Curse

Zuranthium · Mar 05, 2010, 02:21 AM // 02:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

why on earth do you dislike simple eliminations?

Why on earth do you Euros dislike (and fail at) splitting?

Simple eliminations are good for RA because the opponents you are getting constantly change. You have to continually adapt and react to different skills. In TA it's just a couple builds that become dominant and you do the same thing over and over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

and no, it wasnt much about cancel casting purge, since there was no magebane signet; you used purge either under the effects of guardian (which was actually worth carrying because there was no defile yet) or stance.

That's silly. You still had to cancel-cast Purge to bait interrupts. You couldn't always spend energy to Guardian/Stance (which isn't sure-fire protection in the first place) yourself to use Purge Sig. It's not like this was the most annoying thing in and of itself, the skill involved with cancel-casting is worthwhile and can be a fun mind game, but the repetition of it endlessly becomes tiresome. That's why a 4v4 Arena with every skill available and only the most basic movement required will probably become stale.

Movement adds a whole extra dimension. A far greater number of setups become viable and there is more unpredictability.

Teams just running around wasn't something I found a problem with. I think perhaps you didn't bring enough snares. Further balancing of the Arena in terms of points awarded for kills vs. capping is something that could be looked at as well if the format was given time to develop.

urania · Mar 05, 2010, 08:22 AM // 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Why on earth do you Euros dislike (and fail at) splitting?

Simple eliminations are good for RA because the opponents you are getting constantly change. You have to continually adapt and react to different skills. In TA it's just a couple builds that become dominant and you do the same thing over and over.

That's silly. You still had to cancel-cast Purge to bait interrupts. You couldn't always spend energy to Guardian/Stance (which isn't sure-fire protection in the first place) yourself to use Purge Sig. It's not like this was the most annoying thing in and of itself, the skill involved with cancel-casting is worthwhile and can be a fun mind game, but the repetition of it endlessly becomes tiresome. That's why a 4v4 Arena with every skill available and only the most basic movement required will probably become stale.

Movement adds a whole extra dimension. A far greater number of setups become viable and there is more unpredictability.

Teams just running around wasn't something I found a problem with. I think perhaps you didn't bring enough snares. Further balancing of the Arena in terms of points awarded for kills vs. capping is something that could be looked at as well if the format was given time to develop.

oh now we're back at european vs american prejudices? for the record, vD was primarily a split guild.

as far as your so-called staleness is concerned, there will always be dominant builds in an environment where skill choice remains the same (so, excluding CA) - in TA, HA as well as gvg. its usually only skill balances and skill revamps that can change that (and unfortunately, from our exp its usually for the worse).

however, there's little wrong with certain builds becoming dominant as long as they're not broken. unfortunately, its exactly the fact that the dominant builds were just plain broken most of the time that often made ta an annoying place, not so much the repetitiveness. but the fault for that lies on anet, not primarily TA.
during the zb/ba/evisc/ce meta, facing good teams (with similar builds) was very enjoyable, since it was really the better team that won, not the team with the better build on the right map.

and there wasnt many purge-cancel wars until magebane arrived. however, that team build as a whole NEVER became stale and never would, if it wasnt for woh/ff/mb/prage on steroids that made it obsolete.
on a side note, we carried grasping earth on necro and bulls/shock on warr, dont expect sprint and crip shot just for split maps.

if it becomes stale for you when you keep on fighting good people (even if its with same builds), then thats more or less your problem.

more maps merely means more rps in 4v4 player environment. even in gvg you can be pretty screwed if facing a good dedicated split on a split map. and its not my thing to lose because of map or build disadvantage - or in other words, it doesnt make it any more "interesting" to get rps'ed. the simplier the better.

Zuranthium · Mar 05, 2010, 11:00 PM // 23:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

oh now we're back at european vs american prejudices?

It's really more of a fact than a prejudice. The non Top 20 Euro guilds have consistently been worse at splitting than their American/Asian counterparts and have always sat at the stand and jerked off instead of trying to do something proactive when kills aren't happening (or when losing). It's simply the defining playstyle of the average rank 30-100 Euro team, not a prejudice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

as far as your so-called staleness is concerned, there will always be dominant builds in an environment where skill choice remains the same (so, excluding CA) - in TA, HA as well as gvg. its usually only skill balances and skill revamps that can change that (and unfortunately, from our exp its usually for the worse).

Dominant builds. The plural case having important significance. In TA it didn't really work out like that. Rangers and hexes are simply the best and so that's what you're always going to see. If someone doesn't bring that, then they probably lose.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

however, there's little wrong with certain builds becoming dominant as long as they're not broken.

Such as a "balanced" GvG team setup. The difference is that A.) 8 players creates a much different dynamic than 4 players, and B.) GvG allows for movement. If everyone was playing one fairly similar "balanced" build in GvG, matches would still vary quite a bit in terms of what happens and how it is played. This isn't true for TA, though. You just do the same thing over and over and over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

on a side note, we carried grasping earth on necro and bulls/shock on warr, dont expect sprint and crip shot just for split maps.

Considering that EVERY map is a "split" map were TA to use the HB maps, I'm not sure what you're saying. If you didn't take proper movement-related abilities on your Warrior and Ranger, then you weren't building correctly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

if it becomes stale for you when you keep on fighting good people (even if its with same builds), then thats more or less your problem.

That's fair. It's my problem. It was also a problem of many other people, seeing as how TA wasn't very active.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

even in gvg you can be pretty screwed if facing a good dedicated split on a split map. and its not my thing to lose because of map or build disadvantage - or in other words, it doesnt make it any more "interesting" to get rps'ed. the simplier the better.

Again, all of the TA maps would call for movement so that's what you would build for. There would still be small build disadvantages between maps, sure, but that's where the fun of outplaying your opponent comes in.

Corporeal Ghost · Mar 05, 2010, 11:30 PM // 23:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

you ignored my point about limiting build choices with flag running.

I didn't ignore it. I felt it was unnecessary to argue the point since we're pretty much in agreement. I'm not sure why you're so stuck on flags mechanically, though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

moreover, please dont point your finger at characteristics of an arena when the blame lies on lousy and slugish skill balance

Whether or not there is finger-pointing at mechanics, the fact of the matter is, ANet simply does not have the resources to continually balance everything. It's just better design to make a self-correcting--at least to a degree--system, even if it opens the door to rare griefing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

for the record, shove-way would own you on pretty much ANY map, especially a flag one - if you cant see that, then i really dont know if there's a point in continuing this discussion.

They don't have snares. They have zero kill threat unless they move as a four-man team. I'm not seeing it, provided you have non-linear (geographically) objectives numbering more than two. HB maps are a good example. The reason teleports were so good in HB was because a lone hero did not present a kill threat and hero response time was much slower than player response time. They're obviously still powerful, but you're sacrificing slots you need in other maps to run them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

as far as your so-called staleness is concerned, there will always be dominant builds in an environment where skill choice remains the same

It's not about staleness; it's about keeping one-dimensional builds that circumvent viable counters in check. Annihilation means that if you're counterbuilt, you're just screwed. There is no option to send half your team to kill a Guild Lord. You're just going to have to make far fewer mistakes than the other team. Opening up a non-annihilation map in the (still random) rotation effectively makes it harder to counterbuild the (extremely predictable) metagame while maintaining any kind of streak. You need to keep your offensive options open instead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

you cant dedicate chars in 4v4 to run flags like you can in 8v8, but if you do its just plain griefing since you'll (or should) lose on pretty much any other map.

This is pretty much my point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Again, all of the TA maps would call for movement so that's what you would build for. There would still be small build disadvantages between maps, sure, but that's where the fun of outplaying your opponent comes in.

Exclusively hero battle-style maps might work, but it has inherent problems. Mixing annihilation and movement-oriented maps eliminates (or at least curbs) speccing the map to the extreme in either case. One-dimensionality essentially prevents long streaks.

urania · Mar 06, 2010, 12:41 AM // 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

It's really more of a fact than a prejudice. The non Top 20 Euro guilds have consistently been worse at splitting than their American/Asian counterparts and have always sat at the stand and jerked off instead of trying to do something proactive when kills aren't happening (or when losing). It's simply the defining playstyle of the average rank 30-100 Euro team, not a prejudice.

Dominant builds. The plural case having important significance. In TA it didn't really work out like that. Rangers and hexes are simply the best and so that's what you're always going to see. If someone doesn't bring that, then they probably lose.

Such as a "balanced" GvG team setup. The difference is that A.) 8 players creates a much different dynamic than 4 players, and B.) GvG allows for movement. If everyone was playing one fairly similar "balanced" build in GvG, matches would still vary quite a bit in terms of what happens and how it is played. This isn't true for TA, though. You just do the same thing over and over and over.

Considering that EVERY map is a "split" map were TA to use the HB maps, I'm not sure what you're saying. If you didn't take proper movement-related abilities on your Warrior and Ranger, then you weren't building correctly.

That's fair. It's my problem. It was also a problem of many other people, seeing as how TA wasn't very active.

Again, all of the TA maps would call for movement so that's what you would build for. There would still be small build disadvantages between maps, sure, but that's where the fun of outplaying your opponent comes in.

so you claim euros suck at splitting in general or just in the last 1-2 years (ever since woh, prage, smite trains etc came into play and ever since the game's been severely dumbed down)? interesting theory, ill glady see some empirical data supporting those claims other than just random observe instances though.

even ta had plenty of rps builds (bit less ever since ff and woh came into play). primarily its been the hex overload with an ele or ranger, daze train with (prenerf) eda derv, ce necro balanced with a hammer or prage w, wail nec with turret and prage, dual mo teams with sins or some weirdo spikes involving wail necs and ion cannon and then the mb spammers combinations (most often with bo mesmer carrying (prenerf) pious conc). ofcourse there were the 4 ele farm teams during zquest days and ofc shoves. sounds like quite the variety (though broken) each deploying different "tactics" or better, abuses to acheve a win. i doubt you did much TA if you think rangers and hexes were it.

if you can do the same thing over and over to win it means you play vs bad players, because the same can easily apply to gvg too. you cant always do the same over and over again vs good opponents, but rather have to outplay them and i see nothing wrong with that.

moreover, if you're disadvantaged vs good opponents that's pretty much a guaranteed loss - or they arent good enough to capitalize on the opponents' handicap and are thus only average.

TA might have been less active than HA or gvg, but CA is definately more dead and has a far smaller (and fairly mediocre) regular player base.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

I didn't ignore it. I felt it was unnecessary to argue the point since we're pretty much in agreement. I'm not sure why you're so stuck on flags mechanically, though.

good to know we're in agreement there.
i just dislike the idea of capping/running around with flags - maybe 3+ years of TA straightforwardness might be the reason for that, next to personal preference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

Whether or not there is finger-pointing at mechanics, the fact of the matter is, ANet simply does not have the resources to continually balance everything. It's just better design to make a self-correcting--at least to a degree--system, even if it opens the door to rare griefing.

and yet they can literally waste resources for trash such as zaishen manegerie and pve-only skills?
better let GW have gvg only and give up on making any other arenas. after all, their resources apparently wont ever cut it for the overhwelming task of balancing out anything non gvg, apparently. its been hard enough for gvg alone already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

They don't have snares. They have zero kill threat unless they move as a four-man team. I'm not seeing it, provided you have non-linear (geographically) objectives numbering more than two. HB maps are a good example. The reason teleports were so good in HB was because a lone hero did not present a kill threat and hero response time was much slower than player response time. They're obviously still powerful, but you're sacrificing slots you need in other maps to run them.

a shove had 2-3 speedboosts on EVERYONE, a block skill (yay protectors defense) on the warrior (often carrying 2 kds even) for the spike and teleports such as heart of shadow, death charge and return, and you honestly believe your snares would beat that? against divert and ls or multiple empathic removals? right. they'd just kill you off one by one. and dw, they WOULD get you soon enough.
it was virtually unkillable if played right (best you could get vs them if they didnt suck was a draw, especially if faced on the beach map).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

It's not about staleness; it's about keeping one-dimensional builds that circumvent viable counters in check. Annihilation means that if you're counterbuilt, you're just screwed. There is no option to send half your team to kill a Guild Lord. You're just going to have to make far fewer mistakes than the other team. Opening up a non-annihilation map in the (still random) rotation effectively makes it harder to counterbuild the (extremely predictable) metagame while maintaining any kind of streak. You need to keep your offensive options open instead.

i see hexes remaining just as strong in split (at least the most frequent vor+empathy mes and insidi necro), unless one runs heal sig, trols unguent etc and is like that effectively crippled build-wise on most other maps. i can see it work against some builds (the bha+eda combo for example because one really needs everyone to train the shit out of the ff nec), but vs all multiple healer or hexer teams, not quite.

Zuranthium · Mar 06, 2010, 02:07 AM // 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

so you claim euros suck at splitting in general or just in the last 1-2 years (ever since woh, prage, smite trains etc came into play and ever since the game's been severely dumbed down)? interesting theory, ill glady see some empirical data supporting those claims other than just random observe instances though.

Look at the builds that have been run by Euros the past 3 years. It's all documented (for top 16 results in the mAT at least). They run split far less than Americans/Asians. If you've watched the matches they hardly ever split when just playing a balanced build either. Another vivid memory - for double champ point weekend a couple years ago every single Euro team was playing spike. Me, Langola, and whoever else was on my team (all Americans) played split and won nearly every match (even beating Yush's spike team ON BURNING). Two other American teams ran split as well. Not a single Euro team ran split.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

i doubt you did much TA if you think rangers and hexes were it.

Considering my title I think I did plenty of it. That is always what's played when there isn't some newly buffed broken skill in play that later gets nerfed. There was the Shove build as well and it was very effective, sure...that's 2 builds.

The week that HB maps were put in effect for TA, there were all kinds of different builds and tactics being used that were working.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

if you can do the same thing over and over to win it means you play vs bad players, because the same can easily apply to gvg too. you cant always do the same over and over again vs good opponents, but rather have to outplay them and i see nothing wrong with that.

No, the method of outplaying the opponent remains the same and becomes stale. For such a limited arena you still do the same things against good opponents when the skills never change - it just comes down to repetition. Or it just comes down to luck - did you hit through block or not, did you get two critical hits in a row?

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

moreover, if you're disadvantaged vs good opponents that's pretty much a guaranteed loss

It's not like the difference in HB maps is on the same level as Frozen Isle vs. Burning Isle circa VoD. It's just small differences and you need to have movement capability and control regardless. In the end the people who play the best are almost always going to win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

TA might have been less active than HA or gvg, but CA is definately more dead and has a far smaller (and fairly mediocre) regular player base.

As of a year and half ago (when I stopped playing for quite awhile) TA rarely had any actual real TA teams playing during many hours. It was just teams from RA that won 10 and were sent over. The arena would have been dead were it not for RA (and still essentially WAS dead - people didn't stay in TA with their team and go back in if they lost, they just went back to RA).

Codex almost always has more people in-zone than TA did. With the proper support it could have more competition. It's a better format for sure; constantly making new builds is fun.

Corporeal Ghost · Mar 06, 2010, 02:34 AM // 02:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

TA might have been less active than HA or gvg, but CA is definately more dead and has a far smaller (and fairly mediocre) regular player base.

First, I don't think this is correct. I used to idle in TA when I didn't have a guild hall, and it was pretty much dead for about 90% of the day, just as Codex is. There may have been a marginally larger amount of TA regulars, but I think you can attribute this to general population decay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

and yet they can literally waste resources for trash

Again, we're in agreement. But there's nothing to be done about it, so I'm looking at semi-viable solutions rather than dream solutions. Although TA isn't coming back anyway, so it's kind of moot. So basically, yes, in a perfect world where ANet would fix broken things as soon as they were discovered, TA might be a better option (debatable). But as is, they simply cannot, or at least do not, dedicate the resources to do it, so I'm looking at methodology to have an arena that has some manner of self-correction in terms of RPS using pretty much zero new developer time. The maps already exist and already support 4v4. While it's true that individual matches are more RPS-based, it should average out unless people are specifically gunning to kill your streak on whichever map type you're weak on--and I find that most people that are this petty are usually not good enough to actually beat you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

a shove had 2-3 speedboosts on EVERYONE, a block skill (yay protectors defense) on the warrior (often carrying 2 kds even) for the spike and teleports such as heart of shadow, death charge and return, and you honestly believe your snares would beat that? against divert and ls or multiple empathic removals? right. they'd just kill you off one by one. and dw, they WOULD get you soon enough.
it was virtually unkillable if played right (best you could get vs them if they didnt suck was a draw, especially if faced on the beach map).

In terms of HB maps, they're pretty much boned; they can't realistically split. They have no snares. And there are health shrines on half the maps. They're slightly less boned on the shadowstep-friendly maps, but I still don't see them winning often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

i see hexes remaining just as strong in split

Yes and no. While it's pretty hard to kill a VoRbot with an axe bar, he can't actually kill you either. It should pretty much be about generating mismatches in-game. Although the fact that Veil can be maintained at radar range should help a ton here.

But specific theorycrafting doesn't really get us anywhere. It ultimately just leads in circles. The point is the maps reward builds that have more options.

urania · Mar 06, 2010, 12:06 PM // 12:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Look at the builds that have been run by Euros the past 3 years. It's all documented (for top 16 results in the mAT at least). They run split far less than Americans/Asians. If you've watched the matches they hardly ever split when just playing a balanced build either. Another vivid memory - for double champ point weekend a couple years ago every single Euro team was playing spike. Me, Langola, and whoever else was on my team (all Americans) played split and won nearly every match (even beating Yush's spike team ON BURNING). Two other American teams ran split as well. Not a single Euro team ran split.

why would i look at top 16 if top 20 euro teams are (according to you) generally good at splitting?
afterall, you did write:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

The non Top 20 Euro guilds have consistently been worse at splitting than their American/Asian counterparts and have always sat at the stand and jerked off instead of trying to do something proactive when kills aren't happening (or when losing). It's simply the defining playstyle of the average rank 30-100 Euro team, not a prejudice.

i suppose your point stays at americans>euros in general. but hey, opinions differ and since you cant really present actual empirical data over the years for top 100 matches, its pointless to continue really.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Considering my title I think I did plenty of it. That is always what's played when there isn't some newly buffed broken skill in play that later gets nerfed. There was the Shove build as well and it was very effective, sure...that's 2 builds.

with all honestly, i havent seen you once in TA or at least dont remember ever even cacthing a glimse of you in any district, be it euro, american, id or asian. given the amount of time i spent in american district (before the district travel change update) i can say with great certainty you were never there.
moreover, since you dismissed 90% of the builds i listed i suppose you farmed that title in RA and more often than not during nub peak hours (american afternoon to late afternoon) in TA, because ALL of those builds were played on a regular account (in EU/id districts [after the district separation change, so one'd face american and asian teams on a regular account], at least) at certain point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

The week that HB maps were put in effect for TA, there were all kinds of different builds and tactics being used that were working.

i recall no real variety build-wise apart from dedicated grief splits with 4 /a players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

No, the method of outplaying the opponent remains the same and becomes stale. For such a limited arena you still do the same things against good opponents when the skills never change - it just comes down to repetition. Or it just comes down to luck - did you hit through block or not, did you get two critical hits in a row?

i disagree - against good players there's a great amount of possible situations you can come up against and give proper response to, even in TA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

It's not like the difference in HB maps is on the same level as Frozen Isle vs. Burning Isle circa VoD. It's just small differences and you need to have movement capability and control regardless. In the end the people who play the best are almost always going to win.

best comparison would probably be a mo/w fortress against mo/a with return/da - while a mowwa can hold out fairly longer on a non cap map than a mo/a (face it, they will catch you eventually and having less armor hurts too), carrying balanced stance or doliaks with bonettis on a cap map will be next to useless. the typical ranger build is probably the one least disadvantaged on any map, unless we wanna go compare the obvious pros and cons of crip/mel shot against magebane on cap/non cap maps.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

As of a year and half ago (when I stopped playing for quite awhile) TA rarely had any actual real TA teams playing during many hours. It was just teams from RA that won 10 and were sent over. The arena would have been dead were it not for RA (and still essentially WAS dead - people didn't stay in TA with their team and go back in if they lost, they just went back to RA).

the couple of months prior to TA removal the meta was so hopeless it was better to just remove it than keep it there if nothing was intended to be done.

the TA i really enjoyed was that of boon prots and ZB prots - afterwards it just went downhill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Codex almost always has more people in-zone than TA did. With the proper support it could have more competition. It's a better format for sure; constantly making new builds is fun.

it usually has more people only when builds change or during zquest days (TA was very "populated" during those times too) - and even that quickly dies after 30 mins or so. normally i see 1-2 people in american district (which is, like for AB, the one and only district now) and thats it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

First, I don't think this is correct. I used to idle in TA when I didn't have a guild hall, and it was pretty much dead for about 90% of the day, just as Codex is. There may have been a marginally larger amount of TA regulars, but I think you can attribute this to general population decay.

i always idled in TA and more often than not I saw plenty of people in it, especialy people i more or less knew.
removal of TA effectively further decreased the population though because only a small part of both player bases started playing CA. how do i know that? considering 99% of the people who still played TA before it was removed only play RA now i predict with a similar thing happened to HB.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

Again, we're in agreement. But there's nothing to be done about it, so I'm looking at semi-viable solutions rather than dream solutions. Although TA isn't coming back anyway, so it's kind of moot. So basically, yes, in a perfect world where ANet would fix broken things as soon as they were discovered, TA might be a better option (debatable). But as is, they simply cannot, or at least do not, dedicate the resources to do it, so I'm looking at methodology to have an arena that has some manner of self-correction in terms of RPS using pretty much zero new developer time. The maps already exist and already support 4v4. While it's true that individual matches are more RPS-based, it should average out unless people are specifically gunning to kill your streak on whichever map type you're weak on--and I find that most people that are this petty are usually not good enough to actually beat you.

well, the sad thing is those simple 3 rules that they implemented in CA along with certain skill bans would have eliminated about 70-80% of build abuse (foremostly, the shove spike, multiple monk teams and rtl/mb ele builds) in TA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

In terms of HB maps, they're pretty much boned; they can't realistically split. They have no snares. And there are health shrines on half the maps. They're slightly less boned on the shadowstep-friendly maps, but I still don't see them winning often.

they have speed boosts, kds and a certain-to-kill spike (unless they go on a ranger who happens to magebane shove). their spike (counting in the deep wound) pumped out enough damage to bring down an 800-900 hp target, if i remember right. so health shrines wouldnt matter much, really.

remember the beach map, which had only 1 option for heart of shadow to be (ab)used on and yet, it was enough for them to always have a safe way out in case the spike didnt get through. given how HUGE the beach map is and how big most of the HB maps are, i see no obstacle to them simply outrunning you and killing you off one by one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

Yes and no. While it's pretty hard to kill a VoRbot with an axe bar, he can't actually kill you either. It should pretty much be about generating mismatches in-game. Although the fact that Veil can be maintained at radar range should help a ton here.

perhaps. in best case scenario (no degen/rupts/self heal on mes) it would probably end in a draw.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

But specific theorycrafting doesn't really get us anywhere. It ultimately just leads in circles. The point is the maps reward builds that have more options.

true enough. but its pretty much all thats left since you cant really discuss anything like that for CA.

WeeMeeister · Mar 06, 2010, 07:32 PM // 19:32

The final weeks of Team Arenas proved that it was still a very viable format and arena. (New 'sin spikes, fragility condition pressures, etc.) A few nerfs to problematic skills and a reward buff and TA could be repopulated right now. Why does Arenanet not realize that people dislike boring formats with excessive setup times? (Codex)

WeeMeeister · Mar 06, 2010, 07:47 PM // 19:47

By the way, I do not see why you two are arguing about HB maps and monkspike. HB maps do not hinder Shove in any way - I did over 3,500 HB monkspike matches and when an opponent captures both health shrines, spikes can still go through. With two critical hits from the warrior, the spike easily hits 925+ damage. (Enough to kill with both health shrines captured) Both monk touches simply need to do half damage and perhaps a small plague sending nerf, but TA could be perfectly balanced with half-an-hour of work from the "live team".

Zuranthium · Mar 06, 2010, 09:17 PM // 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

why would i look at top 16 if top 20 euro teams are (according to you) generally good at splitting?

LOL, non top-20 Guilds always make the top 16 after swiss rounds. Cmon now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

but hey, opinions differ and since you cant really present actual empirical data over the years for top 100 matches, its pointless to continue really.

I take it you simply haven't watched many matches (or played in any the past 2.5 years)? Euros rarely split and have lost more often than not to Americans/Asians when they do. It's simply a fact. The empirical evidence is there too - again, look at mAT build archives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

with all honestly, i havent seen you once in TA or at least dont remember ever even cacthing a glimse of you in any district, be it euro, american, id or asian. given the amount of time i spent in american district (before the district travel change update) i can say with great certainty you were never there.

I never saw you either and/or never knew who you were in the past either. So,

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

moreover, since you dismissed 90% of the builds i listed i suppose you farmed that title in RA and more often than not during nub peak hours (american afternoon to late afternoon) in TA, because ALL of those builds were played on a regular account (in EU/id districts [after the district separation change, so one'd face american and asian teams on a regular account], at least) at certain point.

Builds being played and builds being competitive are two separate things which you aren't distinguishing. As for playtime - I've played in every different timeslot over the years, depending on my IRL schedule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

i disagree - against good players there's a great amount of possible situations you can come up against and give proper response to, even in TA.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on "great amount of" then. I don't find TA without movement to require nearly as much on-the-fly adaptability and thinking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

best comparison would probably be a mo/w fortress against mo/a with return/da - while a mowwa can hold out fairly longer on a non cap map than a mo/a (face it, they will catch you eventually and having less armor hurts too), carrying balanced stance or doliaks with bonettis on a cap map will be next to useless.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Every HB map is a cap map. There wouldn't be straight elimination maps mixed in.

urania · Mar 06, 2010, 11:17 PM // 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

LOL, non top-20 Guilds always make the top 16 after swiss rounds. Cmon now.

thought you meant top 20 in general, not the top 18 that get silver after mAT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

I take it you simply haven't watched many matches (or played in any the past 2.5 years)? Euros rarely split and have lost more often than not to Americans/Asians when they do. It's simply a fact. The empirical evidence is there too - again, look at mAT build archives.

i pretty much stopped keeping track of things after vd went inactive, so yeah.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

I never saw you either and/or never knew who you were in the past either. So,

do you at least know any of the better american/asian regulars?
else your input on TA can be dismissed as irrelevant for you obviously arent even familiar with the better and experienced playerbase and hence cannot judge the builds that those players (ab)used and thus determined the metas over time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

Builds being played and builds being competitive are two separate things which you aren't distinguishing. As for playtime - I've played in every different timeslot over the years, depending on my IRL schedule.

ALL of those builds were very competitive at a certain point of time. seems you played when the better players didnt, i guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

We'll just have to agree to disagree on "great amount of" then. I don't find TA without movement to require nearly as much on-the-fly adaptability and thinking.

killing small flies obviously doesnt.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zuranthium

I'm not sure what you're saying. Every HB map is a cap map. There wouldn't be straight elimination maps mixed in.

im saying a mo/a will be disadvantaged on a non cap map and a mo/w on a cap map, so itd merely mean more rps'ing.

Zuranthium · Mar 07, 2010, 03:07 AM // 03:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

do you at least know any of the better american/asian regulars? else your input on TA can be dismissed as irrelevant for you obviously arent even familiar with the better and experienced playerbase and hence cannot judge the builds that those players (ab)used and thus determined the metas over time.

I often played against and beat Cirque, Wer, Miguel, Sleepy. Lots of Asian players I can't recall the names of. Names from Euro hours escape me, it's been 2 years they weren't people that I ever interacted with outside of TA. I played GvG more (whereas you admit that GvG is something you've not been too interested in).

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

ALL of those builds were very competitive at a certain point of time.

They weren't all competitive at the same time. Ever since Nightfall hexes have pretty much always been the path to victory for TA. Shove was an alternative and other things have popped up here and there (like double melee + smite monk + rit) but variety has not been a defining element of TA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by urania

im saying a mo/a will be disadvantaged on a non cap map and a mo/w on a cap map, so itd merely mean more rps'ing.

Again, every map would be a cap map.

---------------

Btw, thanks for coming and playing earlier.

Revelations · Mar 07, 2010, 03:39 AM // 03:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

By the way, I do not see why you two are arguing about HB maps and monkspike. HB maps do not hinder Shove in any way - I did over 3,500 HB monkspike matches and when an opponent captures both health shrines, spikes can still go through.

This is completely irrelevant tbh. For said spike to go through they need the entire team, or at very least 3/4 of it to be in the one place. Meaning you're free to cap the shit out of the map if you don't feel you can 4v4 it. Sure, they'll get the odd kill, but you're still going to make it to 20 well before they do.

Assuming they split up then they have zero kill threat. This means you're free to run around and create mismatches as you see fit. They have moderate cap strength due to speed buffs, but given a couple of snares you should be able to generate a few kills over the course of the match, giving you the head start to 20.

Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is the same one as CG is trying to push. The addition of different objective maps give you far more options to deal with shit that would otherwise buildwars you in a straight 4v4.

WeeMeeister · Mar 07, 2010, 03:55 AM // 03:55

What you should be focusing on is not monkspike - it could be easily removed with a quick nerf. The main topics here should be how Codex is boring and empty and reasons why TA should or should not be re-implemented.

P.S. - An example of an effective split on a health shrine map using monkspike can be found here:

Corporeal Ghost · Mar 08, 2010, 07:03 AM // 07:03

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with that screenshot. I can pull up some 20-5ish flawlesses running anything from Shatterstone to Enraged Smash. The people there were just awful. The real point we're digging at, though, is that a team with a monk and two and a half to three damage characters (for example, W W R Mo) has legitimate kill threats at multiple points in the map. It [shove] can either not split and attempt to generate enough kills before losing at a 3-1 shrine deficit or split and not really be able to take any shrines but still be in very real danger of taking deaths.

Apparently it goes through health shrines. They still make it more catchable, as does the fact that your monk knows exactly who it's going to be on every time unless you're for some reason 4v4ing them.

On codex being boring and dead, I honestly have no idea why people find it boring. Literally, no matter what kind of metagame you like to play in, you'll see it four or five times a week in the new rotation. Dead is another matter entirely, but it's really no worse than TA minus the RA feeder teams, or at least it wasn't maybe a month ago before I started road tripping with nothing but my PoS laptop.

edit: grammars

WeeMeeister · Mar 08, 2010, 08:39 PM // 20:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove with that screenshot. I can pull up some 20-5ish flawlesses running anything from Shatterstone to Enraged Smash. The people there were just awful. The real point we're digging at, though, is that a team with a monk and two and a half to three damage characters (for example, W W R Mo) has legitimate kill threats at multiple points in the map. It [shove] can either not split and attempt to generate enough kills before losing at a 3-1 shrine deficit or split and not really be able to take any shrines but still be in very real danger of taking deaths.

This is true if you replace heroes with actual players, but in that case you replace Ogden with a player monk with three healing skills, dark escape, dash and shadow walk. Any monk with these skills would be able to survive easily for minutes. Shove is virtually unkillable with good players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

Apparently it goes through health shrines. They still make it more catchable, as does the fact that your monk knows exactly who it's going to be on every time unless you're for some reason 4v4ing them.

So you doubleknock with grapple - hardly complicated. (I did it in most of my HB matches)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporeal Ghost

On codex being boring and dead, I honestly have no idea why people find it boring. Literally, no matter what kind of metagame you like to play in, you'll see it four or five times a week in the new rotation. Dead is another matter entirely, but it's really no worse than TA minus the RA feeder teams, or at least it wasn't maybe a month ago before I started road tripping with nothing but my PoS laptop.

It is Team Arenas with gimped bars (constant long matches), excessive setup time (15 minutes is way too long at this stage of GW) and really, really bad players. (Hi current GvG players)

- Stop arguing about shove and start arguing about why removing Codex and re-implementing TA would or would not be a good idea.

Robster Lobster · Mar 08, 2010, 09:25 PM // 21:25

What if the format was on a rotation. You could have TA, Codex and TA with HB maps that swaps around maybe every couple of days. Maybe there are some other possible formats as well that could be included if there's enough dev time, like 4v4 dodgeball or costume brawl for example. You could also scale the time that they're available based on popularity or something.

It would keep things pretty fresh, while also probably avoiding a fragmented player base. Obviously people that love a certain format are going to want to be able to play it all the time, but I'm not sure that's best for the game.

Trinity Fire Angel · Mar 10, 2010, 12:17 AM // 00:17

HB maps =

1. A/W + Mo/E + Mo/N + R/P
2. Mo/A + R/P + R/P + R/P
3. Mo/A + D/A + D/A + R/P
4. A/W + Rt/N + Mo/W + R/P
5. A/W + E/D + Mo/E + R/P

etc etc.

Only the pure Dual meld or cap builds would fall down... Except for the R/P builds. These always rock due to 1v1 surviveability. Depending on the map, nearly every one of these builds can 3v4, 3v3, 4v4, 2v2, 2v3.

Corporeal Ghost · Mar 10, 2010, 06:43 AM // 06:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

Shove is virtually unkillable with good players.

You don't have to kill them; you just need to have a kill threat so they can't individually (or even in pairs) take shrines away from you. A monk using Dash and teleports is not taking your shrine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

It is Team Arenas with gimped bars (constant long matches)

Our matches are generally shorter than TA matches. Yes, some people do run Mo Rt BSurge, but you saw that same kind of dual backline trash in TA, and those also took 8 minutes provided they weren't godawful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

excessive setup time (15 minutes is way too long at this stage of GW)

This is sad commentary in and of itself. I can't really agree with it, though. The real problem is not the setup time; it's the fact that you can set up for 15 minutes and then you play three or four matches before endless NOP's. Ultimately, this is the result of a number of failings, most of which are not inherent to the format, but have to do with declining PvP population and extremely poor implementation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

and really, really bad players.

TA, or anything else, would be the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WeeMeeister

why removing Codex and re-implementing TA would or would not be a good idea.

Because it wastes developer resources that I'd rather they were using to fix the gametypes we have. Because TA would be just as dead as Codex. Because TA would still be inherently broken unless they modified it to include a new ruleset (for example, 10% chance of HB maps). Because Codex is an inherently better format with extremely limited developer time and resources, simply because it's balanced for maybe 25% of the time. But mostly because I find it amusing that all these legions of people that were never in TA (and I'm aware that there's 5 or 6 legitimate TA players in this group) bitch and moan constantly about its removal, and have zero understanding that all of the contributing factors to why Codex is empty would be exactly the same in TA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robster Lobster

What if the format was on a rotation.

Seems good on paper. The only real limiting factor here is how much time this would take to implement. Developer time is going to be the limiting factor in pretty much any solution that isn't maintaining the status quo. And frankly, I'd rather they just fixed armor.

But if they were going to devote resources to 4v4 arenas on the overhaul level, this is one of the better ideas I've heard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trinity Fire Angel

HB metagame

The reasons those were effective in hero battles but will not be (for the most part) on the same maps with real people are many. The largest is pretty much that those all require very little player input for the hero to run competently. If you assume competent players (heh), those templates and even core strategies are just suboptimal.

Additionally, none of those builds really has more than one kill threat (the player) at any point on the map unless you leave a vulnerable target exposed to it. This was not unheard of in HB if the player was tied up doing other things and just forgot to move someone. Even the worst player understands that he is overmatched at some point and runs.

What people don't seem to understand is that what made hero battles so broken was the heroes. The builds were really not that strong; they were just the builds that allowed the players to exploit the opposing bad AI the best while allowing their own to be exploited the least. If you want something that's potentially overpowered on HB maps, it probably looks closer to 3 Seeping Wound assassins and a monk. Movement control is very important, as is the ability to actually kill people.

In order to prevent that exact kind of mess, you want to splice the two formats (TA, 4-man HB maps) together. I don't know what the optimal mix is. I suspect it's more annihilation and less capture points, as then you don't have capture point teams trying to farm glads by getting one kill and running away shove-style, and it's pretty much impossible to grief capture points with anything that's successful in annihilation.