Curse

Ellestar · Mar 14, 2005, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave III

Oh, and I'm a little confused about the term "Build" in this context: I'm used to it refering to the latest programmer's patches to the client, as in Build V1.63 replacing V1.59, etc. Y'all appear to be using it in some other way, something in the way one character type gets favored over another, either by the client or the player. What am I missing?

Character build (or character template) is your planned maximum level character on paper. In Guild Wars currently it may include primary/secondary class, skills, attributes, runes, and type of weapon(s). Probably later people will write a type of armor and desired weapon stats/modifiers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Furious

The thing that causes clones is the fact that some skills are just better than others. There's no such thing as true "balance" in a video game. It's impossible to achieve. In a skill based game with so many skills, some skills are just going to be much better than others and people are going to use those skills.

Starcraft is balanced. Most likely it's the only balanced competitive computer game with a lot of options/strategies etc.

Greentongue · Mar 14, 2005, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mister Furious

The designers decided to have 75 skills per class. They came up with a few really good skills for each class to use and the rest are just filler. How many skills in each skill list are completly worthless? 50%? 75%? It's just a fact of life that some skills are going to be much better than others and that some skills are going to combine very well with certain other skills. It's just the nature of the beast. My build is almost completly identical to many other builds of seen. I didn't do it on purpose. I just picked a skill I saw great potential in and then picked a bunch of skills to utilize that potential. And a lot of other people did the exact same thing. Now, the rebel in me doesn't want to be just like everyone else, but the loser in me wants to win.

Making skills NOT worthless should be the goal of the designers.
I believe we will see skills added in expansions that will revive some of the passed over skills.
Every time you look at a skill and think, "This would be great if there was just a way to take advantage of ...", a potential new skill may be added.

Ensign · Mar 14, 2005, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

You assume that all players will play as much as you do, and understand the game as you do.

I do?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

I think assuming for the majority what is best in their style of play is a decision best left to them.

This isn't clear. People can clearly play whatever characters, and use whatever skills they want. There's no reason to think otherwise. If someone wants to play an Echo/Unnatural Signet build, hey, that's their business.

The only subset of players that I'm talking to are those who want to be effective. There is no 'choice' in what the most effective builds in a given style are - those are determined by the parameters of the game. Build design and development is a process of figuring out what those maximally effective builds are. Choices merely guide the process.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

If you think that winning for the sake of winning is what gamming is all about, then strategy is left in the box.

Until you're actually concerned about winning, strategy doesn't even come into the picture. What are you strategizing if you aren't seeking victory? Dye-mixing strategies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

Is it their fault, or are the articles and information posted here lacking clarity?

I'm not trying to attribute fault - I'm merely making an observation about the state of game knowledge in the community. Why the community is in that state is a book that I have neither the ability nor desire to write.

Peace,
-CxE

Odd Sock · Mar 14, 2005, 08:22 PM // 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Why the community is in that state is a book that I have neither the ability nor desire to write.

Hehehe it's quite simple. There are alphas and then people like me who are beta junkies. Most of my knowledge comes from the betas and some of it comes from these articles. Once the game releases, it probably won't take much time until the majority of the players will accumulate sufficient knowledge to be competitive.

As for the case of everyone bringing along the same skills, that's simply because your guild isn't trying to be as competitive as possible. Talk a bit with your guildies and you can easily achieve powerful damage that can result in 2 warriors using skills from many lines. How dependant one character is from another is another topic your guild must look into. Some like ultra-specific/dependant teams while other like a more loose approach. It's just a matter of strategy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Everyone using this term in a negative way

"flavor of the month"

So what if you wish to copy someone else's idea ? If you like it, it suits your play style and is effective then copying it isn't a big deal.

Shrapnel_Magnet · Mar 14, 2005, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

Do not fault those who don't have the key to the door you have been given.

I don't wanna act like I'm defending Ensign, because he IS a jerk by nature and is not worthy of defense... but in his defense (lol), if you are suggesting that he has the "key to the door" as in the Alpha Test, you are mistaken. He's a lowly Beta Junky like like the rest of us. He gets to play 1 weekend a month, as we do. Nothing more.

Different viewpoints on various subjects are always going to cause a certain degree of dissagreement. I know that Lunarhound and I don't often see things the same way and have had a couple issues that neither of us will budge on.

If a person who intends to play the game at a highly competitive level comments on something... it will often clash with the viewpoint of someone who enjoys making random and outrageous builds for fun in PvE.

(Dave III, we use the term "Build" to describe the make-up of a character. If you look under the "Buids Directory" on the Main Page, you will be taken to a list of various character "Builds". A Warrior/Monk using <insert skills and attributes here> is a build.)

EDIT: Am I the only one who thinks that it's weird that Odd Sock and I both use the term Beta Junky in our replies... with neither of us reading them beforehand...?

Dreamsmith · Mar 14, 2005, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Odd Sock

So what if you wish to copy someone else's idea ? If you like it, it suits your play style and is effective then copying it isn't a big deal.

It's either that or be left wondering what all the fuss is about. When Hammerdins suddenly became quite popular in D2, did I run out and make one? Damn right I did, and it was fun for a while too. Got bored with it a lot sooner that a lot of other people apparently did, but it was an interesting build and fun to play for a while.

I probably won't be doing stuff like that in GW, simply because the four character limit makes that kind of fun experimentation impossible while maintaining a reasonable variety of serious characters to play...

Ensign · Mar 14, 2005, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

Because most people are illogical?

Well, we are talking about emotions here, and emotions aren't logical things. But just dismissing it as illogical really doesn't accomplish anything.

What we have to do is acknowledge that people want to accomplish several different goals with a game, and that those goals are, to a certain extent, mutually exclusive. I'd guess that most people enjoy the creative process that goes into figuring out and analyzing their build, that people use the game as a social medium to play with their friends, and as a competitive medium, be it PvE or PvP. All of these put constraints on the others, but people don't want those constraints - they want to push everything to their individual limits.

What usually gives first, at least for a more casual player, is the competitive part. It isn't that players don't want to be competitive and successful, but that they're putting things like individual expression and socializing over success in game, and they get smashed by people without those constraints.

So, yeah, the problem is that people want the impossible and get upset when they can't get it. The trick is that it doesn't seem like it should be impossible, at least at a glance. Hence the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

Actually, it's my understanding that the match-up system tries to match opponents of similar skill, no?

In GvG, yeah. Well, not similar skill, but similar ratings - so some combination of strategic and tactical strength combined with player skill. Once the system is seeded and running it should end up kicking you into a string of 50% matchups in any case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

We'll also see greater variety than those who are playing in the rarified upper ranks where only the optimal builds survive. Frankly, it sounds like a lot more fun to me.

It's a matter of where your preferences lie. A player who values creativity and individuality would certainly enjoy hanging around the middle with similarly creative players, and would find losing to the pwnage build for the twentieth time incredibly boring. A more competitive player would work on refining their pwnage build, and would feel that smashing your creative build is a waste of their time. Different players find different things fun - hopefully the ladder will make it easier to match up players of similar interests so that everyone enjoys the game more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

We're in it for fun, and doing what it takes to be #1 sounds too much like real work.

Training to fight for the top isn't real work. It's one of the most enjoyable activities in the world. Failure, now that's work.

Different players, different goals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrogDevourer

most players will be making illogical choices.

Illogical from the perspective of 'winning'. Perfectly logical from the perspective of a player who finds other things fun. I may write strategy articles and crunch numbers but I still understand that 90% of the players out there are more interested in having a unique character than an ultimate badass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrogDevourer

If you just want to play PvP at a decent level, you can expect your share of 'illogical' wins with a rogue build.

For varying definitions of 'decent level', sure. Teams should be able to find their level and get their share of wins in whatever way they happen to enjoy once they're there.

Peace,
-CxE

Dreamsmith · Mar 14, 2005, 10:28 PM // 22:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Training to fight for the top isn't real work. It's one of the most enjoyable activities in the world. Failure, now that's work.

"No man is a failure who is enjoying life." (William Feather)

The key to success is finding out what truly makes you happy. This is as true in any game as it is in real life. Letting other people dictate to you the object of the game is the first step towards failure.

Quote:

Different players, different goals.

Indeed. Thus, I feel confident the game is not going to degenerate into a bunch of clones. Too many people with different ideas of success for the game to so homogenize...

PhineasToke · Mar 14, 2005, 10:56 PM // 22:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shrapnel_Magnet

I don't wanna act like I'm defending Ensign, because he IS a jerk by nature and is not worthy of defense... but in his defense (lol), if you are suggesting that he has the "key to the door" as in the Alpha Test, you are mistaken. He's a lowly Beta Junky like like the rest of us. He gets to play 1 weekend a month, as we do. Nothing more.

So we should therefore consider those talking from one's posterior orifice not so much a skill but rather as a magic trick?

Ensign · Mar 14, 2005, 11:36 PM // 23:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

Indeed. Thus, I feel confident the game is not going to degenerate into a bunch of clones. Too many people with different ideas of success for the game to so homogenize...

On a global scale, that's certainly true. I'm guessing that you'll see recurring themes amongst the 'best' in particular areas of the game - not carbon copy characters, but a set of 'popular' strategies for the Tombs, or Arena, or even PvE. But even then not everyone wants to be the best, there's a layer of tinkerers right below them who understand things but refuse to play with a known quantity. Then there's a whole bunch of randomness right below that.

So I'd go one further and say that even competitive players are going to arrive at different builds, just because different maps call for different strategies. A good Tombs character is radically different from a good Arena character, and those players who really try to rip up PvE will have builds that wouldn't make a lick of sense in PvP - like the Death Necro.

Clearly there will be copying in all aspects of the game - either through independent invention or just the trade and assimilation of information over time - but, yeah, I'm not too worried about character diversity. Characters will be as diverse as the people who play the game. =)

Peace,
-CxE

mostro · Mar 15, 2005, 01:17 AM // 01:17

Well, I don't believe I have seen uber build(s) in the game so far. Some builds are better than others, but there are always counters to these builds. So what if people like to use the build flavor of the month. If you don't like to follow the trend nobody is forcing you to do that.

This topic reminds me of the one where people are whining to get the pre-mades removed from the game...

ThePaper · Mar 15, 2005, 01:55 AM // 01:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhineasToke

Do not fault those who don't have the key to the door you have been given.

hehe do you think someone who could play this game and obvipusly likes it ALOT would spend ANY time in fourums? Thats why we see absolutely no alpha testers in here. Thats better than any NDA, they wont want to get off the game to complain

ratatass · Mar 15, 2005, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Illogical from the perspective of 'winning'. Perfectly logical from the perspective of a player who finds other things fun. I may write strategy articles and crunch numbers but I still understand that 90% of the players out there are more interested in having a unique character than an ultimate badass.

Peace,
-CxE

I don't want to sound to much of an Ensign fan, but I enjoy his writing immensely! We are 3 days and 6 hours away from the fun is about to begin. Thank you all for keeping my head over the water by contributing such insightful and enjoyable writing.

I am not trying to get whine or get rid of the premade (as if I could) by the discussion in this thread.

Ensign actually answered my question, when he pointed out the W/Mo premade skills. A lot of players use premades, and as a monk I usually encounter those premade W/Mo.

My observations were correct! I was attacked by clones!

The other part of the question regarding we all coming up with the same warriors - seems still to be a little controversial. "Flavor of the Week" probably enforced that perception.

Anyway! 3 days to go!

I would post another thread like Nash did in TGH, where he formed up a Guild Hall All Stars team, but I won't be able to manage the team - a little off and on during the Beta, plus I lack the skills to put together a group. Great Idea though!

Why doesn't Guru, form an Allstar team too ? If we could get Ensign, Spooky, THX and Saus to formulate a strategy and be team leaders - would be fun! decide on a district and I will show!

Ratatass

Mar 15, 2005, 05:55 AM // 05:55

BTW, dont get confused about what it means by the notion of all the top players revolving around a number of different strategies. It's usually very broad, gamestyles that all the top teams will share. However, each of these may degenerate into such a number of ways that many teams wont be playing similar builds when it gets down to the nitty gritty.

Freyas · Mar 15, 2005, 10:57 AM // 10:57

From my experience, clones and Flavor of the Month builds really aren't that great. If there's a lot of people playing W/Mo's using Victory is Mine!, it's generally just a matter of putting in 1-2 skills in an entire team to completely neuter all those people running that build.... mend condition/ailment comes to mind here- without conditions, VIM is useless... and both of those condition-removal skills are spammable. It's quite easy to neuter warriors with a few skills, when used correctly- just as it is pretty easy to neutralize any character, if you're ready for it.

High-end teams will end up bringing a variety of disruption/shutdown combined with damage-dealing and healing- they'll try to shut down the enemy's damage dealers while staying alive and dealing damage themselves. However, there's dozens of different, effective ways to do shutdown, damage, and healing so that people won't end up running the same cloned builds, at least if they intend to be competitive.

As for useless/filler skills, that's something that ArenaNet is working on in the alpha test- if a skill is more powerful than others, it gets nerfed, and if ones are underpowered, they get buffed. As it is currently, I can think of good uses for most every skill in the game- with a few notable exceptions which are being looked at- such as Unnatural Signet. If anyone comes up with skills that they find severely underpowered, let me know, and give me some good reasoning behind your thoughts- if you can convince me, I'll definately give a shout out to the developers about the skill(if it hasn't already been changed in-game, of course). The same goes for overpowered skills.

Most of my builds undergo fairly constant changes in-game. I find I'm not using one skill too much, and replace it with another skill, or I find a weakness with my build which I fix by changing out one or more skills to compensate. The environment in which you're playing also makes a difference. In PvE, I'll use different skills in different areas. Likewise, in PvP, my skill setup is different between Tombs, GvG, and Arena battles- some skills are better in different situations. For example, I'll pretty much never take Spellbreaker into Tombs matches, but I find it's one of the most powerful skills to take on a healer into 4vs4 arena battles. Smite/banish/holy strike are excellent in Kryta where you're fighting undead, but they're so-so when you're fighting in ascalon or the jungle.

As for the question in the thread title, "Will we all become warrior clones?", I'd definately have to say "No!". GW is a game of counters, and if warriors start to become overly common, you'll find an upsurge in people bringing skills like Shield of Deflection, Soothing Images, Ward Against Melee, Ineptitude, etc. If interrupt-using Mesmers start to become popular, you'll see an influx of warriors and rangers....

chalt2 · Mar 15, 2005, 02:50 PM // 14:50

WOW

One thing is clear, there is enough to this "game" to satisfy, consume, piss off, unite, confuse and just plain excite hundreds of thousands of people all at the same time. Weather they are Uber PvPers or PvE weekend warriors they will all have the same oportunity to build the same, similar or completely off the wall different characters.

So IS one build REALLY better than another?

SURE it is, as long as you believe it is then it is.

Is that the realality of the "game", hmm don't know but then again it is JUST a fantasy....