Curse

Red · Sep 11, 2006, 08:13 PM // 20:13

I would have previously argued point 2 with you on shakier ground--because at that time, it really was about a difference in how much time you were willing to spend raising a PvE characters, compared with instantly making a PvP.

However, the purchase of a Tournament Edition is no longer a question of choice in how you spend you time--it is a choice in how you spend your real life dollars.

We can argue back and forth about whether time spent should be rewarded; but when what you spend your real world money on becomes a part of that choice... that's another situation entirely. I'm not sure you can defend that so easily.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

Point 5: stripping down

That doesn't apply to me. Lyra would like to see the PvE toons stripped down in terms of inventory and such in battle... but I want to see PvP toons buffed instead. GIVE US an option to purchase for free ANY armor, weapons, runes, and mods that we have unlocked with Balthazar Faction.

In fact, I say take the weapon/armor/runes out of the character creation screen completely. Just roll-up a PvP as you would a PvE--that is, only looks and name. Then, after your character is made, go to the crafters in the Great Temple of Balthazar and get what you want. Start PvP characters with a free belt pouch and two bags with runes of holding, and let us fill up the PvP inventory as we would a PvE player's.

You can still keep your pimped up ride of a PvE, with your FoW armor and unique skins. But don't punish me for going for the straight functionality of a PvP character, by denying me access to multiple rune-armor sets or Armor+10 vs. X shields, etc.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

Reread point 4. My post stands.

Horseman Of War · Sep 11, 2006, 08:18 PM // 20:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by The truth itself

- Special PvE items, such as Nolani wands, HoD, -50 hp item, extra energy staff.
- Lower Req. weapons, 7 and 8, at max damage.
- Alot of more armors, and abillity to change mid-battle.
- Alot of more weapons.

Your right, there is "no" difference :S

-lower req items are meaningless to me, unless for some reason you really NEED a low attribute for the skills you are bringing (which is why personally I see no need to ever buy a req 8 item) If you only have a req 8 in swords you are doing crap for DPS, no matter if its 15^50 or 20w/hex.

-changing armor mid-battle. - I guess I see your point, my armor usually goes with my own build, not the enemies (but I guess the biggest point would be specific elemental protection, and thats really about it)

-change weapons mid battle - same thing. I dont see the need for more than two myself, its a waste of time in the heat of battle- get your (*&% straight before you go in. Having the option of 4 would be nice though, i agree, for those players that like to change weapons frequently.

- nolani wands, -50, etc etc -> get one, put it in storage, put on PvP toon. If you are running a 55 monk in HoH I hope youre my opponent. I personally think these items are too weak for pvp, unless you are Gimmicking. No reason they shouldnt add clones to the pvp screen- if anything for people who, say, run a expertise/beastmaster build with no weapon skill or magic skill
-----------------------------------------------------------

originally I was all set up to bash/flame this thread, but there are some MINOR things presented here that despite my initial opinion, DO make some sense.... IF you are running gimmicks n such. Its not an issue for me, as I rarely use my PvP slot to PvP (really just test builds).

/signed for 4 weapon choices
/signed for 2 armor choices (at least the Hats)
/signed for adding the -50hp (i guess), flame splitter, nolani wand.
/notsigned for adding req 8 weapons

or alternatively->

Put an NPC in the temple of B, so that you can change your build up (warrior or Ele being the best example) and change your weapons/armor to match.

or alternatively->
make one single pve character (gasp!) and go get those items yourself (or buy them from someone in a pve town)

Horseman Of War · Sep 11, 2006, 08:22 PM // 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redly

In fact, I say take the weapon/armor/runes out of the character creation screen completely. Just roll-up a PvP as you would a PvE--that is, only looks and name. Then, after your character is made, go to the crafters in the Great Temple of Balthazar and get what you want. Start PvP characters with a free belt pouch and two bags with runes of holding, and let us fill up the PvP inventory as we would a PvE player's.

You can still keep your pimped up ride of a PvE, with your FoW armor and unique skins. But don't punish me for going for the straight functionality of a PvP character, by denying me access to multiple rune-armor sets or Armor+10 vs. X shields, etc.

/signed

I like this idea even more-> I hate having to decide so much before I even enter my name.

Minus Sign · Sep 11, 2006, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Its your choice irl or in game to purchase PuPs. You chose, you deal with it. Don't but put your accounts shortcomings in my lap for the sake of in-game "fairness". Ask Anet for buffs all you want. Adding PvE nerfs in the asking (OP) crosses the line.

Point 5 doesn't apply to you. It does apply to me and other players who would not want inventory locked.

You haven't had a post stand on its own merit yet Redly. I'm done with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horseman Of War

/signed for 4 weapon choices
/signed for 2 armor choices (at least the Hats)
/signed for adding the -50hp (i guess), flame splitter, nolani wand.

Thiose, the PuPs can have. And probably will. The rest of it, including lyras idea: no.

lyra_song · Sep 11, 2006, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minus Sign

1. I conceed that PvE characters have advantages to PvP characters, as PvP has advantages thanks to balth faction and free customization. I state unequivicolly that PvE advantages are earned through time and money spent. I do not state in any way that those advantages are game breaking between players, nor that the outcome of a match will ever be decided because of armor swaps.

Ok thats fine. We disagree. I feel that gamebreaking or not, its still a point that has to be addressed.

Quote:

2. As is stated so often in so many threads about UAS and the new PuPs: you always have a choice (and if you believe that, I'll tell you another). No, I don't think it would be cool for lvl 5s to pop into arenas. I'd rather keep them locked out and in the low level arenas where they belong.

Yes you do have a choice. Thats what the game is about. But your choice shouldnt give you a disadvantage or an advantage in what should be a fair and level tournament.

And why would the lvl 5 wanna be in the low level arenas? Those places are full of twinkers with max lvl armor/weapons/elite skills and is no place for a new player to learn how to fight. He should be in the main arena where he has access to the same things.

Crazy Idea 3 says: PvE characters become PvP characters. Meaning a lvl 5 turns into a lvl 20 with 200 attributes, all the unlocked skills, weapons, weapon mods and armors available.

Quote:

3. We already have access to the same armor, weapons, skills, etc. Can PvP characters equip PvE weapons? Can they equip PvE purchased runes?

Yes. But those items require PVE in the first place. How can a PVP only character make money? Win HOH and sell the items from the chest. Celestial Sigil. Thats not an alternative for your average player.

Quote:

4. If you've revived this thread for the sake of PvP only players then you must conceed that they are only playing half a game. It is for them to deal with the shortcomings of their decision not to play PvE, not force those who play the whole game down to their level. You still have not discounted this primary argument. Do you intend to?

I do concede that they are playing half of the game. That much is obvious. I DO NOT LIKE that people only play half of the game. Don't get it twisted. However, this is a reality. As much as I want to believe and pretend that people play both sides of the game, there are PVP-only players who HATE PvE and PVERs who HATE PVP.

I hope you dont forget: Skill balances that affect the whole game revolve around PvP balance. Those who play "half the game" affect all of it.

I dont care if they only play half the game. When im fighting them, this is the only game that matters. Just me vs my opponent. I dont want an unfair advantage. I dont want to be at a disadvantage. I dont want someone to lose because they didnt have the proper equipment because they can only have 2 weapon slots in rolling the character.

Quote:

5. Your continued attempts at a running analogy between cars not withstanding, you sidestep my point completely. How would the owner of a tweeked car react if you came to him and asked him to let the manufacturers strip out all his addons when he races it? Thats what you're asking Anet to do to my PvE toon. Thats what you are asking me to accept.

Your car would be disqualified, or rather time would be added on to your final time because of your mods, to even out your technological advantage.

Yes. I'm asking you to give up your advantage.

The same advantage that you say: "I do not state in any way that those advantages are game breaking between players, nor that the outcome of a match will ever be decided because of armor swaps"

If this advantage is not gamebreaking to you, if it doesnt affect the outcome as much as i overdramatize it to be, why are you so adamant about giving it up?

Red · Sep 11, 2006, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minus Sign

Its your choice irl or in game to purchase PuPs. You chose, you deal with it. Don't but put your accounts shortcomings in my lap for the sake of in-game "fairness". Ask Anet for buffs all you want. Adding PvE nerfs in the asking (OP) crosses the line.

Point 5 doesn't apply to you. It does apply to me and other players who would not want inventory locked.

If point 5 doesn't apply to my argument and suggestions, then why did you refer me to it?

What I'm afraid I don't understand at all is... if a consumer purchases a PvP-only Tournament edition, shouldn't they have the full range of PvP abilities, including any bonuses a PvE character might have? Yes, it was their choice to purchase the PvP edition... because they wanted to only PvP. As ANet offers that as a seperate, legitmate, stand-alone T.Edition, you would infer that they would consider it a complete game.

At that point, if a PvP player lacks functionality that a PvE player has, the response shouldn't be "you chose to get the TE; if you wanted that functionality, you should have gotten a PvE/PvP version of the game."

PvP T.Edition should have the full PvP functionality that the rest of us have now. Denying them that is a design flaw that needs to be addressed. You shouldn't have to choose between a PvP version with less functionality in PvP, or a PvE game that's required to be grind'ed (ground?) through in order to achieve PvP functionality.

Zuranthium · Sep 11, 2006, 08:51 PM // 20:51

I think armor swapping needs to be disabled for PvP. It's ridiculous that in the middle of battle somebody can suddenly switch breastplates or shoes. Why bother trying to make Bows and everything else realistic if you're going to allow other such absurd actions in the game. Plus, armor swapping is damn annoying. You should concentrating on other things in battle.

Red · Sep 11, 2006, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

I think armor swapping needs to be disabled for PvP. It's ridiculous that in the middle of battle somebody can suddenly switch breastplates or shoes. Why bother trying to make Bows and everything else realistic if you're going to allow other such absurd actions in the game. Plus, armor swapping is damn annoying. You should concentrating on other things in battle.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just pointing two things out:

1) As far is being annoying, well, you don't have to switch out if it angers you...

2) I get what you're saying about the realism of switching chest armor in battle. But, while we're on the subject, shall we talk about the ranger's infinite arrow supply... or the **Paragon's magically appearing spear?** XD

Mordakai · Sep 11, 2006, 08:56 PM // 20:56

I agree with Lyra and Red.

IF Anet really believes this game is about skill, not Grind, then a revision of the current differences between PvP and PvE needs to be addressed.

If not, and PvE characters are supposed to have an advantage, then why is Anet ripping people off selling a Tourney Only package? How is that good for the future of Guild Wars?

Understand, Anet needs both PvE and PvP people in order to make money. They can't afford to lose half of their clientele in either case. So, a compromise must be made that will not piss off too many people.

Loviatar · Sep 11, 2006, 09:06 PM // 21:06

just to toss in something else.

since the straight PVP who got UAS through his CC has been getting in hundreds of PVP prectice hours while the PVE is getting them the regular way............

shouldnt the PVE who spent hundreds of hours have just a tiny edge as fair compensation for all that time the PVP person was getting in practice that the PVE missed?

Minus Sign · Sep 11, 2006, 09:10 PM // 21:10

I'm afraid lyra_song, that the Guild Wars you seek will never be. There will forever be those that have an advantage and those that do not.

For me? The advantages I have, I don't want to surrender. I don't want to surrender them because I have them, and others don't. Others may have advantages that I don't. I will never ask them to surrender them. I will, instead, ask them where they got them.

This is the concept I accepted when I first began to PvP in this game. This is the view I held when everyone was whinning about IWAY.

I never whined about IWAY. My first post in this forum was a thread wide flame against those who were. My second was on how to BoonProt.

I consider it dishonorable to ask a man to weaken himself that I may have a better chance to defeat him. This is combat...and I'll kill you any way I can.

I don't ask anyone to surrender an edge they have found. I look for a way to dull and coutner it. Thats part of who I am. When they beat me I ask myself how they did it and adapt. When I beat them, I ask myself what I did wrong, what things I could use to beat them more soundly next time. If it takes a day, a week, a month, or a year, I tweek what works to make it work better.

Its taken a year to get my monk, necro and warrior where they are. I'm not done yet; probably never will be.

Thats how I play PvE and PvP. My PvE is geared in no small part toward the end result of PvP. The tiny tweek that makes my character just that little bit extra.

It hasn't made me uber. But its gotten me rank. Its gotten me titles. Its pushed me to better myself in-game by bettering my characters.

Tweeking my toons is how I play Guild Wars. You're asking me to give it up to play your way. I don't want to. I like the way I play this game. And if Anet takes your suggestions, I will no longer have much reason to play this game.

That is why I am so staunchly--personally--against this proposal. You're asking them to kill off one type of gamer to promote another. You're asking them to kill off me.

The truth itself · Sep 11, 2006, 09:56 PM // 21:56

-lower req items are meaningless to me, unless for some reason you really NEED a low attribute for the skills you are bringing (which is why personally I see no need to ever buy a req 8 item) If you only have a req 8 in swords you are doing crap for DPS, no matter if its 15^50 or 20w/hex.

But it is, without doubt an advantage, opening this would allow more flexible builds. It's not really important, i agree, but it is, nontheless, an advantage.

-changing armor mid-battle. - I guess I see your point, my armor usually goes with my own build, not the enemies (but I guess the biggest point would be specific elemental protection, and thats really about it)

Don't only look at yourself. Changing to +10 physical versus warrior heavy teams and changing to +10 elemental is definetly a huge advantage. The list goes on, change to +hp vs spiking teams. Change to +e vs degen/hex teams.

-change weapons mid battle - same thing. I dont see the need for more than two myself, its a waste of time in the heat of battle- get your (*&% straight before you go in. Having the option of 4 would be nice though, i agree, for those players that like to change weapons frequently.

For any decent monking you need, at least 4.
1. Primary wand/sword + idol
2. negative energy set, vs. Edenial. weapon/shield
3. Positive energy set +30/-2, for emergency heals.
4. Other staffs with ect +10 al and such.

- nolani wands, -50, etc etc -> get one, put it in storage, put on PvP toon. If you are running a 55 monk in HoH I hope youre my opponent. I personally think these items are too weak for pvp, unless you are Gimmicking. No reason they shouldnt add clones to the pvp screen- if anything for people who, say, run a expertise/beastmaster build with no weapon skill or magic skill

Wrong, what if i don't have a PvE character?
You can't just say, this build is useless, don't bring it into HA anyway. Well, that is my choice, and if i want to, i should be able to WITH a PvP-toon.

OniMaster · Sep 11, 2006, 10:31 PM // 22:31

So frustrating to read because 80% of this thread is filled with people with huge chips on their shoulder not really getting into the discussion at all.

So lets start with the basics:

1) Some people are completely butchering up basic logic. They come form the view point of pve vs pvp, but then want their pve time invested to count towards their pvp game........ :S So, here it is: Your pve time invested counts toward your pve advantage!! It should not affect a pvp advantage.

2) More likely, one should realize that we dont have groups of pvp'ers and pve'ers exclusively. Most people do a mix of both. The key point here is: GvG, TA, RA is emphasized as a competition between PEOPLE. And any time PEOPLE compete directly, you dont have "time based benefits". Because thats really lame. To take it to an extreme, lets pretend their is 500k armour that gives you 1000 Armour. Do you know what would happen to GvG/TA/RA? It would cease to exist. Balance is CRITICAL for any person vs person competition.

3) PvP does NOT place emphasis on roleplaying, it places emphasis on skill. And part of skill is in designing builds, and that means that unlike pvp where you can easily ammend a E/Me echo nuker into a direct damage dealer, you cant do the same in PvP because an air spiker will simply have your fireball immolater beat. That means that you consistently need to vary your character up. And its quite silly to suggest that I should have to store: 4 air wands, 4 air offhands, 4 fire wands, 4 fire offhands, 4 earth wands, 4 earth offhands etc etc etc. THat isn't an aspect of competition.. thats an aspect of.. well.. boringness.

Competition only exists on truly balanced platforms. Having any side with a clear advantage is simply lame.. it creates "time based battle". Time based battle is BAAAD. Why is it bad? Lets go back to the 500k armour battle.... You kill the community with it.

PvP chars are there to FOSTER competition! THey allow players to adapt to builds FASTER by re-rollling. They allow TA to go smoother since you can re-run w/o putting down money every time... (IE: It creates self-sufficiency pvp). HAving PVE chars have advantages dampens competition and creates "grinding". The entire idea behind every competition we have is that on game-day, players are all equal.

In hockey, we regulate the size of a goalies bads, the size of hte chest protector and curve of hte stick. IN baseball, they regulate what bat you can use, how big your glove can be. Because if people enter in unequal, competition dies off.

The people who have put in 3000 hours allraedy have an advantage - they should have accumulated superior skill in that time. There is no need to give a completey phoney weapon switch skill.

Lets remember: the "pve" side is maintaining that their time spent in PVE! should give them an advantage in PvP. They seem to forget that as a "sacrifice", PvP chars CANNOT even enter PvE.

I think it would be a complete over reaction to ban PvE chars from PvP, but with the "snobby" time spent attitudes observed in this thread, that is almost the easiest solution. ANd thats sad. Because there is an entire sect of gamers that appreciate BOTH PvE and PvP and simply want PvP chars to be as viable as PvE chars INSIDE A PvP ENVIRONMENT.

Instead, the partisan "PvE" only and "PvP" only sects with axes to grind are making non-sensical arguments about PvE time spent = PvP advantage - which complete comprimises any competition.

Yawgmoth · Sep 11, 2006, 10:36 PM // 22:36

me :: *80% pvp 20% pve player
*using only pvp characters for pvp play (this may change soon but requires alot of work)
*using some pve equipment from my storage on pvp chars (and everyone can do it, these items are very cheap)

my opinion on this topic :: the differences apart from armor switching are very minor and i think people should stop complaining on things that are just so unimportant. Stop saying that its an unfair advantage when its sooo small.

And i totally agree with recent Minus Sign's post #171 : read_it_again

What Anet should do ::
*add reconnect option!

(sorry offtopic, but THIS is the Number 1 issue that wrecks competetive matches)
*lock armor switching in combat zones
*improve the pvp character creation screen by adding ability to fill 4 weapon slots
*add the ability to edit an existing pvp character using the same interface which is used to create a new one! (thats THE main reason i'm going to use pve chars for pvp soon)
*and dont change anything else - the very minor differences dont unbalance anything and i actually like them very much

lyra_song · Sep 11, 2006, 10:49 PM // 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minus Sign

You're asking them to kill off me.

No, im asking you to change. Just like how the game changes CONSTANTLY.

If you've become so good, why are you relying on a crutch? You want the advantage that badly?

Guild Wars cannot escalate into a REAL competitive format unless it is balanced.

The game is splitting, and if Anet doesnt wrangle this imbalance, the PVP-Only versions will be at a disadvantage.

Quote:

I consider it dishonorable to ask a man to weaken himself that I may have a better chance to defeat him. This is combat...and I'll kill you any way I can.

So you would fight a sick man? You would strike your sword to a man who didnt have a sword? Wheres the honor in that?

If you dont support the "weakening" then support the PVP character buff.

Sli Ander · Sep 12, 2006, 04:28 AM // 04:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

No, im asking you to change. Just like how the game changes CONSTANTLY.

If you've become so good, why are you relying on a crutch? You want the advantage that badly?

Guild Wars cannot escalate into a REAL competitive format unless it is balanced.

The game is splitting, and if Anet doesnt wrangle this imbalance, the PVP-Only versions will be at a disadvantage.

So you would fight a sick man? You would strike your sword to a man who didnt have a sword? Wheres the honor in that?

If you dont support the "weakening" then support the PVP character buff.

'If you've become so good, why are you relying on a crutch'
I like that. Heres support for that statement.
Musashi Miyomoto is one of the greatest swordsman known in history(arguably). He was undefeated. One day he took a boat ride to a duel, drunk. He had forgotten his sword, so he borrowed the boatsman's oar, killed the opponent and quietly returned home.
You speak of battle and ruthlessness, yet speak of dishonor of being weakened by another(nerfed). An honorable man knows that there are those weaker than him, against whom he needs no advantage, and a skilled man knows how to fight one, despite a handicap. Forgive me if this is slightly off-topic, but I felt it needed to be addressed.
On-topic: I don't play much pvp, so I can't see both sides of this argument clearly. Pve characters may have an advantage, and posts in this thread have shown me some examples of how(I won't repeat them here).
/signed for a reasonable solution to this problem.
/signed for helping keep pvp and pve together, rather than dividing them
Thanks Lyra for putting out your usual reasonable, well-thought out ideas.

Brustow · Sep 12, 2006, 10:52 AM // 10:52

Yes, no armor swap in game, 4 weapon slots during creation, at least.

Level the playing field. Anet is already taking steps, balancing skills, offering UAS.
If you're not going to offer a 100% level playing field between PVP and PVE chars, then don't offer the option, in the game, to create either one. That's a design flaw. Now that PVE players recognize the advantages they have in PVP, they won't want to give that up. Who can blame them though? If you found a way to exploit the competition and gain an extra edge, that wasn't against the rules, wouldn't you want to keep it?

I personally use PVE chars in PVP because of that. And I still vote for a level playing field between PVE and PVP chars in PVP competition.

Minus Sign · Sep 12, 2006, 12:44 PM // 12:44

Off-topic: sick, unarmed, drunk, whatever: if he's trying to kill me, yes I will fight back. I won't stand there and let a player kill me just because they believe/say that they are unequiped to the task. Neither, I might add, would Musashi Miyomoto.

You asked me a personal question. I gave you a personal answer lyra_song. If that answer does not satisfy you, it was not intended to.

It was not my argument. It was my motive.

On topic: Remember; any player can acquire the same advantages that I can. That they choose not to is their choice. If they choose to fight with sword--or oar--then they have no right to complain when I bring a crip shot ranger. If they choose to use substandard weapons then they have no right to complain when their enemy upgrades his arsenal.

The game is balanced as it can be without adding restrictions to old players in an attempt to cury favor with the new. Players who have earned an advantage through playtime should not be penalized because new players can't have that advantage without working as hard as I did. If they want those advantages, let them buy the whole game, play the whole game, and get them the way I did. I'll even help--I know I will because I have--if they ask.

I have signed off on three buffs that will assist PvP only characters as they transition to the better weapons that PvE present. If that does nto satisfy you, it was not intended to either. It was my call; what I think will be fair as players 2 chapters behind me catch up.

If they only want to PvP in a perfectly balanced environment, they should stick to FPS. This is an RPG and there will always be some grind to remain competitive.

Thats it. I'm finished here.

lyra_song · Sep 12, 2006, 02:16 PM // 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minus Sign

It was not my argument. It was my motive.

So you have no reasonable, justifyable cause to deny this change other than your own personal gains?

Mordakai · Sep 12, 2006, 02:33 PM // 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brustow

Now that PVE players recognize the advantages they have in PVP, they won't want to give that up. Who can blame them though? If you found a way to exploit the competition and gain an extra edge, that wasn't against the rules, wouldn't you want to keep it?

Thank you, that's exactly what it is: an exploit that probably was not factored into the original design of the game.

Minus Sign, the game must be balance above all else. I hope not all PvPers feel like you, because it really could be the end of Guild Wars if a lot of the population just quits if this is implemented.

And I believe it will be implemented sooner or later, either with Redly's suggestion of offering armor switching to PvP only toons, or with Lyra's suggestion of locking in armor at the start of the PvP match.

Either way, the current system can not last and remain fair and competitive.

PS The only advantage a PvE player should have in PvP, is that he/she looks better.