Curse

Kai Nui · Aug 12, 2005, 08:57 AM // 08:57

No point in arguing seeing as I know they won't implement this into the game. This is over.

Dahl · Aug 12, 2005, 09:07 AM // 09:07

As much as I love PvP, I think 1v1 is a terrible idea, for several reasons.

It's a very easy way to take advantage of newbies in the condition that you make bets.

It will make a very unfriendly community out of Guild Wars, you know how it was on Diablo II. If you didn't fall for a rediculous deal, you would be harassed for a few minutes being called names, then constantly challenged to duels. Yes, I know it's fairly easy to walk away, but your Maximum capacity for your ignore list isn't very high, and it would get tedious after awhile. No one wants to play in an unfriendly environment.

I was gonna say some other stuff about it too much I'm too distracted and I keep forgetting.

Dahl · Aug 12, 2005, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

is it just me or you guys sound afraid to lose a 1 vs 1 battle ..

i would add a restriction , since it can be so out of this world for some people

- make the 1 vs 1 battle only availe after you have beaten hells percepice ...

most people say the game is boring after that , pvp is what to do after that ...

so add 1 vs 1 , to make it more enjoyable ... and 1 on 1 adds personal reason to fight , not just the usual faction hunt , or favor of gods hunt ...

i want to fight someone , just becose i want to ... not becose the game will give me something for it ....

You're twisting pvp out of proportion. It's a game, why would you need to fight personally? It's not just for faction, or favor. It's for strategy, skill, and RANK. You can fight in team arenas or gvg because you "want to, and not because the game will give you something for it." I don't fight for rewards, I fight to get better, and for fun. Why would 1v1 give you more of a thrill than 4v4 or 8v8? In fact, I think 4v4 and 8v8 would be MORE thrilling. Furthermore, there is substantially less skill involved in 1v1, and less use of skills.

Also, the balance that arenanet made for professions will be thrown out of whack. Air ele's would be a dominant profession. Do you see where I'm coming from?

neoteo · Aug 12, 2005, 09:13 AM // 09:13

its amazing , people post without reading all the posts , you just read the first post on thread topic , that makes you sound stupid and usesell old news

so help me god

neoteo · Aug 12, 2005, 09:15 AM // 09:15

what if im bored of 4vs4 and 8vs8 , i want something new , i want 1vs1

Andy of Glacieria · Aug 12, 2005, 09:16 AM // 09:16

Right I didn't read anything from above but I think his idea is great. It would be just like in the last two Jedi Knight games, Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy. U'd turn black and could not be hurt by anyone except ur 1v1 target, people could pass thru u, couldnt hurt u. In short: Outside effects would simply have no effect on u. It's a great idea which I'm sure many ppl have posted similar versions of. I say it should seriously be put in the game. 1v1 guild battles aren't effective because people usually cheat and bring 8 ppl to own the scammed person that just wanted a duel.

Schorny · Aug 12, 2005, 09:29 AM // 09:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

is it just me or you guys sound afraid to lose a 1 vs 1 battle ..

Let's summarize your arguments:
* i want it
ok, that was ist.

I explained to you why 1vs1 is unbalanced and why player skill has nothing to do with winning or loosing 1vs1. Please prove me wrong.

You need to bring arguments. It's ridicolous to discuss about a feature if all you say is "i want, i want, i want".

It has nothing todo with winning/loosing. But imagine 2 healing monks fighting each other. Just think about it, please. It all depends on who has the better skills to counter the enemy. A 1vs1 is totally the opposite of what guild wars is trying to do: beeing a team game. Play random arena for 20-30 rounds and see to whom you lose and who you beat. You will easily spot that it doesn't really matter how you play - you will lose and win depending on your team build and the opponents build. Now let's take it a step further and imagine what it would be in 1vs1.

I understand that you played diablo or games like that where a 1vs1 was a viable option, but GW doesn't offer this possibility -> It is not balanced for it. I brought enough reasons for it. Please start to read my posts and answering them. I asked really nice to prove me wrong. Come and take the opportunity and prove that I'm wrong and 1vs1 would be totally balanced. Just prove it and most people will stop telling you that you are wrong.

Kamatsu · Aug 12, 2005, 10:17 AM // 10:17

my 2 biggest issues with this whole idea is:

1. griefing / pk'ing / newbie killing

Lets face it, if you allow 1v1 this is exactly what would come into the game. sure you might say "but you don't have to accept!". Except the griefer's would spam the "1v1 battle" on people till those people either gave in or left the area.. and can you imagine all the name calling and abuse going on to try and get players to accept.. pgfft.. just that would peeve me off when entering a outpost/town (even more than the cyber'ing that happens)

if the "battle" invite was like party invites.. a person could easily be having these invites spammed and not being able to ignore it with the ignore feature...

This only causes 1 thing - ruination of people's enjoyment of the game. I know I get peeved off and hit an instanced area when someone starts party-invite spamming me... and it happens. and I guarantee it would happen if 1v1 is ever allowed in.

Second problem is something that's been mentioned - people getting rushed to Droknir's for the best armor and then fighting new players/characters 1v1 and totally dominating them purely because the new character/player can't do any real damage to them (assuming they don't also have forge armor, max weapons, etc).

I can tell you.. just between those 2 issues it would turn people right off the game...

I mean really, can you imagine the garbage of enter a town.. and have to fend off "battle" invites from the griefer's who sit in town challanging people.. all the while trying to sell stuff, get quests, buy armor, etc.. it would get annoying and frustrating and put people off the game.

About the only suggestion in all I've read was stating only between characters who've finished the game. That would stop the whole griefing issue... but would still cause issues of ppl who have finished spamming "battle" invites on anyone else who'd finished... so it's still griefing.. just not of new players/characters.

2. balance

The game is not balanced for 1v1 at all - and I'm not going to go into it, as it has been discussed to death. and if you still don't get it.. then I feel sorry for you and thre people who wasted their time trying to explain it to you.

No, my issue is that people would complain about the balance and whine and want the game balanced for 1v1. Yes, you might say "but there's no fame! or faction!".. but if 1v1 was allowed.. and people did 1v1.. they WOULD cry about the imbalances that are in the game when dealig with 1v1.. and demand that anet balances it...

I can just see all the whinging and whining and posts on GW forums demanding that anet balance skills/attributes/etc for 1v1.. no matter that it was set up as "practice" or such.. people would complain that it's not balanced.. and the threads would end up as big flame fests as the 1v1'ers and non-1v1'ers get into fights about the whole issue..

And on this matter.. if you don't allow faction or fame... you can bet that people would complain and whine about that and demand that faction and/or fame be allowed on 1v1..

*shrugs* take it as you will. but the fact is anet designed GW for team-play, not 1v1 and I seriously doubt anet will ever consider implementing 1v1. and this post is just my views. I'm not "scared" of loosing a fight or any codswhollop like that.

neoteo · Aug 12, 2005, 11:26 AM // 11:26

im not reading anymore , close the dam thread ... devs dont do it ! the cumunity doenst want ...

BOOOOOOO .... no life losers

neoteo · Aug 12, 2005, 11:28 AM // 11:28

how can you kill a newbie if you can only batle the same level after hells percipice.

you guys are so smart but you cant read

over

Mithie · Aug 12, 2005, 11:43 AM // 11:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

you guys are so smart but you cant read

YOU can't read. Not only that, you're disrespecting everyone here's who's presented a counter-argument.

"You dont have to accept" IS NOT A FREAKING REASON for having this.

I can suggest a feature where if both people agree and click on the "Computer Asplode" button in GW, both people's computers explode. I don't see why this feature shouldn't be implemented, because after all, You don't have to accept!

Before you post, read what others say, THINK, and counter their arguments before presenting rehashed old ones and insulting others.

Kassad · Aug 12, 2005, 11:51 AM // 11:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mithie

YOU can't read. Not only that, you're disrespecting everyone here's who's presented a counter-argument.

"You dont have to accept" IS NOT A FREAKING REASON for having this.

I can suggest a feature where if both people agree and click on the "Computer Asplode" button in GW, both people's computers explode. I don't see why this feature shouldn't be implemented, because after all, You don't have to accept!

Before you post, read what others say, THINK, and counter their arguments before presenting rehashed old ones and insulting others.

Ya would be good if someone challenged you and you can 'choose' to fight or not, dont see why this shouldnt be put in the game though..

Schorny · Aug 12, 2005, 11:54 AM // 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

you guys are so smart but you cant read

I have asked you to prove my arguments wrong. You didn't even replied. So I'm stating it here the _third_ time. Please answer and prove me wrong. If you can prove me wrong, people will think differently about this feature. There are also other issues brought up by other people in this thread - feel free to prove them wrong too. Please do it.

ParaJiM · Aug 12, 2005, 07:30 PM // 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by kamatsu

2. balance

No, my issue is that people would complain about the balance and whine and want the game balanced for 1v1. Yes, you might say "but there's no fame! or faction!".. but if 1v1 was allowed.. and people did 1v1.. they WOULD cry about the imbalances that are in the game when dealig with 1v1.. and demand that anet balances it...

Now this is an excellent post, if any of you would like to see the results of extrem balancing, try playing eve-online. i was in the early beta and played the game for a year after, the devs were CONSTANTLY re-balancing items, ships etc. you would get used to something, someone would cry about it and *poof* it would be changed. the entire game up til now has been an extension of the beta, attempting to get EVERYTHING balanced just right.

When I started playing GW and EQ 2, it was like a dream, everything was stable, balalnced, and very few changes (relative to eve) were made.

Please do try eve... its a good game, but the whingers...

Personally I couldn't care less about 1vs1'ing, so long as there was, like galaxies, an option or setting that allowed you to auto ignore, or be impervious (meh, havent slept in 27 hours cant be bothered thinking of the right word

) to all the invites, say like /duel enabled and /duel disabled.
I would just walk round all day everyday with dueling turned off

Kamatsu · Aug 12, 2005, 10:56 PM // 22:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

how can you kill a newbie if you can only batle the same level after hells percipice.

you guys are so smart but you cant read

over

Is this pointed to me? Because if it is... The pure irony of what you say has me laughing. How about you take a page from your own book and go and read my post from start to finish. You will see I addressed this issue.

And btw, I have yet to see any good reason to implement this apart from "I think it would be fun/cool/etc and I want it!". That's no reason to implement something that would drastically alter a game and put in something that would cause more problems for both the players and the devs.

Also, insulting people and calling them names and putting them down simply because they don't agree with you is no way to try and convince people to even consider your idea. All your doing is putting people off even more by constently insulting them and putting people down and never ever responding to what people are saying.

Schorny - I'd say he has nothing to say to back up his idea except "I want it!" and "you can decline!" He's had ample chances to respond with reason's (apart from "it's cool!/fiun/etc" or "i want it!") and he hasn't said anything.. in fact all he's done is insult everyone who disagree's with him. I'd say he couldn't prove anything we are saying is wrong... and has shown time and time again he can't.

Kassad - read the whole thread. Many reason's have been put forth as to why this would be a bad idea.. and as of yet no-one has been able to show that it would be a god idea except for the "I want it!" & "It'll be fun/cool/etc!" people..

Mithie - LOL can we implement a "blow up your computer" option where if they accept but I decline only their computer blows up?

Kai Nui · Aug 13, 2005, 08:12 AM // 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

its amazing , people post without reading all the posts , you just read the first post on thread topic , that makes you sound stupid and usesell old news

so help me god

Funny you should say that because you keep throwing out the same responses when people have answered them.

Seriously folks, if you disagree with this, then don't post here. They can't keep this stupid thread alive unless people keep saying how bad it is. Just leave and let it rot to the next page. I really don't need to see this as a hot topic. Let it go, they won't put it into the game anyway.

Red Sonya · Aug 13, 2005, 10:03 AM // 10:03

I've already seen what happens in 1v1, been in several myself and watched a few others. 90% of them boil down to a "draw". It would be useless to waste resources for this game on 1v1 arenas or dueling now that I've seen it first hand and participated in it. I fought a W/Mo for 30 minutes 1v1 before we finally agreed to just roll for the victory and faction points. I couldn't be brought down and neither could he. I watched a ranger and a warrior do the same, ranger would use pin down and run like a chicken and that's what a lot of the outcomes of these would be a run fest if one was losing just like rangers do now. Classes without any form of heals would be at a disadvantage in 1v1 at any rate, unless they had a slow/cripple skill to give them time to regen health. This game isn't designed around 1v1 like say EQ where damage output was far superior to most healing spells and mana regen was so slow that eventually the mana ran out and then casters were nothing but paper. Mana regens wayyyy too fast in this game for a decent 1v1 dueling or arenas. And with several skills that give practically unlimited mana like Balthazars spirit and bonettis defense it just isn't viable to have such types arenas or duelings. And that's just a couple of the ones.

So my vote would be don't waste resources on something that would be silly and useless.

neoteo · Aug 14, 2005, 08:16 PM // 20:16

none of my posts are personal ... points everyone who knows its to them

BlaineTog · Aug 14, 2005, 10:05 PM // 22:05

As long as the challenged party has the option to decline, neither party gets XP or faction out of it, it can only occur in designated areas (perhaps towns, or maybe even just in the arenas), and it isn't too much trouble for the Devs to program, I think this is a very good idea.

Yes, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for most classes to kill a Mo/whatever. Hence, the only people who would accept dues versus Mo/whatevers would be characters specifically designed to kill Mo/whatevers. The Mo/whatevers would quickly catch on and thus counter the counters, eventually making it possible for other classes to kill them as well.

But I see no real downsides to this (provided it doesn't distract the devs from more important things, like the expansions).

quanzong · Aug 15, 2005, 12:16 AM // 00:16

I dont think this will happen because if you look at the name of the game it says "Guild Wars." Is a guild 1 person? No its more than 1 person. War means a battle. Put them together its more than 1 person battle.