Curse

Death_From_Above · Jun 10, 2007, 06:03 PM // 18:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

it has also been clear that the HA player base has been steadly decreasing even before Anet introduced 6v6. Infact it was around this time that HA got more and more empty, and that the HA population hasn't recovered even when summer ended, but got worse and decreased. HA was dead 1 year ago and its not till now that we smell the rotting corpses.

LOL can i have proof please that the HA player base has been steadly decreasing. Also by how much, how do you know this supposed decrease is even due to HA its self but rather not a natural change in which HAs population then increases again.

As for HA dying it basically goes like this. HA had a large population which would have taken 100 years before it reached 0. We dont care about gw in 100 years time so we will be dead. Enjoy what you have now, anet decided o tamper with it and instead of 100 years anet dies within 3 days.

HA never died 1 year ago and its now were smelling the corpses, it died the minuted anet tampered with it and purposely set to kill it off. If this were not the case and the game was just dying off because of natural corses. I would like to to explain why the graph drawn up for this would not be linear but rather the equativant to a seed time graph of a parachcute guy jumpin from a plane. Its common sence, things dont suddenly die over nite if there were not other factors involved in which this case is kill count and HA.

Just look at the poll for goodness sake, look at how many HA guilds there are now. Ask guilds why they moved to gvg, ask people why they quit. Just open your dam eyes and stop making irrelivant statements which clearly reflect your ignorance and lack of research.

evil joo · Jun 11, 2007, 02:04 PM // 14:04

HA is still around, but just not as popular. For a game that is distributed worldwide in Europe, America, and Asia--having 1 or 2 international district is pretty sad (......really sad....imo).

I mean...c'monnnn now....you guys really think that fixing kill count would really make much of a difference? Yeah....it would probably satisfy the current base HA players, but eventually boredom and skill imbalance will strike them.

Heck, even if Anet added brand new maps, the outcome of this will be a waste of their time and resource in the long run. The point is that the system is not as great and some may even say it is flawed, but in any case, it seems like through experience, Anet discovered this flaw and decided to re-AMP and reinvest their effort to create Guild Wars 2.

Not sure how successful that will turn out, but for the most part, I guess most of us has to be patient for the next 2-3 years. As for me, I lost my patience long ago with the skills imbalance and HA matters. The game is still fun playing with some old buddies, but I shake my head looking at these players who still cares/rants for Guild Wars, and nothing is getting done.

(free monthly subscriptions = not enough money to hire and train new employee = slow turn around time updates for guild wars players = player loses confidence in Guild Wars and Anet staff = in 2-3 years, What will happen to Guild Wars (1)? = GG? )

Death_From_Above · Jun 11, 2007, 03:30 PM // 15:30

Yes fixing a few broken mechanics will fix HA. When anet brought back 8v8 many people came back to HA but then left when they saw it had a new broken flaw under the despired abomination kill count. If HA were to get board for the satisfied player base why is it years ago the players who played it then still played it even after years past. HA in its old state was new every day. A new build to face a new build to try. A new HA to hold and an ever changing meta refreshed it and kept it intresting.

The fact is, HA being straining on anets resources its absolute figgledy gook and is a true as little miss mupet sat on the tuphet eating her mustard away. Along came a spider, sat down beside her and ate miss mupet up in one day because ANET ruind HA.

Izzy has highlighted himself that putting HA back to how it was would be like an hours work, it could be done in a click. They have templates an all that stuff remember its only that they dont want to. They still think kill counts better. As i said before, if anet dont want to do any more work what so ever on HA because there lazzy then just put it back how it was.

I never went begging them to change it, its a simple request, just put it back how it was and leave us to be. Please explain to me where the difficult bit in that request lays.

defrule · Jun 11, 2007, 03:54 PM // 15:54

Too many artists in the development team. lol

A change now or anytime in the future is meaningless because I have no friends to play with. Most quit.

Nero_Fayth · Jun 11, 2007, 04:45 PM // 16:45

A conversation I had a while ago with gaile pretty much sums up her view (possibly anet's?) on kill count.

Screens~

Edit: sorry, screen resolution was too large, i'll post links to them from imageshack instead:
http://img116.imageshack.us/img116/8373/gw352qy3.jpg
http://img45.imageshack.us/img45/1149/gw353dk3.jpg

wuzzman · Jun 11, 2007, 07:14 PM // 19:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

LOL can i have proof please that the HA player base has been steadly decreasing. Also by how much, how do you know this supposed decrease is even due to HA its self but rather not a natural change in which HAs population then increases again.

As for HA dying it basically goes like this. HA had a large population which would have taken 100 years before it reached 0. We dont care about gw in 100 years time so we will be dead. Enjoy what you have now, anet decided o tamper with it and instead of 100 years anet dies within 3 days.

HA never died 1 year ago and its now were smelling the corpses, it died the minuted anet tampered with it and purposely set to kill it off. If this were not the case and the game was just dying off because of natural corses. I would like to to explain why the graph drawn up for this would not be linear but rather the equativant to a seed time graph of a parachcute guy jumpin from a plane. Its common sence, things dont suddenly die over nite if there were not other factors involved in which this case is kill count and HA.

Just look at the poll for goodness sake, look at how many HA guilds there are now. Ask guilds why they moved to gvg, ask people why they quit. Just open your dam eyes and stop making irrelivant statements which clearly reflect your ignorance and lack of research.

explain to me please? Do you honestly think Anet is stupid? I mean do they hire crack heads to program this game? Why would Anet change HA if they was not concerned with HA. WHy would they do something so drastic? Anet never does a skill change without huge outcry from the community. Obviously whatever Anet tried to fix with the HA change was destroying HA. True Anet failed, but there was a problem. A big problem apparently to make such a drastic change.

Again, I can count the amount of districts in HA then, compare that to several months before then, and look at it now. HA was declining at a steady rate back then. The HA population was alot smaller then it used to be especially in the American districts. Believe it or not there used to be 8 american districts when i started HA back in Febuary 2006. 5 around factions. 3 in October and finally 1 now. Now you could say that everyone went to Int district. But it went from 12 Int districts in Feb to 3-4 now. Big difference.

wuzzman · Jun 11, 2007, 07:48 PM // 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurse With Wound

Bad. In fact whole pvp side of the game is being neglected in my opinion. Lack of often ( as promised ) skill updates, badly developed ATs, updates that were supposed to come ages ago ( jade isle anyone? ), ignoring both HA and TA, putting large amounts of money and time into epic fail that HVH is. So... where do I start really?

It seems to me that Anet developers gave up on us long time ago. Not only on Heroes' Ascent players, but on pvp players in general. Its sad that game with such huge potential declined so fast.

The reason for this I believe was lack of vision for the game development. Instead of nurturing awesome, original and unique PVP in Guild Wars, Anet decided to produce low content, boring , repetetive PVE expansions that were supposed to compete with World Of Warcraft, and failed, obviously. All money and dev time was put there.

From the PVP point of view two expansions brought unnecessary classes that broke game mechanics ( paragons, ritualists ), countless broken and overpowered skills ( i dont have to mention them here ). I don't see anything good in both Factions and Nightfall. Both expansions, although their content was obviously marketed towards PVE players couldn't get new blood to the game, simply because nothing can compete with World of Warcraft, in terms of PVE experience.

Focus on PVE was also a reason for lack of important game mechanic changes ( soul reaping for example ) - it isn't fixed till that very day because of fear of PVE masses that would drown all forums in tears. Its obvious that PVP players and PVE players have different wishes and expectations from the game. Anet decided to cater to the PVE players , because there is more money in that market. As it is now, lack of proper balance is contributing towards decline. Countless, game-breaking gimmicks are running rampart because theres no interest in fixing some skills.

6v6 in HA. No one wanted it, except noobs who whined about rank discrimination, and inability to find a team. It dealt finishing blow to already decaying Tombs population.

Lack of support and decent rewards for middle ranked guilds ( 100-300 range ) stopped influx of new blood into gvg.

HvH, so aggressively promoted are last in Anet's failure list. All the money, time could be used otherwise ( better GVG tournament system, better rewards )

In my opinion, Guild Wars, game that had it all at the begining, failed.

And last, but not least, why they ( Anet reps ) aren't posting in here? It's very simple. They don't have anything to say to us.

My perspective? Honestly? I don't care anymore.

Its funny. A skill balance here and there, and a metagame that hasn't changed since Febuary 2006 and they may have kept the kids in guru happy. Except not releasing any new content would have truely emptied out their playerbase. Also eventually alot of pvp'ers would eventually do a mass migration from guild wars, even if the warder and blindbot build hasn't changed since 2006, stale is fun ^_^. Or Anet could release new expansions and even go through the trouble of introducing new mechanics, class's, and maps, but you can see how far they got them on the pvp side of things today. Either way, Guild Wars would have lost just as many pvp'ers by the time June 2007 rolled around. Of course the latter option retained 90% of its pve playerbase which happens to be at least 90% of its playerbase period....so business wise at the expense of the almighty kids at guru, anet made a profit ^_^.

Seriously stated if you look at what they released so far for GW2 pvp wise, anet has been considered most of pvp a lost cause. We get world pvp and gvg. Thats it. UAX woot. I can't blame anet for their decision. Lets assume that they haven't stopped funding their PR section. To take all this sh**t from a group of players that don't even represent 10% of the player base is commendable(assuming their still funding their PR section...), but can't last forever.

Death_From_Above · Jun 11, 2007, 07:54 PM // 19:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

explain to me please? Do you honestly think Anet is stupid? I mean do they hire crack heads to program this game? Why would Anet change HA if they was not concerned with HA. WHy would they do something so drastic? Anet never does a skill change without huge outcry from the community. Obviously whatever Anet tried to fix with the HA change was destroying HA. True Anet failed, but there was a problem. A big problem apparently to make such a drastic change.

Again, I can count the amount of districts in HA then, compare that to several months before then, and look at it now. HA was declining at a steady rate back then. The HA population was alot smaller then it used to be especially in the American districts. Believe it or not there used to be 8 american districts when i started HA back in Febuary 2006. 5 around factions. 3 in October and finally 1 now. Now you could say that everyone went to Int district. But it went from 12 Int districts in Feb to 3-4 now. Big difference.

The answer to your question is, is a 12 month wait justifyable. Nurse said it herself, they gave up on pvp. Heck Galie even admited it as i said, they put it further on there to do list claiming they had spent alot of time on it already, now i call that basically slitting your own throat there. If HA was dying why kill it off even quicker may i ask. Why not see whether players like changes rather than raming it down their throat. We would have said nope if they never went sloppy and continued in the proffesional manner of testing things on a weekend event.

Ok anet made a mistake, understandable, but it becomes no longer understandable when they deny it, they clearly dont care what you think and want to continue doing it there way hence were we are now. May i ask who here asked for kill count with 8v8. Go many posts back people said bring 8v8 back with no kill count. Kill counts a 6v6 mechanic, what happened to the test 1 variable rule anet had. They messed up and they just wont admit it.

Instead we get there prs smiling at us like everythings honky dory when it clearly isnt. If HA were decreasing, why not wait a bit longer to make sure it were decreasing and say it wasnt just going through a phase. If your comparing gw to when it first came out then thats the wrong way to go about it i recon. Take for example the koreans, a bunch of them were here a bunch of them are gone. If your taking these guys for example into account then its going to affect your graph. Basicaly as i said before, we dont mind anet making original changes to HA if it improves it and they say want to test it on a weekend, see what people think then impliment it. The thing is, what they have done is they made kill count. Added it, no one liked it, because they had spent so much time on it they didnt wanna remove it. GG HA= DEAD.

The amount of people playing before anet tampered with HA was reasonable. Wasnt too little was not excess. As many other players have suggested, there are plenty of other ways to make HA better and it doesnt even involve much work. Basically what im highlighting is just because HAs population was supposedly declining weres the justification for just killing it off compleatly. Then doing nothing about it.

wuzzman · Jun 12, 2007, 01:12 PM // 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

The answer to your question is, is a 12 month wait justifyable. Nurse said it herself, they gave up on pvp. Heck Galie even admited it as i said, they put it further on there to do list claiming they had spent alot of time on it already, now i call that basically slitting your own throat there. If HA was dying why kill it off even quicker may i ask. Why not see whether players like changes rather than raming it down their throat. We would have said nope if they never went sloppy and continued in the proffesional manner of testing things on a weekend event.

Ok anet made a mistake, understandable, but it becomes no longer understandable when they deny it, they clearly dont care what you think and want to continue doing it there way hence were we are now. May i ask who here asked for kill count with 8v8. Go many posts back people said bring 8v8 back with no kill count. Kill counts a 6v6 mechanic, what happened to the test 1 variable rule anet had. They messed up and they just wont admit it.

Instead we get there prs smiling at us like everythings honky dory when it clearly isnt. If HA were decreasing, why not wait a bit longer to make sure it were decreasing and say it wasnt just going through a phase. If your comparing gw to when it first came out then thats the wrong way to go about it i recon. Take for example the koreans, a bunch of them were here a bunch of them are gone. If your taking these guys for example into account then its going to affect your graph. Basicaly as i said before, we dont mind anet making original changes to HA if it improves it and they say want to test it on a weekend, see what people think then impliment it. The thing is, what they have done is they made kill count. Added it, no one liked it, because they had spent so much time on it they didnt wanna remove it. GG HA= DEAD.

The amount of people playing before anet tampered with HA was reasonable. Wasnt too little was not excess. As many other players have suggested, there are plenty of other ways to make HA better and it doesnt even involve much work. Basically what im highlighting is just because HAs population was supposedly declining weres the justification for just killing it off compleatly. Then doing nothing about it.

The problem is your thinking Anet did it out of malicious desire to kill HA. Anet tried to fix it, they messed up, but do you really expect an apology? What mmorpg or any game business have ever went out of their way "Hey Joe Farmer, we are the idiots, sorry for messing up your farming build. Here's a cookie and I promise a patch to make it all better." It came to a point, where it became clear to anet that their not going to sastify the community at a reasonable level. We are suppose to be the intelligent side of the community and yet 90% of the community thinks that anet is personally trying to purge Guild Wars of the very players that play their most celeberated feature?? How long do you think Anet will put up with that and care? Granted they will never make Joe Farmer happy, but guess what over 90% of guild wars are Joe Farmer, and less then 10% of guild wars is Kid Guru.

Every change to HA loses players, good or bad, some changes lose more players then others. The only reason why HA was changed back to 8v8 was because anet was sure that the current players playing 6v6 and the players petitioning in the forms will outnumber the amount of players leaving.To anet a change to alter holding will make no difference or better yet might make things worse then it already is. Considering that the change to 8v8 was only provided a short term gain in the HA population, do you really think a few more map adjustments will bring HA back to levels acceptable to Anet? While it is great and dandy to worry about the actually skill level of HA (I'm against killcount by the way), you have to consider that Anet is in the business of keeping and growing the players of HA. Faced with a lose lose situation, it really makes no difference whether they put development time into HA or not. Ha in itself is a waste of development time. They could have been working on the next expansion and Guild wars 2. Not to mention a forgoten pve wishlist.

Anet pays more attention to pvp then it really has to and what they they get for it? " Hey anet! You f**king a** holes, destroyed the game again!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Death_From_Above · Jun 12, 2007, 05:57 PM // 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by wuzzman

The problem is your thinking Anet did it out of malicious desire to kill HA. Anet tried to fix it, they messed up, but do you really expect an apology? What mmorpg or any game business have ever went out of their way "Hey Joe Farmer, we are the idiots, sorry for messing up your farming build. Here's a cookie and I promise a patch to make it all better." It came to a point, where it became clear to anet that their not going to sastify the community at a reasonable level. We are suppose to be the intelligent side of the community and yet 90% of the community thinks that anet is personally trying to purge Guild Wars of the very players that play their most celeberated feature?? How long do you think Anet will put up with that and care? Granted they will never make Joe Farmer happy, but guess what over 90% of guild wars are Joe Farmer, and less then 10% of guild wars is Kid Guru.

Anet pays more attention to pvp then it really has to and what they they get for it? " Hey anet! You f**king a** holes, destroyed the game again!!!!!!!!!!!!"

The thing you missed out was yes anet messed up but thats not whats the case here. Its what they did after they messed up. They tried forcing changes upon players although the players didnt want it. As iv said, yes they messed up ok acceptable everyone makes mistakes. Its now when im left waiting 9 months for them to fix that mistake they made and then now almost 12 for them to fix the kill count issue that i think there is a problem now and yes anet have now messed up hard core.

Anet never did it our of malicious thinking i believe, but i believe their pride got the best of them and after spending so long on making kill count. They didnt want that work to go to waste hence why they kept it although people hated it.Although HA has been perminantly scared the reason i say change it back to later capping is because as i stated, anet will not have to go out of their way to do it. Its a quick update to be honest being they have the template so there not exactly pumping resources into that area.

Also to make things worse tell me what you think about this. Oh yes HA players go on the forums and post your views anet read them. Like forums littered with can you get rid of kill count please when it was 6v6 and 8v8. Then you have Galie grey one of the people who claims to read the forums saying ooooooh i think kill counts a great idea and it seems to be succesful. I think when you have said this and it reflects what anet have done on HA. It clearly does highlight anet messed it up.

Lastly, yes you will upset players no matter what happens. But you claim if HAs made back to alter capping the amount of people playing will remain as it is now. I have to disagree. Many players would play HA but just dont because of the whole kill count thing. Many players would also return to HA although not as large as the amount of players playing before it will certainly be a dam lot more than it is now. When 8v8 first came back, you saw many players turning up for it, (old players). Hence why it was like 12-14 districts in ID. Now when people realised kill count was there that number deminished over the days to like 3 IDs. Writing HA off completely if Alter maps where there is not fair at all. The best option for HA has yet to be tried, and until then we cannot close our eyes to the fact it can be returned to a play able state again.

As i said, it wouldnt take anet long nor kill them to fix HA. Izzy highlighted it himself (hes the guy in charge of pvp).

As for your last comment, anet tried to improve pvp yay but they went about it the whole wrong way and upon realising there mistake still continued to bump resources in time into their failing system which could have been used for the better in terms of HA. If you read further back in this post Nurse summed it up, and another guy or was it nurse i cant really remember offered some possible option to make HA better which Anet could have taken. These options are not demanding on time and yet seem like they could be a success. So why are we here now when these things are available.

Simply doing a poll on who wanted 6v6 and who wanted 8v8 to stay before 6v6 was implimented would have avoided this disaster. Many players after the double fame weekened for 6v6 where board of it. Yes it was fun for something tempory not perminant. So as for your last comment, as sad as it is it is very much partly true because the good anet wanted to do they turned it into evil and instead of killing that evil decided to try spread it like cancer.

Think of it like this, a dictator comes into power wanting to do the best for the country. Some of his plans like economic reforms dont work. Instead of revaluating he decideds to keep these plans in place. People aka his close advisers say to him, sir we should do this and it will make things better. The dictator ignores them now trying to force his reforms through even though people dont support him. In the end he leaves the country with a crippled ecconomy. Now he had good intentions at first but they became bad along the way. Understand what i mean now?

defrule · Jun 12, 2007, 10:52 PM // 22:52

@Death

Nurse is a he.

Rumours are that there will be a considerably large update mid-June which is the next few days-ish. Don't expect any PvP updates but at the very least some skill changes should occur.

EDIT: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gaile_News

wuzzman · Jun 13, 2007, 12:57 PM // 12:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

The thing you missed out was yes anet messed up but thats not whats the case here. Its what they did after they messed up. They tried forcing changes upon players although the players didnt want it. As iv said, yes they messed up ok acceptable everyone makes mistakes. Its now when im left waiting 9 months for them to fix that mistake they made and then now almost 12 for them to fix the kill count issue that i think there is a problem now and yes anet have now messed up hard core.

Anet never did it our of malicious thinking i believe, but i believe their pride got the best of them and after spending so long on making kill count. They didnt want that work to go to waste hence why they kept it although people hated it.Although HA has been perminantly scared the reason i say change it back to later capping is because as i stated, anet will not have to go out of their way to do it. Its a quick update to be honest being they have the template so there not exactly pumping resources into that area.

Also to make things worse tell me what you think about this. Oh yes HA players go on the forums and post your views anet read them. Like forums littered with can you get rid of kill count please when it was 6v6 and 8v8. Then you have Galie grey one of the people who claims to read the forums saying ooooooh i think kill counts a great idea and it seems to be succesful. I think when you have said this and it reflects what anet have done on HA. It clearly does highlight anet messed it up.

Lastly, yes you will upset players no matter what happens. But you claim if HAs made back to alter capping the amount of people playing will remain as it is now. I have to disagree. Many players would play HA but just dont because of the whole kill count thing. Many players would also return to HA although not as large as the amount of players playing before it will certainly be a dam lot more than it is now. When 8v8 first came back, you saw many players turning up for it, (old players). Hence why it was like 12-14 districts in ID. Now when people realised kill count was there that number deminished over the days to like 3 IDs. Writing HA off completely if Alter maps where there is not fair at all. The best option for HA has yet to be tried, and until then we cannot close our eyes to the fact it can be returned to a play able state again.

As i said, it wouldnt take anet long nor kill them to fix HA. Izzy highlighted it himself (hes the guy in charge of pvp).

As for your last comment, anet tried to improve pvp yay but they went about it the whole wrong way and upon realising there mistake still continued to bump resources in time into their failing system which could have been used for the better in terms of HA. If you read further back in this post Nurse summed it up, and another guy or was it nurse i cant really remember offered some possible option to make HA better which Anet could have taken. These options are not demanding on time and yet seem like they could be a success. So why are we here now when these things are available.

Simply doing a poll on who wanted 6v6 and who wanted 8v8 to stay before 6v6 was implimented would have avoided this disaster. Many players after the double fame weekened for 6v6 where board of it. Yes it was fun for something tempory not perminant. So as for your last comment, as sad as it is it is very much partly true because the good anet wanted to do they turned it into evil and instead of killing that evil decided to try spread it like cancer.

Think of it like this, a dictator comes into power wanting to do the best for the country. Some of his plans like economic reforms dont work. Instead of revaluating he decideds to keep these plans in place. People aka his close advisers say to him, sir we should do this and it will make things better. The dictator ignores them now trying to force his reforms through even though people dont support him. In the end he leaves the country with a crippled ecconomy. Now he had good intentions at first but they became bad along the way. Understand what i mean now?

Hmm, nothing is ever that simple. At best in a dictatorship or any government with a stronge central government, the close advisors half the time are looking out for their own special interest more then they are for the peoples. Priorities and motives, while always claiming to be for the general good doesn't half the time live up to its words.

Anet's priorities on this matter has been one thing and one thing only, the amount of districts in HA. Thats it, they may have changed to kill count to discourage defensive builds(they hate those), but the ultimate goal is popularity not quality. Your not singing the tone anet cares to hear. If anet changes HA to alter holding right now. Then what? That doesn't change the "lfg" status of 90% of the players in ha period. It makes no difference to the vast majority of players who hardly get past Underworld. It makes no difference to them even if they reach Broken Tower, since most players in HA probably never makes it past there with or without killcount anyway. Changes to HA you want to make is very similar to expansion packs of certain mmorpg's that only effect the 1% of the community that is level 100 with fully unlocked accounts(guild wars hates that by the way). To properly sell alter holding your going to have to convince anet that alter holding is infinitely more popular then kill count and that American district will have at least 3 active districts. Good luck doing that.

The interest of the people of this forum and anyone who really talks about killcount has been, "Hey anet change it back to alter holding so me and my friends and a couple of guildies can enjoy HA." Granted that the reason why it is not fun is because killcount is less skillful then alter holding, but guess what if everyone on this forum spoke for their guilds and their 5-10 friends, that would be a pin-drop compared to even the current HA population. Better yet you can compare that number to the players who never get in a group in 2 hours of consistent spamming. Alter holding will not change the 1 hour people will take spamming this;

"lf ritspike"
"lf paraway"
"lf vergway"
"lf fotm"

This won't change, add signet of mystic wrath and eball for alter holding, but thats it. Won't even bring in 1 more district.

Metal Skin Slayer · Jun 15, 2007, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Bring back altar holding, when the new update is gonna come out holding wont be such an easy job for some (hyperdeffensive) builds out there atm

My point being: max +25 am stack ftw!

Andrew Patrick · Jun 18, 2007, 10:02 PM // 22:02

Thanks for making this into a poll. I'm including these results in our Community Summary.

Do you have any suggestions for alternatives? What specific part of Kill Count bothers you? I know that my groups have had a few kills "stolen" during matches. Is that the major concern or do you just not like the heavy-offense it encourages?

My guildies bring up kill count every time we HA, but they can never really put into words what their issues are (other than they don't care for it

) so if you could elaborate that would be a great help. A lot of posts in here already have a lot of great info, but we can never have too much.

Lord Mendes · Jun 18, 2007, 10:49 PM // 22:49

Thank you for answering.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Do you have any suggestions for alternatives?

Well, if you leave HoH as multiple objectives (which you should, just change some of the wierd mechanics and map) then I see no issue with having the new king of the hill (2 sec cap, 1 point/30 secs).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

What specific part of Kill Count bothers you? I know that my groups have had a few kills "stolen" during matches. Is that the major concern or do you just not like the heavy-offense it encourages?

Stealing kills, punishing players for running somewhat balanced builds, encourages lame ranged caster/paragon spikes, getting horrible teams that rambo in and feed the other team with kills, ghostly being lame and ramboing into other teams, etc...
It is just a shit PvP mode overall.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

A lot of posts in here already have a lot of great info, but we can never have too much.

Don't read Death_From_Above's posts, save your time and braincells.

P.S. If you want to "revive" HA, please for the love of god print Ensign's (entire) thread out and hand it to Izzy, and make the barriers of entry into HA easier. You need to encourage new players to play the game (prizes after every win where you gain more the lower rank you are, double fame if you're below rank 3, less skips) while keeping the old ones happy with balanced skills.

Andrew Patrick · Jun 18, 2007, 10:54 PM // 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Mendes

Stealing kills, punishing players for running somewhat balanced builds, encourages lame ranged caster/paragon spikes, getting horrible teams that rambo in and feed the other team with kills, ghostly being lame and ramboing into other teams, etc...

So essentially you feel there are too many variables that make it so victory isn't actually determined by player skill?

Lord Mendes · Jun 18, 2007, 11:09 PM // 23:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

So essentially you feel there are too many variables that make it so victory isn't actually determined by player skill?

Pretty much.
You could play much better than your opponents but still lose for so many different reasons. Generally when you have a bad third team and a second team with one of the common HA gimmicks, you have to play much better than both teams in order to win. If your build is setup to spike fast or at a range, then you will generally kill much faster than the other more balanced team.
Combine this with poor skill balance, and you are encouraged to run lame builds or play much better than your opponents if you want to win.

Divinus Stella · Jun 18, 2007, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Ah great, someone from anet.

Well the problem i think is the fact its a 3-way system that requires players to kill eachother, 3-way works when the objective is holding or capping points but not kill count.

More 1v1 maps would be good, theres only 3 real 1v1 maps, whenever i play during the day i see a lot of 1v1 broken tower games and they are a lot more fun.

Killcount wouldnt be so bad if HA wasnt full of paragons, fearme spam and rit spike, i think it would be best to balance the skills before changing the maps.

Nurse With Wound · Jun 18, 2007, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

So essentially you feel there are too many variables that make it so victory isn't actually determined by player skill?

Exactly - you put it on very nicely. Also, thanks for noticing PVP forums on guru. That's the first anet's rep post in months.
The problem with Killcount isn't only the requirement to run heavy damage/ spike builds ( degen, shutdown builds are at serious disadvantage ) but also randomness of entire format. Quite often, one of the teams is really weak and its getting farmed by both teams. Of course the team with brainless AOE spam is getting kills faster than usual balanced. Thats wrong mechanic. Ghostly hero behaviour is also broken - he often lags behind team, and when hes getting killed, he rushes to the place when he died, instead to his own team.

Ganking is another problem. When iway or other non-vent gimmick team will c+space you at the beginning of the game, they will usually stick to you till the very end, so you end up with two teams attacking you, or defending vs iway/gimmick team while the other simply farms them.

I'm high ranked player in old PVP guild, wich is in big HA alliance. literally no one, no single person wants killcounts to remain in map rotation. And as long as HOH has rotating objects, altar maps on both broken tower and courtyard wouldn't be a problem.

Andrew Patrick · Jun 18, 2007, 11:32 PM // 23:32

Thanks for the clarification. As I said, I am forwarding a link to this thread on to the designers so any more info you have to share would be great.