Curse

Xellos · May 31, 2005, 02:53 AM // 02:53

Quote:

Ok, let's assume I am wrong. You are winning! So, if you are winning then you have demonstrated that what has been provided to you is adequate and the playing field is sufficiently level.

That's just plain ignorance right there. Just because your winning means you can't say the games unfair? What the hell? Are losers the only people with rights now?

Quote:

Of course, I suspect I was right the first time. You are whining because you are losing. I haven't met a lot of whiney winners.

I haven't seen Hope and Glory win HoH. You don't want to mess with the wrong people in ego.

Quote:

It matters so that people reading your post understand the context and who said what. It is important.

No it doesn't. Content matters.

Quote:

I think you clearly lost track of what I was even talking about in the first place ^^

Why? Because I made a general statement? Who ever said I had to make a whole post reply to only you? Your not special, that's Spooky

...Spooky ELECTRIC. ZAP!

Quote:

(In context, it is very clear I am talking to The Virago, not you, Xellos)

I know, it was humour. Didn't follow?

Quote:

I hope you understand why I made that statement. Ad hominem attacks get everyone nowhere and add absolutely nothing to the discussion. You really have to point them out so the other side can realize what they are doing. I can assure you I have thick skin despite this realization. I'm not really sure why you are talking about John Kerry ^^

Sarcasm please.

Quote:

How does it affect you? "Oh no! they're having fun now! I'll have to thwart them!". It's not like you would get owned... You can make a PvP character too... You don't need to be a whiner about it...

Dude, that's hitting below the belt. Don't doubt their skills, they obviously learned from PVE how to win tombs before beating their mirror. Because they claim to know what is balanced and what is not like it's the physics of the world.

EDIT: No more posts, THX asked so!

DarrenJasper · May 31, 2005, 02:55 AM // 02:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

DarrenJasper, believe me. I've tried your method where when I got frustrated I'd just started making cynical remarks toward the opposition. I suppose experience will eventually teach you that your current method is flawed, although I think it should be self-evident with how people have responded to you in this thread ^^

Uh huh... And how many people in this thread have fallen to their knees and tearfully embraced all of your ideas, as a result of your skillful pinpointing of their "logical fallacies" and constant use of "^^" smilies?

Maybe I've tried out your methods, and experience has taught me what people respond best to. Let's not make assumptions.

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 03:00 AM // 03:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

No it doesn't. Content matters.

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "taken out of context?" Knowing who said it so you can refer back to it and see the context is extremely important. The context is part of the content.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

Why? Because I made a general statement? Who ever said I had to make a whole post reply to only you? Your not special, that's Spooky ...Spooky ELECTRIC. ZAP!

You quoted me and then directly replied to me in that series of dialogue. You were replying to me ~_~

It's a wierd blend of sarcastic humor if that was what you were going for, Xellos ^^

DarrenJasper, I genuinely believe certain people have understood more about the other side than would be otherwise possible if I had simply resorted to a constant 8 page barrage of flaming. I also think those you flamed would not have flamed you back so quickly in return if you hadn't flamed in the first place.

DarrenJasper · May 31, 2005, 03:04 AM // 03:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

DarrenJasper, I genuinely believe certain people have understood more about the other side than would be otherwise possible if I had simply resorted to a constant 8 page barrage of flaming. I also think those you flamed would not have flamed you back so quickly in return if you hadn't flamed in the first place.

Hey, that's great! But what you genuinely believe doesn't prove anything, so as far as either of us know our methods are both equally effective. I genuinely believe that my posts were more than a "constant 8 page barrage of flaming" even if you don't. Which of us is right? There's no telling.

And I like it when people respond promptly, I lose less momentum that way.

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 03:06 AM // 03:06

Eh. We'll agree to disagree at this point. Time will tell ^^

Xellos · May 31, 2005, 03:08 AM // 03:08

Quote:

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "taken out of context?" Knowing who said it so you can refer back to it and see the context is extremely important. The context is part of the content.

If your going to put perspective into play, this arguement can take hours. Do you really want to go there?

Quote:

You quoted me and then directly replied to me in that series of dialogue. You were replying to me ~_~

What? How does that work. I simply quoted you, and replied to you in a way that satired the way Virtago would've with a metaphor.

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 03:10 AM // 03:10

I'll admit the joke flew above my head ^^

I still believe you're underestimating the importance of context.

DarrenJasper · May 31, 2005, 03:13 AM // 03:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

Eh. We'll agree to disagree at this point. Time will tell ^^

I doubt it, but whatever.

I think we're done here anyway, unless this thread gets a resurrection in the morning.

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 03:20 AM // 03:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

You are resorting to baseless ad hominem attacks of calling us childish and prop yourself up as better and older. Do not take this offensively, but this is ironically childish.

Just noticed this... kindly note I said the behavior was childish. Not the people. If someone chooses to self-identify, that's entirely up to them. Folks like Jasper (who happily sits in the ignore corner due to his inability to maintain any form of mature discussion) do not bother me, and those who insist on rabidly foaming and attacking those with whom they disagree are doing more to ruin their credibility by over-reacting and being overly-negative than they realise -- all the while exemplifing precisely the attitude and behavior that ArenaNet is starving by making PvP players hunt up their own skills and upgrades.

As to the rest, someone assumed because I disagree with them, I "obviously don't know anything about PvP". They are wrong. Not only do I know PvP, I knew it very likely before most posting here knew it, when it really was worth enjoying... back when people didn't whine when they didn't get their way.... hell, they didn't whine at all.

You didn't see the stupidity of 'smack talk', because people respected one another and had a fundamental grasp that you don't grow the herd for slaughter by running off players, by insisting on being max skill immediately, and by laying in the proverbial floor kicking and screaming if you don't get it NOW NOW NOW.

I applaud ArenaNet for building a game where people who have never PvP'd don't feel they can never learn it. The arena teams (4 on 4) are wonderful for learning the ropes in a way most PvP players of today simply lack the foresight to support.

I applaud them as well for putting 'King of The Hill' in place for the folks who prefer number crunching to experimentation, and who don't expect anything more from their game than the chance to test themselves against all comers.

I applaud them for permitting cookie cutter templates and still giving people an opportunity and avenue to do something outside the cookie cutter if they're willing to invest the time and effort into pursuing a different setup under the same rules as the rest of the game utilizes.

What I hear when I read all this whining is that most players want cookie cutter templates, but they also want everything available at once. And that just wouldn't support the cross-over from PvE that ArenaNet obviously intends.

What boggles me is that everyone who has posted screaming for UAS can't seem to understand that it isn't in ArenaNet's best interest to segregate PvP any more than they have at present. Until those of you wanting more than what you have now understand this, really understand it, you're doomed to be frustrated. To break it down for you:

ArenaNet intends this game to provide PvE players the chance to cross-over PvP without having to feel like once they've tried it, they're stuck with it for good. They didn't design a PvP game. They designed a PvE game with optional PvP, and rankings for those who engage in it more than occasionally.

"PvP for PvE players" is a much greater possibility in this game than in any other I've seen... and this is precisely because everyone knows that we're all operating under the same ruleset. You take this away and you lose every bit of that.

Not only this, it is a means by which to insure that those who are avid or 'hard core' (read: time, not type) players cannot possibly exhaust all the content before the intended time frame for expansion.

Simply put, the design is one that serves both as a balancing factor against content exhaustion and to offer players who have never considered PvP a slower and less risky avenue to try it. Very smart business.

Now I fully realise most PvP players simply do not care about this kind of thing, but thankfully, we've got ArenaNet acknowledging every step of the way that this is INTENDED. I view this as A Good Thing.

My *personal* opinion is that the playing community as a whole will benefit from having to PvE to get skills and upgrades. Because in order to succeed on EITHER side of the preferential playing style 'fence', you have to be more involved in being part of the community. We're all familiar with the stereotypical PvP player and I think it was incredibly insightful of ArenaNet to put in place a mechanic that single-handedly eviscerates it as a method of operation.

So I suppose the answer to the initial question, "Why are you against a UAS ladder that does not affect you?" is simply this:

I am against it because, whether it is realised, understoood, or accepted, it would affect the overall quality of the game along with harming its ultimate longevity, which would very much affect me as a fellow player.

@AirOnG -- First, dang your hide for drawing me back into this thread. (grin) Secondly -- Your points on etiquette are well taken. If you would consider that the things you infer may not be intended by their writer, it would help as well.

@Hostile Contributors -- Thank you for changing my mind about my own suggestion to make skills 'lootable' from defeated opponents in PvP matches. The process of forming my thoughts here finally convinces me that the way things currently are is as they should be, and I would not have contemplated it this deeply had some of you not been as overtly hostile. Should the matter ever come to poll (doubtful), I'll vote accordingly.

DarrenJasper · May 31, 2005, 03:32 AM // 03:32

Ho ho, I guess that's what happens to everyone who strikes a nerve. Storm off in a huff (twice), come back later putting the offender on ignore so that she can spout the same rhetoric she did hours ago, and pretend to be unchallenged. Welp, don't let me get in the way

BE|Dac · May 31, 2005, 03:43 AM // 03:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virago

Just noticed this... kindly note I said the behavior was childish. Not the people. If someone chooses to self-identify, that's entirely up to them. Folks like Jasper (who happily sits in the ignore corner due to his inability to maintain any form of mature discussion) do not bother me, and those who insist on rabidly foaming and attacking those with whom they disagree are doing more to ruin their credibility by over-reacting and being overly-negative than they realise -- all the while exemplifing precisely the attitude and behavior that ArenaNet is starving by making PvP players hunt up their own skills and upgrades.

As to the rest, someone assumed because I disagree with them, I "obviously don't know anything about PvP". They are wrong. Not only do I know PvP, I knew it very likely before most posting here knew it, when it really was worth enjoying... back when people didn't whine when they didn't get their way.... hell, they didn't whine at all.

You didn't see the stupidity of 'smack talk', because people respected one another and had a fundamental grasp that you don't grow the herd for slaughter by running off players, by insisting on being max skill immediately, and by laying in the proverbial floor kicking and screaming if you don't get it NOW NOW NOW.

I applaud ArenaNet for building a game where people who have never PvP'd don't feel they can never learn it. The arena teams (4 on 4) are wonderful for learning the ropes in a way most PvP players of today simply lack the foresight to support.

I applaud them as well for putting 'King of The Hill' in place for the folks who prefer number crunching to experimentation, and who don't expect anything more from their game than the chance to test themselves against all comers.

I applaud them for permitting cookie cutter templates and still giving people an opportunity and avenue to do something outside the cookie cutter if they're willing to invest the time and effort into pursuing a different setup under the same rules as the rest of the game utilizes.

What I hear when I read all this whining is that most players want cookie cutter templates, but they also want everything available at once. And that just wouldn't support the cross-over from PvE that ArenaNet obviously intends.

What boggles me is that everyone who has posted screaming for UAS can't seem to understand that it isn't in ArenaNet's best interest to segregate PvP any more than they have at present. Until those of you wanting more than what you have now understand this, really understand it, you're doomed to be frustrated. To break it down for you:

ArenaNet intends this game to provide PvE players the chance to cross-over PvP without having to feel like once they've tried it, they're stuck with it for good. They didn't design a PvP game. They designed a PvE game with optional PvP, and rankings for those who engage in it more than occasionally.

"PvP for PvE players" is a much greater possibility in this game than in any other I've seen... and this is precisely because everyone knows that we're all operating under the same ruleset. You take this away and you lose every bit of that.

Not only this, it is a means by which to insure that those who are avid or 'hard core' (read: time, not type) players cannot possibly exhaust all the content before the intended time frame for expansion.

Simply put, the design is one that serves both as a balancing factor against content exhaustion and to offer players who have never considered PvP a slower and less risky avenue to try it. Very smart business.

Now I fully realise most PvP players simply do not care about this kind of thing, but thankfully, we've got ArenaNet acknowledging every step of the way that this is INTENDED. I view this as A Good Thing.

My *personal* opinion is that the playing community as a whole will benefit from having to PvE to get skills and upgrades. Because in order to succeed on EITHER side of the preferential playing style 'fence', you have to be more involved in being part of the community. We're all familiar with the stereotypical PvP player and I think it was incredibly insightful of ArenaNet to put in place a mechanic that single-handedly eviscerates it as a method of operation.

So I suppose the answer to the initial question, "Why are you against a UAS ladder that does not affect you?" is simply this:

I am against it because, whether it is realised, understoood, or accepted, it would affect the overall quality of the game along with harming its ultimate longevity, which would very much affect me as a fellow player.

@AirOnG -- First, dang your hide for drawing me back into this thread. (grin) Secondly -- Your points on etiquette are well taken. If you would consider that the things you infer may not be intended by their writer, it would help as well.

@Hostile Contributors -- Thank you for changing my mind about my own suggestion to make skills 'lootable' from defeated opponents in PvP matches. The process of forming my thoughts here finally convinces me that the way things currently are is as they should be, and I would not have contemplated it this deeply had some of you not been as overtly hostile. Should the matter ever come to poll (doubtful), I'll vote accordingly.

That would be fine, we all accepted we would have to go through pve

but not 500+ hours of PvE, when there is only 100 hours of straight content, that is like 5x repetition.

We don't mind going through the game, but we dont like beating it 6x to play.

Most people will be "turned off" by this as you can see on forums, just a small portion of the unhappy crowd.

Why is it not required of PvE players to play PvP? Wouldn't this increase PvP? Well maybe they dont like to, forcing players to play PvE over and over is stupid. Most of the time they bypass this by going straight to ascend at lvl 3 so they dont even contribute to the "overall playing experience".

Your logic seems sound but there is NO REASON for forcing players to play what they dont want to for hundred of hours to get to what they consider fun.

Also your idea of community is a bunch of screaming children on average.

Quintus · May 31, 2005, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Virago

[Snip]

ArenaNet intends this game to provide PvE players the chance to cross-over PvP without having to feel like once they've tried it, they're stuck with it for good. They didn't design a PvP game. They designed a PvE game with optional PvP, and rankings for those who engage in it more than occasionally.

[Snip]

I don't have the time or the patience to respond to the rest of your post, but I found that the game's synopsis doesn't support this line of thinking at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.guildwars.com/gameinfo/default.html

If you like Player-versus-Player competition, Guild Wars was made for you.

Mormegil · May 31, 2005, 04:18 AM // 04:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

EDIT: No more posts, THX asked so!

Ahah. That's the most hilarious thing I read in the whole forum. Sounds like "hey kid, enough now! go to bed!". Too bad this will make his gladiatorial efforts to "quote-kill" people even more ridiculous and out of place.

Now, that's what I call some fresh air.

(sorry for the OT)

I agree with BeIDac, but I still have my personal idea. PvE to get Elite Skills, Runes and rare drops alike is fine to me, but shouldn't be as it is now. It should be compelling, and shouldn't make you feel as if you're repeating the same thing 5000 times. New areas (dungeons maybe?) and some more clever design (aka "not to make the bosses spawn randomly") could make it far more interesting. Why not raising the difficulty bar in some particular PvE zones? That would make PvE fans happy and the quest for Elite Skills challenging.

Of course that must be done cautiously, but I'm convinced it can be done somehow.

Redfang · May 31, 2005, 04:23 AM // 04:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xellos

I haven't seen Hope and Glory win HoH. You don't want to mess with the wrong people in ego.

I sincerely doubt our little guild will be winning HoH anytime soon, if ever. But I can promise you this. If we lose, we won't be here crying about it, asking that the game be changed, or blaming arenanet because we lost.

Corwin_Andros · May 31, 2005, 04:25 AM // 04:25

Hell it would be nice if they added a boss from each or at teh minimum half of the primary classes in each area to cut down on the skill gaining.. But I also agree that you are going to need a faster way to get skill points even then.. and if the amount of xp required is streadily growing each "level" after 20, they are going to have to do something to give people a faster way to get the skill points.. either that or stop requiring a skill point be spent on a SoC.

Immortal Flame · May 31, 2005, 04:30 AM // 04:30

Anyone who complains about GW's PvE obviously hasn't played any other MMOs. The PvP only templates attest to the fact that if you don't want to do a very minimal grind to be marginally better than another player (in comparison to most MMOs), you don't have to.
Edit: Basically, if you got GW so you wouldn't have to spend time getting better, then use the templates.

BE|Dac · May 31, 2005, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Immortal Flame

Anyone who complains about GW's PvE obviously hasn't played any other MMOs. The PvP only templates attest to the fact that if you don't want to do a very minimal grind to be marginally better than another player (in comparison to most MMOs), you don't have to.
Edit: Basically, if you got GW so you wouldn't have to spend time getting better, then use the templates.

I got GW because the PVP was awesome.

The PVP sucks with templates and the stupid grind barrier. People are already bad enough, why gimp them more.

Also there is a lot more to a game then that. You have character attachment, its hard to have any gratification running a premade. It would be like playing MTG without choice in cards or the ability to pay for more decks vrs players that can.

Also there is a lot to learning the game that you really don't get from premades, there is a lot more to the game then the premades offer, such as a real mesmer!

RedX · May 31, 2005, 05:08 AM // 05:08

The UAS ladder is an idea with good intensions, but will cause more harm than it will good to ONE of the two communities. The reasons for this have been explained over and over so I feel no need to repeat them. The game was built around PvP but everyone knew that PvE would be just as important. If you didn't know that, it is your own fault because NO WHERE does it state that you don't have to PvE.

I do believe there can be some modifications to the skill system that will help level the playing field. One idea is that you should be able to buy ANY skill you want from the skill trainers (with exception of the ones that need to be captured) so you can get the skills you want.

Another idea is that once you complete all the missions, you get all skills (except captures) unlocked automatically for that character's primary and secondary professions.

Off the skill topic, it would also be cool to have some of the runes unlock able through quests.

Any comments?

The Virago · May 31, 2005, 05:17 AM // 05:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by BE|Dac

Also there is a lot to learning the game that you really don't get from premades, there is a lot more to the game then the premades offer, such as a real mesmer!

Agreed. I spent tonight in HoH on a mesmer and had a blast. I think my group was purple with amazement that I didn't care if I died. Heh. The monks on the other teams feared me with good reason, and in the end we held until our tank and monk had to head out for the night.

With this said, I would hate to see someone trying to learn a mesmer straight off a template or even a UAS. There are things to know that you just don't learn reading someone's guide.

And for what it's worth, I feel your pain about feeling you're having to do 5x the work to get a reward... but in all honesty, I ripped the place apart tonight with nothing more than my lil level 12 mesmer/monk had available and my PvP build is mesmer/elementalist.

Which, I think, speaks to the reality that spending some time on PvE is not a bad thing for anyone.

Be|Dac, I would be very interested in hearing what you think would be a legitimate compromise solution, friend. You seem less inclined to the inciteful and therefore, I think, more inclined to be insightful.

@Quintus -- PvP competition doesn't mean someone can't be better than you, does it? Whether than means they have more time to spend on the "pve grind" as some are calling it or otherwise.

One aspect of this that bemuses me is this is, in theory, no different than the reality that raiding guilds in a PvE MMO are much more likely to gain better gear, more money, etc. simply because they have more time to invest in pursing it.

The 'complaint' as I understand it thusfar (excepting Be|Dac's post) isn't that too much time is required, but that ANY time is required.

Correct me if I'm misunderstanding you, please.

AirOnG · May 31, 2005, 05:31 AM // 05:31

Redfang, I hope you come away from this argument understanding we are not blaming arenanet or whining them to change the gameplay due to lack of ability. It's simply for a level playing field.

Virago, I think you are doing many PvPers a disservice by making it seem PvPers simply want ubercharacters and claiming they have a "NOW NOW NOW" mentality. PvPers simply want a level playing field without having to do things they perceive as completely arbitrary barriers. You do however make a very good point that segregation of PvP is a very important thing to consider while making decisions, and that consideration of the community as a whole is crucial. Perhaps you are right in that a dual ladder system would be detrimental in splitting the community and that it would be better to err on the side of caution.

Quote: