Curse

qwe4rty · Nov 09, 2005, 05:17 PM // 17:17

I think some sort of Tombs ladder is needed. Discuss:

unienaule · Nov 09, 2005, 05:18 PM // 17:18

Interesting idea, except every time you enter, you are guaranteed an eventual loss.

Luthor · Nov 09, 2005, 05:23 PM // 17:23

Actually I was thinking about the same idea.
It could only be done for guilds.
The more they win in Hall of Heroes the higher they get on the ladder.
The counter only counts up wins at Halls, so it doesn't matter if you lose.
This will also influence guilds to do more HoH, because if they just form PuG's they won't get any recognition.

Navaros · Nov 09, 2005, 05:24 PM // 17:24

A Tombs ladder that has fame bonus incentives based on your ladder rank (ie: rank 50 or above on the Tombs ladder gets you plus 2 fame bonus for every map you win) would be an awesome idea.

romO · Nov 09, 2005, 06:12 PM // 18:12

im not going to support this because then it could become a matter of how many people are in the guild. whereas in gvg, usually only the best players are allowed to play and they make assurances of winning, in tombs you can grab anyone and go at any time of day and stand a chance at winning hall. the guilds with the most people will simply be running constant groups and will end up winning more hoh than the smaller, more skilled guilds.

and navaros that seems like kind of a terrible idea because it will just widen the fame gap and give players that have an easy time gaining fame naturally another incentive which really isnt necessary.

qwe4rty · Nov 09, 2005, 06:28 PM // 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by romO

im not going to support this because then it could become a matter of how many people are in the guild. whereas in gvg, usually only the best players are allowed to play and they make assurances of winning, in tombs you can grab anyone and go at any time of day and stand a chance at winning hall. the guilds with the most people will simply be running constant groups and will end up winning more hoh than the smaller, more skilled guilds.

Someone mentioned it should only be done with guilds, but even if its not, why not have a ladder for it? It may not be as prestigous as GvG, but it still gives some guys a sense of *fame*. As it is, fame doesn't have anything to do with ingame fame, just wins.

Think of it like Warcraft III where there is the 1v1 Solo ladder, and the 4v4 Random Team ladder. Everyone agrees, the solo players are better, but they still have more than one ladder.

romO · Nov 09, 2005, 06:50 PM // 18:50

i see what you mean qwe4rty and i respect your opinion, but it just seems like it might be an annoyance to most skilled players when the most skills guilds are farther down the ladder and the guilds that simply play the most and have the most members are at the top. in warcraft III, the ladder was based on wins and losses and the way that this tombs ladder was suggested, the assumption was that only hoh victories would count toward a guild's ladder rating and rank. thus, even 4v4 random ladder required a lot more skill in individual games, and each game was very important because a win vs. a loss meant a huge turnaround in rating.

qwe4rty · Nov 09, 2005, 09:08 PM // 21:08

yeah, it would be kind of hard, because each HoH battle isn't a "single" Enter Mission. Its a chain of wins. Not like WCIII where it was one game at a time, win or lose.
Just an idea to throw out there, I'm sure the Dev's could find a way to do this a lot easier than what we have said so far.
I just really want fame to = fame, not wins

Navaros · Nov 09, 2005, 09:28 PM // 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwe4rty

I just really want fame to = fame, not wins

That's a great idea, but a Tombs Guild ladder would not give that.

Best way for fame to equal fame, is to make an individual player ladder based on fame points. And people with the same exact number of fame points as each other would be ranked higher based on who got that much fame first.

Hannibel · Nov 09, 2005, 10:29 PM // 22:29

/not signed

i think the only ladder should be put in other than gvg ladder is a single player ladder based on fame

qwe4rty · Nov 10, 2005, 03:10 AM // 03:10

That would be an idea as well.

To extend my last post, I was thinking about a way for a Tombs Team ladder. It can't be based soley on wins and losses, because you have to take into account level of skill. GvG, WCIII, most ladders are based not only on Wins, but Rating, or Experience.
To determine this in a tombs group, maybe have a formula which adds the whole teams collective rank, and that will give some idea of a challenge rating in determining how much Experience (or whatever, don't know what to call it). However, the ladder won't be based on this collective rank.
Just an idea to throw out there.

And just to have a little bit more input, if you guys disagree (or even agree), fine I respect that, but if you could, add a little bit of why. It will go a long way to furthering a productive conversation.

Thanks

One and Two · Nov 10, 2005, 07:49 AM // 07:49

They would have to fix tombs before they even thought of making a ladder for it...

And it would need to say losses and wins, cus just wins is stupid. You could just run 20 tombs groups at once and jump to the top of the ladder...

qwe4rty · Nov 10, 2005, 04:11 PM // 16:11

I'm thinking more along the lines of a Group Tombs ladder, rather than a Guild Tombs ladder.

The problem with doing the ladder just based on wins and losses is that it doesn't take into account the other teams skill level. Hence my idea for somehow adding all the players collective rank to determine some type of *challenge* rating. Wins/losses will still be recorded, just not the solo factor of determining rank.

This is by no means the only, or even the best solution. What would ya'll do besides wins/losses.

Navaros · Nov 10, 2005, 05:07 PM // 17:07

You can't really record a win/loss ratio in Tombs because it is not a fair determination of legitimate losses.

There are a few Altar maps on the way to the Hall, and on each of them that are not 1vs1, luck plays just as big of a factor in losing or not as skill does.

If the two other teams gank you, you are dead. Period. Only way you won't be is if they are both incompetent teams.

So how are you gonna count a "loss" against a team that got ganked by 16 players? It wouldn't be fair to do so.

qwe4rty · Nov 10, 2005, 05:30 PM // 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navaros

You can't really record a win/loss ratio in Tombs because it is not a fair determination of legitimate losses.

There are a few Altar maps on the way to the Hall, and on each of them that are not 1vs1, luck plays just as big of a factor in losing or not as skill does.

I'm saying only count HoH, not the maps before. I'll think about the second part of your question.

tomcruisejr · Nov 10, 2005, 07:14 PM // 19:14

the pinnacle of GW pvp is GvG, quality pvp that is.

Tombs PvP should not be ladderized coz most of the time, you guys arent facing an organized team.

quality = ladder = GvG

qwe4rty · Nov 10, 2005, 09:49 PM // 21:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomcruisejr

the pinnacle of GW pvp is GvG, quality pvp that is.

Tombs PvP should not be ladderized coz most of the time, you guys arent facing an organized team.

quality = ladder = GvG

So whats the point of not having Tombs then? Should it just be abolished? Or, why not have a seperate ladder for it? Most people will still value the GvG one more, but a Tombs will still be good to have.

Also, please read the entire topic before you post something like this. If you had, you would have noticed my idea for basing challenge rating of the team on the cumalative rank of the whole team (or something similar). This way, it's not just counting wins/losses. Your post lost a lot of credibility to me when you said that.

BTW: Not all guilds are organized

glenn_rolfe · Nov 10, 2005, 10:02 PM // 22:02

Bad idea to make a tombs ladder. It doesn't even make sense since the majority of groups are PUG's

what they really need to do is vary some of the map objectives in GvG instead of just hold flag kill guild lord.

I agree about the greastest competition being in GvG (quite obviously). But I'm annoyed that anyone inside the top 50 is just a ranger spike guild.
(Ok, i'm sure there's a couple that don't always run it, but not many)

Makes you wonder about the world tournament when everyone is just going to rock up with ranger spike.

tomcruisejr · Nov 10, 2005, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwe4rty

Also, please read the entire topic before you post something like this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwe4rty

I think some sort of Tombs ladder is needed. Discuss:

errrrr?

Quote:

Originally Posted by qwe4rty

So whats the point of not having Tombs then? Should it just be abolished?

technically, tombs is still part of the pve realm. the favor system regulates the passage to the underworld or FoW.

i found it funny when people were suddenly "im rank 25. im the greatest pvper there is"

qwe4rty · Nov 10, 2005, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by glenn_rolfe

Bad idea to make a tombs ladder. It doesn't even make sense since the majority of groups are PUG's

This can be fixed as well. Have a certain requirement that the team must have played X amount of games together before qualifying for ladder. Not X amount of maps, but X amount of "Enter Mission"

I don't always Tombs with Guild, I do with friends who aren't in Guild, and see no reason not to have a Tombs ladder.