Curse

Jackell · May 31, 2005, 05:43 AM // 05:43

AiRong, I put this suggestion up here a little while ago, but it got swept away by the anger, so I don't know if you saw it:

"The way I see it, characters should be able to unlock skills in pvp. Perhaps for every 5 wins you get (not consecutivly), you get a skill point that you can use to unlock a skill for the pvp characters. However, to balance it, maybe there's a ladder in the skills you have to follow, a la Diablo 2 style, and you can capture elites from other players."

Would this be more acceptable?

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 05:47 AM // 05:47

If one can eventually unlock everything in the game through some method purely by playing PvP in a reasonable timeframe, then I'd be perfectly content. Such a system would be the best compromise that I've seen so far.

The largest PvE investment a PvP character should ever have to make through whatever proposed method is to simply finish the campaign with one character.

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 05:48 AM // 05:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

We'll agree to disagree. I actually think the PvP community will be far healthier in the long run if there is less grind than there is currently. I think the most optimal solution is the ability to obtain weapon mods, skills (elite and nonelite), and runes purely through PvP in a reasonable timeframe. It maintains the mechanic of "earning," doesn't cause a massive schism in the community, and doesn't force people to do aspects of the game they do not want to. Do you see anything wrong with this, Virago?

I think elites should remain as is... they're supposed to be 'elite', hence, rare.

Also, I would disagree that permitting access solely through PvP would support the community balance. There would be no reason whatever for a PvP player to care about anyone doing PvE if they didn't have to work with them to gain what they need.

Why is this important? First and foremost because that is what community is about... working with others toward common goals. That definition doesn't get much more 'spot on' for how things currently work (even if some guilds would rather make farming characters than consider actively seeking out PvE players to work with...).

Secondly, because the dynamic of interaction between PvE and PvP players is the method that draws PvE players TO PvP. Think about it... you go out hunting elites... you're grouped with folks who are usually PvE, probably either have no interest in PvP or are polarized on the matter. You, as a PvP player, every time you interact with that side of the world, have the chance to change that... to interest 'fresh meat' (for lack of a better term).

From what I read here, there is heavy implication that the folks speaking out for PvP only unlocking or UAS just don't want to 'be bothered' with 'carebears' and frankly, I think that is the attitude that is out of place and counter-productive and reminds me of the 'Great Holocron Grind' and a few other dim moments in the history of meetings between PvE and PvP.

As for the rest -- define 'reasonable timeframe'. I'll spot ya my definition -- the average amount of time it takes the median amount of PvE players to obtain their full set of Elites and Runes/Upgrades.

The power PvEers will shave that pretty respectably, but I suspect it would still be too slow for what most here (forums) would like to see... however, it would be a good compromise without completely segregating the two from one another.

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 05:57 AM // 05:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virago

I think elites should remain as is... they're supposed to be 'elite', hence, rare.

They won't be rare. People will simply grind for the ones they want with an RP character before they PvP, and you'll see them all over the place. I do admit elite farming is not half as bad as weapon mod and rune farming that you have almost no control over. You also have to keep in mind that "elite" is just a label to differentiate a class of skills. They could've called them "only one of these types of skills can be in your slotbar" skills and it would mean the same thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virago

Also, I would disagree that permitting access solely through PvP would support the community balance. There would be no reason whatever for a PvP player to care about anyone doing PvE if they didn't have to work with them to gain what they need.

Why should a PvP player be forced to do something he does not want to do? I do not think forcing a player to do something against his will is beneficial to the community. If you believe there needs to be interaction between the two camps, won't the constant HoH messages and crossover PvE/PvP players fulfill the role of interaction between the two?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virago

As for the rest -- define 'reasonable timeframe'. I'll spot ya my definition -- the average amount of time it takes the median amount of PvE players to obtain their full set of Elites and Runes/Upgrades.

I would want the PvP obtainment system to be comparable to PvE grind. However, the current PvE grind is far too long. Superior drops are exceedingly and unnecessarily rare and very ennui-inducing to obtain. I'd venture to say it would actually take over five hundred solid hours before one could get all superiors and elites for just a single class combination based on estimations of people on these forums.

Jackell · May 31, 2005, 06:01 AM // 06:01

Well, my suggestion doesn't say you HAVE to pvp to get the skills. You can unlock them the same with PvE, but this would allow PvPers to grow their characters in the way they want, the same as PvE'ers. I don't think people would hate the grind of getting them as much if they could get them doing what they want to do.

Also, maybe make it so you can "loot" other epoples armor. They don't loose it, of course, but if you kill someone who has a rune, then you get the chance to unlock it from them.

Virago, this would keep the PvP and PvE communities interlinked, like you want, and still allow players to grow in pvp and avoid PvE which is more like what they want, instead of a UAS.

As for reasonable timeframe, for armors and elites, it would depend on who you were fighting, and how good you were. 5 wins for a skill point, if your good you could unlock your skills quite quickly. If you suck, then, a little longer. Once again, that would be skill based, which I think is closer to what the PvPer's want than what your willing to give them Virago.

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 06:03 AM // 06:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

Why should a PvP player be forced to do something he does not want to do?

ALL games make you do things 'you don't want to do' and usually because the design mechanic somehow supports either community, longevity, or revenue stream.

Succinctly -- the reason a PvP player should be forced to do something they do not want to do is because that's the way ArenaNet wants it.

Probably not the answer you wanted to hear, but it is a true answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

If you believe there needs to be interaction between the two camps, won't the constant HoH messages and crossover PvE/PvP players fulfill the role of interaction between the two?

No, and that's my point. The PvP folks should be more a part of things than 'oh look, there's [guild xyz] winning again' or something you meet only after moving to PvP areas. Integration, not segregation... and that means movement in BOTH directions and this is something the current system supports very well.

Edit: The trip to the searing was a surprise for me, because it introduced a completely unavoidable PvP session. I understood this was to give players who might avoid PvP completely and with deliberation a chance to experience it, but it annoyed me that it was, in fact, unavoidable.

I think the real issue here is 'choice'. PvP players dislike not having the 'choice' of UAS. But in all honesty, freedom of choice is not what these games are about, are they? (I'm not trying to be flippant, just pointing out this is reality.)

@Jackell -- You're pretty much in tune with my original suggestion found here.
At the time I posted it, no one was willing to admit it was a viable compromise. Finally -- 'what I'm willing to give them' is not the point. I'm not in power or control here. I'm just voicing my opinion like everyone else.

Jackell · May 31, 2005, 06:16 AM // 06:16

I know your not in power or control or anything, but so far you've been very vocal against their opinions.

As for "all games making you do what you don't want to do", this one can be different. Why let it fall into the same trap of that, when they can make it so that people can do what they want?

Anet may want it this way, but with their weekly updates and ideas that they've implemented, they seem to want to make sure their players get the most out of their gameplay experience. Despite what people beleive, they are listening.

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 06:25 AM // 06:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackell

I know your not in power or control or anything, but so far you've been very vocal against their opinions.

Not against their opinions, just equally vocal about my own. It isn't an attempt to 'win' here, simply an attempt to see if anyone is actually interested in understanding the other side.

In all honesty, thusfar, there is very little such interest on display. That is, I think, part of the problem. You see, I understand why people want UAS or PvP only unlocking or whatever variant is being discussed at the moment.... but I have yet to see a single poster on the 'Pro-UAS/whatever' side of the discussion even give credence to the notion that there is something more important than UAS/whatever.

Before any discussion can truly proceed, both sides must accept that the other has a point of validity in their own perspective. At the moment, for the most part, that hasn't really happened here. It's just more and more folks trying to tell me all the reasons I'm wrong or don't understand them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackell

As for "all games making you do what you don't want to do", this one can be different. Why let it fall into the same trap of that, when they can make it so that people can do what they want?

Anet may want it this way, but with their weekly updates and ideas that they've implemented, they seem to want to make sure their players get the most out of their gameplay experience. Despite what people beleive, they are listening.

If you want to see what reactionary change does to a game, just look to EQ I.

I don't like everything I see in GuildWars. But for the most part, I accept the reasoning I see behind it. It is their sandbox, their rules, and their decision, and that's cool by me.

Jackell · May 31, 2005, 06:35 AM // 06:35

EQ 1 did it wrong. In any chance like that, there's always risks that could make or break a game. If done right, this could enhance gameplay for all. And yes, their sandbox, their rules. But they are more than willing to change them, hence why they read the suggestion forums.

As for their arguments, this is a game, and their argument is "I would like this because it would make the game more fun to me". And, most of the time, that's good enough for me. A game is made for fun, and Anet wants it to be fun for everyone they can make it for. So, that argument in this case holds validity in my eyes.

I ride the middle ground in this debate. I enjoy PvEing for a little while then finishing up my day with usually the same amount of time in the arenas, and when I get back into a guild, doing some GvG, so this is a hard topic for me. But other people want a change, and with it being this well argued, a need for a little compromise on both sides is going to be needed to create a good change. If it's this important to so many people, Anet is looking into it, but, and this is just what I'm thinking, I do not in any way speak for Anet, they probably won't make a decision if both sides of the argument is this deadset about it. It would piss off one entire group of gamers, and they don't want that.

Jwh6913 · May 31, 2005, 06:40 AM // 06:40

well anet have said that uas button were for bwe only, and i see no reason to argue. I'm mainly pve'r. but seriously, I think it would be easier not to mention quicker to pve for the stuff that they want for pvp than fighting 10 very good guild groups that hold the top 10 on the ladder to get SOMETHING and that's not even guaranteed. I say let the runes come when they come.

TiC · May 31, 2005, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Here's a scenario.

Player buys Guild Wars on release day. Player wishes to explore all facets of gameplay, and ultimately decides to experiment with various characters in the coming weeks. Player later creates 4 characters, each with various primary and secondary skill sets, designed for unique builds and gameplay.

Player also frequents in tombs PvP as well as regular PvE, with two of his max level PvE characters, after they have completed the story mode. Player likes his balance between PvE and PvP.

Somewhere down the line, an individual PvP laddering system is implemented for both PvE and PvP characters. This system segregates both PvE and PvP characters, requiring them to play with characters of the same type. Player is now not only limited in terms of sheer availability of groups, but also cannot compete in the primary PvP ladder, unless he chooses to delete one of his characters. Player successfully becomes "affected" by the situation.

I've read through most of the posts in this thread, and only maybe 1 or 2 people have seen the big picture here. I know of many who play GW for both the PvE and PvP aspects, myself included. I enjoy going through the PvE game, exploring, capping a skill or finding a rare item, and then hopping into the tombs and competing in organized PvP. I do this with two of my four PvE characters, and while I don't have every single rune or every single elite skill, my builds have become extremely effective after some fine tuning and experience.

Problem is, no matter how the OP's concept is implemented, I'm still going to get screwed over in some fashion. And to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't like having my gameplay experience tarnished because a couple of whiney players couldn't learn how to adapt or move on and play another game.

I mean, even if I didn't have all 4 of my character slots used up, I would still have to take the time to build a PvP character from scratch to compete in serious PvP, despite the fact that I have 2 perfectly functional characters already created and customized. That in itself is an annoyance that I shouldn't have to deal with, so imagine how I feel about the concept of deleting a character just to allow me to play how I used to.

So, that's why I'm against an UAS ladder that doesn't affect me. Because it really does, and you just didn't know it until now.

Lazarous · May 31, 2005, 07:21 AM // 07:21

Quote:

Somewhere down the line, an individual PvP laddering system is implemented for both PvE and PvP characters. This system segregates both PvE and PvP characters, requiring them to play with characters of the same type. Player is now not only limited in terms of sheer availability of groups, but also cannot compete in the primary PvP ladder, unless he chooses to delete one of his characters. Player successfully becomes "affected" by the situation.

Fallacy here. You're only affected because you want to fight the people in the UAS ladder. The pve ladder still exists in full force. The proposal doesn't change any of the current abilities in GW for pvers. Yes the community is split, but one is only 'primary' if the vast majority of the population uses the option. If the vast majority of people use the UAS ladder, that implies that

Quote:

I wouldn't like having my gameplay experience tarnished because a couple of whiney players couldn't learn how to adapt or move on and play another game.

is wrong and thus your entire argument falls apart.

Eclair · May 31, 2005, 07:22 AM // 07:22

Why would you have to create a new pvp character from scratch? You'd be level 20 immediately with all your stat points and access to all skills and weapons and armor. It's instant.

That is assuming there is a UAS system.

Celes Tial · May 31, 2005, 07:35 AM // 07:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiC

Problem is, no matter how the OP's concept is implemented, I'm still going to get screwed over in some fashion. And to be perfectly honest, I wouldn't like having my gameplay experience tarnished because a couple of whiney players couldn't learn how to adapt or move on and play another game.

Well said, you are my hero.

An UAS ladder would dramatically reduce the number of PvP groups and challenges open to those who enjoy PvE AND PvP, which is a lot of players.

TiC · May 31, 2005, 07:36 AM // 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarous

Fallacy here. You're only affected because you want to fight the people in the UAS ladder. The pve ladder still exists in full force. The proposal doesn't change any of the current abilities in GW for pvers. Yes the community is split, but one is only 'primary' if the vast majority of the population uses the option. If the vast majority of people use the UAS ladder, that implies that

And why exactly wouldn't the vast majority of PvP players play PvP in the PvP (UAS) ladder? I mean seriously, if you expect any human being with the slightest bit of brain power to believe that a PvP only ladder wouldn't have any more PvP players than a PvE only ladder, then let me know now, so that I may immediately disregard your future posts, in the hopes that I will no longer be subjected to further insults to my intellegence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eclair

Why would you have to create a new pvp character from scratch? You'd be level 20 immediately with all your stat points and access to all skills and weapons and armor. It's instant.

That is assuming there is a UAS system.

It's the customizing of the skills and points that's just an annoyance that I shouldn't have to deal with. Granted, it isn't a terribly long process, but I just want to play the game, and not have to go back and tweak stats that I have already customized on other (PvE) characters. Since I don't have to do that now, I see no reason why I should be forced in the future just to play serious PvP.

Lazarous · May 31, 2005, 07:40 AM // 07:40

Quote:

An UAS ladder would dramatically reduce the number of PvP groups and challenges open to those who enjoy PvE AND PvP, which is a lot of players.

only by those people who dislike the fact that this game requires 500+ hours to unlock all your skills, runes, and item mods. If there are a lot of pve/pvp players then you have nothing to worry about.

This argument is, as i have pointed out before, tantamount to admitting pve sucks. If everyone migrates over to the pvp ladder, this means no one found pve fun. Are you admitting that your conception of fun is so out of whack with the vast majority of the community that if they were given the choice between that and a level playing field pvp model they would universally shun what you enjoy?

Quote:

And why exactly wouldn't the vast majority of PvP players play PvP in the PvP (UAS) ladder? I mean seriously, if you expect any human being with the slightest bit of brain power to believe that a PvP only ladder wouldn't have any more PvP players than a PvE only ladder, then let me know now, so that I may immediately disregard your future posts, in the hopes that I will no longer be subjected to further insults to my intellegence.

I personally expect that if there was a split like this the entire competitive pvp fanbase would migrate to the UAS ladder. This should really tell you something about how the current ladder is structured, rather than be a point of contention for you. If you see a mass exodus of this order, then there is something radically wrong with the current system.

Yet, if as you say this 'whining' is only by a tiny fraction of the playerbase and the vast majority LOVE grinding till their eyes bleed, then this mass exodus won't occur.

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 07:46 AM // 07:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarous

This argument is, as i have pointed out before, tantamount to admitting pve sucks. If everyone migrates over to the pvp ladder, this means no one found pve fun. Are you admitting that your conception of fun is so out of whack with the vast majority of the community that if they were given the choice between that and a level playing field pvp model they would universally shun what you enjoy?

1) The posters of this forum are, by far, a minority to both lurkers of this forum and players of this game.

2) "IF" is a big word. It should have more letters.

3) There is no 'vast majority of the community' on these forums, and certainly not one that is saying they want UAS, so kindly stop trying to imply otherwise, it tends to ruin your credibility.

4) The problem with declarative statements (or even heavy inferences) like 'no one likes PvE' is that it only takes one exception to break the rule. For example -- I'm thoroughly enjoying Guild Wars PvE. Rule broken.

Celes Tial · May 31, 2005, 07:52 AM // 07:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarous

Fallacy here. You're only affected because you want to fight the people in the UAS ladder. The pve ladder still exists in full force. The proposal doesn't change any of the current abilities in GW for pvers. Yes the community is split, but one is only 'primary' if the vast majority of the population uses the option.

Could you please stop assuming that there are two kinds of players - PvPers and PvEers? At least HALF the playerbase enjoys BOTH. You keep on totally ignoring this, and you have chosen to not respond to any of TiC's arguments on the matter. Why?

I dont know the numbers, but from my experience I would assume that only 20% of the playerbase plays PvE ONLY. GW does not offer endless content for pure PvEers, which is why many of them quit the game after beating all missions in 2 weeks or so. That leaves a very small number of pure PvE'ers who stick around, and because none of them want to PvP, NO ONE WOULD USE THE PVE LADDER.

Everyone who enjoys PvP (including those who ALSO love the PvE) would be forced to use the PvP ladder because:

-People want to team up with friends. If just two friends out of a group of 6 chose the UAS button, the others would be forced to follow to still be able to play with them. Guilds would be split up and forced to move to the UAS PvP ladder for the same reason.

-Very few PvE ladder groups, it would take forever to get matched against another team.

Lazarous · May 31, 2005, 08:01 AM // 08:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celes Tial

Could you please stop assuming that there are two kinds of players - PvPers and PvEers? At least HALF the playerbase enjoys BOTH. You keep on totally ignoring this, and you have chosen to not respond to any of TiC's arguments on the matter. Why?

I dont know the numbers, but from my experience I would assume that only 20% of the playerbase plays PvE ONLY. GW does not offer endless content for pure PvEers, which is why many of them quit the game after beating all missions in 2 weeks or so. That leaves a very small number of pure PvE'ers who stick around, and because none of them want to PvP, NO ONE WOULD USE THE PVE LADDER.

Everyone who enjoys PvP (including those who ALSO love the PvE) would be forced to use the PvP ladder because:

-People want to team up with friends. If just two friends out of a group of 6 chose the UAS button, the others would be forced to follow to still be able to play with them. Guilds would be split up and forced to move to the UAS PvP ladder for the same reason.

-Very few PvE ladder groups, it would take forever to get matched against another team.

If half the playerbase enjoys both, then this option will have little effect. That players want to play with friends cuts both ways - if only one person wants to switch to the uas ladder, and 2 don't...guess what, he'll stick around.

As to tic's arguments, a small newsflash: what you're quoting is a response.

People who like unequal matchups in pvp will continue to play the standard ladder. Those that want actual skill based competition will migrate to the uas ladder. If you're so terrified that no one will play the unequal standard ladder, you need to seriously look at just whether or not what you enjoy about this game should be considered a majority opinion.

TiC · May 31, 2005, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazarous

I personally expect that if there was a split like this the entire competitive pvp fanbase would migrate to the UAS ladder. This should really tell you something about how the current ladder is structured, rather than be a point of contention for you. If you see a mass exodus of this order, then there is something radically wrong with the current system.

Yet, if as you say this 'whining' is only by a tiny fraction of the playerbase and the vast majority LOVE grinding till their eyes bleed, then this mass exodus won't occur.

I'm sorry but... what?

Of course players will migrate to the UAS ladder for PvP because it will become the only viable PvP option. Creating a PvE character for the purpose of PvP would obviously be futile after this split, for the reasons mentioned 1000 times before.

And for the record, one person's "grind" is another person's gameplay. Just because you don't like going through PvE and grabbing a skill or rare item from time to time doesn't mean that nobody else does either. You clearly don't speak for everyone, so I don't even see how that's even relevant in the first place.

But even still, none of that is my problem. As both an avid PvP and PvE player, I shouldn't have to be inconvenienced because of some people who consistantly get the tears flowing whenever they come across something they don't like in a game. Simply adapt, or move on. I say the same thing to people who do nothing but complain in other games as well. If you don't like how a game is played, then fine, but don't try to ruin it for the rest of us who enjoy the experience as-is.