Curse

Bryant Again · Sep 05, 2008, 06:08 PM // 18:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

None whatsoever, it's bad habit on my part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

this post

Took pretty much everything out of context, nice.

JDRyder · Sep 05, 2008, 06:30 PM // 18:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Took pretty much everything out of context, nice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

I am compelled by your reasoning. /sarcasm

The least you could do is support your points, otherwise you just encourage everyone to up their post count, i.e. pointlessly lengthening the thread.

123456789101

Inner Salbat · Sep 05, 2008, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

Eragon Zarroc · Sep 05, 2008, 06:45 PM // 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

No, I'd say that's the "Guilty Gear" approach to PvP. The main problem with this approach in GW is that unlike GG, there aren't any built-in safeguards in the mechanics.

Ideally, you don't really want the devs correcting overpowered stuff - you'd rather the players were forced to find some way around it. Games like GG enjoy playerbases with very high levels of skill exactly because the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

exactly what i was about to say ^^ good job.

Bryant Again · Sep 05, 2008, 06:46 PM // 18:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

Between Ryder and I it came up with how I stated that many are turned off by the fact that heroes can't use PvE skills, and that it would be quite a thing to miss out on if the person chose to H/H instead of pug.

And, gonna emphasize on Burst Cancel's comment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

No, I'd say that's the "Guilty Gear" approach to PvP. The main problem with this approach in GW is that unlike GG, there aren't any built-in safeguards in the mechanics.

Ideally, you don't really want the devs correcting overpowered stuff - you'd rather the players were forced to find some way around it. Games like GG enjoy playerbases with very high levels of skill exactly because the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

I don't see how this has anything to do with heroes though.

There's a difference between "overpowered" and "imbalanced". Generally, something is overpowered when it's totally out of balance. From what I've played in GG, it isn't just one character being given all of these "OP" abilities, but instead everyone is equally crazy. For GG, it's just it's game design. Nothing's wrong with it, it's just a different playstyle.

Things only become a problem when one character is more powerful than everyone else, but that applies to all games. In Guild Wars, it's certain builds.

JDRyder · Sep 05, 2008, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inner Salbat

Was kind of brought about by looking at the aspect of 7 hero's and what would happen to PvP areas, and I think it was concluded that remaining 2 should be removed as well, PvP should be just that Player vs Player not player vs hero/player that's just dumb, if you want to play with your hero's vs other people that is what hero battles are for.

agreed, dont know why they let you use them in pvp in the 1st place

Burst Cancel · Sep 05, 2008, 09:14 PM // 21:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

There's a difference between "overpowered" and "imbalanced". Generally, something is overpowered when it's totally out of balance. From what I've played in GG, it isn't just one character being given all of these "OP" abilities, but instead everyone is equally crazy. For GG, it's just it's game design. Nothing's wrong with it, it's just a different playstyle.

Things only become a problem when one character is more powerful than everyone else, but that applies to all games. In Guild Wars, it's certain builds.

No, not everyone is "equally" crazy, and some matchups are actually pretty bad. But as I said, one reason GG can get away with overpowered stuff is that there are safeguards built into the base game mechanics.

Here's the bigger problem though: how do you know when something is actually imba? In some cases it can take a long time for players to figure out how to deal with a particular tactic. Further, the average (or even above-average) player is almost never a good judge of balance - the appropriate counter to a seemingly imba tactic might require skill that only the best players possess.

Tyla · Sep 05, 2008, 09:33 PM // 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

players will always be smarter than NPCs, thats why in HM NPCs have fast casting, 30 atts so their skills do 10000 damage 500 energy and 1000 armor

imo make the IA better and take that crap off cause it has rended some profs/skills useless

Enemies in PvE need to know how to react towards certain situations, not incredibly high attributes and buffs. They also need full bars and with decent comprahension.

Just giving people PvE skills isn't going to balance it out, it's just power creep versus power creep.

Quote:

i think he means SY warriors

... Which usually refers to Godmode D-Slashers in the first place anyway?

Quote:

also dont forget FGJ does not work for DS in pvp

I understand that. SY wouldn't exactly work in PvP either though, will it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damian979

PvP is a breeding ground for making skills mediocre. It's always about "itz so imba", "itz so op". Instead of constantly omitting or nerfing skills in the name of "balance", I say make it harder. Open up all the skills, ignore the whining, learn to counter skills, and be a better player and let's see who can really survive in PvP instead of having the watered down whine pool of skills we now have.

You're pretty retarded if you think build wars is a good idea, which is what "learn to counter skills" means. A common balanced build is very tight, but if you have to prepare for more and more different things and take a more defensive, one-sided approach you end up having an inflexible build that can't combat much at all.

"Really survive in PvP" isn't the case at all, because if you have some uber awesome 1337 counter to X build, but it fails against Y build and maybe Z build because your bar isn't designed to combat Y or Z build, which degenerates into build wars.

Quote:

I might actually stand to play PvP more like I used to if it weren't for all the QQ's of "you're only winning because you're running an overpowered build". I'm sorry, but I don't start crying just because someone takes me down with a good bar, and I call someone running an underpowered build a noob.

In other words, (going back to the Cultist's Doom Spikers here) you'd blame someone for losing if they were using a build not equally as powerful?

Build flexibility is a very important thing. You can't design your build to defeat everything if there's too many builds that need specific counters and beat every single one, because once again, it degenerates into build wars and skill won't be nearly as important as bringing counters. That, and power creep versus power creep is bad.

EPO Bot · Sep 05, 2008, 09:40 PM // 21:40

Even if i could have seven heroes, i would still try to play with players as much as possible.

Just imagine something now: What if Anet had continued to pump out new chapters as originally planned. We could have had like six continents by now. Having seven heroes would be almost a must for latecomers in the game, because older areas would be abandoned completely.

Bryant Again · Sep 05, 2008, 09:41 PM // 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

Here's the bigger problem though: how do you know when something is actually imba? In some cases it can take a long time for players to figure out how to deal with a particular tactic. Further, the average (or even above-average) player is almost never a good judge of balance - the appropriate counter to a seemingly imba tactic might require skill that only the best players possess.

Determining an imbalance relies on numerous factors, including the following: how simple is it to use? What's the tradeoff for the simplicity? How effective is it? What's the skill threshold? The list goes on.

A good example is the Necron race in Dawn of War: Dark Crusade. The main problem with the Necrons is not that they have too much versatility, but unlike they Eldar they don't make a tradeoff: they're also highly resilient. They would have numerous abilities and specializations but not suffered little consequence for it. Because of this, the only way to beat a Necron player was to be *much* better than him and not hope he screws up by just a little bit but a whole lot. But in every 1v1, if it's against the Necron and between players of equal skill, Necrons will always win.

So yeah, Necrons got a well-deserved nerf in Soulstorm, the next expansion.

To answer the other part of your question, how "imbalance" should be decided and acted upon, I think it goes a bit one side and mostly the other (also in the same philosophy that I hold to Guild Wars): The most knowledgeable and experienced should always be the ones who guide the utmost vital balance of the game, while at the same time making sure the lesser-skilled players are able to find a wide variety of options of bearable play. While I don't think going polar in either direction is good for the game, it's vital to keep a larger emphasis with the experienced portion of the playerbase. Generally, the "lesser-skilled" are always easier to please.

Inner Salbat · Sep 06, 2008, 01:18 AM // 01:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by EPO Bot

Even if i could have seven heroes, i would still try to play with players as much as possible.

Just imagine something now: What if Anet had continued to pump out new chapters as originally planned. We could have had like six continents by now. Having seven heroes would be almost a must for latecomers in the game, because older areas would be abandoned completely.

That is slowly happening now it would be like a ghost town when GW2 hits the market so it's better to start bringing it out soon so that the good players can filter some of there genius to other players before that happens of course it's not imperative.

On the other hand that maybe the plan to depopulate GW1 so they can close the servers, I for one am not buying GW2 so at that point unless there is some sort of offline version or something will wave goodbye too my 3 years of effort.

This debate sounds like the favor debate we had before they changed it, it isn't going to go away.

Crom The Pale · Sep 06, 2008, 03:59 AM // 03:59

At this point PvE is very much a dieing aspect of GW.

By the end of this year, barring some major PvE content update, I expect PvE to be completely dead.

Only those diehard title farmers will be left in game, plus those few that are still rather new to the game.

Today an old guildie of mine joined me for the MOX quests. We partied with a pug and it was a split between 3year vets and new relatively new players.
The vets were basically just there for the Hero, then they would go back to some other game.

It may already be to late for 7heros to keep people in GW. If they were unable to H/H or PUG something in the last 6 months chances are they left GW and may not return.

Inner Salbat · Sep 06, 2008, 04:43 AM // 04:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

It may already be to late for 7heros to keep people in GW. If they were unable to H/H or PUG something in the last 6 months chances are they left GW and may not return.

That's all the more reason to get it out and done sooner before it becomes too much a job for 1 dev and 1 artest to handle, maybe we should have pushed harder sooner but I think people have been pushing for this option for a long time, well it took us 2 years to get them to sell unlock packs for us to UAX our accounts 3 years for them to split favor.

JDRyder · Sep 06, 2008, 07:19 AM // 07:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Enemies in PvE need to know how to react towards certain situations, not incredibly high attributes and buffs. They also need full bars and with decent comprahension.

thats what i said

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

Just giving people PvE skills isn't going to balance it out, it's just power creep versus power creep.

umm???

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

... Which usually refers to Godmode D-Slashers in the first place anyway?

why do you want SY warriors for pvp?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

I understand that. SY wouldn't exactly work in PvP either though, will it?

nope thats why i lol'ed irl when he said "sy warriors" when we were talking about pvp

Avarre · Sep 06, 2008, 07:38 AM // 07:38

Quote:

the players have to be able to deal with stupidly broken shit on a regular basis.

How can people even bring this argument into a discussion with a straight face?

Skill countering overpowered stuff usually involves using an equally powerful strategy, or opportunistic strategy, to retake initiative or preying on the weaknesses of the setup.

Completely imbalanced stuff, however, just gives whoever uses it an advantage in all situations and therefore even if skill can defeat it, it takes away the whole point of competition, which is meant to be a fair platform of skill.

Theories like this work in games where you can change your style midway, but in Guild Wars, the build you have is the build you have, and there are limits to what you can do midway (compared to most RTS games, where you can switch builds/unit compositions in response). Tactical adjustments only go so far.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 06, 2008, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmr819

I sometimes wonder what would happen if ANet offered a "7 Heroes" feature as a purchase option the way they currently offer extra character slots.

Additional revenue, for virtually no labor investment

/SIGNED!

That's the way to do it, IMO. They could even sell extra heroes individually at $2 - 5 per extra hero slot. Only the people who really wanted extra heroes would buy them, and somehow I'm thinking most people likely to PUG would not be in that group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

whyyyy?

you dont need 8 of them theres a reason people dont use 8 of them now, and cry of frustration is not a pve skill i think you mean Cry of pain.

8 lightbringers gaze for a player at 10 LB means 8 interrupts and 8000 points of damage dished out over up to 10 enemies every 15 seconds.
8 cry of pain means 8 interrupts and 8x93 armor-ignoring AoE damage every 12 seconds.
8 Vanguard assassins mean 8 interrupts and 8 extra lvl 20 minions for 15 seconds every 30 seconds.
That's pretty powerful stuff.

Sure there may be situations where it's even more beneficial to bring other PvE skills on some or all the heroes (e.g. you do want headbutt on your dslash warrior, necrosis on your discordway necros, eternal aura on your dervish etc etc) but the point is that there's tons of PvE skills which would be horribly powerful if heroes could use them, not just Save Yourselves! like you said.

EDIT: Of course, human teams can use PvE skills today, so heroes with PvE skills wouldn't be more horribly overpowered than human teams are today, so I'm actually more arguing against the existence of the stupid PvE skills than against heroes using them. However, as long as heroes don't get to use those horribly overpowered PvE skills, human-only teams will be more powerful than any team with 7 heroes, which I guess is the way many people want in order to keep PUGs alive.

And personally I'm not sure I want my heroes to be able to use PvE skills - I enjoy facing at least some level of challenge.

JDRyder · Sep 06, 2008, 09:52 AM // 09:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Numa Pompilius

8 lightbringers gaze for a player at 10 LB means 8 interrupts and 8000 points of damage dished out over up to 10 enemies every 15 seconds.
8 cry of pain means 8 interrupts and 8x93 armor-ignoring AoE damage every 12 seconds.
8 Vanguard assassins mean 8 interrupts and 8 extra lvl 20 minions for 15 seconds every 30 seconds

you going to put 3 non prot/heals on your monks?

also you going to have to micro all that cause heros are not going to use things like CoP, the way you want them to

Moloch Vein · Sep 06, 2008, 10:16 AM // 10:16

Frankly, it puzzles me why this hasn't already been added to the game.

Seven heroes could also be used to make up new Guild Wars pvp arenas.

Inner Salbat · Sep 06, 2008, 10:21 AM // 10:21

On the other hand we could just farm gold buy consumables and power stones to make the h/h party so overpowered that it requires no skill to actually play at all great solution ~not~, I'd rather make a build and roll with it to see what I'm made of rather than rely on cheap tricks.

Numa Pompilius · Sep 06, 2008, 10:56 AM // 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDRyder

you going to put 3 non prot/heals on your monks?

"Sure there may be situations where it's even more beneficial to bring other PvE skills on some or all the heroes" --- "but the point is that there's tons of PvE skills which would be horribly powerful if heroes could use them, not just Save Yourselves! like you said."

What was unclear about that?

Quote:

also you going to have to micro all that cause heros are not going to use things like CoP, the way you want them to

They don't need to coordinate spike, they just need to spam on recharge.

Give up, your point was wrong, SY! is not the only skill "people may change" to if heroes could use PvE skills.