Curse

Thevil King · Oct 23, 2010, 02:20 AM // 02:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by plenethor

Well a lot of the people complaining claimed to have synced previously and can't really offer a good reason why the changes are a bad thing so it doesn't take much to guess why they're actually upset. Also the only people I've seen complaining about it ingame were syncers, (who were losing badly if that's at all relevant). I also said people who want to stay in the same teams so it's not only syncers I was mentioning.

so, it seems to u that all the people disagreeing with the new change have no good reasons, and are just qqing.either

1. you have not read the previous arguments put forth in this thread or the other cb thread, and thus completely ignorant of any. in which case you really should not make a claim like that

2. you have read them but intentionally chose to ignore them for your own purposes. in which case will invalid ur statement

3. you have read them and have a legit objection to them. in which case you not shown it

Quote:

My picture of a pvper is fine, its a wide variety of people who play any of the pvp games in Guild Wars, including me. "pvp'ers" on the other hand are veteran complainers who's main vs. player activity takes place on the forums, mainly complaining about noob pve'rs and how they ruin their games by beating them all the time.

again, you are bringing in the largely irrelevant pvp vs pve debate.
if that is your picture of a typical "pvper" then thats fine. but tbh it is a dangerous generalization based on stereotypes and extreme situations. especially it is being utilized by AＬＯＴ　of people to falsely characterize the pvp community. and in this case, that is what you are doing

Quote:

All that still exists, just for less matches and there's plenty of times I've had some of the same people in 3 or 4 consecutive matches. And as an added advantage instead of all the people who used to join and then /resign til they got a team they thought was good we might actually get people who want to have fun and win not one or the other. /resigning until they get a team they want is more annoying than syncers for me. Really it's just a more time consuming, lazy and obnoxious form of syncing. This way you can resign all you want since even if you get the team you want you get it for one round not 20+ so people are more likely to actually play instead of try to farm victories.

wait, what are you talking about? this new system is exactly the opposite of that. instead of entering one time and getting some leaver+resign+griefers before finally getting a good team and settling down, now you get it ALMOST EVERY GAME, and it dont stop because you nver settle down with a good team.

Quote:

Feigned nonchalance notwithstanding if there's no incentive to win now what was the incentive to win before

I mean either you want to play and have fun or you dont. If you really want organised pvp you can play something that was designed for it instead of reapplying to a random mode hoping you luck out and can then faceroll for a bit til someone else lucks out. And really it's only now that there is any incentive to play well, previously if you had the time you could keep playing til you found a group to carry you. Now you play well or lose. And maybe you should go 1v2 to win, pessimism is never much fun.

are you deliberately misinterpreting the quote? but to answer you question, the incentive in the old system is an organized, coordinated match up, with engaging tactical thinking and subtle but sophisticated strategies that just promotes winning as an end in itself. what do you have with the new system? none of that, its just a bunch of random ppl put together to fight a battle then the whole grp is gone. there is no way to develope any form of organization or teamwork beyond the typical slugfest dmg spam chaos.

btw, the maps in cb clearly have some correlations with the old hb maps. in other words, this format is supposed to encourage the type of strategic play style, because if it did not it would just be another ra arena. in addition to that, just some one playing well will most likely get more wins that loses, but that will be a lot more stressful because in the presence of incompetent teammates, which happens almost every game, they are forced to carry. in alot of these cases they are helplessly dragged down by the sheer incompetence of the team.

Quote:

And FWIW I prefer the old RA system when there were TAs, you won 20 consecutive in a row and you got put in the team arenas. It discouraged syncing while allowing you to keep a team and the few victories you scraped in the TAs were more fun than any other random PvP. Though obviously there being no team CBs it wouldn't work for this.

and i, amongst alot of other ppl, prefer the old cb system.

MithranArkanere · Oct 23, 2010, 02:28 AM // 02:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Your entire argument can be summarized as "CB isn't PvP because I said it isn't."

Not. Into "It's not your usual PvP, it's meant to promote everyone join and keep playing, not ones that are already regulars in PvP".

I now play much more PvE than PvP, but I didn't join GW after using one of those trial keys.
I bought GW after playing in one of the Open PvP weekends. I found it really fun.

If the usual PvP is not enough to lure more people, then something else must be tried, and I'd rather have them try it in a festival game than in the other PvP formats.

So, instead using the same rules, it has different rules. So no matter how good you are, if the others are bad, you'll have to fight with them sooner or later. And if they get better, that's neither bad or good, since you may also either be with or against them.

I still think that "The More, The Merrier".

Killed u man · Oct 23, 2010, 03:01 AM // 03:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Not. Into "It's not your usual PvP, it's meant to promote everyone join and keep playing, not ones that are already regulars in PvP".

I now play much more PvE than PvP, but I didn't join GW after using one of those trial keys.
I bought GW after playing in one of the Open PvP weekends. I found it really fun.

If the usual PvP is not enough to lure more people, then something else must be tried, and I'd rather have them try it in a festival game than in the other PvP formats.

So, instead using the same rules, it has different rules. So no matter how good you are, if the others are bad, you'll have to fight with them sooner or later. And if they get better, that's neither bad or good, since you may also either be with or against them.

I still think that "The More, The Merrier".

I don't really know how to interpret this post. Are you pro or contra my OP then? Do you agree the changes were good or bad?

If you're on "the opposing team":

I fully agree that new people (PvE'ers) should be brougth to PvP. I hope by now, 5 years after GW release, people will finally learn to accept that PvP is the harder format to play (Need more dedication aswell as input and actual skill).

So when you want more people to play PvP (create a healthy influx, which currently doesn't exist anymore for either HA nor GvG), you indeed need lure them with healthy rewards and conditions. However, the intire point was that Anet is doing this in the wrong way.

Instead of bringing the playing field down to the level of PvE (where CB is at right now. I really notice a huge difference now that almost every PvP'er has left. Everyone just runs around like brainless chickens employing flawed tactics such as: "camp center all day and we'll win" or "don't fight only cap and run"), they should level up PvE'ers to the playing field. Some people, (a large part nontheless) however, completely refuse any form of input towards improving their competitiveness (which is their full right, play however you want to play), and those people have the right not to venture in PvP.

For those, however, willing to put in a bit more effort just for the sake of it, Anet needs to create small steps to slowly lure these people in. Rewards (such as ToT) bags is a good alternative, if only they were in a worthwhile amount (Don't get me wrong 50 ToT bags is ALOT for top GvG'ers, because they'll win alot of matches fast, but for a PvE guild, this means maybe 50 ToT bags per hour, peanuts...), and are actually earned rather than given freely. (Kinda like in CB where you have a 50% chance of winning or loosing, give or take, and rewards accordingly)

Because it is then new people come into contact with PvP, NOT to brainlessly farm, but to work towards the goal which is winning. Obviously this goes hand-in-hand with a healthy format. Look at HA for example: It is the prime example of how some PvE'ers came with the farming mentality to PvP, and actually managed to farm their way to R9, but still be completely clueless as to how the game exactly works. (Because farm builds exist when they shouldn't) This, however, is no problem in CB because there is no such thing as gimmick builds, there is only the 10 bars which are pre-determined.

Imo, CB is close to the ideal way of bringing new people into contact with PvP. Given them a set bar, set attributes, and force them to understand how their bar works in order to win. (Again, how the old palm strike worked. A bad player would be relatively bad whereas a good player would absolutely dominate) From there on, it's only a small step into the bigger formats, HA and GvG.

Kawil · Oct 23, 2010, 03:22 AM // 03:22

I'm liking the new CB format. I also liked the old one. I like the fact that I can get in rather quickly...I know my skills (or at least try to know them, lol)...and then assess what way I need to play.

Last year, I found it really frustrating to get in quickly only to be rolled by synced teams. This year, I find it a little frustrating that my teammates are different after each win. It's a nice feeling when you get a good team together and are able to play as one...until you're bested by a better team.

Peeps here are talking about tactics and teaching others and also about noobs and their lack of...whatever. I'd simply like syncing to be done away with before the beginning of the match. Assign random #'s to peeps when they hit Enter Battle. Then sort them however (#1's all together or shift place in line by so many--you get my drift I hope) so long as those hitting it at the same time...canceling...then hitting again all get in together (syncing) doesn't happen. Allow teams to stay together between matches when they win and bring back consecs with rewards. I like the competition and I also like to have some fun.

mrmango · Oct 23, 2010, 03:34 AM // 03:34

I think the warrior bar is fine. It's kinda self-sufficient leaning, reminding me of Korean bars back in the day.
Fun practice to get Bulls. ;P

Ewon · Oct 23, 2010, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrmango

I think the warrior bar is fine. It's kinda self-sufficient leaning, reminding me of Korean bars back in the day.
Fun practice to get Bulls. ;P

if you end up in a 1v1 vs an ele or ranger you wont feel so self sufficient. Pin down run, pin dow run, + blind kd. Fun times

Konig Des Todes · Oct 23, 2010, 05:37 AM // 05:37

Time to play "quote war catch up" ...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thevil King

in this case, then tell me why this new map is so bad at encouraging ppl to "think and focus on capping". afaik, almost every game on that map turns into a "big arse brawl in a ball", apparantly the person who goes solo capping is useless because no matter how hard you cap on this map, or the other norn map, the team who spams out the most dmg in a brawl will win. these maps are so small that it is extremely difficult to avoid either a huge brawl or getting rolled.

Ignored commenting on this before, but...

I'll just say that I don't get the intention behind the map. But it still allows some intentive thought - while almost every path crosses another or risks easy combat, that's why you have to think which path is better. I.e., you're at one of the moral shrines and enemies are on the bridge - do you risk going under the bridge, do you go through the enemy base which is currently empty but enemies could rez at any moment and have an advantage over you, or do you go the long way around?

It's small, and it is easy to just go "rawr c space rawr!" but it's also making it much more thinking-needed.

Sadly, at the moment especially, people don't seem to think about what to do (I cannot tell you how many times I've had a teammate *usually warrior* who goes 1v3/4/5).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

Sure but well , can there be some arena fun for PvPer's too maybe ?....

I woulda thought that a change in the typical format that you PvPers play would be enough fun for you. You know, having diversity and a lack of repetition.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aji Moto

I believe this is why they made this new map and removed the other large one, which was my favorite. Since the new format doesn't allow for tactics, it's better to have small maps that just let people mindlessly bash at each other until one side wins.

Plikkup Works not showing up was a bug which was already fixed. There was no removal of maps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sankt Hallvard

Stop repeating this false accusation. There's not a single post in this thread by anyone complaining about not being able to sync.

You're right, that's not what's being said. The complaints are about the re-randomization...

Which is a fix to syncing and having good teams that steam role other teams.

Now, *I* am not saying it is QQ'ing about sync fixing, but it *is* complaining about the solution used for it. So don't go putting me in the group of the former in response to this please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

I don't really know how to interpret this post. Are you pro or contra my OP then? Do you agree the changes were good or bad?

Some people are neutral in debates, merely trying to clarify points to promote better discussion. I tend to try to keep this - in my previous posts, and in this, I merely explained why things were done. Do I support them? Yes, but that's irrelevant to why I post.

I try to defend in the form of explanation of why things are done, not why I agree with what was done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

I fully agree that new people (PvE'ers) should be brougth to PvP. I hope by now, 5 years after GW release, people will finally learn to accept that PvP is the harder format to play (Need more dedication aswell as input and actual skill).

I'm very certain that people who play PvP will get steamrolled in DoA or UW - heck, possibly even Sorrow's Furnace - without some form of "dedication" "input" or "skill" (I am not including gimmick builds, which exist in PvP in equal numbers as PvE).

I wouldn't say so casually that PvP is the "harder" aspect of GW. PvE could easily be made to be harder than any PvP format possible, and without the use of "wtf high numbers" that Linsey Murdock loves to put in (thankfully we now have John Stumme who is more focused on entertainment than "high numbers" - especially for PvE).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

Instead of bringing the playing field down to the level of PvE (where CB is at right now. I really notice a huge difference now that almost every PvP'er has left. Everyone just runs around like brainless chickens employing flawed tactics such as: "camp center all day and we'll win" or "don't fight only cap and run"), they should level up PvE'ers to the playing field. Some people, (a large part nontheless) however, completely refuse any form of input towards improving their competitiveness (which is their full right, play however you want to play), and those people have the right not to venture in PvP.

I'll have to say that I agree with this - except for that this is where CB is at (do note that you say that CB was brought down to PvE level because all the PvP'ers left. This may not be solely due to CBs change but rather due to the fact that many people get tired of the... to put it bluntly, morons who don't get what to do. I expect to see a great decrease in this once the quests appear).

I would love to see some new casual formats - year round formats - that help do this. Along with that, some new PvE that would require more thought than "which gimmick build should I bring?" - or changes to the festival PvP formats (CB, snowball, DA) to promote some change into PvP from PvE - and vice versa.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ewon

if you end up in a 1v1 vs an ele or ranger you wont feel so self sufficient. Pin down run, pin dow run, + blind kd. Fun times

CB isn't meant to be 1v1. Nothing is. And as I must say again: each build has its pros and cons. Some builds are stronger against others, some are equal, and some are weaker.

Elnino · Oct 23, 2010, 05:59 AM // 05:59

I have to say that the level of enjoyment I got out of Costume Brawl this year is significantly less than last year's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

CB isn't meant to be 1v1. Nothing is. And as I must say again: each build has its pros and cons. Some builds are stronger against others, some are equal, and some are weaker.

It isn't meant to be 1v1 but it happens more often than not thanks to players not understanding the format.

Quote:

I'm very certain that people who play PvP will get steamrolled in DoA or UW - heck, possibly even Sorrow's Furnace

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That is all

Thevil King · Oct 23, 2010, 06:03 AM // 06:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I'll just say that I don't get the intention behind the map. But it still allows some intentive thought - while almost every path crosses another or risks easy combat, that's why you have to think which path is better. I.e., you're at one of the moral shrines and enemies are on the bridge - do you risk going under the bridge, do you go through the enemy base which is currently empty but enemies could rez at any moment and have an advantage over you, or do you go the long way around?

It's small, and it is easy to just go "rawr c space rawr!" but it's also making it much more thinking-needed.

the key word you are using here is "some", how much is that? minimal? barely? sufficient? and then later on you switch it to "much more"?

no doubt everywhere you go u need to make sound decisions, but the fact that one team loses in the big brawl will mean that this team will almost never be able to come back, if the other team keeps pressing on the kill streak. this almost always happen, because 99% of the people have no idea wtf "time kill" is, and just get rolled when they charge one by one into the mob. very rarely are teams able to come back from that; it literally takes some miracle to have teammates who know how to recover from this or do something extraordinary to make a comeback.

the criticism i have for this map is precisely this: that this map, along with the norn map rewards exactly this type of brainless brawling. that once a brawl in the start is done, you can pretty much tell who wins, though significantly more so the case in the former. in other words, this completely undermines any kind of strategic play. and i can say this: an effort by one exp player will most certainly not suffice in carrying the team to victory.

yes, the map is small and easy to go c space spam, even you point that out. if that is so, then how exactly is that compatible with your immediate claim that it is "much more thinking-needed"? you are contradicting yourself here. honestly even if two skilled teams were to play eachother on this map, it makes no difference to when two noob teams play on it. because it will be an all out brawl in both cases.

Chocobo1 · Oct 23, 2010, 07:01 AM // 07:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I'm very certain that people who play PvP will get steamrolled in DoA or UW - heck, possibly even Sorrow's Furnace - without some form of "dedication" "input" or "skill" (I am not including gimmick builds, which exist in PvP in equal numbers as PvE).

I'm sorry but if you honestly think DoA/UW/SF is out of reach to PvPers you need to not talk about things you don't know. That may come off as rude, but someone needs to tell you.

*lemming* · Oct 23, 2010, 07:48 AM // 07:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I'm very certain that people who play PvP will get steamrolled in DoA or UW - heck, possibly even Sorrow's Furnace - without some form of "dedication" "input" or "skill" (I am not including gimmick builds, which exist in PvP in equal numbers as PvE).

That's most certainly not the case. Just as one example, the first group to ever kill Urgoz was comprised of famous members of the GvG community.

drkn · Oct 23, 2010, 10:23 AM // 10:23

Quote:

That's most certainly not the case. Just as one example, the first group to ever kill Urgoz was comprised of famous members of the GvG community.

Only reason being that back in 2006 strict high-end PvE guilds were non-existant or merely crawling. I do agree that in its beginnings, GW was a primairily PvP game - or at least much more than now. Thus PvP guilds were organised since the very beginning, had players that know each other, were much more into teamplay.
Now, with the current rusty division of PvP/PvE grindfest, Konig's argument still stands. A high-end PvP guild that does nothing outside controlling Halls would have trouble with the current UW without enough reconnaissance, experienced failures and polishing their builds for Nth time.

Chocobo1 · Oct 23, 2010, 10:47 AM // 10:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by drkn

Only reason being that back in 2006 strict high-end PvE guilds were non-existant or merely crawling. I do agree that in its beginnings, GW was a primairily PvP game - or at least much more than now. Thus PvP guilds were organised since the very beginning, had players that know each other, were much more into teamplay.
Now, with the current rusty division of PvP/PvE grindfest, Konig's argument still stands. A high-end PvP guild that does nothing outside controlling Halls would have trouble with the current UW without enough reconnaissance, experienced failures and polishing their builds for Nth time.

Quote:

high-end PvP guild

Quote:

does nothing outside controlling Halls

I think most people would disagree with what you consider to be a high end PvP guild.

mage767 · Oct 23, 2010, 11:31 AM // 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chocobo1

I'm sorry but if you honestly think DoA/UW/SF is out of reach to PvPers you need to not talk about things you don't know. That may come off as rude, but someone needs to tell you.

Trust me...pvp'ers don't care about PvE elite missions. So, if you ask a pvp player what's DOA, he wouldn't know, but wait...he will be using his tormented shield for show anyway. Most pvp players did not even finish the game, let alone play high-end content. The only elite area they know is underworld because everyone knows thats where ectos mostly come from. Seriously, the knowledge of pvp players make me laugh. They may have plenty of experience in pvp style formats but honestly, they don't give a shit what happens to pve universe or the gw lore.

The best part is they are very pissed about HOM being mostly PvE oriented. I guess they got the rod up their *fill in the blanks*

NerfHerder · Oct 23, 2010, 12:17 PM // 12:17

The PvE vs PvP arguement isnt even valid. If your any good, your probably good at both. You guys act like its a different game. Its not, the same mechanics and tactics apply. They both take experience and a well rounded knowledge of game mechanics to be any good. And once you get to the highend side of either, there are pricks everywhere.

Anyway, I'm going to go do some CB. Its really fun now that each match is random. Titties.

Reformed · Oct 23, 2010, 12:55 PM // 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

and without the use of "wtf high numbers" that Linsey Murdock loves to put in (thankfully we now have John Stumme who is more focused on entertainment than "high numbers" - especially for PvE).

Glad someone else notices the complete overkill that was going on as a substitute for real difficulty. Looking forward to seeing how having Mr. Stumme at the wheel plays out from here on in. CB changes were pretty bold if not controversial but at least somebody is willing to take the risk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Just as one example, the first group to ever kill Urgoz was comprised of famous members of the GvG community.

I choked on my coffee laughing when I read post #2 in that thread. For as unhappy as PvPers seem to be with their side of the game I'd say most PvEers are the same way with theirs at this point. It got turned from wow this is hard nobody will ever win to an e-sport with <30 minute clear times for everything or gtfo. Not really a healthy game at either end of that spectrum in my opinion.

cantalus · Oct 23, 2010, 12:56 PM // 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by aspi

But pvp people dont seem to play for fun they just want to win.

i think a large number of HA players are exactly like that, but i also think anet don't object at all to this mentality, otherwise certain op builds would be nerfed to oblivion

when i tried CB for the first time yesterday a thought of perhaps these wammo mentaility rushers are all anet devs 'pvping' for the first time

NerfHerder · Oct 23, 2010, 02:34 PM // 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reformed

Looking forward to seeing how having Mr. Stumme at the wheel plays out from here on in. CB changes were pretty bold if not controversial but at least somebody is willing to take the risk.

(actual photo of john stumme)

dwchang · Oct 23, 2010, 04:09 PM // 16:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konig Des Todes

I'm very certain that people who play PvP will get steamrolled in DoA or UW - heck, possibly even Sorrow's Furnace - without some form of "dedication" "input" or "skill" (I am not including gimmick builds, which exist in PvP in equal numbers as PvE).

O RLY? Funny you should mention that....

My Guild used to only play in high-end GvG for ~3 years and has recently come back to finish off our HoM. Just last night we beat all of Domain of Anguish with a random build not found on PvX, no consumables and just hitting c + space for a few hours. Oh and the previous weekend we did Urgoz and the Deep with the same setup.

So yeah, you might wanna stop generalizing things. PvE isn't as "hard" as you make it seem so stop getting such a big head. Especially after you add all those consumables and PvE-only skills. Back when Te beat Urgoz, both things did not exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by drkn

Now, with the current rusty division of PvP/PvE grindfest, Konig's argument still stands. A high-end PvP guild that does nothing outside controlling Halls would have trouble with the current UW without enough reconnaissance, experienced failures and polishing their builds for Nth time.

See above.

Perhaps you mean a current high-end PvP Guild and maybe things have changed since then, but this type of PvE "Elitist"(Oh my God that word!) is ridiculous. I seem to also recall a group consisting of mostly rawr players finishing "Domain of Anguish" in what was then the fastest clear time (~2 hours or so?).

Then again, you did qualify your statement with "does nothing outside of controlling Halls," but that's also a bit of a generalizing statement. Many high-end PvP Guilds still do PvE or at least some of their members do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mage767

Trust me...pvp'ers don't care about PvE elite missions. So, if you ask a pvp player what's DOA, he wouldn't know, but wait...he will be using his tormented shield for show anyway. Most pvp players did not even finish the game, let alone play high-end content. The only elite area they know is underworld because everyone knows thats where ectos mostly come from. Seriously, the knowledge of pvp players make me laugh. They may have plenty of experience in pvp style formats but honestly, they don't give a shit what happens to pve universe or the gw lore.

The best part is they are very pissed about HOM being mostly PvE oriented. I guess they got the rod up their *fill in the blanks*

This type of PvE elitist attitude is laughable (especially when considering the irony that PvE'ers always call PvP'ers elitist). I'd suggest you stop being full of yourself. After all, you're only beating a scripted AI with exploits, consumables and skills specifically designed to be OP.

Seriously, why does either side feel so superior to the other? It's like you're in middle school or something.

Still Number One · Oct 23, 2010, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwchang

O RLY? Funny you should mention that....

My Guild used to only play in high-end GvG for ~3 years and has recently come back to finish off our HoM. Just last night we beat all of Domain of Anguish with a random build not found on PvX, no consumables and just hitting c + space for a few hours. Oh and the previous weekend we did Urgoz and the Deep with the same setup.

So yeah, you might wanna stop generalizing things. PvE isn't as "hard" as you make it seem so stop getting such a big head. Especially after you add all those consumables and PvE-only skills. Back when Te beat Urgoz, both things did not exist.

And before anyone tries to say something, his guild isn't a one in a million situation. Hell when I was only in about rank 500 play my GvG roster could do anything in PvE we wanted with no problem at all, normal mode or hard mode. I know for a fact that [rawr] used to PvE quite a bit together and had no problems. People honestly believe being able to beat stagnant AI is harder then living, thinking, ever changing real people? I guarantee you a top PvP guild can do any PvE content within a couple tries, but your top PvE guilds won't be able to place in the top 16 of an mAT within a year.

I hate these PvE vs PvP arguments, but that post Konig made was just so ignorant and completely wrong.