Curse

Burton2000 · Aug 10, 2008, 10:14 AM // 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by erk

What about some simple formula like your Guild Lord receives +200 health for each of your NPC that are still alive?

That would give a clear objective to kill the enemy NPC's with a split.

But extra health on a guild lord isnt an incentive to kill npcs or save them.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Aug 10, 2008, 02:23 PM // 14:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by lutz

It's the fact that you're forced into an 8v8 at 18-20 with no pre-vod splitting differences taking effect.
Yeah.

The biggest problem I have with this VoD is the 28 minute tiebreaker, damage done to the lord is a pretty stupid tiebreaker cause it basically encourages you to attack the lord over actual players from 20 minutes forward.

NPCs lost most of their value and as such so did splitting into the other team's base, I think the best fix for this would be to drastically reduce the amount of NPCs so bases are more pushable and the lord can actually be threatened pre-walk. Of course this means that a defensive 8v8 team can choose just to camp their base till the lord walks and bank on superior 8v8 power.

I haven't really made my mind up about wether the lords walking AT ALL is a good idea, I'm leaning towards not having them walk to maintain splitting as a viable strategy, but the 28 minute tiebreaker will have to change.

lutz · Aug 10, 2008, 07:38 PM // 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

The biggest problem I have with this VoD is the 28 minute tiebreaker, damage done to the lord is a pretty stupid tiebreaker cause it basically encourages you to attack the lord over actual players from 20 minutes forward.

NPCs lost most of their value and as such so did splitting into the other team's base, I think the best fix for this would be to drastically reduce the amount of NPCs so bases are more pushable and the lord can actually be threatened pre-walk. Of course this means that a defensive 8v8 team can choose just to camp their base till the lord walks and bank on superior 8v8 power.

I haven't really made my mind up about wether the lords walking AT ALL is a good idea, I'm leaning towards not having them walk to maintain splitting as a viable strategy, but the 28 minute tiebreaker will have to change.

NPC value and boost value are certainly too worthless at this point in the game, where you are forced in to 8v8s at 20 minutes. Boosts need to give you more of an advantage as you get more of them, such as % damage on the other team or on the other Guild Lord. 300 health to your Guild Lord really does nothing as it doesn't prevent any damage to help you for the 28 minute tiebreaker. Overall, I think consecutive boosts need to be rewarded with more advantages and NPCs need to give more advantages to make the flag stand fight and the NPC base fight both extremely important.

I do believe that one team with all their NPCs wiped compared to a team with all their NPCs still alive and consecutive boosts throughout the game should be taking 50% more damage from the other team, as an entire base wiped would be counted as a massive disadvantage in the old VoD meta. NPCs should grant a total of 50% more damage if all are wiped (scaling for how many NPCs are on a map; I don't want to give a fixed percentage because of maps like Corrupted with 16 NPCs) and boosts giving 1% damage boost per consecutive boost, multiplying by 2 every time. (for example, you get 0% damage first boost, 1% damage second boost, 2% damage third, 4% fourth, 8% fifth, and so on.) This clearly discourages turtling until VoD and encourages NPC and flag stand control to win.

IMMORTAlMITCH · Aug 10, 2008, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by lutz

NPCs should grant a total of 50% more damage if all are wiped

No RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing way, 50% damage increase is completely retarded even if both teams have it. I think damage increases are a very poor way to reward NPC kills and boosts unless they are very very moderate (like up to 10% maybe) I'd much rather see NPC kills affecting morale/team status somehow and have that be the tiebreaker at 28 minutes.

Damage increases will only lead to omega spikes.

Riotgear · Aug 10, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

Is the end-game victory based on how much sustained damage the Lord has taken, or how much health he currently has?

HackingHippie712 · Aug 10, 2008, 10:42 PM // 22:42

A few pretty good ideas here maybe something like this

Morale boost every 2 min for whoever holds stand, plus -x% dmg reduction to npc's for each CONSECUTIVE boost(to prevent turtling) ends once other team boosts(or caps?)
2% dmg increase per npc killed (caps at X percent)(perhaps only 1%)
VoD Occurs at 20 minutes(X% Dmg boost to both teams, ench/stances last X% shorter?) not quite sold on the ench/stand thing, but that would stop passive defensive bs
Either none of the npcs walk(including lord) or the chamber walks
Lord Chamber NPC's consist of:
2 BG
[Oath of healing][immolate][fireball][Mind Burn]
2 Knights
2 Archers
1 Lord
(if this would make chamber too crowded, even though its only adding a bg, could drop the 2 archers)

tnyp · Aug 10, 2008, 11:06 PM // 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by IMMORTAlMITCH

No RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing way, 50% damage increase is completely retarded even if both teams have it. I think damage increases are a very poor way to reward NPC kills and boosts unless they are very very moderate (like up to 10% maybe) I'd much rather see NPC kills affecting morale/team status somehow and have that be the tiebreaker at 28 minutes.

Damage increases will only lead to omega spikes.

I agree, damage boost against the other team only lead to forteresseway that can only kill with the boost.
But damage boost/reduction against the lord only could be good imo

Expending on the tread's original idea:

Each moral boost gives +5% dmg against the lord (max 40%)
Each npc killed gives the other team a dmg reduction (something around -3%, minimum -40%) against the lord

That way if a 8v8 team turtles around the lord against a split team, they will have a big disadventage at VoD

What do you think?

erk · Aug 10, 2008, 11:23 PM // 23:23

What about something like for each of your NPC's killed, your team looses 5% morale effectively creating a DP that you team has to wear off by way of getting morale boosts at the flag stand?

That should make both flags and NPC killing/protecting important.

Lodurr · Aug 10, 2008, 11:38 PM // 23:38

Why introduce weird systems of +% damage for NPCs killed? Why not have them walk like they used to? All of these solutions seek to emulate what was already in place, only less elegantly, and make VoD less exciting than it was.

I know there were problems with VoD before, but this isn't a fix, it's just throwing the whole thing out. GvG is missing a whole dimension now. It's like football without a quarterback, just linemen that push against each other until one falls over.

lutz · Aug 11, 2008, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lodurr

Why introduce weird systems of +% damage for NPCs killed? Why not have them walk like they used to? All of these solutions seek to emulate what was already in place, only less elegantly, and make VoD less exciting than it was.

I know there were problems with VoD before, but this isn't a fix, it's just throwing the whole thing out. GvG is missing a whole dimension now. It's like football without a quarterback, just linemen that push against each other until one falls over.

Because then it makes VoD a farming run. Whoever farms better wins.

To be honest, you take out VoD/walking altogether and make all NPCs respawn at 18 minutes. At 28 minutes the team with the most NPC kills + morale combination wins.

DutchSmurf · Aug 11, 2008, 11:30 AM // 11:30

There should have never been npcs in a PvP game anyway. This is a step in the right direction, making them far less important. Problem is that splitting became completely worthless with that. I wouldn't introduce any systems that have an effect when you kill a npc. Honestly, I would just remove most of the archers for sure. The less AI in a PvP game, the better it is. Said it before, will say it again, 2 archers, 2 knights and 1 bodyguard is, combined with the amulet, more then enough to protect against early ganks. Place the 2 archers inside the base, overlooking the gates/entrances. 2 knights at the way(s) to the lord, bodyguard where he is now. Any other npcs are not needed.

FoxBat · Aug 11, 2008, 06:15 PM // 18:15

Is the GL being basically invincible until 4 even a good thing? Would the game be so awful if #8 waited in base to bring the 2nd flag while watching to see where the enemy was going?

Snow Bunny · Aug 11, 2008, 06:22 PM // 18:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

Is the end-game victory based on how much sustained damage the Lord has taken, or how much health he currently has?

That's exactly what I've been wondering.

If it's how much health he currently has, then fortress-way should work. Aura of Faith ftwwwwwww

If it's how much damage he's taken, then that's very different.

DarkNecrid · Aug 11, 2008, 06:41 PM // 18:41

It specifically says if you read the update notes:
"The final, 28-minute tie-breaker is determined by the team that did the most damage to the enemy Guild Lord. This tie-breaker is now effective in all GvG matches. "

DutchSmurf · Aug 11, 2008, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat

Is the GL being basically invincible until 4 even a good thing? Would the game be so awful if #8 waited in base to bring the 2nd flag while watching to see where the enemy was going?

Not sure tho. At 25dps, it takes 67.2 seconds to kill the lord. But by the time you manage to get there and killed the bodyguard, you are already around 3 minutes into the match. At which point you are already at 34dps, meaning 48 seconds. Might be about right, less then that only invites full men ganks, which isn't what we want either.

Aera · Aug 11, 2008, 11:01 PM // 23:01

Ok what about this:

For every NPC you kill, one of yours will walk with the lord.

If he's already at the stand, the acher/knight will start walking as soon as an NPC has died.

This way, when you've killed 3 of their archers and the lord walks, you will have the lord + archers on the stand. They will then either die or, with a higher probability, kill your achers. Their archers will then also walk, so you kill theirs and this keeps going till you're out of NPCs, or the match ends.

This way splitting does still give you quite a big advantage in VoD and the NPCs will actually have a purpose. Especially killing the bodyguard because you have free heals on the lord.

Comments/thoughts?

tnyp · Aug 12, 2008, 12:46 AM // 00:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aera

Ok what about this:

For every NPC you kill, one of yours will walk with the lord.

If he's already at the stand, the acher/knight will start walking as soon as an NPC has died.

This way, when you've killed 3 of their archers and the lord walks, you will have the lord + archers on the stand. They will then either die or, with a higher probability, kill your achers. Their archers will then also walk, so you kill theirs and this keeps going till you're out of NPCs, or the match ends.

This way splitting does still give you quite a big advantage in VoD and the NPCs will actually have a purpose. Especially killing the bodyguard because you have free heals on the lord.

Comments/thoughts?

I like the idea. And I gess without the VoD damage buff, forteresseway are out the picture so it could work.

Daenara · Aug 12, 2008, 01:09 AM // 01:09

8v8 for 20 minutes is boring to watch... I haven't seen any matches on obs lately that don't involve 8v8 at flagstand. Even glad aren't splitting!

erk · Aug 12, 2008, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by DutchSmurf

There should have never been npcs in a PvP game anyway. This is a step in the right direction, making them far less important. Problem is that splitting became completely worthless with that. I wouldn't introduce any systems that have an effect when you kill a npc. Honestly, I would just remove most of the archers for sure. The less AI in a PvP game, the better it is. Said it before, will say it again, 2 archers, 2 knights and 1 bodyguard is, combined with the amulet, more then enough to protect against early ganks. Place the 2 archers inside the base, overlooking the gates/entrances. 2 knights at the way(s) to the lord, bodyguard where he is now. Any other npcs are not needed.

Last weeks reduction in NPC importance has made GvG already into an 8v8 slug fest. In fact HA now has more variation. There can't be any real early ganks as the Guild Lord is too hard to kill before about the 4min mark. Flag running is pretty pointless unless it's to recharge sigs. Many teams are not capping the flag stand until several minutes into the game. The runner is usually just participating in the 8v8 still holding the flag. Some guilds have started using dual Paragon midline just to gain a little more damage on the GL at the 20min beat up.

I don't thing the 8v8 slug fest meta is going to last very long. I see A.net altering it again pretty soon from boredom.

I Angra I · Aug 12, 2008, 03:36 AM // 03:36

The problem with putting focus on/taking away focus from NPCs is that unless you have a perfect balance, it's either going to make them pointless to gank, or required to gank. Both situations have happened with various changes, and neither are very good.

I've always liked the idea of giving 2% morale per npc killed or something of that nature, and then having all of that morale plus flag morale somehow affect the end of the game tiebreaker if neither team wins.

The idea that someone had of reducing the huge number of archers and making guild lords more susceptible to actually dying from a split sounds like it may work also.