Curse

Rob Roy The Divine · Jun 08, 2011, 04:19 PM // 16:19

Everyone knew this would happen, just gotta do what they do with champ points and limit it to a certain guild range, or do regular ladder resets. If you do ladder resets, means grinding for champ range, lose lose situation

TBH, take out the rares from strongboxes and give it party items/alcohol/sweets/green weps/zcoins/zkeys, it's kinda bullshitty move, but it'll stop the box farmers.

Ghost Dog · Jun 08, 2011, 05:09 PM // 17:09

So the rewards brought the worst of PvE to PvP I see. Speed clear groups and full on exploiters.

This game is rather dead.

Essence Snow · Jun 08, 2011, 05:23 PM // 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghost Dog

So the rewards brought the worst of PvE to PvP I see. Speed clear groups and full on exploiters.

This game is rather dead.

It was already in PvP. It just wasn't as obvious or lucrative.

Shayne Hawke · Jun 08, 2011, 05:38 PM // 17:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

I think it's time for a good old rollback and some bans. PvP should not give PvE rewards.

A rollback might have been a good idea if we were still in maybe the first twelve or so hours of this getting exploited. At this point, these guilds have been doing this for days, and everyone else has been playing the game as they see fit. Rollbacks affect everyone, not just those who are doing this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanyatta

He did address many of the points and pointed out how they would not work. However, any solution to this issue was not offered up.

see

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

Others who have proposals of limiting strongboxes to higher rating ranges or to a certain number in a period of time would probably be more reasonable.

In addition to that, bans for the accounts and guilds that have been involved directly in this activity could also be a reasonable course of action. Bans alone will do little if the exploit remains. This idea has also been brought up by others.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kanyatta

Although, I suppose that lends itself to the fact that this is a pretty big beast of a problem that has no clear-looking solution outside of removing the boxes, which I personally don't think will happen.

If any action was to be taken on the ill-gotten strongboxes, it would have been a rollback, and should have happened a long time ago. At this point, there's little that can be done about them except hope that they're being hoarded on the abusers' accounts so that they'll be inaccessible if they get banned.

jazilla · Jun 08, 2011, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by melissa b

It has come to my attention that certain guilds are farming strong boxes in GVG, some are resigning, others are facing themselves, many times its red letting blue kill the guild lord or resigning. Also, intentionally lossing to get a low ladder ranking.

Reason #129 that people don't want to play GvG. The funny part to me is I have suggested rewards for PvP in general in the past and I have had more than a few seasoned players tell me(as well as insult me) that true PvP'ers didn't care about loot. I feel vindicated that the truth was as I suspected it to be: Most players want phat lewtz.

HigherMinion · Jun 08, 2011, 06:37 PM // 18:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron The Greatest

So GvG has its own "red resign" now, it should meet the same fate as HB and get the axe imo.

Remove GvG from the game.

Then they can change the name of the franchise to Random Wars. I like your idea.

jazilla · Jun 08, 2011, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by HigherMinion

Then they can change the name of the franchise to Random Wars. I like your idea.

GvG has had more cheating going on in it than all the other formats combined. I agree, get rid of the format.

Essence Snow · Jun 08, 2011, 07:01 PM // 19:01

If anyone from anet is reading this thread today is the day where it'll be painfully obvious who the offenders are as they will be doing it all day b/c of the zc.

One guild in particular comes to mind that was created 2 days ago has 27 losses 0 wins...not gonna say their tag but it's on the ladder for anyone to see.

*lemming* · Jun 08, 2011, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

Maxing 30 titles takes a lot more skill than playing IWAY anyway.

lol

Quote:

Originally Posted by jazilla

Reason #129 that people don't want to play GvG. The funny part to me is I have suggested rewards for PvP in general in the past and I have had more than a few seasoned players tell me(as well as insult me) that true PvP'ers didn't care about loot. I feel vindicated that the truth was as I suspected it to be: Most players want phat lewtz.

You realize that the rewards are probably being exploited by gold sellers, right? I'm not sure if I'd describe them as "PvPers."

Incidentally, I'm interested in hearing the other 128.

Back on topic: A problem I see with banning is that new accounts are so cheap at this point that with the profit they're making, it's far too easy/cheap to replace them. Even IP banning won't be slow them down that much, I imagine.

AT forfeits losing your guild 25 rating is one way to tank a guild in preparation for this. The only other way is to resign a lot of matches. Perhaps both of these can be used as methods of identifying perpetrators.

Still Number One · Jun 08, 2011, 07:44 PM // 19:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Back on topic: A problem I see with banning is that new accounts are so cheap at this point that with the profit they're making, it's far too easy/cheap to replace them. Even IP banning won't be slow them down that much, I imagine.

It is a problem and a reward at the same time. Accounts are cheap and they are able to buy a new one for less than what they made off the banned account so they really aren't hurt by the ban, but it does slow them down and A.Net gets more money every time they buy a new account to replace the one they banned. Could be a very profitable policy for A.Net to adopt.

*lemming* · Jun 08, 2011, 08:11 PM // 20:11

You really think they're buying from Anet, though? I don't know how much profit Anet makes off of resold CD keys, and I can only assume that for resold accounts, it's zero.

jazilla · Jun 08, 2011, 10:19 PM // 22:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

You realize that the rewards are probably being exploited by gold sellers, right? I'm not sure if I'd describe them as "PvPers."

Incidentally, I'm interested in hearing the other 128.

The gold seller thing makes sense. But, it doesn't change the fact that "PvPers" were doing similar things when tanking ratings, sans loot. What would keep them from getting all the loot on their alt accounts whilst tanking their main accounts. Who's to say that really good players don't like making in game coin on the side?

I am working on the other 128 reasons. I will message you with them as soon as I make them up

*lemming* · Jun 08, 2011, 10:27 PM // 22:27

I have no idea what you're referring to. Refresh my memory?

Swingline · Jun 08, 2011, 11:12 PM // 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

The strongboxes were added as an incentive for people to play PvP. Why would we want to stick it on a Z-Coin vendor for PvE players to farm up? That would defeat the original purpose of the item, and it's not like we need to give PvEers more stuff to farm..

1) Strongboxes in their current means of acquisition have caused more harm than good.

2) GvG/HA cannot be fixed by just adding more PvE rewards.

3) Changing the titles was a damn good incentive to start doing RA/Codex(also changing deck rotation once per day).

4) PvP has enough PvE rewards(zkeys/HA chest/z-combat)

5) Even at the z-coin vendor a pvp player can make more z-coins per day than a pve player.

cantalus · Jun 09, 2011, 09:44 AM // 09:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sauron The Greatest

So GvG has its own "red resign" now, it should meet the same fate as HB and get the axe imo.

Remove GvG from the game.

can't really argue with Sauron's logical estimation of anet's historical blunt axe problem solving methods, funny though

and as someone else posted, anet doesn't apologise and doesn't change

still, anet has given a carrot, doesn't mean that the cheats have to bite, it's just a depressing aspect of human nature

remove the new rewards, balth and zquest bonus is enough

oh, and the fun

jazilla · Jun 09, 2011, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by cantalus

can't really argue with Sauron's logical estimation of anet's historical blunt axe problem solving methods, funny though

and as someone else posted, anet doesn't apologise and doesn't change

still, anet has given a carrot, doesn't mean that the cheats have to bite, it's just a depressing aspect of human nature

remove the new rewards, balth and zquest bonus is enough

oh, and the fun

or they could design the game a little better to avoid this type of thing. how about this: disable being able to resign for the first 5 minutes of a GvG Battle. If people want to rage quit, let them. If ANet doesn't want to do this then go with Sauron's idea.

Martin Alvito · Jun 09, 2011, 07:05 PM // 19:05

I'm actually of two minds about this one. Setting aside the issue of match manipulation for the moment:

- These players are engaging in economic behavior that benefits a lot of players. The items that come out of the strongboxes are desired, and so if you want to buy the item with existing wealth you win as a result of the price decline.

- By driving down prices, these players are cheapening the reward for people that play the game legitimately.

My sense is that the best solution would be to rework how the highly desired items such as mini Guild Lords and EL Tonics are distributed. Enforcement isn't going to solve this problem, as much as we might wish for that to be the solution. Giving out the highly desirable rewards in a box that can only be acquired by winning ATs would at least do a better job of rewarding the "right" players.

Lithril Ashwalker · Jun 09, 2011, 07:28 PM // 19:28

removing GVG is a bit much in the least and would kind of go against the game being called "Guild Wars' in th first place however, if it was made simple to something like a team or so of anything even gvg and HA that the strong boxes have a lower chance of spawning etc after a set number of consecutive wins or so. say 5 legitimate wins that a GVG team must beat opponents that ARE NOT in the alliance or guild at all that fight each other so no one knows each other and no one is in the same alliance that can possibly rig a match, one team beat the opposing team 5 times from then on strong boxes can be obtained AFTER a win the constant farming them is a bit heinous so the only way to get them is to fight and win consecutively.

much like switching the OLD pre-update point aquisition RA with gvg except instead of points make it strong boxes. ... less whining....gets things back on track and a well balanced compromise as well

i farm baddies · Jun 09, 2011, 09:04 PM // 21:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

If you could remember how the PvP crowd reacted to Sardelac ideas of making emotes for KOABD title track you wouldn't have called my argument irrelevant.
And yes, rank 9is a title. And the reward for achieveing it is its emote. Why no rewards for KOABD title tiers? Maxing 30 titles takes a lot more skill than playing IWAY anyway.

killing humans with BRAINS is harder than killing computers. #elitistlolol

also gw just loves throwing me wads of $$$. i dont even have a job and buy all this expensive shit. ahhh gotta love being a professional gw player.

Sk8tborderx · Jun 09, 2011, 11:51 PM // 23:51

They should just do what they did with reward points, you don't get a box if you have less than 1000 rating.