Curse

makosi · Apr 19, 2008, 09:46 PM // 21:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

Guild Wars is skill-bar based, in the end it will ALWAYS come down to Build Wars (Dshot > Casters, Anti-Melee > Dshot, bla bla bla)

Everything in this thread has been said already over the course of the past few years, but it always comes down to this:

I agree. Coming from a predominantly PvE player, I don't care about skills in PvE being nerfed for the sake of PvP. I don't care that they nerfed Mind Blast, Rodgort's and Searing Flames (the staples of a modern PvE fire nuker). Trim a few damage points off by all means because those monsters will die anyway - albeit a couple of seconds later than they would prior to the nerf.

I have resigned myself from PvP almost altogether but not as a protest, I just don't enjoy it any longer. I do, however, like to spectate occasionally on Observer Mode and it's not an entertaining show to watch virtually identical mirror image builds playing in the same way as eachother. These teams are playing these builds not because they are copy-cats but because the game as evolved to such a state that people know what is optimal, what is flexible and what works. This is the boredom age of GW.

The dev team don't realise that ever single day they allow crap, like those flying balthazar dervishes exploiting the old Pious assault and Grenth's Aura, it cheapens Champ points and weakens the game's reputation as a skill-based co-operative game. For this very reason, HA fame is looked down upon. How many people got tigers by exploiting IWAY, r-spike and all the other builds that ANet took forever to nerf?

My advice would be for ANet to make more, frequent skill balance patches and address problematic builds and skills before everybody catches on and exploits them. Don't be afraid of the people who make QQ threads and threaten to quit because of alleged PvE nerfs, they won't go anywhere in the same way I won't go anywhere if the skill balances remain as weak and as lackluster as they currently are.

I'm moaning in the aid of improving the game, not for the sake of moaning.

~

Different subject:

As a PvE player, I don't care about Ursan Blessing being overpowered. It is overpowered but so are us humans when it comes to AI. If Ursan didn't exist, we'd find a way of clearing DoA in such a fast, efficient way that we'd be 'forced' to play that way anyway by PuGs. Perhaps this efficient method wouldn't be as fast and as straightforward as Ursan but it would ultimately do the same job.

If anybody wants to run Ursan or is dead against it, it isn't really my business because it has no impact one me. Sure, it has decreased the value of DoA gems and armbraces but if that's the worst thing to happen to you this year, you're a lucky git. Whether you're running Ursanway or dual SY/TN2F paragons and D-slash warriors, you're neither a dumbass or a genious. You're just enjoying and getting on with the game.

Fril Estelin · Apr 19, 2008, 09:55 PM // 21:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racthoh

You can't adapt in PvP in that same sense because you're placed in a different environment every single time.

I hope you realise that my post is not in contradiction with what you said, since I wasn't talking about the game but rather about the players. Here we have an(other) example of PvP players unhappy about something done for PvE (and there's probably as many in the other direction) and they have to feel sad. Why can't "they" simply adapt in the case we're discussing in this thread? Do they feel threatened and that Anet is going to kill their fun? (and if so, did they think one minute about the fun of the PvErs who simply want to experience the game in a way that conflicts with PvP-oriented skill balances and do not ursan?)

Just to be clear: I know that PvP has to dictate most of skill balances, but I'd like PvPers to try to pull the blanket a little less to "their" side and learn to live with PvErs. And my biggest wish is that we all evolve into players with different styles and ways to have fun, but all tolerant of each other (but that's not going to happen). There have always been conflicting requirements and I believe that Anet made the right decision to mix PvE and PvP, despite the unwillingness of the community to "leave together" (or the unwillingness of many, but not all, PvPers to be friendly and helpful to other players, but may be I'm biaised?)

Ok, time to go to bed, I guess this is going nowhere as the previous dozens attempts.

RotteN · Apr 19, 2008, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Why can't "they" simply adapt in the case we're discussing in this thread?

So basically PvPers have to "adapt" to the fact that one of the cornerstones of a functional competition (balance) is being RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed over ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Just to be clear: I know that PvP has to dictate most of skill balances

Wait, but you just said they have to adapt to not dictating anyway. Even though it's perfectly understandable they wouldn't accept it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

but I'd like PvPers to try to pull the blanket a little less to "their" side and learn to live with PvErs.

So basically, PvE-ers can go dictate stuff that isn't even remotely important for them. Fine, then you probably won't mind that PvPers would for example, ask to let monsters stop dropping loot, but instead give reward points. After all, for us, it's easier to just buy a new skin for our PvP toons @ the tournament agent.

They should just leave PvE out of consideration when it comes to balance, or just split up the game in 2 skillsets : one fixed PvE set, so all PvE-ers can continue to e-hug their beloved fixed skillbar, and a dynamic PvP set, for the sake of balance.

Celestial_Kitsune · Apr 19, 2008, 11:56 PM // 23:56

The developers have not yet determined how future balance implementation will work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

The way it was explained to me is that the changes are going to be reverted, as stated -- to reduce the impact on PvE play. After the changes have been reverted, the effects of the changes will be evaluated. As for the statement regarding possible future tournament changes "that will not impact PvE play at all," I'm unable to provide more details because of the contingent nature of the possible plans. Basically, there are some ideas floating around about this, but they aren't sure whether the implementation will work, and/or whether we have the resources to do so. Because the plans are not definite one way or the other, and because the plans depend on a lot of internal factors, it's not something we can go into great detail about at this time. If we did go into detail and then the plans changed, there would probably be a lot more anger and speculation than if such details were not released.

Source

DreamWind · Apr 20, 2008, 01:54 AM // 01:54

Alright, it is time to pick apart every terrible argument made in this thread. It will be a long read and probably only for those who actually care about this game. Enjoy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

You sound like a spoiled kid who's world is coming to an end.

Let me start by saying, if you are calling people names in this thread, your points are already probably bad by default. I did read everything though, so I'll continue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

The message and the main point is: we don't want to hurt PvE play while balancing PvP for tournaments. Nobody gets hurt, we have a win win situation.

Wrong...PvP players get hurt because the quest for true balance is given up because of PvE. PvP needs constant balance, not temporary balance that is reverted for PvE purposes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

PvP doesn't have to sacrifice jack sh1t. PvE sacrificed over the past 3 years all in the name of balancing PvP.

I will admit that both sides have had some sacrifices, but I strongly believe that PvP has had many more sacrifices over the years because of PvE.

If you can give me a list of 5-10 MAJOR changes that STRONGLY affected the PvE game in the name of PvP, let me know. I will give you a list twice as long of PvE stuff that affected the PvP game if you ever do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gun Pierson

I have to agree on you though that a lot of the PvP players resent PvE and that's exactly why we have those doom posts now. You guys can't stand it PvE won't take collateral damage it seems.

You have to understand that me (and others like me) don't want to see PvE take damage and die or something. I simply believe that if PvP requires major changes that minorly affect PvE, those changes need to be made.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDL

Dreamwind: You know what I really, really resent? The use of 'ursan' as a "hah! I win the argument!" tactic in every post you seem to make (I know you're not the only one to use this tactic, but you're here, so hey).

Look: not everyone uses it. Seriously, there are a ton of people who don't even HAVE it, and of those that have it, not all of them use it. Certainly there are relatively few people who use it ALL THE TIME, FOR EVERYTHING.

The fact that some people don't use Ursan or don't have it is irrelevent. The fact it EXISTS is relevant. It proves that PvE does not have balance by its sheer existence. The point I was trying to make is that Anet CAN ABSOLUTELY NOT claim that they care about PvE balance when Ursan runs wild throughout PvE.

So when Anet makes the statement "we will not make changes that affect PvE play", me and others like me laugh because it implies that their intentions are for PvE balance when they obviously aren't.

The Ursan argument is an easily won one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDL

Your argument is simply "Who cares: you idiots all use URSAN!" and then streams of poorly concealed hate.

The fact that an effective godmode exists in GW does not IN ANY WAY detract from the fact that "non-godmode" stuff is in need of attention. Funnily enough, not everyone LIKES to play in godmode. Some of us like..well, things like "skill", or "playing the way the game was intended to be played".

I didn't say everybody uses Ursan (as I stated above), but the fact that a godmode exists DOES detract from any form of balance PvE may ever attain. I could easily make the argument that Ursan exists because Anet WANTED a godmode in PvE.

Let me give an example to make a point. When DoA first came out, there was an incredibly long thread on this very forum of PvE players whining that it was far too difficult. Now comes Ursan, and the entire game can be effectively farmed. You never hear DoA difficulty complaints anymore do you? Anet succeeded. They realize that PvE players in general HATE nerfs and LOVE buffs.

But not everybody hates nerfs and love buffs obviously...just the majority. So what is the point I am trying to make? The point is that Anet will throw balance out the window as long as they appease the MAJORITY. That is what these recent announcements reek of.

Arguing that you or people you know are in the minority is completely irrelevent to the point. There can NEVER be balance in PvE as long as Ursan or anything overpowered exists. The problem is that you rarely EVER see PvE players complaining about overpowered skills...they only complain when nerfs happen, even if the nerfs hardly affect the PvE game whatsoever. That is why balance cannot exists in PvE with Anet running the show.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDL

Now, aside from all that: consider the statement "focus on changes that will not impact PvE play at all" and actually look at some of the changes that have been made: loads of stuff that stops guild NPCs from being ganked/buffed to invincibility. Oh, look: Guild NPCs crop up fairly rarely in PvE, don't they? So that's not impacting PvE play at all, and it's not even really changing the functionality of any skills at all.

Thanks for making my point for me. These changes hardly affect PvE. The fact that any PvE player complains about them just confirms my earlier point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDL

If the changes work, they'll probably be implemented permanently at some point in future. If they don't they won't. if they sort of work, they'll sort of be implemented.

The point is they get to SEE what effect these changes have without actually committing to a permanent change, which is what they should be doing all the time, to be honest.

The fact that they are reverting the changes is not the major concern here. The major concern is that they said they will not make future PvP changes that affect PvE. That sounds to me like a PERMANENT statement, not a "we are testing this" statement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by quickmonty

Do we really need all these threads that revert to the old PvP vs. PvE arguments?

Let me ask a question. Who lit the spark that started this argument? I think that entity is as fault.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom the Pale

Truthfully, GW should have been 2 games not one in the first place. Integrating PvP and PvE just will not work.

I disagree. There are a ton of games with both PvE and PvP out there that work just fine. Hell, even this game with Prophecies worked fine. There was relatively few PvE vs PvP arguments back then compared to today. The two sides just blended a lot better back then. Nowadays they are completely separated, and theres only one entity to blame for that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kusandaa

IMHO, UB does NOT justify the nerf of skills in PvE.

Yes it does if you care about balance whatsoever. See my point about it above. The reason some people are mad on this issue is because you can't claim to like this update, and still say you have no problems with overpowered stuff in PvE. It is logically ridiculous to claim to care about balance and ignore the most inbalanced things in the game (PvE AND PvP).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

This thread started from the very own OP with a PvP/PvE divide and guess how it's going to end... Anet didn't being this on "us" (though they could have made things in a better way), "we" did.

I hate to say this, but that is absolutely ridiculous. As I said above, who lit the spark? ARENANET lit it. Anet created the PvP vs PvE divide that exists today. They have lit every spark between the two sides that has ever existed over the years. It is not the players fault that this happened.

I can probably come up with a list of 50 things that Anet did to make PvE players and PvP players resent each other. Saying it is our fault this happened is like taking a tiger and a lion who don't mind each other, then throwing a big steak in the middle of them and watching them fight over it. Is it really the lion and tigers fault they are fighting, or is it the person who threw the steak?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chthon

1. Don't be oblique. Come right out and say it: You think a-net is giving up on GW1 and this is the end of balance updates.

2. You may be right.

3. As a PvE player, that doesn't bother me too much.

Yes I think Anet is giving up on true PvP balance in Guild Wars 1. They either realized they can't do it, or the benefits weren't worth it. The fact that you say you are a PvE player and it doesn't bother you is a big statement. I believe that type of thinking is exactly why Anet is doing this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chthon

If you really think PvE hasn't had to make a lot of sacrifices for the sake of PvP balance, I have a necromancer who really wants to talk to you.

Anybody who cares about balance whatsoever, whether they are a PvE player or PvP player, knows that soul reaping was broken in both PvP and PvE. Anybody complaining that it was nerfed simply doesn't care about the strength of Guild Wars as a game, and only cares about their own selfish wants quite honestly. This was not a PvP affecting PvE balance. It was a "this is needed for the better of the game" balance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by xx sorin xx

The fact is, the majority of PvP players dont understand, nor care to, the average PvE player and the things that the average PvE player want. And the fact is, the majority of PvE players dont understand, nor care to, the average PvP player and the things they want. Stop pretending like most of you do, because this thread proves you don't. It shows all of the overgeneralized assumptions that one makes about the other, with no real understanding of what they are saying. Give it a rest.

I hate to break this to you, but most people who call themselves "PvP players" started out in PvE. Many of them (probably most of them) still play PvE to this day, so technically they could be called PvE players as well. They just like PvP more so they put themselves in the "PvP player" title for sake of these arguments.

So what am I trying to say? PvE players and PvP players are not black and white. Most of them are shades of grey, and play both sides of the game. That is the reason why this Anet created divide is so sad. Most of the people I play with consider themselves "PvP players" and have multiple maxed out PvE titles.

What I am about to say will tick off some people, but I find it true. If I was going to put the task of giving Anet information from the players to either PvE players or PvP players, I would definately choose the PvP players. They almost surely have more experience, because most of them came from PvE. More of them know the experiences of both sides of the game. Of course, many PvE players also play PvP, but I have found that if you call yourself a "PvE player", you are less likely to have the solid experience in both sides of the game required to give Anet good information.

The problem is, Anet has resorted to listening to majority, regardless of how bad the information is. That is the direction they have taken, and this recent update is just another step in complete and total PvE takeover. I know that sounds ridiculously doom oriented, but that is exactly what is happening here folks, and you are blind if you can't see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtle222

For goodness sake just be happy they are updating the game every bloody thursday. Trust me, if EA was in control of GW, this whole fanbase would be empty by now.

The difference is that EA is an established company with hundreds of games under their belt. Anet is relatively new with one game under their belt. The way I see it, people like me are simply trying to let everybody (including Anet) know the mistakes they are making. If people like me can do anything to change the future of Guild Wars 1 or 2, I will be happy.

And I am not trying to take this game or company down. I really like this game. If I didn't, I wouldn't be posting any of this. I strongly believe though that if Anet continues on the direction they are going, they won't get anywhere near EA in terms of how long they last. To me it feels like they are trying to make the next WoW, and I'm sorry but it just isn't going to work that way.

So what is the conclusion I have come to in all of these recents events? Here it is: Anet needed to capitalize on what made them unique, and PVP WAS IT. But they didn't...and I guess that is that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

The way it was explained to me is that the changes are going to be reverted, as stated -- to reduce the impact on PvE play. After the changes have been reverted, the effects of the changes will be evaluated. As for the statement regarding possible future tournament changes "that will not impact PvE play at all," I'm unable to provide more details because of the contingent nature of the possible plans. Basically, there are some ideas floating around about this, but they aren't sure whether the implementation will work, and/or whether we have the resources to do so. Because the plans are not definite one way or the other, and because the plans depend on a lot of internal factors, it's not something we can go into great detail about at this time. If we did go into detail and then the plans changed, there would probably be a lot more anger and speculation than if such details were not released.

First I've heard from Regina. Anyways...Anet not providing details...well I can't say I'm shocked. I'm very interested to see what these "internal factors" are. All I have to say is, they have created a lot of anger and speculation already over the years. I'm not sure how it can get any worse. The future awaits as they say...

Master Knightfall · Apr 20, 2008, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

No...it simply means that Anet will NOT balance PvP because they are getting pressure from the PvE playerbase. They have given up their freedom to balance because of the PvE backlash they would receive

Well it's about time, YAY for PVE superiority it's about time they got recognition and PVP was put in it's place. It's a SECONDARY part of the game not that main part. I never saw reason to continually attempt to balance what cannot be balanced in the first place. Bring back free spirits and unlimited minions and bring back soul reaping as it was and bring back un-nerfed EOE and spirit spamming. <grin> It is much better that they lose the insignificant base of their population (pvp) than the more significant one that is PVE based. <smile>

ensoriki · Apr 20, 2008, 02:22 AM // 02:22

I want pvp to affect pve.

Give me that variety....don't remove it >.<

PS: Sin buffs plz

DDL · Apr 20, 2008, 02:34 AM // 02:34

Is it worth reminding everyone at this point that the entire GW model is fundamentally different from basically every other MMO out there purely because it's not a monthly subscription deal?

I mean, for most posters here (I gather) ANET already HAVE as much money as they possibly can get from you, extra char slots aside. They're not getting any more until GW2: no matter how happy or angry you are, this won't change.

They could completely ruin everything (UB in PvP? That would be incredibly interesting from a purely curiosity based standpoint), and it wouldn't effect their monthly income..because really, they don't have one.

And let's be realistic: even if GW has truly and utterly pissed you off, you're still likely to at least TRY GW2, because the very fact that you're even playing GW suggests you're not a WoW-clone fanboy/girl who loves slow but steady power-creep and "epic lootz".

I mean, honestly: no matter how much GW might annoy you, is there a better alternative out there?

ensoriki · Apr 20, 2008, 02:36 AM // 02:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by DDL

I mean, honestly: no matter how much GW might annoy you, is there a better alternative out there?

cake and pie.

mrmango · Apr 20, 2008, 02:46 AM // 02:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kerwyn Nasilan

So you vote for removing everything from PvE saying "just use Ursan" for your precious PvP. This is why I hate damn Elitism.
There are two halves to Guild Wars remember that. We need separate skill tracts not more balancing at the cost of PvE. (I am not saying we should forget PvP, just think of the other side, and with the addition of In game prizes PvP is no more serious than PvE, with real money involved I can see concern, now one is just fighting monsters the other is fighting people.)

Learn to adapt, don't cry elitism. I enjoy the updates.

mrmango · Apr 20, 2008, 02:47 AM // 02:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

Well it's about time, YAY for PVE superiority it's about time they got recognition and PVP was put in it's place. It's a SECONDARY part of the game not that main part. I never saw reason to continually attempt to balance what cannot be balanced in the first place. Bring back free spirits and unlimited minions and bring back soul reaping as it was and bring back un-nerfed EOE and spirit spamming. <grin> It is much better that they lose the insignificant base of their population (pvp) than the more significant one that is PVE based. <smile>

This post = fail. What's the fun in that, mind boggling easy PVE, as opposed to the just easy PVE of atm.

ensoriki · Apr 20, 2008, 02:53 AM // 02:53

lulz.

pve probably would of died of soon after pvp if they hadn't been influenced by each other.
With no reason to change skills, pve soon gets bored of using the same play style with little innovation and branches off.

Avarre · Apr 20, 2008, 02:58 AM // 02:58

Splitting PvE and PvP, to make two distinctly different (MMORPG and CORPG) game styles seems ridiculous when most of the problem can be solved by designing PvE in a more proper manner for the structure of Guild Wars.

Granted, ANet will probably split the game anyways since that's what their balance attempts in PvE (PvE skills, etc) are leading to. I can expect GW to focus more on PvE than PvP if that happens, which would be pretty sad considering GW PvE is pretty standard, while the PvP was an original concept that has the potential for a lot more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

The way it was explained to me is that the changes are going to be reverted, as stated -- to reduce the impact on PvE play. After the changes have been reverted, the effects of the changes will be evaluated. As for the statement regarding possible future tournament changes "that will not impact PvE play at all," I'm unable to provide more details because of the contingent nature of the possible plans. Basically, there are some ideas floating around about this, but they aren't sure whether the implementation will work, and/or whether we have the resources to do so. Because the plans are not definite one way or the other, and because the plans depend on a lot of internal factors, it's not something we can go into great detail about at this time. If we did go into detail and then the plans changed, there would probably be a lot more anger and speculation than if such details were not released.

So basically, they're purely listening to the mewing of poor players to overthrow the requirements of the maintenance of their game, and have no idea what they're going to do next. Wonderful.

DDL · Apr 20, 2008, 03:05 AM // 03:05

I can't help but be amazed by the statements along the lines of "skill changes are great, they help keep the game fresh"...it just seems so strange that, in a game basically based around the fundamental principle of "giving you HUNDREDS of possible skills but only letting you use 8 at a time", people should even NEED often essentially arbitrary changes to the hundreds of existing skills to keep things 'fresh' for them.

It seems so sad that a game with such potential for inherent variety ends up being basically just the same few builds with minor tweaks based on the latest nerfs/buffs....and that people LIKE doing the minor tweaking.

Seriously: if your super-optimal PvE build is boring you, change it. Don't wait for a nerf to come along and force you to slightly tweak it so you can do basically the exact same thing only with slightly different skills.

Hell, if your super optimal PvP build is boring you, do exactly the same thing: change it. You might lose horribly for a while, but you'll almost certainly be more entertained trying to do well with a sub-optimal bar than you will be simply wiping the floor with a perfectly honed bar.

Xx_Sorin_xX · Apr 20, 2008, 03:12 AM // 03:12

I'm primarily a PvEr, but I'll be the first to admit PvP has gotten the shaft for the majority of the skill updates, which doesn't make sense.

Most farming skills (atleast that I use) aren't mainstream PvP or aren't anymore for the most part. I can only think of a few skills that farmers use that were in mainstream PvP, and even then I dont know if they were ever nerfed for PvP and then screwed over a farming build. One of only a few skills that I can think of that intertwine were the Shadow Form gank assassins, and they lost popularity quite a while ago.

And as some have said on here, Ursan Blessing shows anet doesn't focus all that much on PvE. Ursan is way overpowered, and anyone who thinks otherwise is completely blind. Don't get me wrong, I don't want them to nerf it. Every once in a while I can't help it but 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 it. That doesn't change the fact that there isn't much of a balance in PvE. It's all about who can do the most retarded amount of damage first.

For those noble enough to not want to use Ursan, or consumables, admittedly the build choices do decrease by a lot. There still a lot of viable options though. Taking a few staple skills and decent players make it so that in PvE the builds don't have to be cookie cutter.

I think the PvE community needs to realize that in terms of skill updates for PvP, we really have not been hit hard.

Kusandaa · Apr 20, 2008, 03:12 AM // 03:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by DreamWind

Yes it does if you care about balance whatsoever. See my point about it above. The reason some people are mad on this issue is because you can't claim to like this update, and still say you have no problems with overpowered stuff in PvE. It is logically ridiculous to claim to care about balance and ignore the most inbalanced things in the game (PvE AND PvP).

My point was that even amongst some of the UB users, there are some who'll go back to their usual skills and such in order to go through the game and high-end areas. I've done it before, so if I have to do it again it's gonna be okay O_o. Nerf it tomorrow, sure I'll probably be disappointed but over a relatively short amount of time (after a WTF they nerfed it?! discussion), I'll be playing this game like UB never even existed. In fact, as I've stated, beside DoA (which I can do without UB) and FoW/UW (which I can do without UB), I don't use it. So I'd get over it.

Just like any other update, really.

But yeah, there are STILL other things beside UB, that's what I meant. I had the impression people contradicted themselves with UB, saying once that it should be removed, second that we should use it because it's overpowered and because most people don't care about normal skills anymore.

IMHO, UB was created to be overpowered, but not as the ONLY skill to use out there. I know it sounds weird, I know... But I don't think other skills should be nerf under the pretext UB's still running and that's what everyone should be using because it's overpowered. There are still viable alternatives and I doubt everyone want those alternatives gone. I know it's not gonna happen really... well, let's hope.

And then there's balance and nerf. Balance, IMHO, means you can still use it but it won't be overpowered - but still usable. Nerf means unusable, outdated.

Example of balance: the recent Ward Against Melee changes. Sure it's 18 seconds at 16 earth magic... but in 18 seconds my mob is dead. Will have served it's purpose. Yet, not overpowered for that matter.

Example of nerf: Watch Yourself! 2 or 3 hits? IMHO, not worth it much. Maybe some PVP builds still run it and make it effective, but in PVE it's totally useless.

And yet I deal with it. I switched stuff on my para's build (I ran with it) and my warrior's build. It's that simple. But I don't wanna see it happen with every other skill.

Xx_Sorin_xX · Apr 20, 2008, 03:16 AM // 03:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

Well it's about time, YAY for PVE superiority it's about time they got recognition and PVP was put in it's place. It's a SECONDARY part of the game not that main part. I never saw reason to continually attempt to balance what cannot be balanced in the first place. Bring back free spirits and unlimited minions and bring back soul reaping as it was and bring back un-nerfed EOE and spirit spamming. <grin> It is much better that they lose the insignificant base of their population (pvp) than the more significant one that is PVE based. <smile>

Quite possibly the worst post ever to reach guru. This is just sad. I really hope we haven't reached this low of a point. It's people like you in this game that bring it down.

*Gem* · Apr 20, 2008, 03:49 AM // 03:49

I'm pretty sure that post was created so people like you would take the bait.

Although, if he is being legit then it does seem pretty silly.

DarkNecrid · Apr 20, 2008, 04:32 AM // 04:32

Quote:

but I'd like PvPers to try to pull the blanket a little less to "their" side and learn to live with PvErs.

1. 99.9% of all PvPers have PvE'd, or still do. (check observer, you will see Tormented shields, people in 15k armor, etc in the top guilds)
2. Most PvE'ers haven't PvP'd, or only do it at a level that no one cares about (hello RA)

kthnx.

Cacheelma · Apr 20, 2008, 04:38 AM // 04:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Avarre

Splitting PvE and PvP, to make two distinctly different (MMORPG and CORPG) game styles seems ridiculous when most of the problem can be solved by designing PvE in a more proper manner for the structure of Guild Wars.

Granted, ANet will probably split the game anyways since that's what their balance attempts in PvE (PvE skills, etc) are leading to. I can expect GW to focus more on PvE than PvP if that happens, which would be pretty sad considering GW PvE is pretty standard, while the PvP was an original concept that has the potential for a lot more.

So basically, they're purely listening to the mewing of poor players to overthrow the requirements of the maintenance of their game, and have no idea what they're going to do next. Wonderful.

I wonder, though, how comes the pvp-pve relationship in other games works, but not in GW?

Granted, there're some people who whine about WoW's skill changes because of PvP (I'm using WoW, another game, as an example here). But most people just don't care. The changes rarely affect PvE play. Or maybe they do, but people also care about PvP too because somehow, the pvp imbalance affects them?

I refuse to believe that WoW players understand the need of PvP balance more than GW players. With that said, why does it work in WoW, but not here? WoW PvP is item-based, at best. One would think that trying to balance PvP in WoW is pointless because of that alone. But skill changes due to PvP happen anyway in WoW.

One of the reason I can think of is that PvP and PvE play in WoW (and many other games like Lineage 2 or Anarchy Online or City of Heroes) is intregrated more tightly than that of GW. You get good rewards (for both PvP and PvE) from playing PvP in those games. You need to do PvE in order to PvP (leveling and items). PvP in those games is also casual-friendly; you get something out of it even if you suck at it, and you can also HELP other people even if you suck at it. Just being there and shoot something is enough.

GW barely has any of those. PvE players barely get anything out of PvP. Z-chest comes way way too late and too random to be worthwhile; you'd better off farming for gold AND buy the key OR the chest rewards instead of PvP for a key and get a creme brule out of it. And if you suck at PvP, don't expect to get anything out of it, period. Fort Asp. and Jade Q. are both similar to WoW's BGs and CoH's BGs, but aside from Jade & Amber (which is currently too cheap and don't have much use aside from the armors) and the faction points (which you'd better off doing HFFF instead for such insane grind), you don't really get anything out of it. Fun maybe? But that depends on people's idea of "fun", really.

So I'd say if Anet want to separate PvP from PvE, make it so that it's really SEPARATED; different skill balances, different kind of reward system and leveling system and item system. Otherwise, TRY HARDER to make them CO-EXIST. How comes other companies can do it, but not Anet?

EDIT: I apologize if there're some gramma mistakes and bad wordings. I'm trying my best to fix those I find.