Curse

Andrew Patrick · Aug 28, 2007, 04:45 AM // 04:45

I'm sorry if I'm not being clear...but as I said...twice

they are working on a new proposal or proposals. If you think #1 or any of these shouldn't be an option, great, because if I am understanding them correctly, these 3 options are being removed from the table and replaced with a new one, or new ones. Once they have a chance to work out all the numbers (and since it involves the lead designer, I would bet that will be after GW:EN releases) we will post the new (and hopefully improved) ideas for you to discuss.

LuckyGiant · Aug 28, 2007, 05:36 AM // 05:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

I'm sorry if I'm not being clear...but as I said...twice

they are working on a new proposal or proposals. If you think #1 or any of these shouldn't be an option, great, because if I am understanding them correctly, these 3 options are being removed from the table and replaced with a new one, or new ones. Once they have a chance to work out all the numbers (and since it involves the lead designer, I would bet that will be after GW:EN releases) we will post the new (and hopefully improved) ideas for you to discuss.

Thanks for the update

DreamWind · Aug 28, 2007, 06:20 AM // 06:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orange Milk

Here ya go:

snip

So yeah, this thread is pretty much TAers dicussing why they are against the proposas and attempting to form solutions, so your points are now proven invalid and are not needed, thx for playing, please leave, we all know you are a habitual leaver anyway. I still need to find the thread where you admit to Syncing, just need to do a little research and I'll have it.

You took everything I said out of context. More power to you. I am arguing for reasons why RA is good AS IT IS and I don't care if people leave. It doesn't mean I actually do it.

How many times are you going to derail this thread? My points are not invalid...I said I don't think theres needs to be ANY change because the system as it stands is fine. The only reason these changes are even being discussed is NOT to please the people who already play in RA or TA, but the rampant PvE players who look at the arenas as "icky".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Shiz

I don't even see why proposal one is even an OPTION to be honest. 1 point PER WIN!? It's mind blowing. I mean....why? What's the point of that? It literally doesn't take ANY skill to rack up points like that. I could go in with an empty skill bar every game, and still pull out more points that way than in the system it is in now. WHICH MAKES SENSE.

There's nothing wrong with the system implemented now, and leavers aren't even that bad of a problem tbh. On my way to a glad I'll see MAYBE one or two leavers per 10. Of course it varies, sometimes I see none sometimes I see more than two. But it's not worth ruining anything else to stop it.

This is exactly what I agree with. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough before. I think RA should STAY THE SAME and TA NEEDS A CHANGE because RA is fine as it is and TA needs something to make it more respectable (which it has the potential to be). Hope this helps.

red orc · Aug 28, 2007, 07:05 AM // 07:05

I think I finaly get what Anet is trying to do. They want more PVEers in RA. They got 4Mil players and only a handfull are doing RA. They want to multiply it 10 times or even 1000 times.
If they do so, while keeping current titles intact it will benefit both dedicated PVPers and new comers PVEer and Anet.
- Anet will provide more service per $ to her customers.
- PVEers will enjoy the game more and will have a taste of PVP.
- PVPers will earn easyers titles for they will fight more fights with ppl coming from PVE and less with fellow GALDX. There is a catch here however, since only this fact, with out even changing the system can degrade the glad title.

Legendary Shiz · Aug 28, 2007, 07:16 AM // 07:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by red orc

I think I finaly get what Anet is trying to do. They want more PVEers in RA. They got 4Mil players and only a handfull are doing RA. They want to multiply it 10 times or even 1000 times.
If they do so, while keeping current titles intact it will benefit both dedicated PVPers and new comers PVEer and Anet.
- Anet will provide more service per $ to her costomers.
- PVEers will enjoy the game more and will have a taste of PVP.
- PVPers will earn easyers titles for they will fight more fights with ppl coming from PVE and less with fellow GALDX. There is a catch here however, since only this fact, with out even changing the system can degrade the glad title.

PvPers don't WANT the title to be easier to attain, that's the point. PvPers don't care about earning more points easier, if the title doesn't mean anything.

red orc · Aug 28, 2007, 10:44 AM // 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Shiz

PvPers don't WANT the title to be easier to attain, that's the point. PvPers don't care about earning more points easier, if the title doesn't mean anything.

This is the catch that I'm talking about. Now there are ways to overcome it. For example:
for 1 win you gain 0 point
for 2 wins you get 0 points
for 3 wins you get 1 points
for 4 wins you get 2 points
for 5 wins you get 4 points...
...for n wins you get 2^(n-2) points

as for the title:
gladiator1 is 256 points
gladiator2 is 512 points
gladiator3 is 1024 points
gladiator4 is 2048 points...
..gladiatorn is gladiator(n-1)*2 points

I'm not sure about the start points of the gladiator title but in this system both skilled an unskilled get titles. The unskilled will get by grinding glad1, glad2 and maybe glad3. He will not be able to gain any further titles due to the high point requirements. The skilled players however, will gain very fast glad2 and from there will advance only if he can get high number of wins in a row.

converting current glad titles should be something like (didnt do the math, just a guess):
old glad1 = new glad3
old glad2 = new glad4
old glad3 = new glad5
....

Master Ketsu · Aug 28, 2007, 03:25 PM // 15:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by red orc

This is the catch that I'm talking about. Now there are ways to overcome it. For example:
for 1 win you gain 0 point
for 2 wins you get 0 points
for 3 wins you get 1 points
for 4 wins you get 2 points
for 5 wins you get 4 points...
...for n wins you get 2^(n-2) points

as for the title:
gladiator1 is 256 points
gladiator2 is 512 points
gladiator3 is 1024 points
gladiator4 is 2048 points...
..gladiatorn is gladiator(n-1)*2 points

I'm not sure about the start points of the gladiator title but in this system both skilled an unskilled get titles. The unskilled will get by grinding glad1, glad2 and maybe glad3. He will not be able to gain any further titles due to the high point requirements. The skilled players however, will gain very fast glad2 and from there will advance only if he can get high number of wins in a row.

converting current glad titles should be something like (didnt do the math, just a guess):
old glad1 = new glad3
old glad2 = new glad4
old glad3 = new glad5
....

Reminds me of what I made a while back in the thread:

Win #1 = 1 point
Win #2 = 1 point
Win #3 = 1 point
Win #4 = 2 points
Win #5 = 2 points
Win #6 = 2 points
Win #7 = 4 points
Win #8 = 4 points
Win #9 = 5 points
Win #10 = 5 points + 3 bonus points
Win #11-19 = 5 points
Win #20 = 5 + 4 bonus points
Win #30 = + 5 Bonus
Win #40, 50, 60, 70 ect. + 6bonus

*Lose 2 points for losing before 5 consecutive wins*
NOTE: Leaving or DCing counts as a loss.

Multiply current player points by: 55

Multiply each rank requirement by: 40

moko · Aug 28, 2007, 04:11 PM // 16:11

thanks for the reply, Andrew.

i guess until new information will come in this may remain silent as there's no further need to explain any further.

also, stop the bitchfights in this thread, i'm sick of it.

Skye Marin · Aug 28, 2007, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by red orc

This is the catch that I'm talking about. Now there are ways to overcome it. For example:
for 1 win you gain 0 point
for 2 wins you get 0 points
for 3 wins you get 1 points
for 4 wins you get 2 points
for 5 wins you get 4 points...
...for n wins you get 2^(n-2) points

There is still a flaw with this idea. It still is best to win a lot of games, and by best, I mean, a whole lot better. The per-win point amount has to be small, and has to get there at an early point in the win streak. Otherwise, people are still going to leave the team, which is what we are trying to prevent.

With the exponential suggestion, a player isn't asking "Can we win 10 games?" but instead "Can we win 500 games?". We really want him to be asking, instead "Can we win more than just this one game?".

Sab · Aug 28, 2007, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Thanks for the answer, Andrew. Hopefully Proposal 1 won't be an option next time. =S

Legendary Shiz · Aug 28, 2007, 06:20 PM // 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skye Marin

There is still a flaw with this idea. It still is best to win a lot of games, and by best, I mean, a whole lot better. The per-win point amount has to be small, and has to get there at an early point in the win streak. Otherwise, people are still going to leave the team, which is what we are trying to prevent.

With the exponential suggestion, a player isn't asking "Can we win 10 games?" but instead "Can we win 500 games?". We really want him to be asking, instead "Can we win more than just this one game?".

So you want RA/TA to turn into kill count HA huh? If you're getting a point per win people are just going to come out with mass damage builds and farm farm farm.

I really don't see the point in changing the title track to be honest. There's nothing wrong with it, noobs still can get that glad1 or glad2 if they really want it. The titles meant to take more than an hour to obtain. You want to implement some lame ass anti-leaver system? Fine, I'll live with it. But changing a title track that ISN'T broken isn't going to solve anything.

I don't even think I'm going to post in this thread anymore until they announce some new proposals.

Div · Aug 28, 2007, 06:53 PM // 18:53

Thanks for making it clear. A lot of the worries came about when Anet released the "bugs" of the title track changes that matched perfectly with proposal 1, but now that it's being tossed out, the worries should subside.

And yes, there's no reason posting until new proposals are made.

notrich · Aug 28, 2007, 10:47 PM // 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Maybe you missed this post:
That is the last thing I heard on this topic. I will likely have a new proposal or proposals to share with you shortly after GW:EN ships. I'm still reading this thread, and frankly, no one is really saying anything that hasn't already been said, and until the new proposals are posted, people are basing their concerns on proposals that are no longer relevant.

This would be a great thing to add to the very first post of the thread - and unless you are looking for new ideas from this board - maybe the thread should be locked?

Negative points for losses isn't a new idea? Darn! I was hoping that anet would remove the current grind and start having titles that go up and down based on current performance or that are based on percentage of population (moving point totals required for different titles - similar to rank on the leader boards in pvp... top 1% get top title, next 4% get second best title, next 10% get third best title, etc. ).

Hopefully they can implement the new anti-leaver system while we are waiting for the new proposals... RA might become fun again without the leavers. (besides - isn't it a good thing to make changes in stages so that the "right" solution gets the credit for fixing the problem? IOW - maybe we don't need a new title system for glads - maybe just the leaver issue needs to be fixed?)

lacasner · Aug 28, 2007, 10:55 PM // 22:55

I hope everyone can understand here what I'm trying to say and not take it the wrong way.

I seriously think this, how many people really care about leavers (there are not that many of them at all imo) legitemetly? Are these people just asking for a free way to get a pvp title?

This can be only proved ig or with screenshots, something I have yet seen with anyone supporting making the glad title easier to get.

erk · Aug 28, 2007, 11:48 PM // 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

I hope everyone can understand here what I'm trying to say and not take it the wrong way.

I seriously think this, how many people really care about leavers (there are not that many of them at all imo) legitemetly? Are these people just asking for a free way to get a pvp title?

This can be only proved ig or with screenshots, something I have yet seen with anyone supporting making the glad title easier to get.

Well you must have had some very good luck with the quitter situation, or perhaps you only play in a district that has few leavers. I have been playing RA/TA every day since March and the problem is real.

Quitters are worst in the International District were the HA players love to hang out. On average about half of the teams have a quitter at the start at certain times of the day. It's much better in the American districts where there are a LOT of n00bs that have not yet discovered the art of quitting. Also the quitter ratio will vary if it's "kiddie hour" in your current district.

Rapture · Aug 29, 2007, 10:21 AM // 10:21

international dists is full of quitters not because thats where the HA crowd gathers but because its where the people who don't suck crowd gathers. the percentage of players who realise playing out a certain loss is pointless is much higher in int.

int ra is completely different to the rest of ra, the player quality is much higher and because bad teams simply leave so is the build quality. whether this makes glad points easier or harder to get depends on you, it certainly makes ra more interesting to play.

ps. option 1 and any future incarnation of option 1, regardless what you call it or how much you wax it will always be terrible. <3

BlackSephir · Aug 29, 2007, 12:37 PM // 12:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

I hope everyone can understand here what I'm trying to say and not take it the wrong way.

I seriously think this, how many people really care about leavers (there are not that many of them at all imo) legitemetly? Are these people just asking for a free way to get a pvp title?

This can be only proved ig or with screenshots, something I have yet seen with anyone supporting making the glad title easier to get.

I care about leavers- do you mind?
Not many leavers? Nooo, why, it's not like you can go to RA and get a leaver 5 times in a row.

lacasner · Aug 29, 2007, 08:31 PM // 20:31

Quote:

I care about leavers- do you mind?
Not many leavers? Nooo, why, it's not like you can go to RA and get a leaver 5 times in a row.

And you can justt enter again in a matter of like 30 seconds...even if this claim you have is true, which I doubt it is. Wammos and touchers could care less if people leave anyway since they aren't playing to get glad points.

BlackSephir · Aug 29, 2007, 09:21 PM // 21:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by lacasner

And you can justt enter again in a matter of like 30 seconds...even if this claim you have is true, which I doubt it is. Wammos and touchers could care less if people leave anyway since they aren't playing to get glad points.

Sonny, I really don't give a *beeeep* about what do you believe. The fact is, I care about leavers, I want them to be punished.

Quote:

And you can justt enter again in a matter of like 30 seconds

So? That's the point of RA? To get in, get 2 leavers, loose, re-enter and repeat? How are you? Where do you live?

Quote:

Wammos and touchers could care less if people leave anyway since they aren't playing to get glad points.

NEWSFLASH- I play often in RA- I'm neither wammo nor toucher- and I'm not alone.

Lemme ask you somethin. How many times have you left because there was no monk? Or because your team was crappy?

minor · Aug 29, 2007, 09:40 PM // 21:40

Seeing had andrew has said the whole thing has been canceled, how about a lock on this plz Nurse?