Curse

Mister_Abc · Jun 18, 2008, 08:25 PM // 20:25

I keep seeing posts about midset... blah blah blah, organization, new players not being accepted, and all of it always comes down to one thing: Flavor of the Month builds. Yes, new players can't get into HA just because of the Flavor of the Month builds like sway that plagues the game and makes it so that the new players will always run that. That means fixing it will mean getting rid of the next sway, but every skill balance will bring in new sways, after however long.

What I suggest is having more frequent and drastic skill changes in the game. For example, once a month at a certain date, all the "in" skills should be nerfed and some other random forgotten skill brought up. Instead of the 3 or four nerfs and buffs per profession per month, I would like seeing many many more every month. For example, something along the scale of the March 6 update every month. This will keep the players innovating, and possible lead more people to try out new builds. This will also mean a sway like build won't be powerful for too long, and even if that does happen a skill update during the month can fix that. You might say that won't work well. Well, to provide an example, Wounding Strike was buffed at the beginning of March. I'm very sure it wasn't at least until April that it was started to be abused by derv spikes.

However, I don't really see how one person (Izzy) could keep up with all this, so I'm proposing a special committee from various guilds, sort of like the alpha testers, be assembled to discuss changes every month. Perhaps an IRC chat every so and then to discuss possible changes to keep the meta fresh.
Another idea is for Guild Wars to have a mass poll in effect as well. Simply have various people submit nerfs or buffs to specific skills, then outline them in a poll. Then, everyone would vote on a rating of possible 1-10, 1 being underpowered and 10 being overpowered. Then, a new changed poll will be released halfway through the month to reflect opinions and remeasure them. I'm sure this will be a great way to keep skills in check.

Thoughts or opinions?

laurana half elf · Jun 18, 2008, 08:42 PM // 20:42

stupid.

people would constantly be forced to change builds. They would never get to become any good at any of the builds and by the time they practiced enough to run it effectively it would be nerfed.

/stupidashell

supa tim · Jun 18, 2008, 08:51 PM // 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by laurana half elf

stupid.

people would constantly be forced to change builds. They would never get to become any good at any of the builds and by the time they practiced enough to run it effectively it would be nerfed.

/stupidashell

No, I think this is actually a very good idea because playing a build for more than a month gets bored anyway (at least in my case).

Although I like the idea, Anet wont put that much effort in it anyway.

Grz,

Timmeh

American Redneck · Jun 18, 2008, 08:52 PM // 20:52

I think your ideas are certainly interesting. However, I don't think either would work and this is why-

1. Guild Wars players are bastards. Using my guild as an example, we get banned about once every two weeks (giver or take) because another player (and his friends) hates three of our guildies. Why do I say this? Because if the second of your systems was put in place, then skills we like to use would be spammed on by them and any other guild that hates us (the list is a long one). The same would apply to any other guild that wins halls even a small amount of the time and has gained enemies (Gank, Visa, IYF, ect.)

2. Guild Wars players are hypocrites and sore losers. In the second system, everyone would attack any build that could beat their personal favorite until skills nerfs became absurd. In other words, in three or four months, every skill would be reduced to no effect other than doing +10 damage against a hexed, conditioned, and enchanted foe.

3. Politics. If the first of your systems was put into place, then corruption would explode. Some people would obey the rules, but I suspect that bribes would be going on from the moment that it was set in place. Certainly political parties would evolve and, amusing as that is, it just wouldn't make the game any better.

4. Define various guilds. Obviously every guild can't have a vote, so how would that work?

Of the two, I like the first more and personally believe it could have potential. However, it would take more work and a much more detailed system (which you may have already). Those are my thoughts.

Rakim B · Jun 18, 2008, 09:12 PM // 21:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by laurana half elf

stupid.

people would constantly be forced to change builds. They would never get to become any good at any of the builds and by the time they practiced enough to run it effectively it would be nerfed.

/stupidashell

Troll Moar and GTFO.

@alpha, it would probably save HA from the current state of staleness but instead of every month probably lengthen to about 3-4 or maybe 6 months.

There will always be a FoTM build that every will use and every will complain about, probably will they are currently using it. This cannot be stopped, it is better to embrace this idea, which your current system does.

it won't solve complaining though, people will agree with this post and still complain about it - sort of like what I did

Motoko Kusanagi War · Jun 18, 2008, 09:42 PM // 21:42

It's not a bad idea to have a committee to do such thing, but here are some pointers that you would need to understand.

ANET is not concerned with this game nearly as much as it is preparing GW2.
Also, this "committee" would be comprised of top pvpers. People who run the show, that is something "no ranks" and "underskilled" players would need to come to terms with.

itsvictor · Jun 18, 2008, 09:55 PM // 21:55

I always wanted to go with the idea: let's have a lot of fotm's that people(most likely lower ranked) can run(zergiway,etc). It'd be rock-paper-scissors with fotm builds and not like paper-paper like it is now (sway). TBH I think your idea is unrealistic with the frequency of their balance updates already(and how lackluster they are) and the amount of time drastic overhauls take.

Teh Jace · Jun 18, 2008, 10:16 PM // 22:16

This can't work cuz of obvious reasons alrdy mentioned.
Also how to decide who is a top pvp player? Is champ5, hero11 bspiker who can't even weap swap a top player?
Is r12 rspiker a top player?

Just kick izzy. Izzy is a guy who thinks R/D are fun to play and they are interresting. Also he's a guy who listens to retarded wammos on his wiki talkpage. Yes on that wiki maintained by pve ppl.

All we need is a guy with brain who is able to make often and interresting skill updates.

Mister_Abc · Jun 18, 2008, 10:20 PM // 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by American Redneck

I think your ideas are certainly interesting. However, I don't think either would work and this is why-

1. Guild Wars players are bastards. Using my guild as an example, we get banned about once every two weeks (giver or take) because another player (and his friends) hates three of our guildies. Why do I say this? Because if the second of your systems was put in place, then skills we like to use would be spammed on by them and any other guild that hates us (the list is a long one). The same would apply to any other guild that wins halls even a small amount of the time and has gained enemies (Gank, Visa, IYF, ect.)

2. Guild Wars players are hypocrites and sore losers. In the second system, everyone would attack any build that could beat their personal favorite until skills nerfs became absurd. In other words, in three or four months, every skill would be reduced to no effect other than doing +10 damage against a hexed, conditioned, and enchanted foe.

3. Politics. If the first of your systems was put into place, then corruption would explode. Some people would obey the rules, but I suspect that bribes would be going on from the moment that it was set in place. Certainly political parties would evolve and, amusing as that is, it just wouldn't make the game any better.

4. Define various guilds. Obviously every guild can't have a vote, so how would that work?

Of the two, I like the first more and personally believe it could have potential. However, it would take more work and a much more detailed system (which you may have already). Those are my thoughts.

1. The thing is, a single guild won't be enough to make a large impact. Also, if the majority of the GW community wants to gang up on a single build, that'd probably mean that build is already overpowered and need fixing.

2. ANet would still control what happens, it's just that the suggestion box is opened to a more general community on a easy way. Look at the threads in Guru, most of the time they're so messed up you can't really get what the general population is saying without reading every single post where the info that you already have is repeated many times over. I probably didn't stress this enough, but ANet MUST present some more random buffs to make, because we all know all we're gonna do is nerf :P Maybe 2 or 3 skills from each profession is enough to keep the balance.

3 and 4. The other thing is, the skills balance isn't meant to be perfect or anything. If anything, it's meant to be imperfect so that the meta changed very often. I would much rather see some more community oriented guilds be represented then top level PvPers with a lot of competition.

Motoko Kusanagi War · Jun 19, 2008, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Jace

This can't work cuz of obvious reasons alrdy mentioned.
Also how to decide who is a top pvp player? Is champ5, hero11 bspiker who can't even weap swap a top player?
Is r12 rspiker a top player?

Just kick izzy. Izzy is a guy who thinks R/D are fun to play and they are interresting. Also he's a guy who listens to retarded wammos on his wiki talkpage. Yes on that wiki maintained by pve ppl.

All we need is a guy with brain who is able to make often and interresting skill updates.

No, title means nothing. People who have the connections with Izzy are usually the best people for the job. Players from rawr and dR are good examples of people who would do the best to have a balanced meta.

"They would just make skills more preferable for their style!!"

Fortunately, these players are at the top of the game, they don't need that to have an edge over other players. Thats why you would leave it to top pvpers. Oh, and if you even consider an HA-er as a top pvper, gtfo.

Golden Rice · Jun 19, 2008, 08:29 AM // 08:29

HA is lacking imagination, noone is down for making new builds, you need to taste the rainbow

Teh Jace · Jun 19, 2008, 09:23 AM // 09:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motoko Kusanagi War

Oh, and if you even consider an HA-er as a top pvper, gtfo.

Many noob guilds have silver cape now so what's the difference?
And I don't rly think gvg ppl should balance skills for HA.

deya · Jun 19, 2008, 09:38 AM // 09:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Jace

This can't work cuz of obvious reasons alrdy mentioned.
Also how to decide who is a top pvp player? Is champ5, hero11 bspiker who can't even weap swap a top player?
Is r12 rspiker a top player?

Just kick izzy. Izzy is a guy who thinks R/D are fun to play and they are interresting. Also he's a guy who listens to retarded wammos on his wiki talkpage. Yes on that wiki maintained by pve ppl.

All we need is a guy with brain who is able to make often and interresting skill updates.

You really shouldn't talk about something you know nothing about.

Teh Jace · Jun 19, 2008, 09:49 AM // 09:49

too bad I know

pah01 · Jun 19, 2008, 10:54 AM // 10:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by deya

You really shouldn't talk about something you know nothing about.

I think this really destroys a bunch of fun and interesting builds, the Thumper, Pack hunters, and Escape guys are interest builds and one of the few ways that rangers are seeing play. Izzy

--- Here http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User:...e/game_balance

Izzy does indeed suck.

Frank Dudenstein · Jun 19, 2008, 05:33 PM // 17:33

Wow, what a fundamental misunderstanding of what ails HA.

Here is the problem with HA, in a nutshell:

In GuildWars, good experienced players are an order of magnitude better than new players.. They aren't a little bit better. They are WAY WAY better. Meaning that, all things being equal, an experienced team will steamroll a new team every time.

This isn't a problem in GvG (or HB) because of the rating-match system. But HA, being an unseeded "one and done" tournament format, suffers greatly. In the early days of GuildWars, when eveyone was close to the same skill level ... the problem wasn't immediately obvious. But now that the veteran community has three years of skill under their belt, the barrier to new players is tremendous.

Ironically, overpowered easy-pug-able builds like Sway and Iway are the only thing that saves HA - at least new players can get some wins, learn the maps, and not be totally discouraged. If they were forced to run Warriors and Mesmers it would take 6 months before a new player ever got past underworld. No one would stick around for that - HA would've become TA two years ago.

Teh Jace · Jun 19, 2008, 07:08 PM // 19:08

Ofc learning curve of this game is insane. It takes months to train a good pvp player and considering newbs are getting smashed by pro teams very often it's even worse.
But once u reach a high rank this game becomes very competitive and fun.
Also problem is many ppl who came from WoW and similar simple games just can't adapt but maybe they like shiny emotes so they are willing to spend tons of hrs with boring sway.

Tearz1993 · Jun 19, 2008, 07:53 PM // 19:53

imo they should add something to the tournament agent and everyone sets a skill they want nerfed and a skill they want buffed every like 15 days. That way anet can see what most players see as a problem and what people want to see get more playability.Ultimately it would be izzy's choice but at least we could have proof that people DO want certain skills nerfed *cough* strength and honor *cough*

Grugio · Jun 19, 2008, 08:10 PM // 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motoko Kusanagi War

Unfortunately skill balances have never centered around HA. It has always been gvg that is the main concern. Therefor people with the gvg experience will be the most viable candidates for skill balances.

/shoo

I think picking the comitee itself would be a joke. I think that in no way I should be on it, but there will be some egotistical r150 GvGer who thinks he is the hottest thing since sliced bread, who will be trolling around and spamming about how ArenaNet is a hater, and he should be on it.

I think the suggestion box would fail as people who have no idea what they're talking about would be sending in an email about the overpoweredness of any build they lose to.

Anyways, it doesn't really matter what any of us think, as ArenaNet wants our money for Guild Wars 2, not our opinions, whatever their worth may be.

Killed u man · Jun 19, 2008, 10:16 PM // 22:16

As much as I respect JR and Divine, I'dd rather see myself on the dictating chair than them. They have amazing insight in PvP in overal, and they also know HA, BUT they don't even HA enough to realize what is in need of fixing.

HA needs much more than some "sway" nerfs. Those are face-lifts, that will keep it going for another few months orso, and that's it...

But then again, WHY would Anet care about HA, right? I mean, only the largest part of PvP (Yes, they are swayers who only want their Tiger, but they're still in PvP) is located within the districts of HA.

What I find most sad about all this, is that today, I actually opened my Runescape browser (Yes, I admit, I used to play it 2.5 years ago) to see what was going on...
THAT'S how bad it has become... It's not even the fact that Runescape is a better game (My opinion atm is that it DOES outclass GW in every way, except graphics), but rather the fact that Jagex (Developers, like Anet) actually cares about the people who play their game... ZoMG, ATTENTION FROM THE DEVELOPERS, OMG!!!!!

HA needs an update, bottom line... It's Free to Play, well that's fine, BUT when Anet promoted their, I'm pretty sure they didn't claim this:

"Guild Wars, NO MONTHLY FEE's, NO UPDATES AFTER A YEAR AND YOU CAN GO FCUK YOURSELVES AFTER 3 YEARS, CUZ WE COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOU!"

Imo, it's time Anet starts doing stuff, because if it were up to me (and Thank God it isn't right, because people might be having fun whilst play GW), I would prevent anyone from buying GW2, untill they provided a loyal service to the GW1 community...
Question this:
It took Anet 1 year to say "f u" to the HA community (pretty much when they 8v8 -> 6v6), GvG community has been left abandoned for quite some while aswell, unless you can call these so called updates "active" and "well taught off".
HOW LONG will it be in GW2? A year? Less? An extra year?
I'dd rather pay a monthly fee, knowing I get quality, rather than a 1 time payment, knowing I will get neither quality nor quantity...