Curse

con_ritmo · May 26, 2005, 07:19 AM // 07:19

(copy of a post I wrote on another forum)

Earlier this evening I joined an Arena PvP random 4vs4 game.

Our team was pretty good, and we quickly racked up 8 consecutive wins,
just about all of them without a single party member death (flawless).

At this point we wanted to see how long of a run we could go on...

In our ninth battle, we quickly dispatched 3 out of the 4 opposing members
in a few minutes. However, the fourth member, Leet Runna Zooooom [CR],
made it a point to to live up to his namesake and keep on runnning away.
He had no res, and his dead teammates all logged out knowing that there
was realistically no way he'd be able to win.

OTOH, our team makeup was such that two of us had no offense...only
heals/prots, one of us smiting, and one melee. None of us had
slow/knockdown skills/spells...and we didn't have enough spike offense to
take him down before he'd run away.

In my conversation with Leet, he knew he couldn't beat us, but he wanted
one of us to quit before he'd quit....just to give himself the satisfaction I imagine.

...so our team decided to wait.

50 minutes.

It took 50 minutes before Leet Runna Zoooooom decided he had enough "fun"
and logged out. It could've gone on for hours, days, weeks, months...

Our hope was that through this example, and other examples, Areanet can
come up with a solution to STOP these stalemates. A time limit perhaps,
which takes into account the remaining amount of members left?

We were never able to see how long our run could last as half the team went
afk after about thirty minutes of this madness.

I know many will cry that we didn't have enough skill to take him down...
nevertheless, there has to be some solution to a true stalemate that could go
on for eternity. Otherwise a few people can ruin what is otherwise an
awesome gameplay experience.

So what do you think Areanet could implement to curb situations such as
this?

screenshots:

Poppinjay · May 26, 2005, 07:28 AM // 07:28

Whatever it is I hope it is not to get rid of the speed skills.

All it would have taken is for ONE of you to have one of the many spells or skills that can slow a player down. I think it is very odd that nobody had this and this battle was probably a fluke that won't often be repeated. It is probably not going to be common enough for AN to have to take action.

It is certainly a strategy that is easily counterable.

Besides what is wrong with a stalemate? If anything, after a certain amount of time passes without a victor a stalemate should be declared. In chess you don't say that the person with the most peices won if no further move can be made. It is a tie game.

Pop

Helios · May 26, 2005, 07:32 AM // 07:32

First of all, I hope that next time, you make an attempt to bring a skill that can take down a runner like that if it doesn't interfere with your build too much. But I do agree that something like this would annoy the crap out of me. There should be a 5 minute countdown if the last person standing doesn't have res. That way, if that person has the skill, they can pull off a last minute upset. If not, which might be the case 99% of the time, there won't be a ridiculous 50 minute long stalemate. That should give the last person a chance to make a comeback and still have the battle end in an acceptable amount of time.

con_ritmo · May 26, 2005, 07:47 AM // 07:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poppinjay

Besides what is wrong with a stalemate? If anything, after a certain amount of time passes without a victor a stalemate should be declared.

Pop

There is nothing wrong with a stalemate. However, this game doesn't HAVE a stalemate in Arena PvP. You will just sit there for eternity until people decide to log off...and break up their random PVP group.
Hence, the need for a possible solution...

DrSLUGFly · May 26, 2005, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Perhaps a cool way to set a time limit would be to introduce (at a given point) a wurm that would attack indiscriminately, if the two teams band together to kill the wurm another comes.

Unik · May 26, 2005, 12:21 PM // 12:21

Don’t think I agree with anyone running around for that long in any type of pvp fight and I do share your *grief* as the exact same scenario happened to a team I was in.

I don’t see how a time limit would work or at least may not be as easy as we think to implement properly, we have to keep in mind that 2 on one 1 at the end of a fight can be a long up and down battle and even if the 2 should win, it is possible for the lone fighter to over come the odds.

Just taking into matter the different possibilities here, I think complicates a lot more than we think adding a timer in the game for this purposes, when does it start, in what situations and so on.

I’m not saying this to ridicule or insult anyone here, but Anet as already put in GW things to counter such actions, the obvious of course knockdowns and slowdowns, but you also can use degen skills and long range Ele attacks.

Yes it is extremely frustrating to see a fight drag on 20-50 minutes more than it should, but let me ask you this. Next time you go in an arena battle, are you going to make sure someone brings a skill that will counter this? I know I started making sure of this after the first time it happened, since then I’ve seen this many times and it never lasted more than 2 to 3 minutes.

Rack one up for experience and good gaming.

Unik

Shadowsting · May 26, 2005, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Hmm..........I've never had any such experience. I have had a lot of times in the Tombs where both my team and their's just stand there and wait for the other to attack....which never happened. I don't think it's really necessary though.

Navaros · May 26, 2005, 05:19 PM // 17:19

@original poster: if you didn't kill all the opposing team members, then you did not win the match. nor should you expect the opposing team member to commit suicide to gratify you

if your team can't kill him, it's your own problem. whether or not he had resurrect on him and whether or not he could have killed all your team members is a moot point

if i was Leet, i would have stayed in the game forever. it is not griefing and there is nothing wrong with what he did. i would say you were unfairly ruining his gameplay experience by insisting that he commit suicide when there is no legitimate reason why he should have

the devs do not need to change a thing in regards to this issue.

Valarian of Ascalon · May 26, 2005, 05:30 PM // 17:30

Give me a break. Next time at least one of your melee types should bring a cripple or speed boosting skill. Do not blame others for entering the arena unprepared. Valarian.

Talizar · May 26, 2005, 05:39 PM // 17:39

You get 3 mo and w/mo u can pretend to be good in any 4 on 4 and never die but if u cant stop runner then your team isnt worth much. I would do the same thing if i was him and had some time on my hands, just to make a point. Bottom line is he was prepared and your team wasnt.

On another topic i hate it when i am in a group with 2 rangers and neither of em has pin down. Rangers are not that great at doing dmg, rangers are best at annoying/harrassing the other team thru snares, traps, interrupts so dont load 5 dmg bow attacks,pet, trolls ugument and storm runner.

Granamyr · May 26, 2005, 05:41 PM // 17:41

Navaros,

Don't you believe that there is an obligation to fight in the arena. Isn't that the purpose of the Arena? Doesn't a player owe it to his teammates and the opposition to do his best to win? From your earlier posts, you strike me as someone who strongly believes that everyone should do their part to help the team and in doing so, improve the game.

How does Leet's behavior meet that obligation? If he were a monk, this would be a different story but he owed it to his teammates and to the opposition to put up a fight. There is little class or character in what he did and little consistency in your attitude if you support him.

Navaros · May 26, 2005, 05:48 PM // 17:48

putting up a fight if it is guaranteed suicide, is outright stupid. Leet was not obligated to put up a fight vs. suicidal odds. just as no player is forced to stay in one spot during matches whilst he gets beaten on til he is dead.

a good player would never purposely commit suicide vs. a team that could not kill him. nor is there any obligation to.

the purpose of the Arena is to win by any legal means necessary. what Leet did was certainly attempting to win within necessary legal means.

Xellos · May 26, 2005, 05:56 PM // 17:56

BodyBlock works, though griefing in Arena is somewhat still painful no matter what you do.

Redfang · May 26, 2005, 06:22 PM // 18:22

In boxing, if you don't win by knockout within a certain time, a winner is chosen based on points. Maybe that is the answer. PvP battles, after 30 minutes without resolution, end with the winner being the team that inflicted the most damage (or made the most kills).

That also adds another level of complexity, just like many major sports such as football and basketball are timed, with "clock management" being an element of strategy.

Demetrious · May 26, 2005, 06:25 PM // 18:25

The funniest part of the deal is the name backs up the action.

I get where it would be annoying as stink and personally I would end it, but with the name Leet Runna Zoooooooom - you should have known you couldn't win.

Mountain Man · May 26, 2005, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redfang

In boxing, if you don't win by knockout within a certain time, a winner is chosen based on points. Maybe that is the answer. PvP battles, after 30 minutes without resolution, end with the winner being the team that inflicted the most damage (or made the most kills).

I like this idea.

grimmolly · May 26, 2005, 07:28 PM // 19:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navaros

@original poster: if you didn't kill all the opposing team members, then you did not win the match. nor should you expect the opposing team member to commit suicide to gratify you

if your team can't kill him, it's your own problem. whether or not he had resurrect on him and whether or not he could have killed all your team members is a moot point

if i was Leet, i would have stayed in the game forever. it is not griefing and there is nothing wrong with what he did. i would say you were unfairly ruining his gameplay experience by insisting that he commit suicide when there is no legitimate reason why he should have

the devs do not need to change a thing in regards to this issue.

This is silly. Arenanet said this is a team game and a game of skill. Allowing this goes directly against that and ruins gameplay experiences. You should've had some damage hex or snare, though.

con_ritmo · May 26, 2005, 07:42 PM // 19:42

thanks for all the responses.

to clarify though, i never intended to paint Leet as the loser.
that's why i call it a stalemate...no one wins.

currently the only way to resolve a stalemate is to log out...which hurts *both* sides...causing both groups to disband in the random pvp arena setting...

although doubtful, who knows what would happen if there is a genuine tourney or ladder match on hand. the situation could arise again...depending on who was left standing...

in regards to the necessity of a slow/bash/hex/skill/etc. i fully understand that, but i feel that does not address the issue of what happens (rather what doesn't happen) in a true stalemate.

regardless of HOW the stalmate situation arises...games should NOT be won simply by waiting for someone to log out.

a solution should be implemented.

Navaros · May 26, 2005, 07:43 PM // 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by grimmolly

This is silly. Arenanet said this is a team game and a game of skill. Allowing this goes directly against that and ruins gameplay experiences.

in my view, this statement is completely untrue

if Guild Wars is a game of skill, then that is precisely the reason why players such as Leet should not be penalized with an illegitimate loss if they have not been killed. the other team was not skilled enough to kill him, therefore they did not win. nor do they deserve to have winned.

arbitarily changing the rules of the game simply to cater to players who are frustated because they do not have all the necessary skill to succeed under the current rules would be what ruins gameplay experiences.

EDIT: this was posted this before i saw original poster's latest response

con_ritmo · May 26, 2005, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navaros

in my view, this statement is completely untrue

if Guild Wars is a game of skill, then that is precisely the reason why players such as Leet should not be penalized with an illegitimate loss if they have not been killed.

who says leet should have been penalized?

no one on either side wins in such a situation. both teams should go on, or refight, or SOMETHING.
not simply log out.

edit: this was written before i saw navarros's edit. lol