Curse

_SiO_ · Aug 16, 2007, 12:01 AM // 00:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Isn't that the same info that is in the first post?

Your feedback is great, and we understand and appreciate the different points of view you are sharing....The more explanation and reasoning you provide the better, and supporting your opinion is always more effective than trying to disprove others'.
...Feel free to visit Ryan's talk page if you want to see some of the thought process behind this, and of course, if you have any questions feel free to post them and I will try to find you the answer.

ive posted something already, like many else, but you just ignore our doubts, and aversions against the changes...

so i have few questions:

1. why do u cant accept the idea that the glad title is fine how it is?

2. why do u cant accept the idea that TA and RA should be divided?

3. why do u not just punish the leavers with timeouts or whatever?

4. what rank is that ryan guy?
g0? or g1?

5. why do you guys want to screw something that is working? just for your degenerated ideas?

KebabVan · Aug 16, 2007, 12:02 AM // 00:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Isn't that the same info that is in the first post?

Feel free to post alternative suggestions, but simply posting "don't change the title it's fine" isn't going to do much good. According to the designers, a change is coming so it would be more beneficial for everyone to share their point of view to make that change the best it can be for all parties rather than to simply resit the change entirely.

Well thats rediculous bordering on insanely stupid for customer satisfaction isnt it? So if everyone here said keep the title as it is, the designers would say tough luck, we're changing it whether you like it or not. surely it should be changed or not changed according to the customers' demands. That is seriously unbelievable.

If that's the attitude Anet take towards all aspects of the game then no wonder people get angry and question what they are doing with skil updates half the time.

kvndoom · Aug 16, 2007, 12:17 AM // 00:17

It has already been established that gladiator rank currently means nothing, and mainly because RA wins counted towards it. So asking what one of Anet's dev's rank is really drains your credibility. It doesn't take hundreds or thousands of played RA matches to see the problem. I dare say anyone could spend half an hour in RA as it is now and see all of its problems.

Master Ketsu · Aug 16, 2007, 01:09 AM // 01:09

Alternative proposal, if you absolutely must change the title.

Title track
• Multiply current player points by 2
• Multiply each rank requirement by 2

Random arena:
-Leavers who leave before 2:00 banned for 10 minutes
-Kept the way it is. 10 wins gets a glad.
-Teleported to TA after 10 wins
-Randomly selected teams through all districts ( make syncing harder. Syncing is what really killed the prestige of glad imo. way too easy to farm )
-kurzick map removed from rotation

Team arena:
-Change win streak requirement from 10 to 5
-Add tournament ladder
-kurzick map removed from rotation.

My reasoning behind these changes: The title track itself wont change much for TA'rs, since their points will be doubled and the track would be doubled, the 10 wins would be the same. Making TA 5 wins in a row for 1 point and making RA Stay the same will make it more worth it for people to TA then RA. It will also defeat one problem in TA: You often run into a gimmick build that would have no chance against many other builds, but happens to have what they need to beat your balancedway ....at 8-9 wins or so. 5 wins in a row makes it less likely to run into people exploiting rock/paper/scissors gimmickway builds, and thus make TA more worth the effort.

Ive won half my glads in RA, and its twice as easy to win glads in RA. The fact about RA is you really only need 2 people who know what they are doing per team... the others can be subpar players. Im almost ashamed to admit that I have probobly given away at least 75 glad points to various wammos, earthtanks, touchies, and other such poor builds ( usually builds of the "LOOK AT ME HEAL MAHSELF ARENT I GUD LOLZ !!!111!!eleven variety ) that in no way deserve a glad title. Changing the title to double the requirement but leaving RA as it stand will reflect this fact.

Not to say RA doesnt take skill to get glads. It does take skill to get glads quickly in RA, but its possible to get luck wins if your bad:
In the average RA pool of about 20 players:
-3 of them will actually know what they are doing. ( 3 points )
-12 will be "average" players. ( 2 points )
-4 will be either a mending wammo, earthtank, or something rediculous from PvE like mo/e firestorm and whatnot. This includes griefers. ( 1 point )
-1 will be something so insanely bad you pm your guildies to share the lulz. N/R beastmaster with a level 5 moa bird...you get the idea. ( 0 points )

*add 1 point if player is a monk / healing ritualist.

A team with 8 points or more has a chance of winning a glad point. So its possible for bad players to win a glad point, however good players will still get it faster.

This changes in TA. The requirement is more around 10 ( give or take depending on time of day ) But a 1 has almost no chance. This is why TA should have more reward.

As for reasoning behind tournament ladder: obvious. More appeal. More prestige added to glad title, more guilds will take it seriously...ect. ect. No real reason not to have one other then it would take a chunk of the devs time to make it...

minor · Aug 16, 2007, 01:32 AM // 01:32

Flaming andrew helps nothing. Yes the change may suck, but he doesn't have the final say. A change will happen try to make noise for one you want.

Sab · Aug 16, 2007, 01:46 AM // 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by kvndoom

It has already been established that gladiator rank currently means nothing, and mainly because RA wins counted towards it. So asking what one of Anet's dev's rank is really drains your credibility. It doesn't take hundreds or thousands of played RA matches to see the problem. I dare say anyone could spend half an hour in RA as it is now and see all of its problems.

Rank *does* mean something - high rank correlates to experience, whether that be Glad, Hero or Champ. With that said, I'd rather have a high-ranked Glad be in charge of this than someone who's r0 or r1. Because, you know, someone who's new to 4v4 might think awarding a Glad point per win is a viable solution.

To Andrew: I think you should change this line in your original post. It's misleading and it contradicts with what Ryan says on his Talk page.

Quote:

The intention of this change is not to make the Gladiator Title easier to achieve

Nurse With Wound · Aug 16, 2007, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by minor

Flaming andrew helps nothing. Yes the change may suck, but he doesn't have the final say. A change will happen try to make noise for one you want.

QFT. And adding a warning to it as well. I don't want to delete more posts with zero content and full of flames. Keep it civil guys, if not for Andrew, we would go back to old times when no one from Anet was actually visiting PVP forums, yet alone discussing things with us.

Andrew Patrick · Aug 16, 2007, 02:42 AM // 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurse With Wound

QFT. And adding a warning to it as well. I don't want to delete more posts with zero content and full of flames. Keep it civil guys, if not for Andrew, we would go back to old times when no one from Anet was actually visiting PVP forums, yet alone discussing things with us.

Your my hero Nurse.

I did phrase that badly though, so I am sorry. This is not a "we're doing this no matter what you say so

" situation. Please feel free to post your defense for the current system, I was simply trying to suggest you may also want to post some alternatives if you had them as well. If you've heard the saying "don't put all you eggs in one basket" I think you'll understand my intention. I hear you when you say you like the current system. I assure you I have sent links to this thread, as well as verbally passing your thoughts on. My only point is, there is a strong likelihood for a change and I very much want you to provide your thoughts and opinions on what that change may be before it is decided on. You guys have good heads on your shoulders, and I understand and respect your passion, I'm just trying to encourage a more open-minded discussion so we can try to find a system that works well for everyone. And if you don't think there is such a system, feel free to say that as well, but please support your statements with an explanation is all.

Master Ketsu · Aug 16, 2007, 03:06 AM // 03:06

Quote:

Please feel free to post your defense for the current system

The current system is alright, and I dont mind most of the change ideas suggested. As long as Glad title doesnt become just another grind title all is good. Mainly because we already have plenty of titles out their that players who enjoy grinding can grind for.

The only problem I have with the approach is that your essentially changing how a title works to achieve a goal not title related: Decreasing leavers and other such problems. Unless leavers are hindered directly, they will likely always be a problem to some degree.

Also, not to be rude but as somewhat pointed out already:

Quote:

The intention of this change is not to make the Gladiator Title easier to achieve, the designers are simply trying to change the way one acquires that title so that the system no longer punishes, or wastes the time of, those who stay on a team that is unlikely to have long winning streaks.

Is kind of a self contradictory goal. The entire thing that makes gladiator a difficult and challenging title to obtain is that fact that you must be good enough to win consistently against vairous other players, which requires a well thought out balanced build or specific strategy. You simply cannot take away the requirement to win consecutively without also making the title easier in the long run.

Orange Milk · Aug 16, 2007, 03:30 AM // 03:30

I have made my thoughts clear in the 3 main threads concerning this issue that exsits on these forums. In order for me to continue to research the proposed solutions and decide fully where I stand, I shall again pose the question;

Quote:

Feel free to visit Ryan's talk page if you want to see some of the thought process behind this, and of course, if you have any questions feel free to post them and I will try to find you the answer.

What rank of Gladiator does Ryan Scott hold? Many have asked, inquireing minds would like to know.

Simply put, those of us that TA alot would like to know if the right man for the job is at the helm. I myself have done the Urgoz elite mission exactly once, I'm not the person to hire to make changes/develope that part of the game, and I'm sure if you did hire me to do that players of this game that do Urgoz on an everyday basis would pose the question as to my expeience in the elite mission.

_SiO_ · Aug 16, 2007, 03:43 AM // 03:43

ok mate, how about you give us some answers...?

DO u have even considered to divide TA and RA?

DO u have even considered to create a new title for RA?

DO u have even considered that the new systems are "bad"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Please feel free to post your defense for the current system

hmm, wait, oh yea, its already done, by many of us...

write it down this time; pls...
-->> it w-o-r-k-s already fine!<<--

Andrew Patrick · Aug 16, 2007, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by _SiO_

DO u have even considered to divide TA and RA?

It has been discussed, but as far as I know the designers ultimately felt that keeping them combined is the best solution overall. I will let you know if this becomes an option, though, and you can be sure this idea has already been bouncing around. I will look into it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by _SiO_

DO u have even considered to create a new title for RA?

This kind of goes along with the first answer, but yes, the intention is to make a new title that will work well with both TA and RA. The current system does not work well with RA, so the designers are looking at alternatives that balance the needs of both the RA and TA communities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by _SiO_

DO u have even considered that the new systems are "bad"?

Absolutely, and that is why we are asking for feedback prior to even testing any changes. I will say that *most people* seem to find at least one of these to work well, but that does not mean we are not listening to those who don't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by _SiO_

-->> it w-o-r-k-s already fine!<<--

In you're opinion, yes. But many others are saying the alternatives would be much better. The polls on multiple forums show that, along with many of the posts I have read. It seems to me many people are essentially saying "If you disregard all the people who are not agreeing with me, you will see that everyone is agreeing with me!" and I can only ask that you please keep in mind that everyone is entitled to their opinion and their point of view. We can tell the difference between the casual players and the hard-core players and we know who has more invested in this style of game-play. But the designers also see the other side of the spectrum and they are looking into different methods that can work for everyone. We wouldn't ask for your opinion only to disregard it, but please keep in mind that sometimes compromises are essential whenever there is more than one person involved--and there are a lot more than two people in Guild Wars.

P.S. I don't know Ryan's gladiator title.

Hayashi · Aug 16, 2007, 04:16 AM // 04:16

Okay, forget about the ranks of the developers. The fact is, they made the game from scratch and you like to play it. You're good at TA? Well they MADE TA, so I'd like to argue that they know more than you do.

I'm gladiator 5, and whenever i go into TA and I see so many balanced and gimmick team builds that works, I am amazed at the thoughts thats put behind each skill so there can be variety.

With That Said, Lets Look At My Proposed Solution

Identify the problem: The leavers in RA who waste the time of the rest of the team.

Goal: To come up with a fair incentive for players to stay in a team without devaluing the gladiator title track.

Requirements: To not incur a heavy penalty for leavers. Keep in mind these are all people who paid for the game, and they can click enter battle when they want. Barring them from the arena for x time is nonsensical.

solution 1: If its possible for the algorithm to identify high streaked teams and pair them up against other high streak teams, maybe its possible to pair monk teams against monk teams and non-monk vs non-monk teams. These will give any skilled no monk teams a fair chance at getting that glad point. The con for this idea is there might be a surge in healing rits.

solution 2: Damage oriented maps. As of now the arena have flags you can capture that fire obselisk fireballs. If instead there are arena flag effects that reduces the healing of opponents team by 25%, it will encourage a high damage team to strategically gain the upper hand against monk teams. That will feel good.

solution 3: Award the people who stays in the game. If one person leaves before door opens, the three person team gets triple faction for each kill and triple factions for the win. If its possible, awarded one extra win. This will give incentive for players to stay for 3 vs 4 situations, which is at least more battles being "fought."

You can even stack any of these solutions together! Whoa.

Patrick, I hope you can see that all the new proposed changes does little to keep the quitters from leaving incompetent teams. All you're doing is introducing something new, but imo its an unimaginative way to patch a the problem. I know we're a tough crowd to please and what I proposed is generally a lil wish list that may mend the problem without going through a overhaul.

ps: I definitely think making flag capturing more important in arenas will downplay the need for healers. What if you change those flags to 'heal' flags that heals team for 100hp every 20 seconds? We will see mini splits in arenas and that we know, will cripple healer teams where the healer can only be at one place at one time.

Thanks for reading.

Andrew Patrick · Aug 16, 2007, 04:39 AM // 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayashi

solution 1: If its possible for the algorithm to identify high streaked teams and pair them up against other high streak teams, maybe its possible to pair monk teams against monk teams and non-monk vs non-monk teams. These will give any skilled no monk teams a fair chance at getting that glad point. The con for this idea is there might be a surge in healing rits.

I believe random arenas are very true to their name. I'm not sure if these things would be possible, but I will certainly pass that along because it makes a lot of sense. As I said though, I think random arenas are supposed to be fully random, so even if it was possible, I'm not sure that it wouldn't go against the philosophy of Random Arenas. Certainly worth passing on though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayashi

solution 2: Damage oriented maps. As of now the arena have flags you can capture that fire obselisk fireballs. If instead there are arena flag effects that reduces the healing of opponents team by 25%, it will encourage a high damage team to strategically gain the upper hand against monk teams. That will feel good.

solution 3: Award the people who stays in the game. If one person leaves before door opens, the three person team gets triple faction for each kill and triple factions for the win. If its possible, awarded one extra win. This will give incentive for players to stay for 3 vs 4 situations, which is at least more battles being "fought."

Both of these are also good ideas. Thank you for taking the time to post your thoughts. I'm not sure if any map changes are intended but it never hurts to ask.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayashi

I hope you can see that all the new proposed changes does little to keep the quitters from leaving incompetent teams.

The change to the title are not intended to prevent leavers, it is meant to function better in the Arenas after the anti-leaver/anti-leecher mechanics are implemented. There is a separate method planned to actually prevent leavers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hayashi

Thanks for reading.

Thanks for posting.

_SiO_ · Aug 16, 2007, 04:50 AM // 04:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

It has been discussed, but as far as I know the designers ultimately felt that keeping them combined is the best solution overall.

and the arguments for that decision were?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

This kind of goes along with the first answer, but yes, the intention is to make a new title that will work well with both TA and RA. The current system does not work well with RA, so the designers are looking at alternatives that balance the needs of both the RA and TA communities.

you guys are just ignoring a very essential fact; TA and RA arent the same! so you cant balance it...
and yes it doesnt work for RA, but it works well for TA!
the logical decision would be to divide them, but of course you guys have a diametric opinion...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Absolutely, and that is why we are asking for feedback prior to even testing any changes. I will say that *most people* seem to find at least one of these to work well, but that does not mean we are not listening to those who don't.

you were asking where?
why do you not go to the TA districts and ask the people what do they think about your "great visions"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

In you're opinion, yes.

thats the opinion of the majority of TA players...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

But many others are saying the alternatives would be much better.

who? some g0-g1?
maybe they say that, because they are incompetent to get 10wins in TA?
the sad fact is, people allways want anything as fast possible with minimal effort; and thats the reason why they haven chosen Proposal 1...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

The polls on multiple forums show that, along with many of the posts I have read.

where? gwo? wt?

Master Ketsu · Aug 16, 2007, 04:54 AM // 04:54

Quote:

The change to the title are not intended to prevent leavers, it is meant to function better in the Arenas after the anti-leaver/anti-leecher mechanics are implemented. There is a separate method planned to actually prevent leavers.

Sweeeet. Any hints ?

/puppydogeyes

Byron · Aug 16, 2007, 06:27 AM // 06:27

I see nothing wrong with the current system to be honest, so far as TA is concerned. Making it 10 wins encourages a balanced build and active tactics in order to respond to different teams. Making it 5 means a team could just take in 4 A/Ws and probably come out with some glad points in a half hour. Unlikely such a scrubby build would last 10 wins.

If the people who play RA are upset that they can't get points, then they need to move on up to TA. The game is about skill and teamwork, so lets please, please stop encouraging individual contests. HvH was already a step back (certainly with all the emphasis that Anet put on it), and I don't know anyone who is happy about fighting heroes in guild battles or Hero's Ascent. I'm really appealing here. Don't make glad points about RA.

If you need to do something, make a different title/system for RA only. No sense in making all the old TA heads angry.

Xanthar · Aug 16, 2007, 07:31 AM // 07:31

Since Ryans talk page is a chaotic place with people shooting suggestions crosswise, I thought I'd post my suggestion here as well:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan Scott

That's the conundrum -- we want to maintain Gladiator as a skill title, but we want to make it more accessible also. My thought is you make the "slow gain" easy...5-win streaks isn't asking much, and give the lion's share of the goodies at streaks 10 and beyond. This way, high-skill teams can rake it in, while low-skill teams and players can pick away at it. I do want the title to be easier -- I don't want to devalue it in the process. Ryan Scott 20:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

From this I gather that ANet goal with the upcoming change is twofold: 1) Accessibility of lower levels of the gladiator title and 2) A reduction of leavers in RA. Changes might come to recude runners/griefing/deadlocked matches as well all leeching, but these are not the primary goals.

Suggestion

Why not do something like this instead: For Glad1, all 5-win streaks earns you a point. For Glad2, all 8-win streaks are rewarded. For Glad3, count all 11-win streaks etc. (These are just wild stabs in the dark, other intervals may be far better).

Paired with this, it would be rational to relax the actual number of streaks needed to achieve a certain Glad-level. Perhaps 25 streaks could be enough for each level - The number of matches that needs to be played for each level will still increase dramatically between the levels.

Projected result

This will make the lower levels of the title very easy to get, whereas the high levels will demand a very, very strong team in TA. Another interesting feature of this kind of system would be that it would be inefficient to do RA in order to achieve a Glad3 or higher - Winning with an RA team in TA is not easily done. This will make the farming of RA a passing thing for every true title grinder and might in fact reduce the leaver problem greatly in itself.

An objection to this would be that the titles would be to hard to get. This is not true: The initial titles would be easily attainable by anyone in RA, the higher titles (3, 4 and 5) would be attainable through effort with decent-to-good TA teams over a period of a few months. The very high titles (6+) will only be possible to reach only with superlative skill and the backing of team members of equal quality. This would certainly be no devaluation of the skill component of the title.

Paired with a leaver punishment system, I believe that this would be sufficient to address both the issues you see with RA/TA

red orc · Aug 16, 2007, 08:52 AM // 08:52

I guess Anet is set on making Gladiator a PVE title.
Here is what is going to happen:
1. more PVErs in RA.
2. Gladiator is farmable => means nothing to PVPers.
3. PVPers leave RA/TA

I myself already left RA/TA. There is no need trying for glad4 if it means nothing. I'm back in HA farming for r6. Otherwise in 6 month time, I will not be able to get into any decent GVG guild.
I suggest all RA/TA plays do the same, you title has already turned into dust. So stop waisting your time there, move to other places.
So now I farm Fame with the stupid Zerg build....... till I get tired of it and leave GW altogether....

Symbol · Aug 16, 2007, 08:52 AM // 08:52

Quote:

I see nothing wrong with the current system to be honest, so far as TA is concerned. Making it 10 wins encourages a balanced build and active tactics in order to respond to different teams. Making it 5 means a team could just take in 4 A/Ws and probably come out with some glad points in a half hour. Unlikely such a scrubby build would last 10 wins.

Actually it's quite difficult to get a 10 win streak in TA with balanced. Especially now with the profusion of teams with 3 or 4 deadly paradox DA spammers (dancing daggers - entangling asp - augury) which are very hard to shut down or defend against in 4v4.

Playing balanced is certainly not the way to farm glad points in TA right now IMO.