Curse

Shifty Geezer · Nov 12, 2005, 09:04 PM // 21:04

Bear with me - This isn't another Nov 10th rant!

As an PvEing Ele who'se reached the South Shivverpeaks for the first time, I feel like the recent AOE changes have hit me hard. Meteor Storm takes a long time to cast. It's oft interrupted. If you do get it off, it was effective in locking down massed characters. Now monsters run out the way a costly and rare (in successfulness) spell has been rendered next to useless. This and other changes are being made for the sake of balance; to remove overly powerful techniques and level the playing field.

However, I suggest that this is counter-productive to gameplay. I propose that moderate, considered imbalances are what makes for a successful game, at least in PvE.

In a perfectly balanced game, for every attack there's a counter attack. For every spell there's a counter spell. Every time you try to do something, they'll stop you, and vice versa. You inflict damage, they heal. You enchant yourself, they hex you. You AOE a group, they move out the way, and when you blast nearby foes, they retreat to get fixed. Stalemate.

It's like two opposing armies. If they're equally well trained, and equally well equipped, in equal numbers on an open field, they'll take equal casualties. So when you realise now that Anet keep levelling the playing field in all areas except the opposition have a much bigger army, you realise that you're at an utter disadvantage!

For me, the key point to GW was the variety of skills and choosing a selection that was more effective. Knowing that ice elementals are weak to fire, you take fire spells and play that strength. If you're in an area where melee fighters mass on your warriors, you take Meteor Storm to flatten them. Some techniques that work well in some areas don't work in others, and the joy is thinking how to jiggle your build to accomodate the changes.

If Anet keep elliminating advantages and strengthening the enemy, they'll destroy all actual gameplay. With perfectly balanced opponents you know every spell and hex and enchantment you cast will be blocked or removed and countered, and there becomes no point in trying. Computer games tend to pit you as the hero alone against overwhelming odds. It's only the stupidity and incompetance of the enemy, and the unique advantages of the player's character, that enable players to win. How else can one space ship destroy an invading alien species, one maverick soldier slaughter entire armies, one Barbarian defate entire planetworths of orcs and goblins? If we're going to be outnumbered 3:1, especially when the henchmen are going to be given a MUCH weaker array of feats than opponents (why have no henchies got interrupts?! Why'd's the Necro neither Hex nor Summon?!) we need there to be weaknesses of the enemy that we can find and exploit.

Ristaron · Nov 12, 2005, 09:21 PM // 21:21

/signed ?

Stop nerfing our ability to win, plzkthnx.

calamitykell · Nov 12, 2005, 10:43 PM // 22:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

In a perfectly balanced game, for every attack there's a counter attack. For every spell there's a counter spell. Every time you try to do something, they'll stop you, and vice versa. You inflict damage, they heal.

Blackout the monk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

You enchant yourself, they hex you.

Hex Breaker or any Hex Removal (I believe N's, Me's, and Mo's all have hex-removal skills.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

You AOE a group, they move out the way, and when you blast nearby foes, they retreat to get fixed.

Snare, knockdown, and uh.. snare?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Stalemate.

Not if you're prepared and coordinated.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

It's like two opposing armies. If they're equally well trained, and equally well equipped, in equal numbers on an open field, they'll take equal casualties.

Tactics, Strategy, and Coordination will win the day. If the AI is good at manuvering your attemps to kill them, approach them differently.

Fin.

LifeInfusion · Nov 12, 2005, 11:03 PM // 23:03

The thing is, almost EVERYTHING in PvE is designed to prepare you for GvG and/or PvP.

When fighting a player, if he/she has 1/2 a brain they will move out of an AOE attack. Also, fire nukers are WAYYYY too cmmon, so this is another way they can encourage use of other elements and facilitate more strategic gameplay. For example, a water/fire elementalist snare-nuker instead of a 16 fire brute-force nuker.

Ensign · Nov 12, 2005, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

As an PvEing Ele who'se reached the South Shivverpeaks for the first time, I feel like the recent AOE changes have hit me hard.

We've heard this a lot, obviously. After playing around with the changes extensively I get the feeling that this is a common reaction because most Elementalist players have never learned how to do anything beyond dropping AoE 'storms' onto a huge mass of monsters standing around a tank.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Meteor Storm takes a long time to cast. It's oft interrupted. If you do get it off, it was effective in locking down massed characters. Now monsters run out the way a costly and rare (in successfulness) spell has been rendered next to useless.

You've had very different experiences with the skill than I have then. From what I can tell monsters don't flee a Meteor Shower *at all*, since the current version of the AI doesn't run until they've taken multiple hits. Even if they ran after the first hit, as they probably should, the skill would still be great, as it'd deal 100+ damage in an AoE, plus a knockdown that holds a bunch of enemies in place, plus a second hit and knockdown if they're impeded from running at all. I couldn't really test the AI against a Meteor Shower, though, as whatever mobs got caught in the Shower were usually dead shortly after the second hit. This was desert and shivverpeaks, though, they'd probably be a bit more durable in the Fire Islands / WaW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

This and other changes are being made for the sake of balance; to remove overly powerful techniques and level the playing field.

Is that why you think this change was made? That this was a deliberate attempt to 'nerf' certain characters?

Guild Wars is advertised as a strategy game, where player skill and experience is supposed to be the deciding factor. This ideal has been hard to implement in PvE because the primitive monster AI made PvE take about as much strategy as shooting fish in a barrel. This AI tweak certainly hasn't solved that - and it has its issues of its own - but it's a step towards making monsters behave intelligently.

What's so maddening is how AI expectations vary from genre to genre. If you come from a FPS or RTS background, you're used to good, adaptive AI being a *selling point* of a game. Enemies that will take cover and use terrain to their advantage? That's awesome. But in the 'RPG' genre good AI is taboo. Enemies are expected to beeline for the player, attack the non-threatening, unkillable 'tank', and sit there hacking away in mindless futility while the rest of the players execute them in turn. Even ancient, retarded dragons must stay true to the tired script of vegetatively attacking the paladin in front of them.

Why the difference? The goal. In a FPS or RTS, the goal is to overcome various obstacles and the gameplay is in the challenge of doing so. But in an RPG, the goal isn't completing objectives, but in harvesting loot from the killing fields. When making a RPG you aren't designing a strategy game, as much as a glorified slot machine with meteors instead of levers and orges instead of cherries.

Your players *are not* looking for a challenge. They're looking to zone out and watch the loot drops in hopes of hitting a jackpot.

This AI change is, perhaps, a sign of Guild Wars attempting to break that mold - as someone who was attracted to the game because it was supposed to be different, I find this encouraging.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

However, I suggest that this is counter-productive to gameplay.

The exact opposite - this AI change is adding actual gameplay to Guild Wars PvE, and people do not want it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

In a perfectly balanced game, for every attack there's a counter attack...Stalemate.

I'll just take this as a sign that you've never been involved in any competition in your life as you clearly have no idea how it works.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

So when you realise now that Anet keep levelling the playing field in all areas except the opposition have a much bigger army, you realise that you're at an utter disadvantage!

Only if you're functionally retarded.

In a PvE game it's not the monsters that counter you, it's you who counters the monsters. You know exactly what's coming. The mobs always use the same skills, and are almost always in the same place. You control the timing and potentially even the position of the engagement. The strategies they're going to use are known. In a balanced game, as you mentioned above, there's a counter for everything, and since you can bring whatever tools you want to destroy the opponent's strategy you have no excuse for losing outside of superior numbers. Superior numbers that, I might add, can usually be divided up and defeated easily with proper tactics.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

For me, the key point to GW was the variety of skills and choosing a selection that was more effective.

How has this changed? The only difference is that now skills that were only effective because of AI exploits are now poor. That's it. It's still the same game, and if you're someone who enjoyed the strategic aspects, it's actually a *better* game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Knowing that ice elementals are weak to fire, you take fire spells and play that strength. If you're in an area where melee fighters mass on your warriors, you take Meteor Storm to flatten them. Some techniques that work well in some areas don't work in others, and the joy is thinking how to jiggle your build to accomodate the changes.

You're joking. The strategy that everyone used was one 'gear tank' to hold the aggro, two monks to support him, and two fire nukers to bombard the masses of enemies around the tank. This was done regardless of resistances, classes, skills, or really just about anything. Meteor Shower wasn't a 'tactical choice to counter a strategy', it was a catch all, one stop, no think solution to absolutely every problem in the game, to the point of utter brainlessness. All this talk about jiggling your build is hand waving that has no basis in reality, because people were *not* changing their builds.

This discussion would be much more straightforward if people would stop lying to themselves and everyone else. This has nothing to do with strategy or tactics. The complaints are coming because people wanted to drop Meteor Showers on pack after pack of retarded cattle in the killing fields and pick up their loot, without having to think in the slightest. That the mobs don't march mindlessly to their deaths anymore is a colossal blow to their slot-machine gameplay, and they're complaining loudly because of it.

So let's cut the crap and get to the heart of the issue - do you want Guild Wars to be a strategy game, or do you want it to be a slot machine game?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

If Anet keep elliminating advantages and strengthening the enemy, they'll destroy all actual gameplay.

You mean they'll add enough actual gameplay that the casino dwellers won't have any idea what to do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

(why have no henchies got interrupts?! Why'd's the Necro neither Hex nor Summon?!)

I don't know why they don't get interrupts, but they don't have hexes, enchantments, or summons, in general, because they want henchmen to fit seemlessly into teams. Necromancers do not want to be getting into corpse fights with Claude. They made a few exceptions, like Healing Breeze, but in general that's the case - no henchman will put a character of the same class at a disadvantage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

we need there to be weaknesses of the enemy that we can find and exploit.

You make this sound like people are having problems overcoming the obstacles in PvE already, when that's the furthest thing from the truth. People aren't trying to figure out how to beat an enemy, because that's usually trivial. They're trying to figure out how to beat a given enemy over and over and over again, as quickly as possible, and with as few players as they can get away with. Unfortunately reality is so far removed from your argument that it's downright laughable. If PvE in this game actually was a challenge, where you had to carefully select your team, your skills, your strategy, and your tactics to be able to complete a mission, I think it would be a lot more fun and rewarding. Too bad that's not the case.

Peace,
-CxE

Amn_En_Tarsath · Nov 12, 2005, 11:22 PM // 23:22

The really fundamental problem with balancing is that A.Net listens to those whining the loudest. This patch did not really make it harder to play an elementalist. You can still play the old way... but... the update just made it annoying and more time consuming.
I like the fact that the mobs flee the AOE Spells. But i don't like the sideeffect of this prolonging a fight you will surely win anyways. The UW for example was allready a somewhat tedious experience before said patch but now it is far too time consuming to be done by a team that doesn't consist of folks that are willing to stay together for more than 6 hours.

The whole PVE Part just got slower... and yes, in my opinion it also became annoying. Just casting something and seeing them scatter over and over and over again... awwwwwww... makes me want to kill something. Nothing in range though, everything is running.

Vhayr · Nov 12, 2005, 11:26 PM // 23:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

So let's cut the crap and get to the heart of the issue - do you want Guild Wars to be a strategy game, or do you want it to be a slot machine game?

Very well said. I love how teamwork has a much greater significance now than it did before the update. Those "unwanted" classes might actually get a look in now.

Venus · Nov 12, 2005, 11:33 PM // 23:33

/unsigned >.<

I want this to be a strategy game, not a "slot machine"

Vel Satis · Nov 12, 2005, 11:40 PM // 23:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

You make this sound like people are having problems overcoming the obstacles in PvE already, when that's the furthest thing from the truth. People aren't trying to figure out how to beat an enemy, because that's usually trivial. They're trying to figure out how to beat a given enemy over and over and over again, as quickly as possible, and with as few players as they can get away with. Unfortunately reality is so far removed from your argument that it's downright laughable.

/signed

I don't post often (read: at all) but the only peeps complaining in-game are rich solo farmers. Some guy last night was trying to base a case against the update on the price of ectos. When 70% of players have less than 10k, how does the price of ectos really affect them?

This update did a good job, the AI is a little smarter which means the game is a little harder which means I have more fun.

edit:and wtf is a 'town dweller'?

Torment · Nov 12, 2005, 11:58 PM // 23:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

What's so maddening is how AI expectations vary from genre to genre. If you come from a FPS or RTS background, you're used to good, adaptive AI being a *selling point* of a game. Enemies that will take cover and use terrain to their advantage? That's awesome. But in the 'RPG' genre good AI is taboo. Enemies are expected to beeline for the player, attack the non-threatening, unkillable 'tank', and sit there hacking away in mindless futility while the rest of the players execute them in turn. Even ancient, retarded dragons must stay true to the tired script of vegetatively attacking the paladin in front of them.

Alright, an rpg this not. Virtually nobody in any game called that online does it. RP stands for "roleplaying". It doesn't happen. But in great books like Lord of the Rings and The Shannara series to name two (I know I have missed naming many others, but get over it) the good guys (or people's characters) face evil and it's forces (bosses and the regular run of the mill minions) and in said books when facing the enemy the bad guys often didn't use much in the way of tactics. Evil is anarchy and a lack of organization. So, they depend on numbers and overwhelming the good guys.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Superior numbers that, I might add, can usually be divided up and defeated easily with proper tactics.

Again, how the hero's in books usually end up winning and defeating the evil plaguing the land. Again simplifying things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

The strategy that everyone used was one 'gear tank' to hold the aggro, two monks to support him, and two fire nukers to bombard the masses of enemies around the tank. This was done regardless of resistances, classes, skills, or really just about anything. Meteor Shower wasn't a 'tactical choice to counter a strategy', it was a catch all, one stop, no think solution to absolutely every problem in the game, to the point of utter brainlessness. All this talk about jiggling your build is hand waving that has no basis in reality, because people were *not* changing their builds.

Do you have any idea how many people can't execute that strategy sucessfully? I have even taken the time to explain in more detail what people needed to do and they still screwed it up. Thus the reason people who knew what they were doing, started using a smaller group of people they knew had the intelligence to do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

So let's cut the crap and get to the heart of the issue - do you want Guild Wars to be a strategy game, or do you want it to be a slot machine game?

It is a strategy game and the strategy that is most popular has changed, my guildies and I have used others. But the AI isn't more intelligent, it's simply more erratic. The real strategy part of the game comes from the PvP side, not the story side, or PvE. They are both completely different aspects and appeal to different people. So, now in order to make Flame Elementalists more viable in PvP how will they nerf/change other classes to do it. Most changes seemed geared to the PvE side and ANET continuing a war against farmers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

You make this sound like people are having problems overcoming the obstacles in PvE already, when that's the furthest thing from the truth. People aren't trying to figure out how to beat an enemy, because that's usually trivial. They're trying to figure out how to beat a given enemy over and over and over again, as quickly as possible, and with as few players as they can get away with. Unfortunately reality is so far removed from your argument that it's downright laughable. If PvE in this game actually was a challenge, where you had to carefully select your team, your skills, your strategy, and your tactics to be able to complete a mission, I think it would be a lot more fun and rewarding. Too bad that's not the case.

There are some noticble problems in completing some of the quests. Most notably the Defend quests given by Glint. The monster fought their take tremendous amounts of damage to destroy. The class that does the most damage are Ele's and in particular Fire Ele's. Without their massage damage spells, I have yet to complete one, with the exception of Defend Droknar's Forge. So, inclosing I'll simply point out that I also never...in a backhanded way insulted you as you did to the person you were responding to. Manners do still count.

allience · Nov 13, 2005, 12:07 AM // 00:07

/signed

i don't like this update because it just concerns PVE players. i don't see why PVE should be made harder since we have PVP for a challenge. making mobs flee aoe just makes other classes stronger, it doesn't balance. nothing can be completly balanced in PVE because human players are creative and always come up with new ways to make fights easier.

and personally i still do 2 man UW runs and 5 man SF runs just as fast as before so this proves there is no balance in PVE.

basically what Anet has done is make the mesmers and necros get partied easyer. i think they should of left the game as it was. at this point my elementalist is just useful for PVP.

and concerning PVE teamwork, it's bullshit. i mean if Anet wants us to farm in full parties, they just need to up the drops. if they'd give larger drops for larger parties it would encourage team play in farming. i mean if same item and gold drops same for 1 person as for 8 ppl, there is no point to make large party since everything splits up.

Aeon_Xin · Nov 13, 2005, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by LifeInfusion

The thing is, almost EVERYTHING in PvE is designed to prepare you for GvG and/or PvP.

Does the game itself state that it's practice for PVP? Does the story eveolve so that PVP is the end of the story?
From what I've read they worked real hard to keep Pvp and Pve seperate, a complete option. A way to reach both communities. An option to do Either, or both.

Other note, Alot of higher level people keep talking about how to overcome the change. That is a diversion, and not an argument. Most of the topics deal with the validity of the patch as it aplies to normal players.
The game does advertise diversity, mix and match as you see fit, find the killer combinations.
Their change of AI narrows that diversity, and strays away from one of the games major selling points.

Edit.

Think of it as a PVP/PVE Shooter, like Halo.
If every damned enemy in the story were as good as "Leet" PVP, how well could you complete the missions?
You'd be dead before you even got the first weapon in HAlo 1, about half the time.
EVen Halo 2, on legendary, give the normal FPS player a 1vs1 with any AI, he could take it down with a little practice.
1vs the army, well, only the excellent have even a slim chance.

darkMishkin · Nov 13, 2005, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Ensign doesn't insult, he smites people with the truth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by allience

i mean if Anet wants us to farm in full parties, ... they'd give larger drops for larger parties it would encourage team play in farming.

Someone tell me why Anet should not do this.

Loch · Nov 13, 2005, 12:45 AM // 00:45

Quote:

Their change of AI narrows that diversity, and strays away from one of the games major selling points.

Funny, I didn't think that making snares have a use made the game less diverse. Most groups always had 1 AoE nuker. Now there are more choices:

1) Use AoE for deterrance
2) Use AoE + snare for damage, plus critical hits against fleeing enemies (warriors and rangers deal the crits, of course)
3) No AoE's period

I myself never liked packing both Meteor Shower and Firestorm. The enemies would be almost dead by the time the spells went off, plus the recharge times are disgusting. I preferred to carry more 1-shot spells like fireball, meteor, immolate, and incendiary bonds. You'd be surprised how a fire ele can still manage. Plus enemies don't run at the sight of a meteor or fireball after Nov. 11 patch, so I've got nothing to worry about.

PieXags · Nov 13, 2005, 12:48 AM // 00:48

The fundamental problem with balancing is that SHIT HAPPENS.

You know, it has to be balanced for it to work. And when things change, that doesn't happen.

...sorry, I'll read the post next time.

Overnite · Nov 13, 2005, 12:54 AM // 00:54

They should make AoE spells damage allies. And then people would have a real reason to whine.

allience · Nov 13, 2005, 01:00 AM // 01:00

i feel like adding that Strategy should be left for PVP. true strategy is human players VS human players.
any kind of attempt to make monsters harder is dumb. it only makes fights longer and boresome.
i do both PVP and PVE and i can safely say that these 2 things are completly different.
PVE does not prepare u for pvp. actually most pve builds are bad in pvp.

and well i don't understand Anet's reasoning... i mean they already had the experience of Diablo I and II. everytime they made monsters harder and nerfed drops it just made the players think a different way around it.
i remember at some point in d2 i would just leave the bot on and never bother to actually pve because it was POINTLESS to play legit. even leveling had become so dull and long that i had to use a bot to lvl up.

what i like about guild wars is that there are no Public bots or cheats. every1 is basically on the same level and pve is actually enjoyable. i fear that with nerfing farming, it will encourage cheats.
and everything is cheatable, is just that right now ppl are not interested in making/releasing any since PVE and farming is still rewarding and relatelely easy when played legit.
if they keep nerfing stuff, 100% farming bots will be released and that would be the end of the game economy and pve alltogether. we already have trade bots and i'm sure farming bots exist in private ebay circles.

jimmy_logic · Nov 13, 2005, 01:06 AM // 01:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

So let's cut the crap and get to the heart of the issue - do you want Guild Wars to be a strategy game, or do you want it to be a slot machine game?

You mean they'll add enough actual gameplay that the casino dwellers won't have any idea what to do.

You make this sound like people are having problems overcoming the obstacles in PvE already, when that's the furthest thing from the truth. People aren't trying to figure out how to beat an enemy, because that's usually trivial. They're trying to figure out how to beat a given enemy over and over and over again, as quickly as possible, and with as few players as they can get away with. Unfortunately reality is so far removed from your argument that it's downright laughable. If PvE in this game actually was a challenge, where you had to carefully select your team, your skills, your strategy, and your tactics to be able to complete a mission, I think it would be a lot more fun and rewarding. Too bad that's not the case.

Peace,
-CxE

Mr. Ensign you sir have HIT THE NAIL IN THE HEAD. /bow

Aeon_Xin · Nov 13, 2005, 01:09 AM // 01:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loch

Funny, I didn't think that making snares have a use made the game less diverse. Most groups always had 1 AoE nuker. Now there are more choices:

1) Use AoE for deterrance
2) Use AoE + snare for damage, plus critical hits against fleeing enemies (warriors and rangers deal the crits, of course)
3) No AoE's period

I myself never liked packing both Meteor Shower and Firestorm. The enemies would be almost dead by the time the spells went off, plus the recharge times are disgusting. I preferred to carry more 1-shot spells like fireball, meteor, immolate, and incendiary bonds. You'd be surprised how a fire ele can still manage. Plus enemies don't run at the sight of a meteor or fireball after Nov. 11 patch, so I've got nothing to worry about.

Do you only read certain parts? Don't they challenge you to find killer combinations? I think that's a major selling point. It doesn't advertise, find killer combinations, and we'll delete them, just for you.

From GW site:
"New heroes can be deleted and created at any time, allowing you to create specialized characters or to have fun experimenting with profession combinations, skills, and attributes until you create the hero that suits you best."

Well, some people fire AOE suited them best, then they changed, for those people, thier whole take on their own skills.

It does not say:

New heroes can be deleted and created at any time, allowing you to create specialized characters or to have fun experimenting with profession combinations, skills, and attributes until you create the hero that suits you best, and then when you have that character created just the perfect way you want him, we'll change the AI so that your style of play becomes defunct, and has to be rebuilt from the ground up.

IF you want to argue further, go read all of the GW sight again first.

Furthermore:

The game wasn't broke before. The problem was farming, they did not do the patch for any group of players, and I'm sick of people arguing that the AI tweak was a PVP power balance, or what people call a nerf, meant to equalize players.

They tried to sneak in a patch that almost made a little sense on the surface, and it went so drasticly bad that they HAD to atleast make it copable for some people in a hurry.

I say put it back, EBAY users have already made a ton, if not, you're still not going to stop them.

MarkyX · Nov 13, 2005, 01:24 AM // 01:24

Quote:

The game wasn't broke before.

It wasn't broken before, but it was sure as hell pretty boring to play PvE with one hand and no intelligence.