Curse

kostolomac · Jul 02, 2008, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So it's ANet's "fault" that they didn't put in tens of thousands of hours to perfect an AI that would have to adapt/react to thousands of profession, build, and skill combinations with tens of thousands of options? Well I'll be damned.

We have pvp for that kind of play , I'm pissed at A.net for making the buffs more different , I'd rather fight a monster with 12 skills of whom 3 are elite rather than a monster with 4 skills where nearly half of them are monster skills. I liked pve because monsters had skills and builds , like us , the more you go in the game the more they become some enemies I would encounter in WoW.

Burst Cancel · Jul 02, 2008, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostolomac

If the designers of GW control how I play this game , this means that every QQ-er can also do that RITE? NO! The game designers have every right to dictate or change the game because they have actually made it , on the other hand you are just a player , you have no right to tell other people how to play the game unless they let you. If you don't like the games design now , leave the game and let people who enjoy it now enjoy GW. If A.net switched their game design to please casual players it was their choice , our choice is whether we are going to play this game under their rules or not play the game.

So basically, there would be nothing wrong with Anet implementing the changes I wanted, because Anet did it and not me?

I think you begin to see the problem - we're discussing what Anet should do. Therefore, it's meaningless to say that "well, other QQing players are not allowed to suggest things, but if Anet actually does it, then it's okay". What is the point of discussing anything about the game, if anything Anet does is okay, and anything suggested by players is not?

In short, you've missed my entire point - there has to be some metric by which game mechanics are determined. By arguing, "stop controlling how I play the game", you are sidestepping a discussion on the merits of the mechanics themselves and simply accusing people of trying to control you, which is completely immaterial to whether the change itself would be good or bad.

Here's a thought experiment for you: should Anet implement instant-kill and item creation abilities for all players? Why or why not?

And Phoenix, I have indeed repeated myself three times (four times now) - I do so because people continue to fail to grasp my point.

Crom The Pale · Jul 02, 2008, 11:12 PM // 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

So basically, there would be nothing wrong with Anet implementing the changes I wanted, because Anet did it and not me?

I think you begin to see the problem - we're discussing what Anet should do. Therefore, it's meaningless to say that "well, other QQing players are not allowed to suggest things, but if Anet actually does it, then it's okay". What is the point of discussing anything about the game, if anything Anet does is okay, and anything suggested by players is not?

In short, you've missed my entire point - there has to be some metric by which game mechanics are determined. By arguing, "stop controlling how I play the game", you are sidestepping a discussion on the merits of the mechanics themselves and simply accusing people of trying to control you, which is completely immaterial to whether the change itself would be good or bad.

Here's a thought experiment for you: should Anet implement instant-kill and item creation abilities for all players? Why or why not?
And Phoenix, I have indeed repeated myself three times (four times now) - I do so because people continue to fail to grasp my point.

Item creation they already gave us, with the bonus items that granted people max damage weapons and offhands free instantly.

Instant-Kill is a little over the top, however what about this...

Players that complete an Elite Zone are granted a PvE Title similar to the GWEN titles but works in all PvE environments? One title per Elite Zone, each with slightly different effect (ie: +200hp or +20armor or +15energy or +15%damage). These would be unlockable bonus more inline with what exists in many other games. In many games when you reach the "end" of the story you unlock some feature that allows you to play the game again with an advantage that is meant to increase your enjoyment of the game.

Another idea could be to make consumables no longer craftable but drops from the end chests of Elite Zones. Would this make them more acceptable to those that dislike them?

Burst Cancel · Jul 02, 2008, 11:33 PM // 23:33

By item creation, I mean full item creation - the ability to spawn any item you want, instantly in your inventory.

You missed the point of my thought experiment, anyway. One camp is arguing that players shouldn't control how other players play the game. Fine, assume that's true. What's the argument for any in-game controls then? Why can't I just do whatever I want, like instant-killing monsters? I want to instant-kill monsters. It's more fun for me. Anybody who doesn't want me to instant-kill monsters is just trying to control the way I play the game!

The point being, the whole "control" argument is spurious.

Savio · Jul 02, 2008, 11:48 PM // 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

So it's ANet's "fault" that they didn't put in tens of thousands of hours to perfect an AI that would have to adapt/react to thousands of profession, build, and skill combinations with tens of thousands of options? Well I'll be damned.

They don't need thousands of hours. For starters, mobs have shitty builds - rarely do they have monks or healers of any sort, full skillbars, secondary professions, item upgrades, or decent skills.

DreamWind · Jul 03, 2008, 12:43 AM // 00:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burst Cancel

So basically, there would be nothing wrong with Anet implementing the changes I wanted, because Anet did it and not me?

I think you begin to see the problem - we're discussing what Anet should do. Therefore, it's meaningless to say that "well, other QQing players are not allowed to suggest things, but if Anet actually does it, then it's okay". What is the point of discussing anything about the game, if anything Anet does is okay, and anything suggested by players is not?

In short, you've missed my entire point - there has to be some metric by which game mechanics are determined. By arguing, "stop controlling how I play the game", you are sidestepping a discussion on the merits of the mechanics themselves and simply accusing people of trying to control you, which is completely immaterial to whether the change itself would be good or bad.

Here's a thought experiment for you: should Anet implement instant-kill and item creation abilities for all players? Why or why not?

And Phoenix, I have indeed repeated myself three times (four times now) - I do so because people continue to fail to grasp my point.

Finally! Thank you for a logical post putting so many "arguments" out of their misery. I find it hilarious that nobody yet has got the point you are trying to make.

Sha Noran · Jul 03, 2008, 06:11 AM // 06:11

I believe the July 2nd update indicates that ANet does indeed have not only the interest in finding a better overall balance for PvE, but also the will/manpower to implement things that will help. This certainly invalidates arguments that try to disuade me from my suggestions by stating that ANet doesn't care or isn't willing to change PvE. The continually more detailed rationale for balance changes in the update notes is absolutely a step in the right direction to keep those in the community who are curious or concerned informed. I can only hope that advancements continue to be made for both halves of your aging game.

Torabo · Jul 03, 2008, 06:28 AM // 06:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

If we want another example, we can go back to my loosely WoW vs. GW thread about "catering to the newbie". A huge portion of the WoW playerbase has still only seen like 1% of the endgame content yet WoW's popularity is still booming. It's just proof that the endgame isn't the biggest selling point, but providing fun on the surface is.

Setting aside the question of whether I agree with your stance on the subject of PVE balance, the fact that the endgame isn't the biggest selling point for WoW has to do with the mentality of people.

When people pay for something they know will cost a monthly fee, the general mentality is that they DON'T EXPECT it to be something they'll finish quickly, or will be able to finish ever, depending on how much of a gamer they are.

Where as if someone pays a one-time payment for something, the general mentality tends to be that they EXPECT to be able to 'finish' whatever it is, have it 'all-at-once' or at least be able to try whatever there is, and not have it possible only after a long period of time either.

I'm not saying the a certain mentality is better or more correct or what not, but this is just what I observe in people around me (as well as in my own approach when it comes to games)

bigtime102 · Jul 03, 2008, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

I believe the July 2nd update indicates that ANet does indeed have not only the interest in finding a better overall balance for PvE, but also the will/manpower to implement things that will help. This certainly invalidates arguments that try to disuade me from my suggestions by stating that ANet doesn't care or isn't willing to change PvE. The continually more detailed rationale for balance changes in the update notes is absolutely a step in the right direction to keep those in the community who are curious or concerned informed. I can only hope that advancements continue to be made for both halves of your aging game.

Thats good to hear, but makes you wonder how long did it take them to figure out that everyones playing PVE and they should concentrate on that, afterall its what made GW a success.

All you need to do is goto RA and see the population, theres more people in Pre Searing than than in RA, and RA is the most populated of all the PVP areas. Wierd, the so called end game, with all the attention thats been paid to it, its all for couple dozen people playing RA.... I like PVP but RA isnt the best form of PVP and anything else is not accessible to the casual PVP player hence RA is the most popular place to PVP... pretty disappointing for a game that touts its PVP. I like the PVP dont get me wrong but is RA the best they could do for us? But thats another topic...

DreamWind · Jul 03, 2008, 09:01 PM // 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigtime102

Thats good to hear, but makes you wonder how long did it take them to figure out that everyones playing PVE and they should concentrate on that, afterall its what made GW a success.

All you need to do is goto RA and see the population, theres more people in Pre Searing than than in RA, and RA is the most populated of all the PVP areas. Wierd, the so called end game, with all the attention thats been paid to it, its all for couple dozen people playing RA.... I like PVP but RA isnt the best form of PVP and anything else is not accessible to the casual PVP player hence RA is the most popular place to PVP... pretty disappointing for a game that touts its PVP. I like the PVP dont get me wrong but is RA the best they could do for us? But thats another topic...

This post made me cringe on so many levels.

Skye Marin · Jul 03, 2008, 09:13 PM // 21:13

SF and Ursan are two completely different things. One was an overly effective solo farming build, and the other is one part of an efficient team build that requires human players to co-operate to succeed.

If your main concern is finding a PuG in a high end area that doesn't want a specific build, then your solution doesn't solve anything. The next most efficient build will just take its place. If your main concern is that Ursan stagnates creative build making, then a duration nerf might be justified, so that Ursan becomes just one part of a player's skill bar, instead of the focus.

Tyla · Jul 03, 2008, 10:27 PM // 22:27

Quote:

Thats good to hear, but makes you wonder how long did it take them to figure out that everyones playing PVE and they should concentrate on that, afterall its what made GW a success.

I lol'd. This game wasn't released a few days ago. Read back to the beginning of the game, where PvP was highly populated, and decent at so many levels.

The PvP made this game succesful from the beginning. I believe the sales became slower with the more campaigns that were added.

kostolomac · Jul 03, 2008, 11:30 PM // 23:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyla

I lol'd. This game wasn't released a few days ago. Read back to the beginning of the game, where PvP was highly populated, and decent at so many levels.

The PvP made this game succesful from the beginning. I believe the sales became slower with the more campaigns that were added.

Tyla is right on this , I'm not much of a pvp player , but I bought the game for the simple fact that no matter how much money or time someone spent on high-end items is equally effective as that ugly pvp sword. This fact is still true , but pvp is so underpopulated that it's sad

DreamWind · Jul 04, 2008, 12:52 AM // 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostolomac

Tyla is right on this , I'm not much of a pvp player , but I bought the game for the simple fact that no matter how much money or time someone spent on high-end items is equally effective as that ugly pvp sword. This fact is still true , but pvp is so underpopulated that it's sad

Blame Anet. There is nobody else to blame.

upier · Jul 04, 2008, 07:27 AM // 07:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

I believe the July 2nd update indicates that ANet does indeed have not only the interest in finding a better overall balance for PvE, but also the will/manpower to implement things that will help. This certainly invalidates arguments that try to disuade me from my suggestions by stating that ANet doesn't care or isn't willing to change PvE. The continually more detailed rationale for balance changes in the update notes is absolutely a step in the right direction to keep those in the community who are curious or concerned informed. I can only hope that advancements continue to be made for both halves of your aging game.

Actually what it shows is that for PvE - they don't plan on balancing the game but rather just plan on countering what they feel is imbalanced.
Build Wars anyone?

Sha Noran · Jul 04, 2008, 11:18 PM // 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by upier

countering what they feel is imbalanced.

So... balancing?

Hopefully these issues are not entirely forgotten in a fluster of repeated special event activities.

Mad King Corn · Jul 04, 2008, 11:29 PM // 23:29

The only way I can see them profiting in the end is to NOT give in to your pathetic sniveling and stop crying nerf for PVE. Im really sick of seeing it on these forums. I think there are far more people that enjoy using these skills and consumables than your little motley crew, and it is these people that anet will lose in the end. In case you havent noticed, there are people that actually use these, stop trying to make GW much harder for the rest of us, we all can't be elitest snobs that are so godly in the game like you may be. Im really impressed by your super abilities in GW, but I am disabled and these skills are what allows me to play HM and other areas that people like you seem to breeze through. Stop using skills that you feel make the game too easy for you, try and remember that the game is not that easy for the rest of us, so please stop trying to ruin the game for us, I think this has gone far enough!

Gin Cometh · Jul 04, 2008, 11:41 PM // 23:41

I am tired of all this change to my skills . Change the Monsters not the players gameplay .

PS Ectos are still dirty cheap , ANET have shot themselves in the foot.

EDIT.touch Protective Sprit ,go on i DARE you!

Crom The Pale · Jul 04, 2008, 11:44 PM // 23:44

This debate could run in circles for the next few months/years...

As I see it I purchased this game 3+ years ago and feel I got my moneys worth. Has the game change? Yes! But then if it didn't I would have quit right after completing Prophicies.

Does the game have flaws? Yes! So does every other game ever made.

Think about this, for PvP, they have yet to create an arena for players between lvl 16 and 19, you cant go into the Shiverpeaks and your not maxed out so you either die fast in RA or have people map out as soon as they see your not lvl 20.

What I would really like to read here are some thoughts about this game from some NEW players, people that have just started playing in the last 3-6months. Are they happy? Are they frustrated? Mad?

Sha Noran · Jul 04, 2008, 11:45 PM // 23:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mad King Corn

The only way I can see them profiting in the end is to NOT give in to your pathetic sniveling and stop crying nerf for PVE. Im really sick of seeing it on these forums. I think there are far more people that enjoy using these skills and consumables than your little motley crew, and it is these people that anet will lose in the end. In case you havent noticed, there are people that actually use these, stop trying to make GW much harder for the rest of us, we all can't be elitest snobs that are so godly in the game like you may be. Im really impressed by your super abilities in GW, but I am disabled and these skills are what allows me to play HM and other areas that people like you seem to breeze through. Stop using skills that you feel make the game too easy for you, try and remember that the game is not that easy for the rest of us, so please stop trying to ruin the game for us, I think this has gone far enough!

People who post responses like this one clearly failed to take the time to actually read my proposed suggestions. At no time did I state that consumables should be altered in any way. All of my changes leave the skills at a still playable level, so those who do enjoy the current meta's builds will still find success with them. It is painfully obvious you must not have read my other thread, which detailed a great number of buffs that must be made to even the playing field should these types of nerfs occur. In all reality, I've suggested a great deal far fewer nerfs than I have buffs.

Please do me a favor and don't go off calling me (and others) names without taking the time to even try to understand the suggestions I'm trying to make. I'm growing weary of people arguing that changes to the game "ruin" it for countless players; if this were true, then the game could be said to have been ruined countless times over, starting with the AoE nerf that made Firestorm a lulzy skill.