Curse

Jeydra · May 28, 2011, 02:04 AM // 02:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

Jeydra, why would I possibly respond to your post with any type of actual discussion? You have made it perfectly clear that no only do you refuse to do anything more than just gloss over what is written, you will either pull bits out of context or simply put words into other people's mouths.

If I'm misunderstanding you and you refuse to elaborate, you will stay misunderstood. It's your choice.

@floor - are you implying that top-tier and mid-tier Dervishes both fail to kill mid-tier Monks (who just need to spam RC / WoH now)? Beyond that, I don't see how what you've written is relevant to my "get better" argument, which goes something like top-tier Dervishes don't stomp top-tier Monks but mid-tier Dervishes stomp mid-tier Monks, but mid-tier Monks should get better instead of complain of imbalance.

Also I don't see how what you've written go beyond the "Dervishes take no skill, therefore they are bad for the game" argument. Perhaps they add a "Dervishes make other professions require less skill, therefore they are bad for the game" dimension, but that's just another variation of the skill argument isn't it? I still don't believe in the skill argument, especially since as far as I can see skill is still present, if of a different kind (as proved by the fact that nobody has assembled a team of random PuGs and won gold). I'll say as well that although I can be convinced that Dervishes need nerfs because they are overpowered in other ways (see pre-nerf Dervishes), I likely cannot be convinced that Dervishes need nerfs because they take no skill to play,

I'll stand by what I've written. If Dervishes and Warriors are equally viable in high-level play, then Dervishes do not need any more nerfs.

wuzzman · May 28, 2011, 04:22 PM // 16:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

This is the attitude. This is the attitude.

This is the attitude.

This is the attitude.

hahahaha

This was the line that I repeated over and over again laughing.

This is the attitude that drove all of the mid-tier players out of the game. This is the attitude that made so many people, the 'critical mass' of players quit the game. This is the attitude that fails to see beyond one's own dick and that a game needs to be good at levels beyond top tier, because not everyone can reach top tier. If there are no ranks to work through, then whatever population you have at the top is the only population you have at the top.

your mid level players were running every spike build imaginable and iway. What drove them all away was the insistent that the build they are "semi" decent with is too broken/unskilled to play and you should really play balance and only balance and get faced rolled by your "betters". Most people are "ok" with losing repeatedly because they are not "that" great, most people are not ok with watching classes cycle in and out of uselessness.

Reverend Dr · May 28, 2011, 10:33 PM // 22:33

Competition argument: With no tier system to work up through new players have an extremely RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing hard hurdle to break into pvp. They cannot really play until they can play at top tier levels, which just rarely happens. Most new players are instead turned away. This leaves the top players in an ever dwindling pool. much like we have now

Business argument: Not everyone that wants to give you money to play your game can play at the highest skill level.

wuzzman · May 28, 2011, 11:39 PM // 23:39

Your mid level players were running away as build diversity dropped off the map. But thats a "gvg" argument, HA was the true breading ground of pvp and it died due to the requirements to "break into" getting higher and higher. Getting into a serious pvp guild, without the need of forum hunting, used to be through HA but with the vast majority of our mid tier players being locked out in droves, the "new" blood never got a chance to be injected because everyone regardless of skill level was treated as RA fodder without the titles to prove otherwise. TA died when anet released AB, than died again when the returning and potential players had to "prove" themselves by yet again farming titles. Forcing players to farm + removing build diversity drove players further and further away from competitive pvp and into the dredges of RA and AB.

Arena Net themselves acknowledges this paradigm by insisting that GVG will be only competitive arena in Guild Wars 2. Want another format? Too bad RA/AB (opps i mean WvW) with the rest of the pve oriented player base.

wuzzman · May 29, 2011, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

gatekeepers? huh?

Get eight people, push enter mission.

The problem is that the game is old and the population is a mere fraction of what it used to be. There were more builds because there were more players. People were willing to try new things because groups could be formed quickly and a complete failure of a build was only the loss of a minimal amount of time. Today because there are so fewer people groups take far longer to form, a failure of a group is a much larger waste of time. Is it really that surprising that the majority of players do not want to take a risk with something new when its failure will cost them an entire night of play?

The format is not friendly to pick up groups. Why? Because there are organized teams. Almost everyone that succeeds with any frequency play with the same group pulling from guild and friend lists. These people don't just know a build, they know the people they are playing with. A pick up group simply cannot compete. You don't go to a sports game then complain that they don't ask you to play. Go find a team, find people, organize yourselves. Pugging is going to set you up for failure from the beginning.

Necro.

Most people who played HA pugged. No one who pugged HA expected to make it to the Hall of Heroes, winning 2 matches in a row was enough of a thrill to most players. Telling people they "can't" pug, despite most people wanting to pug, is a recipe for what we have now. You want to cater to most players, allow them to pug, you want a dead arena, expect them to organize. Very simple. Rank made it hard to pug. Than it made it harder to pug. Than people quite.

Reverend Dr · May 29, 2011, 01:29 AM // 01:29

I know you really want to iceburn me now, but no that is simply not true. Most groups that formed for HA were not pugs but groups formed from guild/alliance/friend lists that maybe maybe added 1 or 2 pugs to fill out the roster.

Aside from that, rank was always a red herring. The people that formed exclusively pugs were the people that got kicked out of guilds/alliances and had no friends.

wuzzman · May 29, 2011, 01:56 AM // 01:56

Not really. I've pugged HA when I was r0, joining groups, making them, even using HA to try new builds. I've came to HA as a organized group as well, sometimes as an 8 man other times as a bored 4 man. I can say with some confidence that HA is made of pugs, mostly, and when a guild/friend group does pop into HA looking for an extra 1-3 people till fill out the team and go, the majority of them ask for dumb rank requirements like r9 or r12 nowadays. Even then most of them end up sitting there long enough to have that extra man log in or just disband.

Reverend Dr · May 29, 2011, 01:58 AM // 01:58

If your recollection is as good as your grammar then my point has already been made.

urania · May 29, 2011, 08:30 AM // 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

TA died when anet released AB, than died again when the returning and potential players had to "prove" themselves by yet again farming titles.

wut?

123456

Jeydra · May 29, 2011, 08:53 AM // 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeydra

I'll stand by what I've written. If Dervishes and Warriors are equally viable in high-level play, then Dervishes do not need any more nerfs.

Looks like they aren't equally viable - all the mAT matches on obs don't include Axe and Sword Warriors, although Hammer Warriors are fairly common. In which case, I'll support further nerfs to Dervishes.

Sk8tborderx · May 29, 2011, 10:43 AM // 10:43

EDA and the Necro needs to be nerfed, until they are triple Derv will remain overpowered.

fowlero · May 29, 2011, 04:03 PM // 16:03

EDA needs nerfing still, personally i'd like fleeting/harriers recharge upped slightly too.

However, even though stuff is still pretty op, i actually really enjoyed this monthly and the meta surrounding it. Every build style is seeing play, though the rotation does support this more than usual, the derv nerf did more than i expected it to do.

Jet · May 29, 2011, 11:25 PM // 23:25

the update to nerf dervishes didn't help much at all. Dervs can still deal loads of damage to one target. If you got 2 dervs on one monk, they can drop him/her quite easily. With all the condition spreading, its causing monks to use RC consistently which leaves them with no energy. Using RC consistently or "spamming" your making it so easy for it to get interrupted. Bottom line is that there needs to be more nerfs to dervs or we just have to play better.

vandevere · May 29, 2011, 11:35 PM // 23:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jet

the update to nerf dervishes didn't help much at all. Dervs can still deal loads of damage to one target. If you got 2 dervs on one monk, they can drop him/her quite easily. With all the condition spreading, its causing monks to use RC consistently which leaves them with no energy. Using RC consistently or "spamming" your making it so easy for it to get interrupted. Bottom line is that there needs to be more nerfs to dervs or we just have to play better.

Don't want to sound like an elitist here, 'cause that's not me at all. But you just mentioned an either/or option. Either Dervs get nerfed some more, OR peeps try to play better. Option #2 is always the preferable option...

Dervs should only get more nerfs if better gameplay doesn't help the issue.

kedde · May 31, 2011, 08:48 PM // 20:48

If the rest of the team except dervish players are forced to improve beyond their usual level of play, then it's quite obvious something is wrong.