Curse

elektra_lucia · Dec 31, 2007, 09:46 PM // 21:46

About the 1v1 that was mentioned... Well, 'killed u man' clearly likes to write a lot of garbage. I always like when someone tries to prove another of being less-than-intelligent mean while putting more errors into their post than there are in windows ME; however, he did speak some sense!

Quote:

Kyp, don't even try to explain to these guys. It's always the same bs here on guru Instead of first investigating, actually observing several times, mayby even using your brain for once, people still prefer to randomly post here, trying to proof you wrong, with their once-in-HoH-experience.

If you edit out the mistakes, and change 'Kyp' to 'Lorekeeper'. It's some what of a come back to 'killed u man's' argument, I mean after all even though HA is not that active do you really get 1v1 relic runs that often?

I don't think so

.

I also agree that the holding team should have an advantage. I think it would be more of an advantage if the first to get a relic wins too, I mean if the scores were 20-20-20 and first to have got 20... Not only would it be more of an advantage (and perhaps more logical) I think it would be more balanced.

Killed u man · Jan 01, 2008, 08:44 PM // 20:44

1 on 1 relic run is never a certain win for blue team... in fact... given the fact that blue team is positioned squarely in between red and yellow... meaning the distance from red to blue and yellow to blue is smaller than the distance between red and yellow and yellow to red...

Ye, ye, trolling whatever, daily checking forums is now concidered trolling

And seriously, do I really need to teach you math?

1+1=2

So that means, Lore, if there is 2 teams playing, there CAN'T be a BLUE, RED AND YELLOW! (OMG, I know it's hard for you to understand)
So that sentence made totally no sence, concidering you gave a 1v1 scenario to start with.

Advantage is FINE, Blue SHOULD have some advantage, but then again, you need to learn to read.
Having advantage is one thing, having a guaranteed win is another.

You seem to fail at grasping the idea of the 3 man bodyblock? You obviously haven't even tried observing a game.

Now, please, explain me, HOW are you going to run relics, when you CAN'T get to the relic in the first place? My point is that you CAN'T fully bodyblock blue relic at spawnpoint, but you can with Reds/Yellows. So this means that in a 1v1 scenario, assuming we have non-retarded people playing, blue will ALWAYS win, even if, in those 8 long minutes, they can only run 4 relics (2Min/relic seems fair, seeing the first 2 are pretty much free), they won.

I do NOT understand why U can't simply admit that this is broken?

as for YOUR "publicy humilation":

1) i said blue team enjoys a slight advantage on relic runs
"Slight"? Guaranteed Win on 1v1, 3-Way, well it all depends on who cap cap last. Which still is retarded, but I never said anything about it.

2) i said this advantage is countered by the ease at which blue team can get snared by red and yellow.
Once again, I NEVER mentioned 3way HoH, I was referring to the 1v1 scenario's, whereas a 1v1 shouldn't mean guaranteed win for blue.

3) the advantage is also negligible because of the last to cap mechanic i never said it was a major advantage... stop falsely representing my arguments! READ->UNDERSTAND->RESPOND
I never said anything about "capping last was a major advantage", It's a major disadvantage for people that are trying to win through "skill", not a random last-cap-luck-scenario.

4) you cant criticise an HoH mechanic because of what happens in 1vs1 situations. ANY mechanic fought in a 1vs1 situation should be an automatic win for blue because they are holding and thus have a slight head start at the beginning of the match. In a 1vs1 situation it is almost impossible for the invading team to make up for this slight advantage. Its not a huge advantage but the effort required to catchup is huge. In relic runs blue team starts off holding 2 altars... in relic run they start off with 1 relic capped much sooner... in altar holding they start with 1 point much sooner and benefit from already having capped the altar and enjoy the auto rez. Theyre not meant to be balanced in 1vs1 match ups... stop arguing like they are meant to be.
What you are saying now, is that in the possible 1v1 scenario, blue should ALWAYS WIN, direct quote: "ANY mechanic fought in a 1vs1 situation should be an automatic win for blue" And you are trying to contribute to this site, by making statements like these? xD IF it is a guaranteed win for blue, WHY even have the fight than? Why not just SKIP the match, and give blue the free fame + items? That is what you are saying right now, FREE FAME AND ITEMS for people who get 1v1, so you want to promote playing at dead-hours?

5) in old school altar holding blue team never had a really strong advantage apart from the fact they started the match with the altar capped.
Gues, what, more than 60% Liked Old-school holding more (Look at the poll, look at all the posts after the removal of Old-school holding) And in old-school holding, NOONE had a real advantage. If blue was Hyper-Defensive, they could try and hold since the beginning. If they were pressure/Balanced, they could let other team kill ghostly/cap and then pressure out and recap... They could also collapse as the blue team (Seeing both teams were hitting on blue in the beginning) and get dp'ed out, disabling them from recapping...
I gues what I'm saying here is you couldn't really tell what was going to happen, there was no advantage/disadvantage, seeing ANY team could cap at 0.000001 seconds till end...

6) in old school altar holding teams didnt have any mechanics to abuse that were in-built in the altar holding mechanic itself... they just ran builds that were designed to survive a couple of minutes of intense pressure.
Yes, I won't disagree on that one, there were some of these builds. But that wasn't because of old-school holding. It was cuz of poor skill balancing. By the way, stop making it sound like other builds didn't have a chance at ALL to win. A good balanced could cut through the defence, and pull of a spike on the ghostly... There was ENOUGH IWAY-holding (Which IS NOT hyper-defensive), or Sandstorm-Spike (Which held through high-pressure on the ghost pre-SoA) or even GOOD-Balanced teams, who could hold through taking out key-players on enemy team (SoMW: Just look for the rend = no spike, etc...) Old-School holding was more balanced out than HA is now, you saw more builds, people like it more, yet you keep claiming current HoH is better...

7) i never argued against altar holding because it gave blue team the advantage, because it never did.
"they just ran builds that were designed to survive a couple of minutes of intense pressure." = direct quote, aren't you here saying that blue DID have the advantage of having a hyper-defensive build, preventing them from loosing?
That aside, I agree on your quote, about the blue NOT having an advantage, because they didn't, they had a MAJOR advantage, and a MAJOR disadvantage, evening eachother out. Advantage: They started with the altar, so it is up to BLUE to decide if they will try and hold it till the end, or let someone else cap. Disadvantage: Even if they decide either of those, they could end being the first team getting hit on (If neither team decides to cap yet, untill 2.00), and end up being the dp'ed out team...

8) i dont want to repeat my arguments against altar holding. If your memory or reading comprehension is that bad i suggest you go repeat primary school english lessons and re-read my MANY posts where i explain extremely clearly... repeatedly the reasons why i dislike altar holding.
The ONLY reason I can recall is Hyper-defensive builds. One dimensional builds, focused on packing as MUCH DEFENCE as possible. There is not a single other valid reason against this (Interrupt Wars was about skill, whoever could find the key-players faster one, putting up pre-songs, etc)
And as you said it yourself, Blue DIDN'T have an advantage, so I don't understand how hyper-defensive builds was a mechanic problem (But rather a skill balance one)

9) my arguments against altar holding rarely involved any mention of the difficulty of fighting vs a holding blue team or any mention of any advantages or disadvantages involved in the 3 way match.

Hmm, WHAT did your arguments involve than? The ONLY differences between old school, and now, is that with old school, you had to pack a basic defence, and then you were pretty much free on skill options. Whilst now, after pakcing your dual-fire eles, your snare, you para-defence, your mesmer, your warrior/derv caller, your 2-3 monk back line, you realize you don't have any room for anything else..

/endofftopic

"active do you really get 1v1 relic runs that often? "
Yeah, That's why I ONLY see it about 3-5 times a day. (That isn't much, really o.0) I mean, WHY even fix HA, seeig only .1 percent of GW only plays it.

It's not because something doesn't occure often, it doesn't need a fix.

IF 1/1000 GvG's is flawed, ending up in a auto-win for a team after 20 seconds (No matter what), doesn't mean it doesn't need a fix. Because gues what, it does.

Same for RR in HoH, it doesn't occure often, but it needs to be fixed, very simply: Widen the bridge...

Lorekeeper · Jan 01, 2008, 10:21 PM // 22:21

im really not going to engage in discussion about HoH maps when they are 1vs1. They are not balanced around 1vs1 encounters.

and just to reiterate my position on the 3 way relic run... theres no need to take away the advantage blue starts with because red and yellow should be good enough to negate this advantage if needs be. There are much better mechanic changes that can be done to make relic run HoH better.

as for 3 man body blocking the narrow path to the relic?

well in a 3 way fight this shouldnt be a problem for you to deal with... and if you are basing all your supporting arguments from your observing experiences... well... enough said i think.

and like i said im not going to discuss HoH 1vs1 matches... thats an entirely different issue altogether.

you cant complain about specific HoH game mechanics because you dont like the fact that there arent enough teams playing HA anymore to fill out the 3 way matchup needed for them to be played optimally.

its the lack of activity that needs to be fixed first. Assuming 1vs1 matches even occur that often in peak times... of course they will occur at offpeak times but there is nothing that Anet can do to force people to stop sleeping and play the game 24/7.

elektra_lucia · Jan 01, 2008, 10:35 PM // 22:35

killed u man -

I see that just because something may not happen often, it does not mean the problem should not be fixed; however, I don't see how you can argue it is broken with a 1v1 situation. The game is built for 3v3 in that map...

You can argue UW is broken with only one team and no enemy to face...

Quote:

And seriously, do I really need to teach you math?

1+1=2

Exactly.

1+1+1 = 3.

Three teams.

Red + Blue + Yellow.

1 + 1 + 1 = 3.

Quote:

5) in old school altar holding blue team never had a really strong advantage apart from the fact they started the match with the altar capped.
Gues, what, more than 60% Liked Old-school holding more (Look at the poll, look at all the posts after the removal of Old-school holding) And in old-school holding, NOONE had a real advantage. If blue was Hyper-Defensive, they could try and hold since the beginning. If they were pressure/Balanced, they could let other team kill ghostly/cap and then pressure out and recap... They could also collapse as the blue team (Seeing both teams were hitting on blue in the beginning) and get dp'ed out, disabling them from recapping...
I gues what I'm saying here is you couldn't really tell what was going to happen, there was no advantage/disadvantage, seeing ANY team could cap at 0.000001 seconds till end...

Skills have changed a lot since then and also I think King of the hill is a lot better for the current amount of damage received and healing given.

Quote:

What you are saying now, is that in the possible 1v1 scenario, blue should ALWAYS WIN, direct quote: "ANY mechanic fought in a 1vs1 situation should be an automatic win for blue" And you are trying to contribute to this site, by making statements like these? xD IF it is a guaranteed win for blue, WHY even have the fight than? Why not just SKIP the match, and give blue the free fame + items? That is what you are saying right now, FREE FAME AND ITEMS for people who get 1v1, so you want to promote playing at dead-hours?

1 + 1 + 1 = 3.

Red + Blue = 2.
1 + 1 = 2.

You could fix it by simply saying... Until there are two other teams to face, have one wait in vault. Perfectly viable, would stop 1v1 fights =).

Kyp Jade · Jan 01, 2008, 11:11 PM // 23:11

@ lorekeeper, it is indeed a problem in the three way, since only the last minute really matters, if you set things up properly before then, you only have to crush one team. and 1 minute is easy enough for 3 people from your team to rush thier relic.

Lorekeeper · Jan 01, 2008, 11:41 PM // 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kyp Jade

@ lorekeeper, it is indeed a problem in the three way, since only the last minute really matters, if you set things up properly before then, you only have to crush one team. and 1 minute is easy enough for 3 people from your team to rush thier relic.

this would involve the following

1) keeping equal with other teams throughout the match (quite easy)
2) with 2-3 minutes to go... taking 1 team out of the game by snaring them completely.
3) with 1 minute to go... going to 3 man block the last remaining team that can possible win.

alternatively

4) with 1 min to go with equal scores send 3 blockers to red and 3 blockers to yellow (this wont work)

possible outcomes that could make the above plan fall apart

1) if i am on red team and blue team comes to snare my runners with 2-3 minutes to go... clearly attempting ganking me out of the game... im going to send my whole team to make sure they cant run a relic either... and so yellow is free to win the game. Gank me and i will gank you back. So for your sake i hope you take out yellow team and leave me as the last team in contention.

2) if i am on red team and blue team comes to snare myrunners with 2-3 minutes to go... what is yellow team doing? If they are any good they would be going off to snare blues runner. Since blue team has sent 2-3 people to snare red... they only have 5-6 to defend against yellow.

3) if i am on yellow team and i see blue team ganking red team out of the game 2-3 minutes before the game ends i should be well aware that they are doing so in order to leave only my team in contention for the match. In which case i will do everything in my power to slow down blue team relics so even if they do manage to stop my runners i might still win.

4) if i am on red team and blue team has managed to slow me down enough so that i have no way of winning AND i see blue team doing their best to snare yellows relic runners... depending on whether i have any friends on blue or yellow i am either going to help them snare yellow or disrupt by any means possible their snaring attempts... which might include killing their snarers and/or their relic runners.

you guys are grossly overstating a very minor problem, in all honesty if a team loses because they let someone 3man block their relic area i kinda suspect they arent good enough to claim a win in HoH anyway. If all it is you are complaining about is the fact that its too easy to gank someone out of the game... then i dont know what to say... in any three way game mode it is extremely easy to deliberately force a team out of the game. Its the fault of three way battles nothing else.

in all honesty the only problems with relic run mechanics in HoH is the three way system and the last to cap system.

Kyp Jade · Jan 01, 2008, 11:53 PM // 23:53

'Letting' someone three man block u? It happens, and you cannot quite prevent it with the people you have back to keep your runners clean. Yes wedging works but to do that u get pushed against the bridge wall, and then ur locked against the wall where u cant get wedged out. The way to deal with this is to call back your blockers and start to kill, but the important thing in a relic run is time. You just lost a LOT of time. (both snaring time and running time). Also, since there is only 1 minute remaining, you have no time.

It is not a big problem now because many builds simply do not have the setup to be able to split three people away. It only happens in ganks currently (or the 1v1 explained below), however if it does become a problem I will be fitting an extra snare somewhere to slow down the people that come thru the hallway to block the relic.

in a 1v1 relic run, the blue team if they can will start pushing at the red teams relic. sending 3-5 people there. If red has aoe they can get out of block fairly quick, if red doesnt have aoe, then they have to recall snare'ers to help kill. losing time, losing the match. GG

Lorekeeper · Jan 02, 2008, 12:05 AM // 00:05

alot of builds have 3 characters capable of splitting off in this manner... the reason why people dont do it is because it requires a difficult sequence of preparations like what i listed above...

you can only safely 3 man block vs 1 team. In a three way match you must force 1 team out of the game first and then 3 man block the third team.

People dont do this often because more often than not it backfires because... gank one team out of the game early and you will start to make alot of enemies in HA fast. It might be a perfectly understandable tactic... but being on the receiving end of a gank naturally causes anger and hatred.

i really dont think its worth discussing HoH mechanics in 1vs1 situations... those arent meant to ever happen. If they do... its pretty clear that blue team has a large advantage. But thats what happens when you balance gamemodes in relation to 1 particular set of variables and are forced to see what happens when the gamemodes are being played with a different set of variables... imbalances will occur.

Killed u man · Jan 02, 2008, 01:03 AM // 01:03

Besides the TOTAL IGNORANCE of some people posting in this thread, ALL I ever ment to proof (Which I did) is that The bridge needs to be wider.

Once again, you say it yourself, 1v1 DO OCCURE. So why MUST it be a guaranteed win for blue? Just widen the bridge, takes about an hour of a devs time, and done. Everything else stay the same, just widen the bridge, so 3-man body-blocks don't occure...

elektra_lucia · Jan 02, 2008, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Would it, or would it not be easier from a programmers point of view to say that you must have all three teams (wait in vault) in order to play? Rather than change the map? I don't know, but it can't be that hard to code surely?

The majority of your argument relied on 1v1. That is where you went wrong <3.

Quote:

Besides the TOTAL IGNORANCE of some people posting in this thread, ALL I ever ment to proof (Which I did)

I think you mean prove, and ignorance means without knowledge.

masta_yoda · Jan 02, 2008, 07:39 AM // 07:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

First-to-cap winning means that if two teams get the same score, the team that hit that score fastest wins. Doesn't that make a bit more sense than the slowest team to achieve a score wins?

not rlly, thats just giving a team no chance to win if they are being snared and end up catching up to cap last.
It cant be helped if your the slowest team if you have a snarer and lots of people blocking you.

if they manage to get into position to 3 man block your runner, maybe you need to backline better.

o me and my guildies tried the relic bug, where it makes it looks like you have 2 relics, i think they may have fixed it because it doesnt seem to work.

Killed u man · Jan 02, 2008, 03:57 PM // 15:57

It still works (Weapon Spell), tried it yesterday...

Also, ONCE again, I'm NOT here to discuss 3-Way Relic Run, I'm here to discuss 1v1 Relic Run Body blocking...

Electric, what would be easier: Widen the bridge, which doesn't take that much work at all, seeing it doesn't require any new graphics to be made, mayby even changing the spawn of the relic by 2-3 feet would be enough (also for the blue team then,, obviously) OR Change it so u can't 1v1 no more, so pretty much change something that has been like that since day 1 in GW. And think about it, teams are ALREADY having 3 NoP IN A ROW (Happened 5 days ago), can u only imagine if u HAVE to wait for 3 teams?

I get your logic, by making sure there is no 1v1, the problem is already (somewhat) solved. But making sure there is no 1v1, would first require HA to become active again. And we ALL know what needs to change for that to happen, and knowing Anet it won't. (It's too late anyways, HA is dead)

So that's why I'm simply suggesting the "easy" way out...

elektra_lucia · Jan 02, 2008, 06:16 PM // 18:16

killed human:

I'm not here to discuss 1v1.

I'm here to discuss starving Africans... So I saw this thing on TV right, some Africans starving.

Then i was thinking UW needs to be changed, so you don't get NOP at the zaishen... That way, you can play UW vs more zaishen. Like elite zaishen!!!

Perhaps if you win, it sends a cookie to a starving African. I hope you appreciate how relative and on topic this is...

This will bring more into HA and then relic run will have 3 teams!!! WOOO!!

..Gtfo.

LifesRestorer · Jan 02, 2008, 07:17 PM // 19:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by elektra_lucia

You could fix it by simply saying... Until there are two other teams to face, have one wait in vault. Perfectly viable, would stop 1v1 fights =).

/win.

12 chars

Killed u man · Jan 02, 2008, 08:30 PM // 20:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by elektra_lucia

killed human:

I'm not here to discuss 1v1.

I'm here to discuss starving Africans... So I saw this thing on TV right, some Africans starving.

Then i was thinking UW needs to be changed, so you don't get NOP at the zaishen... That way, you can play UW vs more zaishen. Like elite zaishen!!!

Perhaps if you win, it sends a cookie to a starving African. I hope you appreciate how relative and on topic this is...

This will bring more into HA and then relic run will have 3 teams!!! WOOO!!

..Gtfo.

Even AFTER realizing it was sarcastic, I still didn't get the "joke" in it :s

It's obviously you don't have alot of HA experience, but having to wait for 3 teams is NOT an option, unless you feel like waiting an hour/match in HoH. For you, that oviously ain't a problem, for me, people who actually get to HoH often, it is... I can farm UW faster than waiting for 3 teams every time...

LifesRestorer · Jan 02, 2008, 10:07 PM // 22:07

how about stop farming at dead hours? and after your comment of no HA experience, it seems you dont know anyone here. go farm some more, maybe later you'll be good enough to learn how to bodyblock in 1v1 relic runs.

Lorekeeper · Jan 02, 2008, 10:41 PM // 22:41

problem with fixing the 3man block as the solution to making 1vs1 relic run less of a guaranteed win for Blue... is that it doesnt. And the same goes for the other game modes when they are 1vs1 matches.

1v1 KOTH = blue team has huge advantage with altar capped at the start AND auto rez. It is extremely difficult for 1 invading team to knock off the holding team without the help of a 3rd team. As long as blue is good at the game... 1vs1 KOTH is a sure win for them.

1vs1 Capture Points = blue team reaches the central altar before the invading team... meaning unless the invading team gets blue team off the altar blue team gain a very early point lead. This slight advantage forces the invading team to go on the offensive and if they make the wrong move blue team's lead might get extended even more. Invading team must be be very good in order to win this match but it is at least more possible than KOTH.

1vs1 Relic Runs = blue team is closer to center altar... narrower access to relic for invading team makes it possible for blue team to 3 man block... makes it very hard for invading team to prevent their runners from being slowed down. Even without the 3 man block its quite easy for blue to win... trust me. Just from the fact that it takes red or yellow a few seconds more to run a relic than blue.

All three maps are imbalanced in a 1vs1 situation. You wanna design HoH towards 1vs1 encounters just because HA is so dead that 1vs1 HoH happens more often than it ever used to?

Good luck convincing them to take time out of developing GWII to fix HoH this way.

elektra_lucia · Jan 02, 2008, 11:31 PM // 23:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

Even AFTER realizing it was sarcastic, I still didn't get the "joke" in it :s

It's obviously you don't have alot of HA experience, but having to wait for 3 teams is NOT an option, unless you feel like waiting an hour/match in HoH. For you, that oviously ain't a problem, for me, people who actually get to HoH often, it is... I can farm UW faster than waiting for 3 teams every time...

Quote:

It's obviously you don't have alot of HA experience

I'm higher ranked than you.

Quote:

you, that oviously ain't a problem, for me, people who actually get to HoH often, it is...

You get to HoH often.

It's 1v1...

I'm thinking, NUB HOUR?

.

On a serious note. I play with some nubs, some good people, etc. I am not too fussy. I don't really care about fame anymore not like I'm going to get rank15. Lol... But I do care about africans etc. For surr, you know?

There was no joke, just showing I can go completely off topic.

What I mean by that is, Kyp made this topic and I don't think he meant for the whole thing to be about 1v1 in HoH because a certain player happens to get to HoH a lot during the hours of 5AM and 8AM GMT. You know?

Killed u man · Jan 03, 2008, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Lol, not Higher ranked? I highly doubt that. And even if you were, it tells alot about you, if you still believe rank = skill

Quote:

problem with fixing the 3man block as the solution to making 1vs1 relic run less of a guaranteed win for Blue... is that it doesnt. And the same goes for the other game modes when they are 1vs1 matches.

Dude, seriously, W T F ARE YOU SAYING?

Ok, let me rephrase what YOU just said:

If Anet would fix the 3-man body block (Preventing Red from running at ALL), than IT WOULD STILL BE A GUARANTEED WIN FOR BLUE?

There is NO point argueing with you, since you completely say stuff that make NO sence at all...

No, let me explain to you, what you should have said:

IF Anet would fix the 3-man body block, Than Blue only has a SLIGHT advantage, NOT a guaranteed win. This is the way it should be...

I also don't think the blue Relic is close to the Altar. Actually, I'm pretty sure it isn't.

elektra_lucia · Jan 03, 2008, 03:31 AM // 03:31

I love you, you couldn't be more illogical if you tried.

You never said skill.

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

Lol, not Higher ranked? I highly doubt that. And even if you were, it tells alot about you, if you still believe rank = skill

Read this, OK? Now Read this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

It's obviously you don't have alot of HA experience

Now read my reply.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Me

I'm higher ranked than you.

Rank was simply an expression of experience. It is fairly truthful to say that someone say rank12 is fairly experienced in Heroes Ascent. Not skill, never did I mention skill. Sure you could have stayed in UW for 32 months and never won a battle then yes you'd be more experienced than me in UW. Let's stick to reality though please?

Quote:

If Anet would fix the 3-man body block (Preventing Red from running at ALL), than IT WOULD STILL BE A GUARANTEED WIN FOR BLUE?

Then, Than. Do you understand the difference?

Quote:

There is NO point argueing with you, since you completely say stuff that make NO sence at all...

Well perhaps you could do the honour of putting your nonsensical things in English?

Quote:

Originally Posted by You

No, let me explain to you, what you should have said:

No. Let me explain to you what you should have said:

.