Curse

elektra_lucia · Jun 12, 2007, 11:41 AM // 11:41

Maybe I shouldn't make another thread, move it if so. Anyway,

How about keeping kill count but having points to capture, rather like hero battles. Don't have it where you have to kill A.I like Alliance Battles though.
With all places captured the points you get will be similar to a top spiking team (this will take a while to tweak).
Then hex builds will work, you'll need to concentrate more on snaring, want to kill at times but killing won't be primary objective.
There maybe ganking, but it will make it so you snare the leading team. The holding team always used to get more pressure than the non holding team, so this shouldn't be an issue.
It might promote split builds and other things too. Certain Areas you will lose all enchants, shouts, weapons. This way, the teams that go with all monks and just run, will be able to be killed.

Have the ghostly cap the center for a small bonus to the amount of points you get per minute from having the capture points held. Don't make it so the ghostly is extremely important. It is heroes ascent, I don't see why people should be worrying too much about the ghostly until they have reached the final battle.

For HoH have altar holding or maybe even the kill count/capture map. If there is altar holding for HoH don't allow a skip past the kill count map, then you won't have monks holding for an eternity.

Bad or good idea?

Radiant Dawnstar · Jun 12, 2007, 12:04 PM // 12:04

Making killcount 1v1 would also solve the problem. However, I like this idea and it would make HA less boring. They could bring Scarred Earth back for this. Or they could make something similar to GvG: every team gets a flag and by capturing the Obelisk in the middle, teams take the old EoE like damage, in short intervals. Obelisks just suck atm.

/signed

Elrodien · Jun 12, 2007, 02:32 PM // 14:32

Interesting idea. I would even suggest maps were you have moving structures that block paths to the capture points at irregular or regular intervals (swinging rope bridges or cavern doors perhaps).

It would promote more of a skirmish style of play which I think would make be much more fun than 321 mash keys- catch opponents spike - rinse and repeat.

I think the ghostly should remain as he is on the first few maps of HA up until HoH (i.e. as a dopey npc who can be killed for morale boost) but I wouldn't have HoH as an Altar map - even with the capture map there as a 'must play' map, it would still encourage teams to bag lots of defense and hope for the best.

Why not have the HoH as a gvg map where the ghostly becomes the guild lord? That would be awesome imo.

erm

/signed

Death_From_Above · Jun 12, 2007, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by elektra_lucia

Maybe I shouldn't make another thread, move it if so. Anyway,

How about keeping kill count but having points to capture, rather like hero battles. Don't have it where you have to kill A.I like Alliance Battles though.
With all places captured the points you get will be similar to a top spiking team (this will take a while to tweak).
Then hex builds will work, you'll need to concentrate more on snaring, want to kill at times but killing won't be primary objective.
There maybe ganking, but it will make it so you snare the leading team. The holding team always used to get more pressure than the non holding team, so this shouldn't be an issue.
It might promote split builds and other things too. Certain Areas you will lose all enchants, shouts, weapons. This way, the teams that go with all monks and just run, will be able to be killed.

Have the ghostly cap the center for a small bonus to the amount of points you get per minute from having the capture points held. Don't make it so the ghostly is extremely important. It is heroes ascent, I don't see why people should be worrying too much about the ghostly until they have reached the final battle.

For HoH have altar holding or maybe even the kill count/capture map. If there is altar holding for HoH don't allow a skip past the kill count map, then you won't have monks holding for an eternity.

Bad or good idea?

Just out of curiosity. Would anet actually listern to this because iv heard they dont want to pump any resources into HA, basicaly they have given up on it.

Anyways my thoughts, well im not going to comment much on it but to to ask some questions. Sort of like how a buisness man asks questions to someone who brings a new idea asking him to impliment it.

So you talk about encouraging snaring, but wouldnt you be quite affraid of this. What i mean is wouldnt it do sort of what kill count does. Promote snaring. And wouldnt this therefore effect what people run and what they can run if they stand a chance. Just want to as how if say im a team who doesnt want to run any snares, how i will fare with this.

As for the promoting split builds. Wouldnt you fear this because would you say it sort of defeats the whole purpose of the originality of HA. How do you think new players would cope in this enviroment also. Also this idea of splitting, if it promotes splint builds the question i want to ask is so if i dont want to run a split build. What chance do i stand on this map because im sure you will agree, the last thing you want HA to become is sort of like a different form of gvg where all builds basically are split builds. Also how will all these ideas affect the promotion of skill.

It would be much appreciated if you could address these questions for me Thanks

elektra_lucia · Jun 12, 2007, 06:48 PM // 18:48

They'd listen if I wanted them too and cared enough for them too.

Quote:

So you talk about encouraging snaring, but wouldnt you be quite affraid of this.

Nope. Lots of hex removal, and interrupts etc. Would bring back spell breaker perhaps. Warriors might learn to use distract blow again.

Quote:

What i mean is wouldnt it do sort of what kill count does. Promote snaring.

Not just that... I don't find snaring is the issue in kill count at the moment.

Quote:

And wouldnt this therefore effect what people run and what they can run if they stand a chance. Just want to as how if say im a team who doesnt want to run any snares, how i will fare with this.

I said the speed in which you gain points would need tweaking; regardless, adding snares to a build doesn't ruin HA.

Quote:

As for the promoting split builds. Wouldnt you fear this because would you say it sort of defeats the whole purpose of the originality of HA

Maybe some teams would decide to use charge and sprint as a group

.

Quote:

How do you think new players would cope in this enviroment also.

Depends how good they are.

Quote:

Also this idea of splitting, if it promotes splint builds the question i want to ask is so if i dont want to run a split build. What chance do i stand on this map because im sure you will agree, the last thing you want HA to become is sort of like a different form of gvg where all builds basically are split builds.

I have kind of answered that. Remember, if they split and you're a group you'll kill them easily. It would just depend on the rate of which you gain points from capturing places.

Quote:

Also how will all these ideas affect the promotion of skill.

People will learn to interrupt the right targets, snare the right targets, coordinate as a team not gank any old team making the end a little more fair (fairness in three way maps will always be hard).

Im In A Build · Jun 12, 2007, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

Just out of curiosity. Would anet actually listern to this because iv heard they dont want to pump any resources into HA, basicaly they have given up on it.

Anyways my thoughts, well im not going to comment much on it but to to ask some questions. Sort of like how a buisness man asks questions to someone who brings a new idea asking him to impliment it.

So you talk about encouraging snaring, but wouldnt you be quite affraid of this. What i mean is wouldnt it do sort of what kill count does. Promote snaring. And wouldnt this therefore effect what people run and what they can run if they stand a chance. Just want to as how if say im a team who doesnt want to run any snares, how i will fare with this.

As for the promoting split builds. Wouldnt you fear this because would you say it sort of defeats the whole purpose of the originality of HA. How do you think new players would cope in this enviroment also. Also this idea of splitting, if it promotes splint builds the question i want to ask is so if i dont want to run a split build. What chance do i stand on this map because im sure you will agree, the last thing you want HA to become is sort of like a different form of gvg where all builds basically are split builds. Also how will all these ideas affect the promotion of skill.

It would be much appreciated if you could address these questions for me Thanks

another wonderfull post that shows clearly how clueless you are

all gametypes encourage some sort of build you cant stop that from happening and some things should be encouraged like snaring and splitting and movement and positioning

now if you choose to clearly ignore something thats good for a certain gametype and matches in general like snaring well thats your choice and if you lose its your fault and no one elses

elektra_lucia · Jun 12, 2007, 07:10 PM // 19:10

It is highly likely that people will have snares anyway. I did not mention removing relic runs. They will probably have the snares for that.

You are right that all game types will encourage some sort of build. I just tried to think up the best available thing. I think it must be within the games engine as they have done it with hero battles.

Death_From_Above · Jun 12, 2007, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Im In A Build

another wonderfull post that shows clearly how clueless you are

all gametypes encourage some sort of build you cant stop that from happening and some things should be encouraged like snaring and splitting and movement and positioning

now if you choose to clearly ignore something thats good for a certain gametype and matches in general like snaring well thats your choice and if you lose its your fault and no one elses

May i ask how this shows exactly how clueless i am. All i was meerly doing was making an enquiry. I was not stating any points nor making any nor setting any as fact. I just wanted to see what the author of the threads oppinion on some of the questions i possed was and if these where to be an issue how she would tackle it.

Of course i know all gametypes encourage some sort of play and of course you cannont stop that but what i was trying to highlight was how does she feel if HA as a result becomes to dependant on this. And what i was asking is so if you did not decide to run these things would you be able to still succeed say based on skill like it was with alter capping. Some people never built for certain maps or builds but relied on skill to get through.

So rather than looking for ways to get a response please read my actual post properly and understand fully what i was exactly asking and why.

Kool Pajamas · Jun 12, 2007, 07:51 PM // 19:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by elektra_lucia

or maybe even the kill count/capture map.

I'm a little confused on what you meant by this part.

As to the rest, a hero battle type of map might be interesting to play on one map.

For hoh I really think there needs to be at least 1 other map in a rotation that doesnt promote super stationary defensive/healing builds like the old alter holding.

elektra_lucia · Jun 12, 2007, 07:54 PM // 19:54

I mean hero battle type map when I said that. Just didn't explain it very well, my bad.

Kyp Jade · Jun 12, 2007, 08:03 PM // 20:03

Actually I like the idea of getting points for capping places / holding alter idea.
Generally what happens now is dance of dots, one team gets backed back to thier spawn area or corner or whatever, and you have a boring stand off of 3 teams, where the build your playing has a very LARGE impact on the outcome because everyone is sitting until 1 minute remaining because the two teams that arent backed into the corner dont want to let the team out or move as the likelyhood of getting ganked if your first to move is high. (I say this because a team with lots of AoE dmg in this situation is likely to win, or a very strong spike team)

Now on the other hand, if there were points to be gained from holding posistions on the map, situations like this will still happen, but much less frequently. If a team gets backed into a corner, the other two teams ARENT going to just stare them down, they will send off a runner or two to cap places, those guys end up fighting, so more ppl get sent back (you cant just let them have the shrines since no1 is killing much) and you end up with one of the teams moving entirely (letting the stuck team out) or leaving few enough people behind the stuck team can score easy kills and then get out.

This will ALSO incedently discourage res point camping, if you leave your entire team on the res point waiting to own face again, the 3rd team will cap all the other altars. If you leave only a few ppl on the res point you get owned, and the team taht just ressed can probably catch up to the other two in terms of points.

Also the maps are more open and movement is more free than in the HoH room, so ganking becomes a smaller issue, but still exists.

Now for the reality check
---------------------\
While I like the idea, and the tactics it would bring into the two maps, thats a LOT of stuff going on.

I imagine that builds like Rt spike and SF will still see play in these situations, but they would have to work much harder to keep up with the teams that are capping areas

If one team is really stupid (always is) and they just dedicate themselves to gank one team, it hurts more than before, even if you can kill em real fast as the other team gets free caps.

Hmmm less in the reality check than i expected, but g2g

Kyp Jade · Jun 12, 2007, 08:27 PM // 20:27

Actually I like the idea of getting points for capping places / holding alter idea.
Generally what happens now is dance of dots, one team gets backed back to thier spawn area or corner or whatever, and you have a boring stand off of 3 teams, where the build your playing has a very LARGE impact on the outcome because everyone is sitting until 1 minute remaining because the two teams that arent backed into the corner dont want to let the team out or move as the likelyhood of getting ganked if your first to move is high. (I say this because a team with lots of AoE dmg in this situation is likely to win, or a very strong spike team)

Now on the other hand, if there were points to be gained from holding posistions on the map, situations like this will still happen, but much less frequently. If a team gets backed into a corner, the other two teams ARENT going to just stare them down, they will send off a runner or two to cap places, those guys end up fighting, so more ppl get sent back (you cant just let them have the shrines since no1 is killing much) and you end up with one of the teams moving entirely (letting the stuck team out) or leaving few enough people behind the stuck team can score easy kills and then get out.

This will ALSO incedently discourage res point camping, if you leave your entire team on the res point waiting to own face again, the 3rd team will cap all the other altars. If you leave only a few ppl on the res point you get owned, and the team taht just ressed can probably catch up to the other two in terms of points.

Also the maps are more open and movement is more free than in the HoH room, so ganking becomes a smaller issue, but still exists.

Now for the reality check
---------------------\
While I like the idea, and the tactics it would bring into the two maps, thats a LOT of stuff going on.

I imagine that builds like Rt spike and SF will still see play in these situations, but they would have to work much harder to keep up with the teams that are capping areas

If one team is really stupid (always is) and they just dedicate themselves to gank one team, it hurts more than before, even if you can kill em real fast as the other team gets free caps.

Hmmm less in the reality check than i expected, but g2g