Curse

unmatchedfury · Aug 30, 2006, 12:07 AM // 00:07

Okay, I know I’m going to get a few flames just because many higher end GvGer’s are against 1 vs. 1 no matter what. Here is my thought process.

Its obvious a simple fight 1 vs. 1 in the current form that’s used in random arena won’t work. Touch rangers would own everything but mass degen slowing Mesmers, and a thousand other very unfair matches besides. Kiting would abound even more than Ele running greifers.
Some people have suggested that only primary classes of the same type be allowed to fight each other. I find that this would be limiting to say the least, not to mention boring. Imagine monk vs. monk or Mesmer vs. Mesmer (wand fest!)

However, here is the point I am going to make. Why not make the 1 vs. 1 matches take place in three separate rounds. In-between each round we’d be able to change secondary, build, (gear if you’re PvE) and formulate a new strategy to take down the other player. You’d have to think ahead of your opponent. This would be a very fluid, skill oriented, and challenging style of game-play. Granted you could call it the ultimate rock paper scissors, but I think it would be fair.

These are the exact details of how I imagine the new PvP type

1. 3 rounds/battles 5 minute time cap to prevent greifing. “Resign” will give the win to the other opponent and let you reset skills, not drawing out a pointless battle.

2. 1-2 minutes in-between battles to allow re-customization of skills Profession changer and your stash will be available to you for this period. There will be a “/ready” chat command to allow you to proceed ahead of time, instead of having to wait 1-2 minutes. Of course both players would have to be “/ready” Again, the 1-2 minute time cap is to stop greifing. I’m not sure whether you should be allowed to know the opponents primary beforehand. Moreover, be allowed a 2-minute prep time. Also the “/ready” emote to cut down on the time of waiting periods would be available here too. It might be a good idea too stop the randomness of the first round, and make sure everyone gets a fair shot.

3. Arena size will be 3-4x the size of your agro bubble perhaps a little smaller than radar screen, this would allow kiting but no straight line kiting such as dodging/Zojun’s hasting rangers and whatnot. Someone could chase you down in a reasonable amount of time. This will also prevent Ritulists from setting up more than one (or maybe two spirits) before you get to them. Giving you a chance to ranged interrupt them.

4. This will take place in random arena. There are obvious problems with feeding, and arranged 1 vs. 1. Arranged 1 vs. 1 would still be available, the only thing you’d earn is a sense of pride.

5. I’m Thinking that the faction you earn for winning a round would be 35 per win none for a tie( again thank those potential monk greifers) and 70 when you win the entire three rounds (best out of three) 35 faction will assigned to both players if no oen can gain teh advatage over the other for 3 full rounds.

-cons that I can think of. PvP characters would be at something of a disadvantage in the way of gear. If free runes for PvP characters were available, this would take care of half the issues. I.e. Switching from degen mesmer to Illusionary Weapon mesmer. Or something like that.

Okay now open fire and discussion. At the minute, I cannot think of anything unfair about this game type. Some matches would be harder to survive than others would, but it would defiantly be an arguable 50%/50% every time, the second and third rounds for sure.

Discuss. -sign

xBakox · Aug 30, 2006, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Did you miss when they added the Guild Scrimmage option?

Sure its a bit different, and you get no Faction, but the only point of 1v1 is to have bragging rights really.

Anyways, no need to implement another form of 1v1 when Guild Scrim, and soon to be Hero v Hero bascially cover it.

tomcruisejr · Aug 30, 2006, 12:23 AM // 00:23

if you want 1 vs 1 to be fair, make players play identical builds, say Shock Warrior vs Shock Warrior or Crip shot vs Crip shot.

its a fact that 1 class has an advantage over the others.

unmatchedfury · Aug 30, 2006, 12:27 AM // 00:27

no one class would have t he atvatage over the others if you were allowed to change secondaries and skills between fights. you didn't even read my post, long though it was.

and the guild scrimmage options is crowed with NCPs, no faction and you can't do it whenver you wan't. No pickup games whatsoever.

i want to beable to log on and be in an enganging one vs. one battle.

guild scrimmage is in no way a replacement for real one vs. one.

Chilly Ress · Aug 30, 2006, 12:34 AM // 00:34

1v1 will never work, face it, learn to love it, and most of all, get over it.

xBakox · Aug 30, 2006, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Quote:

you didn't even read my post, long though it was.

I did too read it.

There are NPCs?

Thats why you meet in the middle. If someone hides? Then you basically have beat them and you get bragging rights.

You can not balance 1v1 and its not really meant for GW.

About your ideas, most people would /ragequit after their first loss anyways.

/notsigned (again)

GloryFox · Aug 30, 2006, 12:43 AM // 00:43

1 vs 1 works fine in scrimmage matches and its fun.. we do this all of the time in our guild.

Its a great way to work on builds and is no different then fighting a nameless master. We even do class vs. class 1 on 1 you would be surprised what people use to win. You can also rolplay "I challenge you to a duel". When this happens you have a scrimmage 2vs 1 with one more acting as judge.

unmatchedfury · Aug 30, 2006, 12:46 AM // 00:46

i would like reasons why one vs. one wouldn't work. It seams like my idea would work and all you g uys have said is, nu uh!

its not a convincing arguement. you see.

Kuja · Aug 30, 2006, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Who cares 1v1 isnt and wont ever be point of game.

...And stop asking for 1v1's (noobs out there) it doesnt prove anything.

majoho · Aug 30, 2006, 01:05 AM // 01:05

I have big fears for this 1 vs 1.

I remember distinctly from WoW how every class moaned about how overpowered other classes were and basically the whining would never end. And that game had no 1 vs. 1 PvP in it, but still people complained.

Anet are shooting themselves in the foot it will make all the leet kiddies whine about how their profession sucks and how others are overpowered.

So don't even start thinking about balancing the game for 1 vs. 1 (not that I think Anet would be stupid enough to do that).

Metanoia · Aug 30, 2006, 01:53 AM // 01:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by unmatchedfury

i would like reasons why one vs. one wouldn't work. It seams like my idea would work and all you g uys have said is, nu uh!

its not a convincing arguement. you see.

Try to see a Guildwars battle akin to a 'micro duel' of an RTS. It's all about how the units perform together. Battles become an intricate melee where player skill is very prominent. Guildwars captures that, and by dividing control between teams of players, takes it to a whole new level.

Basically, 1v1 in GW isn't much more complex than two protoss zealots facing off in SC.

actionjack · Aug 30, 2006, 05:56 AM // 05:56

Great idea in adding a meta-game break in between.
Creative and pratical, I applude you.

Ristaron · Aug 30, 2006, 06:13 AM // 06:13

Why I bothered reading this I am not sure... oh yeah, to say /notsigned!

How many times do you people have to be told that 1 vs 1 does not belong in a TEAM-ORIENTED GAME like Guild Wars? While your ideas may be more logical than some of the bullshit I read here, it still cannot overcome this simple contradiction.
Nobody cares if your e-penis is bigger than the next person's, prove your mettle amongst your equals where it really matters: amongst your equals. Plural. Go to HA or GvG. Win actual prizes for your efforts, and stop entertaining the farfetched fantasy of having your name printed at the bottom of the screen in the '[xxx] has defeated the 1 vs 1 champion and is the new single player champion!' message.

Just to be clear: /notsigned!

stocker25 · Aug 30, 2006, 06:25 AM // 06:25

personally i think this is a great idea. Most of the time i get to play Guildwars is in 20-45 minute chunks. In the time it takes to find a team for pve or pvp i wont have the time to actually do anything. Also i come from a small guild with ussually only 2-3 people on at a time so i rarely scrimmage. This feature would give me something to do.

Poison Ivy · Aug 30, 2006, 06:32 AM // 06:32

They already have the scrimmage thing...if your just doing this for a sence of pride...gosh I dunno what to say then...

/notsigned

Chilly Ress · Aug 30, 2006, 06:44 AM // 06:44

wait, why do you have 2 threads in this same forum about this?

silvershock · Aug 30, 2006, 11:00 AM // 11:00

....HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA.

Let me explain: first of all, this thread and all the other threads about 1on1 battle are not needed anymore, but that's something I will explain in a minute.

To make 1on1 battles not unfair, only people with the same primary profession can fight eachother, that way u don't get total unfair battles, and if u do happen to be losing bigtime, then your opponent was a little smarter than you and used his second profession better.

K, now let me explain why this thread is useless, and I quote:

"Guild Wars Nightfall introduces new customizable Heroes who level up, follow player instructions in combat, and use skills and equipment of the player's choosing. These Heroes will follow the player through savage coasts, ancient monuments, and poisonous deserts during an epic story that spans twenty missions and hundreds of quests. And for the ultimate one-on-one challenge, competitive players can choose to enter the new Hero vs. Hero Battles, where they group with a custom team of Heroes and fight against other players from around the world and their customized groups of Heroes." - Arenanet.

About these Hero vs Hero matches, when i first read it, it sounded like 1 player with some henchies and another player with some henchies who fight.
But it clearly states one on one challenge, so it has to be 1 henchman vs another, and maybe, 1 player vs another player too.

So I think it will be more like 2 teams, which teammembers fight eachother one on one.

Now, you always got those nagging kind of people who will never believe someone by his word, for all you guys: http://www.guildwars.com/press/relea...2006-08-24.php and stfu please.

unmatchedfury · Aug 30, 2006, 11:13 AM // 11:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metanoia

Try to see a Guildwars battle akin to a 'micro duel' of an RTS. It's all about how the units perform together. Battles become an intricate melee where player skill is very prominent. Guildwars captures that, and by dividing control between teams of players, takes it to a whole new level.

Basically, 1v1 in GW isn't much more complex than two protoss zealots facing off in SC.

yea i do understand that. Guild wars is very much RTS like in the fact that certian builds counter others.

Guildmaster Cain · Aug 30, 2006, 11:52 AM // 11:52

Hmm, there is NO need for forcing people to use identical builds/classes or any other way. Since its a friendly match within your own guild (or with guest), you can always agree on using certain builds.

But another idea might spawn from this: King of the Hill, a 1 vs 1 tournament, in which the one that wins will stay in the map and the loser gets himself replaced by a fresh gladiator. Ofc, as you said, these players can only use primary class attributes and can only face opponents of the same class. Then a log can be kept for all the players that stay alive for the most kills in the arena. But then again, it would just be like RA but then with 1 player.

Mr. G · Aug 30, 2006, 02:31 PM // 14:31

you inspired idea about 3 round matches has been going on a for a while now in my guild (of which may i say i am the champion ^ ^), but its a simple idea that works - its makes 1v1 a true case of evolve or die, the only major problem we've ever had is evolving on a limited skill set - You carnt counter somehting for which you have no counter