Curse

dusanyu · Apr 08, 2012, 05:18 AM // 05:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Would people in the PvEer rating brackets (<1050) really enjoy getting beat up on by hero teams?

PvEer's think heros are the solution to everything.

Koyote · Apr 08, 2012, 03:17 PM // 15:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azazello

I'd like to see hero teams for AB, it's not like anyone plays it or even took it seriously when it did get played.

Some players take even JQ, FA & RA seriously. AB is very underrated. It's a better version of RA, except maps aren't random...

Many players would still play AB if map changed every two hours or so and rewards were better. It's interesting both of the current GW2 PvP formats remind of AB but Anet doesn't care about AB.

Missing HB · Apr 08, 2012, 03:52 PM // 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koyote

It's interesting both of the current GW2 PvP formats remind of AB but Anet doesn't care about AB.

They didn't care neither about HA/TA/HB/JQ/FA/Codex/RA. The closest format to make a link with GW2 would be making costume brawl a permanent arena. I won't talk too fast since there's still the 7th year birthday surprise, it could be a possibility.

I mean, they made links with GW2 in PvE and didn't do anything in PvP. I'm pretty sure Codex for example would have been more active for a few weeks at least if we had WoC characters skins there...

Koyote · Apr 08, 2012, 04:48 PM // 16:48

I wouldn't mind CB.

Let's wait and see.

I'll laugh if the 7th year birthday "surprise" doesn't bring any PvP updates.

Helyanwe · Apr 10, 2012, 03:36 AM // 03:36

I'm not a PvP'er so I can't comment on that, but I'd love to be able to take my heroes back into the Zaishen Elite.

Masta Panda · Apr 10, 2012, 11:34 AM // 11:34

I'm sorry, I really don't want to go back to the days of the Gwen Tease and her pro 1/4 cast rupts.

Still Number One · Apr 13, 2012, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

I don't think your answer answered the question. Yes or no?

Yes. They would rather not play at all then get stomped by hero AI abusing teams. Hero builds can be extremely OP. In fact there are several cases where terrible players have been able to put together ridiculous Hero Builds abusing AI and beat top teams with them because they caught them by surprise.

It took a few games for top teams to figure out how to counter the most OP AI builds. Hero builds completely ruined mid tier, because they were better than 90% of all human guilds. People would either stop playing or start running hero builds themselves. It completely ruined mid and low tier back in 2007/08.

That said, I couldn't care less if they come back. The game is dead as is so adding heroes won't kill it any further. It will either just make the already dead scene less fun or give low end legitimate guilds even more teams to get stomped by, and cause them to hate PvP even faster.

Jeydra · Apr 14, 2012, 03:39 AM // 03:39

Curious but when was the last time a top guild losing to heroes wasn't treated as LOL USUK by the rest of the community?

Btw if you say yes, I equally say no. Waiting in the GH with 8 people and getting no matches except vs. forfeit guilds is worse than playing against heroes.

Flash Dilithium · Apr 14, 2012, 04:55 AM // 04:55

Bring back heroes to PvP?

It's PvP... as in PLAYER VS. PLAYER. Having Heroes in PvP is a contradiction and shouldn't be brought back by definition in and of itself. You lose sir!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0

EDIT: I guess i need some substance to my post... lol. If heroes are implemented in PvP, one of two things will happen.
1) Teams with heroes will be at a distinct disadvantage making full parties of 8 bored with GvG and HA because they will faceroll them.
2) Teams with heroes will be able to win competitive mates, making teams of full parties at a distinct disadvantage where Hero teams will faceroll them (it has happened before).

Both scenarios are very very very bad.

Of course, not playing at all is not a good solution either. So what is the solution???

Release GW2. Unfortunately that is the only solution rendoring this entire section of the forum utterly useles... Did you not read the login-thing? The people that were working on GW1 are now working on GW2. Nothing in this section of the forum is meaningful. SORRY!!!

Still Number One · Apr 14, 2012, 06:09 AM // 06:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Curious but when was the last time a top guild losing to heroes wasn't treated as LOL USUK by the rest of the community?

Btw if you say yes, I equally say no. Waiting in the GH with 8 people and getting no matches except vs. forfeit guilds is worse than playing against heroes.

I fail to see how low tier guilds getting beaten by AI in a 5 minute match is more enjoyable than winning against a forfeit guild. Both of them are equally boring and will most likely lead to quitting. In fact losing to heroes is probably worse as it seems to damage people's egos far more.

Adding heroes won't do what you want it to. The best decision for lower end ladder guilds is the decision they have been making for 4 years now. Which is to just avoid playing altogether. Only thing adding heroes does is help higher ranked guilds run a dumb Hero build when they can't find a guest, or use it as a last second emergency filler for someone losing connection to the server before they can hit enter into an AT match.

So sure, go ahead and add them. It does nothing to low tier play at all and the good and bad cancel each other out in higher end. Really the only thing it will do is likely make Halls slightly more active. Maybe 4 guilds will play instead of 0.

Auron of Neon · Apr 14, 2012, 07:28 AM // 07:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Waiting in the GH with 8 people and getting no matches except vs. forfeit guilds is worse than playing against heroes.

GW PvP is dead and has been since 2008/9. The only thing that can revive it is a renewed interest in it from ArenaNet. The game has no tutorial, no mention that PvP even exists unless someone accidentally presses the "observer mode" button, and even then it doesn't tell them *how* to start PvPing.

That is the reason the PvP died in the first place - when GW came out, it was designed and marketed as a PvP game (seriously, watch the early interviews, ANet says it themselves) so the game fed into PvP naturally (you get dumped into ToPK, which is now a separate outpost, after learning the basic map strats for every match type in heroes' ascent). When they removed the PvP req for world favor, and attached it to something meaningless like snorefest grind titles, that removed one of the big incentives to get people into the PvP. When they removed real life rewards for tournaments and added in measly reward points, that removed another. As time went on, ArenaNet offered fewer and fewer reasons to get into the PvP content, so it simply died as the current players got bored and quit.

Putting heroes back into PvP is not going to fix it. The matches are not going to be fun; contrary to your post, they're honestly less fun than no matches at all (or matches against forfeit teams). AI is *not fun* to play against. It's abused more often than not, and the split-second interrupts, hex spreading, etc etc that people have mentioned really destroy the game. You sacrifice so much quality adding heroes that you might as well play Draw Something instead; at least then you'd be competing against real people.

The solution to your problem is for ArenaNet to add incentives to play their PvP. Putting heroes back in does nothing but make the PvP even worse, and de-incentivizes it more than anything.

Missing HB · Apr 14, 2012, 08:18 AM // 08:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flash Dilithium

Bring back heroes to PvP?

It's PvP... as in PLAYER VS. PLAYER. Having Heroes in PvP is a contradiction and shouldn't be brought back by definition in and of itself. You lose sir!!!

And how is a player controlling heroes against an other player controlling heroes not PvP ?? I have to deal against my opponent's tactic right ? If he decides to flag heroes somewhere, it's a part of his tactic ?

Besides, PvE is Player Versus Environment, but the Player word here is exactly the same than the one in Player Vs Player? If a player controlling heroes doesn't fit for the P in PvP, how would it fit for the P in PvE ????!!!

The fun question aside is ridiculous, and it's the same reason for players saying " lalala costume brawl is fun because it lasts only 1 week per year lalalala". Come on, we have the same formats for about 6 years now, and some are still played although they are completly bugged( FA/JQ), flawed and non fun because of cheaters and bots( CA/JQ/FA/RA/HA).

If not, then i think heroes should just be allowed AT LEAST in 1 format, to be able to do something on very empty hours and i think codex arena fits the profile.

Azazello · Apr 14, 2012, 08:30 AM // 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Auron of Neon

The solution to your problem is for ArenaNet to add incentives to play their PvP.

Failed approach continues to fail. Hi strongboxes. Hi zkeys. In order to incentivize 8v8 enough to overcome the barriers to entry you need to destroy the point in every other activity. The level of reward required would make doing anything else for the rewards pointless by comparison. It used to take a hundred thousand dollars, and the barriers were lower then. Every time I've read this line in the last three or four years, all I hear is 'I play in peak times and don't have trouble getting matches, now give me stuff'.

Solution is, and always has been, to reduce or remove the barriers to entry, and fck the whiners who can't handle change. Whether that includes allowing heroes or not I don't know, but it's too late now anyway. Most formats with low or no barriers to entry are STILL doing fine in 2012 with GW2 about to come out, while 8v8s have been dead forever, and they've been trying various ways to reanimate them since 2007. Seems like a pretty simple equation.

Jeydra · Apr 14, 2012, 10:28 AM // 10:28

The problem with threads like this is that it's so totally opinion-oriented. On the one hand we have people that insist that AI is not fun to play against (Auron), and on the other we have people that insist that AI is perfectly fine to play against (me). Statements like "it is more fun to play against AI than to do nothing at all" cannot be proven and is completely down to opinion. The most anyone can say is that "I find it fun to play against the AI instead of do nothing", or "I don't find it more fun ... ", and without an organized poll no progress is possible.

I'll point out three things though. One, there is nothing the AI can do that a skilled human player cannot do. Two, AI is extremely vulnerable to split. Three, if you find playing against the AI not fun, you don't play at all ... same thing as right now when there's no heroes - you don't play at all.

Quote:

I fail to see how low tier guilds getting beaten by AI in a 5 minute match is more enjoyable than winning against a forfeit guild. Both of them are equally boring and will most likely lead to quitting. In fact losing to heroes is probably worse as it seems to damage people's egos far more.

Adding heroes won't do what you want it to. The best decision for lower end ladder guilds is the decision they have been making for 4 years now. Which is to just avoid playing altogether. Only thing adding heroes does is help higher ranked guilds run a dumb Hero build when they can't find a guest, or use it as a last second emergency filler for someone losing connection to the server before they can hit enter into an AT match.

Here's the million dollar question: what makes you think you're qualified in imposing your opinion on lower end ladder guilds? What makes your claim of "not fun" valid for everyone, marginalizing people that do find it fun? What makes you think you can say the "best" decision for lower end ladder guilds is to avoid playing altogether? Do you have the right to dictate what lower end ladder guilds do?

yitjuan · Apr 14, 2012, 10:41 AM // 10:41

/signed

i want to run 8 mesmer team.

*lemming* · Apr 14, 2012, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

One, there is nothing the AI can do that a skilled human player cannot do.

Just because humans could hypothetically run discord spike as effectively as necro heroes didn't make it feasible. The same goes for bars with 4+ interrupts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

Here's the million dollar question: what makes you think you're qualified in imposing your opinion on lower end ladder guilds? What makes your claim of "not fun" valid for everyone, marginalizing people that do find it fun? What makes you think you can say the "best" decision for lower end ladder guilds is to avoid playing altogether? Do you have the right to dictate what lower end ladder guilds do?

Doesn't the converse go for you, too? What's qualifying your assumption that there exists a huge population of players waiting in the woodwork to GvG, but never have because... they can't take their heroes?

superraptors · Apr 14, 2012, 11:56 AM // 11:56

actually the ai in this game is quite superb, they pre-weapon targets before you even ping them or even move towards them or even near them, that is something a real player can never do or predict efficiently 99% of the time, now combine that with excellent multitasking and godly interrupts.

terrible balancing, they change focus and what to balance around all the time. they focus on gvg then they focus on tombs then back to gvg then sometimes 4v4 formats then some random updates for dervs and eles which promotes button smashing at its finest, they basically butchered skills and stitched them together to make a stronger version.

this game was made for 8v8 real players, same goes for 4v4.

absolutely no reason to beat a dead horse.

if you are serious about pvp then you wouldn't ever consider playing with heroes/henchs.

this game has no instant gratification, its repetitive pvp and its boring, its been like that since 07. the incentive to play has more to do with the format rather than the pixel rewards it self.
Who hasn't done it all? once you win halls a couple of times and combine it with holding, it gets old pretty fast, there is absolutely no change to spice things up, instead they kill off build diversity which certain groups of people only enjoy playing and in doing that people have to adapt or perish(in this case quit). After that when you realize there is only a couple of builds you can play that actually has the ability to win and have fun at the same time you will absolutely be bored to death.

the major dervish update was the final nail in the coffin for tombs atleast, it just totally dumbed down alot of builds that actually require a degree of co-ordination.

Its actually the first time i have seen where id1 ha has less than 3 people standing in it.

heroes is definitely not the way to go whether you think its right, the format will still be the same in the end and it will still be dead even if they added it back after a couple of weeks.

Missing HB · Apr 14, 2012, 12:42 PM // 12:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by superraptors

this game has no instant gratification, its repetitive pvp and its boring, its been like that since 07. the incentive to play has more to do with the format rather than the pixel rewards it self.
Who hasn't done it all? once you win halls a couple of times and combine it with holding, it gets old pretty fast, there is absolutely no change to spice things up, instead they kill off build diversity which certain groups of people only enjoy playing and in doing that people have to adapt or perish(in this case quit). After that when you realize there is only a couple of builds you can play that actually has the ability to win and have fun at the same time you will absolutely be bored to death.

I will agree with this. Sometimes, i usually get bored in codex after a dozen of fights( although playing against real players), and it's quite the same in GvG or HA after an hour or so.

About taking heroes : i think i finally understood your point, and won't especially disagree in the fact that it would be quite boring facing dirk/bellicus/vince every match. BUT, the problem would occur for players who're online 24/7. Casual gamers or even players logging 1-2 hours/day wouldn't bother a lot, overall it would be the same as facing the same build(bbways in HA or trip derv rang mes in GvG for example) over and over.

But still, the point is to be able to play in no time. " Addict players" are playing 24/7 today and it wouldn't change much since they can afford waiting hours for a match, whereas it would bring at least a few activity for casual players and would bring players to PvP.

I will say it again, but i think players will just want something to do in PvP alone at least, which means 1 format that can be played with heroes/henchmen. If bringing back hero battles and team arenas would be easier, codex should be played in a such way..

The problem of this thread isn't really players who can't change their opinion like jeydra said, but about players that try to play the game at anytime against people who're just doing C At casually..Sure, if i only played the C AT, i wouldn't notice the lack of players, but if you just try to play around A and B AT's, you would notice that there isn't anything to do really...

Jeydra · Apr 14, 2012, 01:11 PM // 13:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Doesn't the converse go for you, too? What's qualifying your assumption that there exists a huge population of players waiting in the woodwork to GvG, but never have because... they can't take their heroes?

That's why I'll be the first to say that without more data we simply don't know. Right now we're just arguing opinion, and it's just going to go around in circles without getting anywhere.

tealspikes · Apr 14, 2012, 04:26 PM // 16:26

The majority of the low end teams regularly run henchmen to begin with. Th pve-tier teams that attempt to purely 8-man it (I'm assuming what you mean by "legitimate") are all but non-existent this day and age. For the one or two that may exist at a given time, their options are long wait times to fight against mid-high tier and almost always lose, slightly shorter wait times to fight henchway teams, or even shorter wait times to fight heroway teams and have a decent chance of winning. For the other 90% of the low tier, that means they can use heroes themselves.

Also, to say that you would rather not play than play a game involving heroes is your opinion, not everyone else. Though I'd be willing to bet that if they're satisfied with dirk/tannaros henchways almost every game then they would be fine with heroes.