Curse

lursey · Aug 07, 2011, 02:14 PM // 14:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by fowlero

Doesn't happen in GvG (to my knowledge), i doubt it'd happen much in HA. It only occured in HB because HB was a 1 person format, and a few other reasons.

Besides, flooding the lower of HA is a bad thing how?

Of the flood, there's bound to be some teams/players that would continue to play properly, and others who'd fast realise that not red resigning is far better. Teams asking for red resign (if any) would just be free wins. I'd be surprised if you often you'd face one willing to resign at all anyway. They're highly likely to face a team wanting to actually play/win and this in itself will discourage it, and encourage people to learn how to actually play.

You're seriously overestimating the skill of an average team in HA. A well coordinated team (read build setup) of say 6 inexperienced players being carried by 2 experienced players can be plenty competitive on early maps.

How are you teaching the wrong stuff by pairing with inexperienced players? That makes no sense at all.

I can see your last point to an extent, a player has to know the basics of PvP before you can actually teach them anything useful sure, but all you need is freely available on the wiki. There's nothing stopping someone better teaching them at all. That said, this is provided they are willing to learn and open to criticism which sadly a lot of new players aren't.

farmer/red resign teams are playing not in accordance to the format, it should not be encouraged that way...

what can you teach them, when you say teach?

I don't think ha is a teaching ground, because it is a very competitive venue, if you want to teach, you can only teach them to lose..so there is nothing really gain for them...

just like you put kids to the world cup, and saying teaching them soccer when they don't really have any experience, and now you are putting more candies in the world cup field to attract those kids....you see there is nothing really good about it..because the kids are simply not yet competitive enough to compete for the candies

but when you say playing together competitively, then it is another story...

fowlero · Aug 07, 2011, 02:44 PM // 14:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by lursey

farmer/red resign teams are playing not in accordance to the format, it should not be encouraged that way...

What?

Quote:

what can you teach them, when you say teach?

I don't think ha is a teaching ground, because it is a very competitive venue, if you want to teach, you can only teach them to lose..so that is nothing really gain for them...

just like you put kids to the world cup, and saying teaching them soccer when they don't really have any experience, and now you are putting more candies in the world cup field to attract those kids....you see there is nothing really good about it..because the kids are simply not yet competitive enough to compete for the candies

but when you say playing together competitively, then it is another story...

Instead of answering that with a list, i'll retort my own question. What can't you teach them while playing that you can while not playing? Not much.

Saying you can only teach them to lose is an incredibly pessimistic and self defeatist attitude to take, so sure if you take that outlook then you will lose. You can only take 8 players to one other place in PvP, GvG, which is hardly a non-competitive environment. PvE doesn't work as a training ground for PvP no matter which way you twist it, you can't get around that you're facing AI not other players. They do not react in any way similar to teams in PvP do to different situations and different builds.

Your analogy holds something to it, but it will work if you bring in enough "kids" which will happen if the "candies" are good enough. Because they will face other "kids" a decent enough amount of their matches such that they WILL be able to compete for the "candies". Sure they're not gonna win everytime, and they will face teams that will batter them, but that's expected in a competitive environment.

lursey · Aug 07, 2011, 05:44 PM // 17:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by fowlero

What?

Instead of answering that with a list, i'll retort my own question. What can't you teach them while playing that you can while not playing? Not much.

Saying you can only teach them to lose is an incredibly pessimistic and self defeatist attitude to take, so sure if you take that outlook then you will lose. You can only take 8 players to one other place in PvP, GvG, which is hardly a non-competitive environment. PvE doesn't work as a training ground for PvP no matter which way you twist it, you can't get around that you're facing AI not other players. They do not react in any way similar to teams in PvP do to different situations and different builds.

Your analogy holds something to it, but it will work if you bring in enough "kids" which will happen if the "candies" are good enough. Because they will face other "kids" a decent enough amount of their matches such that they WILL be able to compete for the "candies". Sure they're not gonna win everytime, and they will face teams that will batter them, but that's expected in a competitive environment.

because pvp is competitive ... red resign and farmer are not playing for competitiveness....

there are obstacles need to be overcome for making pve to play pvp on the basis of reward

1) if the pve doesn't want to play pvp all
2) to get the good candies they have to be competitive,
3) whether there is any other reward in pve that is easier to get....
4) whether it is worthy to spend time to get the reward
5) etc

you see a pve players will see these 4th obstacles, but another pvp player will just dive in pvp disregarding the rewards, and play straight for the competitiveness.....

unless the reward break the pve economies like making ecto into nothing, I don't think pve player will spend time to play pvp......

just try to imagine putting 200 ectos a hall wins, or 40 ectos a kill...there are still a very high chance the pve will not play the pvp.. because some pve doesn't play for reward to play pve, but play for the adventure in pve...

so concluding, there is no "good reward" at all can be put in pvp to make pve to play pvp more....unless you can think of a definition of magical good reward, that once put in.. the pvp venue will be filled with players...just like answering to how much is good??

The Drunkard · Aug 08, 2011, 12:07 AM // 00:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by lursey

rewarding in pve venue...is different from rewarding in pvp venue....

Right, however the HoM is for PvErs ONLY. Adding a statue for PvP is going to have PvErs working towards it, and then going back to PvE. Even if you make a difficult title that requires you to spend time in pvp, Pvers will skip it in favor of getting to 50/50 with easier titles. Pvpers could care less about something that does nothing for them. Your idea does not reward people for playing in pvp.

lursey · Aug 08, 2011, 01:23 AM // 01:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Drunkard

Right, however the HoM is for PvErs ONLY. Adding a statue for PvP is going to have PvErs working towards it, and then going back to PvE. Even if you make a difficult title that requires you to spend time in pvp, Pvers will skip it in favor of getting to 50/50 with easier titles. Pvpers could care less about something that does nothing for them. Your idea does not reward people for playing in pvp.

my suggestion is trying to make pver to be more competitive and easing the transitioning for them if they become more wishing to play pvp...

not directly turn them into pvp...because there is not a stable difficulty in the venue of pvp....the varying standard cannot allow new player to see their progression clearer.

Silmar Alech · Aug 08, 2011, 01:18 PM // 13:18

You all seem to assume that it's only necessary to put in some other reward- or matchmaking-system, or education system, or leagues, and all of the pve players would come over and begin to play pvp.

This will not work, because the ordinary pve player has a completely different mindset than a real pvp player. He is lacking the competitive drive. He tries one or a handful pvp matches, is beaten to a pulp, and he's out forever again, because he realized that this is not his game.

He is not entirely interested in bashing the same enemy mob for 5-20 minutes and lose 50%+ of all matches. Most of the pve players struggle enough with their builds and own play style. They learn how to beat the static mobs in pve-land, but will never be successful against the ever-changing pvp enemies. They will never see what skill use will make the difference. They will never understand why they just lost or why they just won.

I'm sure almost all of the pve players already tried some pvp, and whoever has pvp skill already does or did pvp. The rest of the pve community is simply not able to play competitively.

The pvp community needs completely new players, not converted pve players.

I am writing this as one of the pve players who tried all pvp formats and found out that this is not his game. I don't say every pve-only player is exactly like me, but in the end this core point applies.

fowlero · Aug 08, 2011, 03:19 PM // 15:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silmar Alech

You all seem to assume that it's only necessary to put in some other reward- or matchmaking-system, or education system, or leagues, and all of the pve players would come over and begin to play pvp.

This will not work, because the ordinary pve player has a completely different mindset than a real pvp player. He is lacking the competitive drive. He tries one or a handful pvp matches, is beaten to a pulp, and he's out forever again, because he realized that this is not his game.

He is not entirely interested in bashing the same enemy mob for 5-20 minutes and lose 50%+ of all matches. Most of the pve players struggle enough with their builds and own play style. They learn how to beat the static mobs in pve-land, but will never be successful against the ever-changing pvp enemies. They will never see what skill use will make the difference. They will never understand why they just lost or why they just won.

I'm sure almost all of the pve players already tried some pvp, and whoever has pvp skill already does or did pvp. The rest of the pve community is simply not able to play competitively.

The pvp community needs completely new players, not converted pve players.

I am writing this as one of the pve players who tried all pvp formats and found out that this is not his game. I don't say every pve-only player is exactly like me, but in the end this core point applies.

It can be the minority in PvE who still want to get into PvP, casual players, returning players, new players who have thought of it, anyone. Hell even those who have previously written off PvP sometimes try it out again. Whilst you're entirely right, that's still a lot of interested players compared to the existing playerbase in HA.

If you look at what the strongbox update did with GvG, it massively increased the number of teams playing on ladder to the point that you can nearly always get a match (i believe this is still the case, haven't played in a while). I put this, at least partly, down to rewards being on a per win basis. New rewards in HA are not on a per win basis, but every 2 wins, which is a much lower incentive.

floor · Aug 08, 2011, 03:39 PM // 15:39

Hi Olly, love ya <3

Also on topic:

As i said earlier, there are lots of players willing to participate in GvG/HA/PvP in general, they are not willing to help themselves. They expect the rest of the existing playerbase to bend over backwards to accommodate them, which isnt going to happen because it takes up too much of our play time, its far easier for us, and faster, to just group with people we know.

If new players want to play, they have to put in some effort on their own part. Form your own guild, go out and search for players, group together with other newbies, try and play urselves. If it fails get some experienced guests to come along and help out, learn from the guests. Invite more guildies, play with more guests, expand ur friends/contacts list, bla bla the list goes on. But it basically all starts with the fact that new players are not willing to form up teams/guilds with other new players.

If you have rank 0, do not expect to join a rank 15 team or a top 20 guild, it wont happen. And perhaps more suprisingly to you, its not because of titles either.

The fact is, all established GvGers know each other, and the ppl we dont know we have at least heard of. Its the same in HA, and to an extent there is plenty of overlap with many GvGers knowing many HAers and vice versa. If you are outside of this friendship circle, then ur screwed. GL getting into groups, guild wars pretty well has nothing to do with titles, its mostly dependent on who you know (and a certain element of being decent at the game too ofc).

If new players are not prepared to invest the time required, in order to form teams and get to know other players, ie socialising and networking, then they really have no chance of getting involved. PvP is a social activity, if u enjoy being antisocial, forget it.

The biggest stumbling block for many players trying to cross from PvE into PvP has been their inability to make friends. Unfortunately getting to know people takes time and effort, trying to play pvp 1 night a week isnt gna cut it. 1 week later people have forgotten you. You pretty much have to regularly invest time, at least 4-5 days a week, if not more initially, at least until you get to know some established people.

Guild wars is about player skill and networking, stop worrying about titles!!

Missing HB · Aug 08, 2011, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by fowlero

If you look at what the strongbox update did with GvG, it massively increased the number of teams playing on ladder to the point that you can nearly always get a match (i believe this is still the case, haven't played in a while). I put this, at least partly, down to rewards being on a per win basis. New rewards in HA are not on a per win basis, but every 2 wins, which is a much lower incentive.

Unfortunately, it worked for a few weeks but people stopped because it made no sense...
I believe there are still people doing it on bottom of ladder for farming strongboxes... but apart of that, i rarely get an opponent fast around 1000 rating anymore... This was due to 3 facts in my opinion :
- most fights last less than 5mn with this meta
- too many griefs( i can't count the number of times opponent resigned purposely at 4.50...)

You can also get a proof of this by checking automated tournaments... all were 5 rounds and now it turned back to 3 ( B AT usually being 1-2 guilds playing and 2-5 forfeiters)...

@ floor : really, i'm not sure whether you're trolling or you got a too active GvG guild, but playing 4 hours/day 5 days/week( and even, that depends on your playtimes....) is really a lot, especially considering you will get no result for at least a month... Your arguments are valid for 2006, but you need to consider INACTIVITY.. Sure you need people to play with, but you also need opponents...

I'm pretty sure though that adding in game messages such as the one for PvE with captain rujiyo would have helped....

There would surely be a population influx if we had messages like : " Captain Rujiyo has arrived in [Enter Format]. Rewards are doubled for next two hours "
This would make formats active permanently assuming we had 4-5 messages per day ( depending on playtimes so that everyone is happy) ...

floor · Aug 08, 2011, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

@ floor : really, i'm not sure whether you're trolling or you got a too active GvG guild, but playing 4 hours/day 5 days/week( and even, that depends on your playtimes....) is really a lot, especially considering you will get no result for at least a month... Your arguments are valid for 2006, but you need to consider INACTIVITY.. Sure you need people to play with, but you also need opponents...

I wasnt trolling at all, i admit i do play in the european timezone which makes it actually possible to play ladder. But assuming your able to play between the hours of like 7-11/12pm GMT, (which suits a lot of people seeing as almost every pvp player is now european), its quite easy to get ladder matches on a daily basis. It clearly becomes more difficult to get matches as you get into the higher reaches of the ladder, but at that point ladder more or less gets replaced by tournament play anyway...

Committing to playing 4 hours a day is excessive though i agree, but then i also never said that ;P Even playing for 2 hours a day, which is probably achievable 4-5 nights a week without really interfering with your real life responsibilities, allows for you to play at least 5-10 matches depending on how long each game lasts ofc. But seeing as games over the last 12 months have moved away from 28 minutes and are reguarly ending in 6-10 minutes, theres plenty of time to fit in several games in an evening.

As with any new activity, if you want to learn/improve it will require a certain amount of time investment on your part. If people are unable/unwilling to commit that time then it becomes an issue.

Note: Im fully aware that asian hours are dead beyond repair, and American hours is reduced to playing the AT's or not at all. So none of this post or my orignal one particularly apply to people playing in those timezones.

Grinch123456 · Aug 08, 2011, 05:13 PM // 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by floor

If you have rank 0, do not expect to join a rank 15 team or a top 20 guild, it wont happen. And perhaps more suprisingly to you, its not because of titles either.

The fact is, all established GvGers know each other, and the ppl we dont know we have at least heard of. Its the same in HA...

Guild wars is about player skill and networking, stop worrying about titles!!

Yep. When I go tombs/HA (which is rare beyond belief), I might see someone I know and get a group. I'm r5 and my groups tend to be r10+. When I'm on, people generally ask me to GvG despite not even being c1. Why? Because I know a lot of people and those people are confident in my abilities. When I'm looking for people, either I know them or I know their references. Titles are meaningless for most players who PvP. I wouldn't worry about that.

My advice for PvErs looking to get into GvG? Find a like-minded group of players on some forums or in-game, go on obs mode between two great guilds, write down as many names as possible, and ask them to come mentor and/or tutor your guild sometime. There isn't a single GvGer who won't come, myself and probably floor included. They'll point out your mistakes and give you some advice.

Lucy Saxon · Aug 08, 2011, 06:07 PM // 18:07

As one of those PVE players, I would never play PVP just for a HoM statue. If PVE players ever have the desire to PVP, they'll do it on their own merits. You can't bribe the kind of drive that you need for serious PVP.

fowlero · Aug 08, 2011, 09:19 PM // 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucy Saxon

As one of those PVE players, I would never play PVP just for a HoM statue. If PVE players ever have the desire to PVP, they'll do it on their own merits. You can't bribe the kind of drive that you need for serious PVP.

Sure, but further encouragements to those PvE players who are interested to (hopefully) get more out of it early on is never a bad thing. Personally, 1 win should give you the reward as in GvG.

P.S. Floor you babe.

Lawliet Kira · Aug 08, 2011, 09:43 PM // 21:43

they should switch all pve characters into pvp characters for a week, and overflow pvp arenas

/win

Reikai · Aug 09, 2011, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Unless PvP is forced and not consensual (aka rape), there will always be individuals who avoid PvP at whatever cost. I learned this full well when I played Aion, and carebears just avoided all PvP prone areas at all times, whined about getting ganked, etc.

All PvP games should always have PvP that is not consensual. For example, in the middle of a vanquish, you will be randomly pit against another party that is vanquishing the same area. The losing party will be sent back to the last outpost they were in, having to start the vanquish all over again.

This forces players to either get better competitively, or literally be unable to progress at whatever they are doing. It will force alot of players to quit, perhaps, but these are not the players a PvP game cares for anyway.

optional PvP is basically the death of any PvP game.

Silmar Alech · Aug 09, 2011, 09:45 AM // 09:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reikai

Unless PvP is forced and not consensual (aka rape), there will always be individuals who avoid PvP at whatever cost. I learned this full well when I played Aion, and carebears just avoided all PvP prone areas at all times, whined about getting ganked, etc.

But I don't want to get raped.
I would not even consider to buy such a game with open PvP. I did not even buy Prophecies when it was new and a friend recommended it to me, since it was said that the endgame would be pvp. Not for me.
I finally bought GW when he begged repeatedly over the years and EOTN came out. At that time, it was clear that there was a PvE endgame and a lot of PvE content without being forced to PvP, so it was something I could consider.

I don't think I harm the PvP community with this understanding of the game, because it makes no difference, if I don't enter pvp or if I don't enter the game at all. However, having bought the game and having paid for it, helped in a different way: it helped funding the life team and the game support in general.

I suggest a more open minded view to the two communities. They have very different views and goals, but they also have an intersection. Don't force one upon the other.

Elnino · Aug 09, 2011, 10:49 AM // 10:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silmar Alech

Don't force one upon the other.

You might wanna take a look at this.

Silmar Alech · Aug 09, 2011, 01:35 PM // 13:35

I understand that the current hom rewards are pve-centric. This is unfair to the pvp-only players. But how is this connected to the dwindling pvp community? Repairing the hom is like increasing the rewards for pvp-play only. It couldn't create new pvp-capable players out of thin air.

I also guess I understand why there are not 2 distinct halls, one for pvp and one for pve. The developers really try to hold the community together. It's one game we are playing after all, so there is one hall. Splitting the hom will officially split the game in 2 halves, and this is perhaps less healthy in the long run than the current situation. I'm no dev or game specialist - I don't know what matters here.

Increase the rewards for the pvp titles in a way that 50 reward points can be achieved with only these titles, and give access to the hall for pvp characters. But will that bring more players to pvp in the long run? I don't think so.

Reikai · Aug 09, 2011, 02:40 PM // 14:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silmar Alech

But I don't want to get raped.
I would not even consider to buy such a game with open PvP. I did not even buy Prophecies when it was new and a friend recommended it to me, since it was said that the endgame would be pvp. Not for me.
I finally bought GW when he begged repeatedly over the years and EOTN came out. At that time, it was clear that there was a PvE endgame and a lot of PvE content without being forced to PvP, so it was something I could consider.

If not already made clear, nothing personal, but you and your PvE ilk are what I (we?) want to get rid of. By disuading PvE players from joining the game, it actually attracts PvP players INTO the game, so TBQH, I really don't see anything wrong here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silmar Alech

I don't think I harm the PvP community with this understanding of the game, because it makes no difference, if I don't enter pvp or if I don't enter the game at all. However, having bought the game and having paid for it, helped in a different way: it helped funding the life team and the game support in general.

But yes. You do. By having PvE players in this game, it gives the devs an incentive to put resources in the PvE side of the game, and not the PvP side of the game. Unfortunately resources are limited, and resources going into PvE means resources not going into PvP. Additionally, having game that completely revolves around PvP futher caters to PvP players, and hence will attract More PvP players. Look at games like League of Legends or Starcraft/II for example.

Quote:

I suggest a more open minded view to the two communities. They have very different views and goals, but they also have an intersection. Don't force one upon the other.

As explained above, the two cannot "co-exist." One will take the place of another. Unfortunately GuildWars, originally intended to be a PvP-centered game, eventually became a PvE-centered game because of the above.

Lucy Saxon · Aug 09, 2011, 03:10 PM // 15:10

Yes, get rid of the PVE players. I'm sure the PVP players can easily keep the game going and make ANET money on their own. To be honest, PVP players need PVE players far more than they seem to realise.