Curse

Blue Mage · May 02, 2006, 03:05 AM // 03:05

/signed

Keilious Ahruhk · May 02, 2006, 05:56 AM // 05:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Not if ya gotta flash rank to get a group... Do you fail to read you do you just lack the common capacity for logic?

What, you don't like where something is going so you start throwing out insults? Very mature.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

*sighs* Are you going to take a mesmer into battle with you? Into Alliance battles? What about an assassin?

Nope, I play in a guild team. Whatever we decide to use, we use.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Well you are becoming OUR problem right now, because they are voicing their opinion about problems like you and if the opinions of others doesn't matter to you and the issues at hand are not your issues - then why are you posting?

Because I needed to point out that not everyone hates the new changes? Because some people like the new changes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

I don't want my guildies to have to flash their ranks

Then play with your guildies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Is it because you too have something to fear?

Running out of ammunition? More insults! Yay!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

And I am sorry but this is where where I lost interest in your post: As for this being a good way for a guild to get their stardom ya goomba that is what GUILD VS GUILD battles are for! DOH! -_-
Also, anyone else notice that guilds do 8v8 in HA.... Isn't that called Hall of Heros... It's pretty empty right now so there is your chance -_-

First you say that I fail to read, hah!
Go back, I clearly said SMALL guilds. Not every guild under the sun can get 8 people online at a given point often.
But in any case, nope, new guilds don't stand much of a chance of getting to the top in either one, because of the constantly improving skill of the best guilds, whereas in AB there are BOUND to be bad players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

I have nothing more to say to you... If you can by chance dig somewhere deep down inside and come back with some logic that works, please do so and do so in more intellegent ways then saying: Your problem isn't my problem! (it seems so very middle schoolish and I refuse to bicker with you any further on common logic...

In other words, you don't want to continue an argument because its too difficult/frustrating/time-consuming so you bail out? Be my guest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Cause right now I am speaking out for those who are having the problems!

Someone remind me to go through this thread and add people I can't hold a intellegent convo with to my ingame ignore list? (ooh is there an ignore list on this board? ...I hope darwinism comes to save me...)

Wow! More insults and fear of a continued argument, what a surprise...

I also notice that you didn't address most of the counter-arguments in my last post, should I take that as meaning you concede to all the points you ignored, or do you plan to respond to them?

Eviance · May 02, 2006, 06:33 AM // 06:33

no you should take it as I said, that I stopped reading your post when you got to the guild comment and that is exactly the issue I don't want for my guildies... It was laughable to me, just as I am sure my points are to you.

I do appologise for the insults they were out of line...
I am trying to make the point that if you yourself were a mesmer and didn't have your guild to back you up but wanted to play in those battles or hand no rank/title to your name you couldn't get in and then how would you feel?

I don't have that issue and I guess I can count myself lucky, but I don't!
I know a lot of people who try so hard to fit in that they lose sight of what is important - the fact that it is a game and it was meant to be FUN!

It has lost its fun for 90% of the players! Read all of the other threads.... So it's ok for 10% of you to have fun but it sure is going to be one lonely game... *shrugs* If the majority of the GW population saw it as fun the way it is I wouldn't be complaining - I just wouldn't be playing.

However if ya want to start a thread to keep it the way it is, do so by all means!

The reason I took such offense is because the message board I hail from if someone highlights every detail in someone elses post and picks it apart piece by piece, it is because they are looking for a fight...

I just don't want to play by your rules and it's as simple as that. You have your opion but the OP of this thread started it with his and thats the leading of the thread... My point was go make your own about why we are so wrong in wanting to have fun.

Synthetic · May 02, 2006, 06:47 AM // 06:47

/signed

This is a bit odd considering all the complaining done after the FPE. FPE was fun. I think that method was fine, people left a screwed up games and stuff. That can still happen now though. The party wide skills were powerful but they are supposed to be that powerful. Judging by the size of this thread though I am sure that it will be changed back to the FPE style in due time.

I think that ANet meant well with all of the changes. They heard the concerns that the community had with the system and they changed it. They had the best intentions in doing so; however, it seems the original version was best.

Keilious Ahruhk · May 02, 2006, 06:52 AM // 06:52

Fair enough then Eviance, but you have to bear in mind the name of the game, Guild Wars.
Everyone really should be aiming to be in a good guild, and Anet aren't going to go out of their way to make it otherwise.

You say you don't want me to play by "my rules" for discussion. Your first reply to me was centred around the fact that you didn't like the way I played AB, and that I should follow "your rules" for AB..

Lastly, I never said you were wrong in wanting to have fun, I said I like things the way they are now.
You can pursue having things changed back, just as I can pursue having them remain the same.

arcanemacabre · May 02, 2006, 07:09 AM // 07:09

A simple solution to this, I think, is have two different types of Alliance Battles. One random, like it was during the FPE, and one like it is now. It would be real easy to implement and understand.

If you just enter the battle without any teammates, it would slap you in a random alliance battle, where everyone is entering without teammates to be put into 12-person teams, like the FPE version. If you form a 4-person team, then it would put you in that type of alliance battle (along with the suggestions of having the other two 4-person teams shown as allies of your team, instead of not at all).

Both types would work exactly the same with the exception of how the teams are formed, that's it. I think it would work fine and make everyone happy. But hey, what do I know?

Eviance · May 02, 2006, 07:14 AM // 07:14

I still think you missed my point on that last bit, but no matter... I found a more interesting thread on this and plan to see where it leads... >_>

I will be watching you sir =P

(again sorry for being a royal bitch, comes with the ovaries ya know <_< )

~_^

Keilious Ahruhk · May 02, 2006, 07:23 AM // 07:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

A simple solution to this, I think, is have two different types of Alliance Battles.

Nope, Europe already has (had during the FPE, at least) waiting times of 10 minutes plus to get into AB, making TWO ABs would increase the waiting times further, bad idea.

Lupus Brock · May 02, 2006, 07:27 AM // 07:27

/Signed!!!

I loved the 12 vs 12 in the preview.

Eviance · May 02, 2006, 07:34 AM // 07:34

Oh crap man you keep posting and now I am curious... If it were two total different setups how would it delay? I mean if they aren't going into the same battle fields - all seperate but the same?

Warskull · May 02, 2006, 07:35 AM // 07:35

A lot of people came on the forums to whine about the AI changes too, it was still a change for the better. The 12v12 is mean to function with 3 smaller squads of 4. This is why in the screen you could have a party of four. What ended up happening is a bunch of players would make crappy assassin builds, join up, be dead weight, and when their team even starts to look behind they quit. The more complex objective system simply isn't designed to work with completely random teams. The gametype wasn't functioning properly due to playerbase issues so the barrier to entry had to be raised. Now the minimum is that you need four players to enter. Thus your build needs to be semi-respectable and you need to be able to work with a team. In addition you have a degree of commitment to the other three allies you chose reducing the desire to just map out once things start to look down.

If you want to play with just any old build Random Arena still exists. On top of this there are still 8v8 maps that involve a fully random team just work your way into the PvE a bit more and give them a shot. Try these out, they are exactly what you are asking for.

A significant portion of the playerbase didn't want Faction's new PvP type completely ruined by players who don't even try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eviance

Xellos I see what you are saying but I personally go a step further and for I think the 5th time in this thread say: How is it unfair when BOTH teams can do it if they are smart enough to do so.

It is only a disadvatange to those who don't utilize the skills given!

Why is JR as a monk NOT utilizing his skills? Does he not use them to farm, to keep his party alive... Why complain unless you feel as if you cannot do this yourself because you either lack the skill or knowledge. I say if someone can make something work for them and their team then do it!

God I know death nova hurts like a mofo but its what the skill is meant for - stop complaining and use what you were given its all equal rights - no one used any hacks to make their heal party or Aegis better than anyone elses so get over it!

JR knows his stuff when it comes to PvP, he knows far more than you ever will. I suggest before you try to claim a distinguished and experience player doesn't know what he is talking about you actually read what he says, stop, and then think. Just because both sides have access to a skill doesn't mean that it is impossible for that skill to be overpowered (look at what happened to gale.) Quite simply Heal Party, Extinguish, and other party wide enchantments were far too strong and that needed fixed.

Eet GnomeSmasher · May 02, 2006, 08:00 AM // 08:00

I noticed that breaking the alliance battles into 3 groups of 4 makes it very very difficult to know that people have quit in the middle of the battle. I dont know why, but the quitting message doesnt always appear. And if people from the other teams quit, you wont know.

So could this be a sneaky way to hide the ragequit problem that was rampant in the FPE?

Ailyrr Merlena · May 02, 2006, 08:06 AM // 08:06

/signed.

This was one of the MAIN reason I bought Factions. And I know my son is completely disappointed over it too.

The only thing I ever complained about was people leaving. This didn't solve the problem. Now, instead of just one or two randomly leaving, you have a whole group of four. And you don't even know if its your team.

I'm very disappointed in this version they've stuck us with. The original 12v12 was fun. This bites.

TheArrow · May 02, 2006, 08:20 AM // 08:20

I don't have a problem with the new setup per-say, except that you can't even comunicate with any other team members much less see what they are running. Make team chat include all members on your side and put the other team members under the 'Allies' section of the party member window. Those 2 simple changes will, I believe, solve most of the problems with the system, aside from a lack of players at the moment.

Eviance · May 02, 2006, 08:24 AM // 08:24

Ya know Warskull I had a nice big post about how neither you nor JR are better than me or anyone else and vise versa and that you also failed to read any other post where I said how you could change the monk overpoweredness - but then I realized... I don't have to prove myself to you and even trying to would be a waste of valuable time.
Now if I am a newb or noob or however you elitest like to term it.... That is just fine with me, because that means I hold the element of surprise, because people like you will never take the time to get to know a person like me.

That and pm from a dev screwed it up as I was trying to edit it one last time >_> Thanks again Gaile XP (I mean that!)

Last Edit I swear: If ya see this as me making a cop, I dare ya call me on it, just so you can see how wrong you were...

Now I am taking my pregnant ass to bed where it should have been two hours ago!

LaserLight · May 02, 2006, 08:54 AM // 08:54

Quote:

Because I needed to point out that not everyone hates the new changes? Because some people like the new changes?

Problem is, Sparky, that the people like the new 12-man format are outnumbered about nine hundred to one by extremely pissed-off people who are looking at GvG which is fun but intense beyond belief and completely impenetrable to lower-echelon guilds, looking at Hall of Heroes, which is corrupt beyond comprehension and actively hostile to anyone lower than r6 these days - Yes, even r3 isn’t good enough anymore – and seeing that they’ve been joined by the brand-new Elitist Hangout on the Block – Alliance Battles! Are random arenas the only place where people who don’t have twenty-two hours a day to devote to a game that is supposedly designed for the casual gamer are allowed? Are we supposed to be happy with a mindless, useless, unrewarded mode probably programmed in a day by a single drunken junior programmer who didn’t even know what game he was programming for? Let me put it this way – if YOU were barred, by rank and chosen professions, from playing anything but Random Arenas, would you not be pissed off?

Quote:

Then play with your guildies.

You keep saying this like it’s the answer to world hunger. Let me tell you something, Mr. Ahruhk – finding a good guild is F***ING IMPOSSIBLE. Ninety-nine out of a hundred guilds out there are filled with complete and total morons, and ninety-nine of a hundred of the remaining guilds only recruit people with UAS accounts, r9, and a few thousand hours logged. Second such account highly recommended. In other words, elitist snobs much like yourself! Whee, overly-serious bastards FTW! And finding that one good guild in a thousand that is both worth joining and accepting of new players is…heh heh, not going to happen. I’m in a guild of only five standing members, and since all of them are good friends and skilled players, I’m a damn sight better off than most. People in mid-sized, coordinated guilds which always have enough members online for a battle, and always have members willing to fight, are living in a polygonal Shangri-La and should make blood sacrifices to the gods of old to make sure that they never get kicked out.

Quote:

not my problem not my problem not my problem not my problem not my problem…ad infinitum

Actually Sparky, it is your problem. First of all because nine hundred pissed-off gamers to one happy gamer is a bad recipe for future chapters. And this is a FUBAR beyond even AoE Nerf proportions. Second of all because four anally overcompetitive play modes and one retarded moonchild play mode makes for many pissed-off gamers. And thirdly, because if there are enough pissed-off gamers, one of them is bound to put his poor, guildless, I’m-casual-so-I’m-automatically-unworthy-of-existence fist down your elitist throat, rip out your frozen, useless heart, and save it for the next Wintersday festival so he can use it as a snowball.

IT IS YOUR PROBLEM, SPARKY. Because it’s a problem for nine-tenths of the community, and you’re part of the community. As much as I loathe the thought of sharing a game with the likes of you.

Quote:

The more complex objective system simply isn't designed to work with completely random teams. The gametype wasn't functioning properly due to playerbase issues so the barrier to entry had to be raised. Now the minimum is that you need four players to enter. Thus your build needs to be semi-respectable and you need to be able to work with a team. In addition you have a degree of commitment to the other three allies you chose reducing the desire to just map out once things start to look down.

Yeah, I’m just covering this to try and pound it through the heads of idiots. No, the squad system does not reduce ragequitting. Instead, people now ragequit in lots of four. One man in a squad gets pissed and drops, the rest of the squad inevitably follows. This is because you have now gone from four men against twelve to three men against twelve. Because, see, you are not actually on the same team as the other two squads on your side. They are in the same map, and possibly fighting the same enemies, but they have absolutely nothing to do with you and you have absolutely nothing to do with them. At the same time, all twelve of the enemy players know you for an enemy and can target and destroy you. This holds true for all six squads of four – each is four men against twelve.

Quote:

If you want to play with just any old build Random Arena still exists. On top of this there are still 8v8 maps that involve a fully random team just work your way into the PvE a bit more and give them a shot. Try these out, they are exactly what you are asking for.

No Thickskull, they’re not. 8v8 PvE missions are just that – PvE missions. They mostly suck. As for Random Arena, I do believe I’ve covered that. What we are asking for is the FPE form of Alliance Battles, or something reasonably close to it.

Quote:

JR knows his stuff when it comes to PvP, he knows far more than you ever will.

Ah, but know this, Thickskull – we have our own expert! If you want to get into a ‘My daddy can beat up your daddy’ contest, let’s point out that Ensign of the Idiot Savants was firmly and vocally behind the FPE 12-man format, as was the rest of his guild via Ensign’s posts. And as much as I respect JR’s experience and knowledge, Ensign wins.

To any other elitist snob I’ve left out, read the above and synthesize it to your own posts. You know who you are, and you know you’re just as horrible as Sparky and Thickskull here.

That said…I can see why breaking global enchants was seen as necessary. I can concede the concept of four-man squads, but NOT with breaking off all communication with the other eight members of what are supposed to be your team. This is bad. This is very bad. This is Alaskan oil spill bad. This is George Bush re-elected bad. Additionally, forcing specific four-man squads prevent units from forming on the fly. People ressing alongside guys from other squads cannot form up with those other members and create a new fighting unit, as was frequently done to great effect in the FPE, but instead must fight back to their own unit, which they very well may not be able to get to, in order to once again have support.

Fixes have been stated: ally windows, global enchants only affecting the eight nearest allies, various others. Honestly, I never even noticed global enchants in the FPE – of grater concern by far were Minion Masters, which have recently been fairly well shot in the head and are only useable by skilled, adaptable players. However you slice it, the current situation is completely untenable, and this is from a player with access to a TeamSpeak server and skilled friends with which to form a quite powerful 12-man assault squad. I cannot abide this new format, and neither can the vast majority of players in this thread.

GAILE! GET YER PURPLE HIDE IN HERE AND EXPLAIN!!!

misthero · May 02, 2006, 08:57 AM // 08:57

Resuming ANET this is what we want :

1) make team mates visible to each other (put in a separate allies tab if you want but put it somwhere)

2) make possible (again) to comunicate with TEAMMATES in the team chat !!

3) allow random ppl to join the battle, maybe they should wait more, maybe they need to be at least 2 ppl, you choose, but let them in. (you can punish leavers some other way: make them w8 10 minutes to join again, make new "leaver" title or whatelse for them )

anything else?

/SIGNED

PS: Gaile please, let us know what you/ANET think about this. Cu and thx.

PPS: Still waiting for my CE

VGJustice · May 02, 2006, 09:25 AM // 09:25

*Hears about individual party limit size of 4 in a highly competative, specialized area*

Well, I'll never be able to get a group with my sword ranger (prefered play style), and if I'm playing a bow ranger, they'll probably only want me for Spike or interrupt. Can't do spike without TS (don't heve the equipment) and I suck dearly at interrupt (poor connection), and barragers are a dime a gross.

Meaning, my chances of actually playing the game are very slim to none. Great. How fun. Wee.

So, I guess I owe a "Thanks for the heads up, guys!" to everyone in this thread. Now I know to avoid Aliance battles, because I'll never get a group.

unienaule · May 02, 2006, 09:52 AM // 09:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keilious Ahruhk

Fair enough then Eviance, but you have to bear in mind the name of the game, Guild Wars.

I have bring up this quote from (I think) Vindexus about how you can't use names to tell you how to play a game or what it's about. "StarCraft sucked because I didn't get to craft any stars in it." If anything, it was clearly established in many, many other places that you could play Guild Wars without needing to group with other people or actually be in a guild at all. Sure, there are some logistical benefits to it, but it says on the box and in the manual that it is not required.

Snowman · May 02, 2006, 10:13 AM // 10:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Former Ruling

Omg...Double Sidedness FTW!

Everyone is obviosuly saying they LOVED the preview 12v12, but think back to when it was actually happening.

All you EVER heard 24 hours a day the entire weekend was "CHANGE 12v12!!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!@!!!!!!!oneone!@!!!@!" because of leavers,and such as that.

Anet listens, and lessens the problem by having people make competent groups, now the same people that were crying for it to change relize the first version of it was more fun...

I have to agree!

This way it also lessens the leaving problem!.. in the FPE as soon as someone saw that another person has left they would give up immediatly! this would snowball into everyone leaving.

I have played alot of Alliance battles over this weekend and the FPE and I must say that leaving is less of a problem and every game ive played they have been very close matches, we have even come back to win from 100 points down!

However!

Serious PvP Players see 12vs12 as just a joke match, nothing serious at all! no better than Random Arenas..

We managed to get two teams of 4 to syncronise 'Enter Battle' and very often we got our teams together! and communicate over teamspeak which makes for a MUCH better game.

These would be my Suggestions

1] Alow communication between the two other parties of 4

2] Where possible, try to join up teams who are in the same alliance!

Alliance Battles are definatly something that needs to be sorted!.. I know LOADS of people who bought factions JUST for this.