it's always griefing however. Teams want to win themselves, but they may go out of their way to eliminate a team they consider to be a much higher threat.

Yeah, there's a lot of gamesmanship going on in the HoH along those lines. Still, when it gets past the two minute mark and a team that isn't holding has eight guys trying to push you back up the stairs, you have to figure that they have something other than winning in mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

There's no way to avoid that though, it's the nature of having multiple teams play at once. Teams are going to get ganked and screwed over.

Yeah, it's only natural, and if you consider HA to be a casual PvP environment and don't take it too seriously then it really isn't a big deal. Plus the Hall needs to have at least three teams on it to accomplish the (unstated) goal of regular turnover, so it's really unavoidable. It's not even a bad thing. It just means that seriously competitive players won't be drawn to the HoH because it honestly is the least competitive PvP map in the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

I found that to be the opposite. Flag running is worse IMO, and people in my guild really didn't want to do that. While monking with SB might be annoying, it's still better than flag running.

Well TBH I'm over specialized flag runners, at least for ladder play. They're liabilities far too often, and a rigid character turns into garbage really quickly as soon as 'the plan' starts to break. In some matchups you can get away with it, but that's exactly what you're doing, pulling a trick.

Having a dedicated flag runner is a pretty basic recipe for success, but honestly I feel a lot stronger when we're more flexible with the flag situation. At a basic level think of it as a 7v7 with an optional character to sub in. It can get pretty complicated, for example elementalists become stronger in a flexible GvG running strategy because running a flag is excellent energy management for them. They dip back to run a flag as someone needs to do oftentimes, and comes back up with a full clip of energy. In any sort of split situation having a flexible flagger is a significant advantage, and so forth.

I do agree however that having to continually run flags back and forth to the flag stand is one of the less appealing aspects of GvG play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

I think this is pretty far fetched. GVG and HA are definitely different, and being good at one doesn't make you good at the other. I can't see how it would make you worse though.

Well if you're still an inexperienced player just playing in general will make you better. But if you have experience in GvG, spending a lot of time in HA, and playing for the HoH, will make you unlearn good habits. The most glaring of which is positioning and movement, not only are they irrelevant in the HoH but because of that gametype you're *forced* to play a positionless game. If you want to take it seriously you have to adjust for that, which makes positioning a liability in many cases (Channeling), and, well, you can go from there. Basically the HoH reinforces really bad habits, that you'll have to break when you go back to GvG.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

The biggest thing I liked about tombs was being able to get a team without having 8 people in the guild available.

Agreed entirely. I still think that, with the exception of the HoH and the lower tier dais, HA is an excellent, casual 8v8 PvP format.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

I think being able to invite people outside the guilds to participate in gvg, along with the increased rate of unlocking things.. has made HA less attractive.

Perhaps so, I know there is a bit of pick-up GvG going on. I don't think it's a particularly fast way to unlock things though. You get a lot of faction per match, but individual matches in GvG can take quite a long time. Per hour, I've found that the fastest way to consistently get faction is with a good team in team arena. Sure you'll do better if you're in a highly rated guild and get some nubstomps, but TA is good for around 3000 faction per hour without much of a hiccup.

Peace,
-CxE

Rey Lentless · Mar 21, 2006, 12:04 AM // 00:04

Quote:

Yeah, there's a lot of gamesmanship going on in the HoH along those lines. Still, when it gets past the two minute mark and a team that isn't holding has eight guys trying to push you back up the stairs, you have to figure that they have something other than winning in mind.

Yah, I don't doubt that at all, and I can see people doing that to say 'we beat iQ in HOH!', as if ganking in that way was some kind of accomplishment.

Quote:

Well if you're still an inexperienced player just playing in general will make you better. But if you have experience in GvG, spending a lot of time in HA, and playing for the HoH, will make you unlearn good habits. The most glaring of which is positioning and movement, not only are they irrelevant in the HoH but because of that gametype you're *forced* to play a positionless game. If you want to take it seriously you have to adjust for that, which makes positioning a liability in many cases (Channeling), and, well, you can go from there. Basically the HoH reinforces really bad habits, that you'll have to break when you go back to GvG.

I think this is really an ego thing though. If you have a player who's done primarily gvg or HA and they just assume they're great at the other one because of that, then that player would definitely be worse off. That's more of the player just thinking they know everything already though, and thus not learning anything. But I don't think playing one or the other makes you bad at the other if you recognize what has to change to be successful at the other. It's still pvp experience and if people don't let their own egos get in the way, and adjust accordingly to the differences, I don't think there's any reason people can't be good at both.. and it shouldn't hurt them.

Quote:

Perhaps so, I know there is a bit of pick-up GvG going on. I don't think it's a particularly fast way to unlock things though. You get a lot of faction per match, but individual matches in GvG can take quite a long time. Per hour, I've found that the fastest way to consistently get faction is with a good team in team arena. Sure you'll do better if you're in a highly rated guild and get some nubstomps, but TA is good for around 3000 faction per hour without much of a hiccup.

Well, I didn't mean gvg was a good or bad way of unlocking things. What I meant was that unlocking things in general (drops, increased faction, etc) has been improved overall, so your average guildie is going to have much more unlocked now.. as opposed to 8 months ago when content was unlocked much more slowly and people obviously had had less time to unlock content. I'm guessing your average guild has a lot of people with most content unlocked and running a particular build is doable. But several months ago, you may have went to tombs just so you could find people who could run your build.

Ensign · Mar 21, 2006, 08:09 AM // 08:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

Yah, I don't doubt that at all, and I can see people doing that to say 'we beat iQ in HOH!', as if ganking in that way was some kind of accomplishment.

Occasionally it swings the other way too. It's not terribly common, but you do sometimes run into fans who will help you out on the multi-team maps. Then there's the occasional 'gg' team that quits out before the match starts because of the guild rank.

It's a weird experience to say the least.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

But I don't think playing one or the other makes you bad at the other if you recognize what has to change to be successful at the other.

Sure, but what I'm talking about is habits. There are a lot of little unconscious adjustments that you make in GvG or HA, adjustments that don't neccessarily translate into the other format. When you play with the same people a lot you form a sort of understanding, where you just work well together and synch up without doing anything too consciously, you know? You get a similar feeling from playing builds and strategies. I can tell you that when I go into HA with a pug that it takes me a good hour or so to stop forming battle lines. If I'm a warrior I can run around with abandon without having to worry about where our monks are.

It isn't that one makes you worse at the other, it's that if you've been playing one for a long time, the habits you've developed aren't going to translate and you're going to have to spend time unlearning what you subconsciously know. Perhaps I'm just apt to get caught up in the nuances of different formats, but it's hard to keep my instincts sharp for everything at once. There's a difference between knowing what needs to be done, intellectually, and having those things burned into your motor memory so that they're just automatic.

Peace,
-CxE

Patrograd · Mar 21, 2006, 08:14 AM // 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rey Lentless

I think this is really an ego thing though. If you have a player who's done primarily gvg or HA and they just assume they're great at the other one because of that, then that player would definitely be worse off. That's more of the player just thinking they know everything already though, and thus not learning anything. But I don't think playing one or the other makes you bad at the other if you recognize what has to change to be successful at the other. It's still pvp experience and if people don't let their own egos get in the way, and adjust accordingly to the differences, I don't think there's any reason people can't be good at both.. and it shouldn't hurt them.

There are certainly players who are good at both. Sadly I'm not one of them, as I suck at tombs....the biggest issue I have is this.

In GvG there is alot of emphasis I think on trying to keep yourself alive as an individual, and taking measures yourself to stay alive; things like watching closely your position in relation to your monks and other teammates, knowing how to kite to suck enemy warriors into overextended positions. In other words you aren't relying on your monks 100% to stay alive, a good part of the responsibility for this lies with you. Then you go to tombs and suddenly its like "Where the hell are my monks in all this mad mess? How am I supposed to kite away from the enemy and towards my monks when the enemy are everywhere around me and my monks are kiting in circles like headless chickens to keep away from them, and no matter which way I run I am running into trouble?". This seems to take away a big chunk of the "personal skill", and drives a heavier reliance on just hitting the right buttons at the right time, which is the first PVP skill anyone learns, and a total reliance on your monks for keeping you alive.

I used to love tombs, but now it seems a little pointless for anything other than practising fighting techniques against domination mesmers

D Fault · Mar 21, 2006, 08:35 AM // 08:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Occasionally it swings the other way too.

I remember 1 occasion the team I was on had a monk err7 in the vault. When we got in it was a 3-way. The team holding was a good team with friends in it and the other was a group we fought before in halls in a 5-way. They had run around in that fight to prevent us from having a chance at the altar.

We ran straight past the holding team and charged the much hated team, preventing them from having any chance of winning.

Revenge is sweet.

dgb · Mar 21, 2006, 09:48 AM // 09:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Agreed entirely. I still think that, with the exception of the HoH and the lower tier dais, HA is an excellent, casual 8v8 PvP format.

Peace,
-CxE

I would disagree here. The only maps that show any degree of sophistication are the relic runs. Everything else tends to turn into a swirling melee clustered around one point. The dais nature provokes certain changes that force people in to these swirling melee's. Everyone wants to win HoH so they plan for that - the monks bring channeling, ele's have wards, necros have wells, everyone has all the usual junk that is useful in a tight confined melee. So everyone makes the tight confined melee just without a dais.

You don't see running skirmishes, you don't get tactical retreats, it's a tight melee until one team gets anihilated. The exception to this is priest maps where one team can get slowly forced back, or even try to turtle at the priest. It still doesn't hugely help.

Two changes that would force this to change are to change the nature of the objective. The HoH influences every map up until it in how they are played. Because everyone designs for it, everyone tries to force similar conditions. The second change is to vary the maps. Look at GvG - you might get a fight on a tight map, or you might be forced onto the more extensive maps - frozen, nomads isles. If you have more varied maps which force people to think about splitting, or at least being mobile builds will start having to think about doing something other than picking a spot and dropping every conceivable AoE skill into that area.

Ensign · Mar 21, 2006, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrograd

In GvG there is alot of emphasis I think on trying to keep yourself alive as an individual, and taking measures yourself to stay alive; things like watching closely your position in relation to your monks and other teammates, knowing how to kite to suck enemy warriors into overextended positions.

Certainly there is in GvG, and that's why the builds look so different. But the reason for that difference is a lot more fundamental really. In GvG you need to play a backline that can keep your team alive. If your team is composed of smart players who kite the warriors, and has offensive characters with a bit of distributed self defense to keep themselves alive in a pinch, you just don't need a ton of healing and monks to stay in good shape. The damage prevention from playing smart alone is effectively a monk's worth of defense.

On the other hand you have the Hall of Heroes. Here the standard is not keeping a kiting ally alive, but a stupid, unmoving, soft Ghostly Hero. You don't get any benefit from distributed defense and movement, every single bit of protection and healing on the Ghostly Hero has to come from your backline. He'll stand in AoE and let warriors rage his face, he doesn't care, but you can't let the bastard die. You *need* that third monk to keep him alive, and oftentimes support from other teammates as well.

Which takes us back to the other maps. How do you expect your guys to build and play their characters when the team neccessarily has a backline built to keep a complete retard alive through all of that pressure?

Exactly.

Which is in so many words why teams that take HA seriously run spike. They know that everyone needs a retarded anti-pressure backline to survive the hall, so instead of trying to fight that, instead you bring a build that ignores defensive capacity entirely in favor of the one thing that does not scale up with more players - reaction time. Spike makes all those additional monks liabilities instead of benefits, giving you the offense that's naturally strong against the only defense a team can reasonably have.

Toss in a lot of iWay and there's the HoH metagame in a nutshell.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgb

I would disagree here. The only maps that show any degree of sophistication are the relic runs.

I agree with that completely, but are you really disagreeing with me? My argument wasn't that it was a good, competitive environment, but a good *casual* environment for pick up teams and the like. I don't think that a lack of sophistication is neccessarily a bad thing if that is the goal. It might even be a good thing, since it lets people just play and beat on things instead of having to worry about the advanced tactics that *teams* need to work on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgb

Everyone wants to win HoH so they plan for that - the monks bring channeling, ele's have wards, necros have wells, everyone has all the usual junk that is useful in a tight confined melee. So everyone makes the tight confined melee just without a dais.

Exactly. I don't think those other maps are neccessarily bad, it's just that they become bad because of the way teams are built.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgb

Two changes that would force this to change are to change the nature of the objective. The HoH influences every map up until it in how they are played. Because everyone designs for it, everyone tries to force similar conditions.

I don't think you need to change the maps leading up to the HoH as long as the Hall itself doesn't suck. There's a nice variety of gametypes going on there and it really doesn't matter if the order is predictible, you have to plan for hitting all of them anyway. If the Hall itself was a more complex gametype that required a bit more out of it than everyone bunching up on a dais, people would have to plan for that instead and it'd influence all of the maps before it. For example the lower tier dais maps would potentially be interesting if people had to approach them with builds that were designed to be flexible for some other objective.

What should the HoH be? I'm not sure. What I do know is that it needs to have multiple important control points for each team (to encourage flexibility and tactics), that it can produce a clear winner inside of ten minutes, and that it supports several teams at once. How those details need to be filled in I'll leave to more creative minds. =)

Peace,
-CxE

Vindexus · Mar 21, 2006, 09:27 PM // 21:27

Could someone start a seperate thread on the differences between HoH and GvG and how HoH could be changed, cause this thread has severely sidetracked :P.

Mage Henchnem · Mar 21, 2006, 09:52 PM // 21:52

I appreciate your in depth research as to the DPS equasions you posted, they are quite interesting to see indeed, much different then I would have thought. One thing to consider though with an elementalist as compared to a warrior is that an elementalist is not a pure damage dealer, wheras a warrior is. Ele's have many other utilitarian skills, like wards, windborne, gale etc etc, the list goes on. Also, a key thing to consider in determining dmg is area of effect, many high dmg ele skills are aoe skills, witch true, will 99% of the time not be able to be used to their full potential, are a significant factor. I think that for pure DPS, an ele and a warrior would be pretty similar if you used your aoe effectivly and got a grand total.

Ele's also arent as gymped by conditions, a warrior with blind or crippled is not where near as effective as an ele with those conditions, anbd while they are easily removed, its time taken awya from the rest of the team to remove them and its dmg not going out.

Symbol · Mar 21, 2006, 10:31 PM // 22:31

AoE is too conditional, and no one really denies that elementalists have good utility. Then again, most classes have good utility, and most classes do not have tons and tons of skills that revolve around doing unconditional damage.

See a problem here?

JR · Mar 21, 2006, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vindexus

Could someone start a seperate thread on the differences between HoH and GvG and how HoH could be changed, cause this thread has severely sidetracked :P.

Your wish is my command.

dgb · Mar 22, 2006, 03:43 AM // 03:43

Ok, I missread you Ensign - I took it as saying that the whole tournament bar the dais provided a good environment and playing experience. I'd still partially disagree with you because as a casual environment, it isn't so. Anet needed to shutdown on ways to acquire fame at ridiculous ammounts through various copycat builds than they did - they didn't and now we have ridiculous segregation occuring. I don't have an emote so I can't easily get into anything halfway resembling coherent.

I'd say it takes about five hours of trying unranked people to get eight people who know what they are doing - casual environment where you can at least provide some semblance of competivity it is not. I can't speak for what higher ranked groups are like - maybe it improves.

I agree is nothing inherently wrong with the maps leading up to HoH - although I think they suffer from a lack of inspiration - there's nothing particularly interesting or varied about them (compare with guild halls, we have lava, quicksand, weird malfunctioning teleporters, trebuchets, ice, vine bridges and who knows what else). Adding some mechanics like this would at least force some thought - even if it is just "don't stand in the lava".

I'm going to have to go with Ensign here and say I'm not creative nor inspired enough to think up of a remedy to the final halls map. My area of study is economics, I can analyse it and identify the problem, but if the solution is creative that's not me

.