Curse

Death_From_Above · May 20, 2007, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Mendes

Well, my point is that HA isn't as bad as people make it out to be, and for the first time since nightfall release I actually had fun running a proper balanced build in HA (not some crappy 3 monk crap).
And tbh it was not like there was no diversity (SF, gay spikes, thumper pressure, panic, etc), it's just that there are some team builds and character templates that are boring to play against, which is exactly how it was when altars were around (chokers anyone?).
I mean sure kill count is gay, but so were altars. As long as halls remains multiple objectives (and the objectives are made less retarded), I think they can do whatever they want with broken and courtyard, the better team will generally come out on top with a balanced build.

Its a pity then the other 20 million players didnt feel the same. You may feel that way about HA but the majority dont. Its like some people liked 6v6, the majority didnt. In the end we can see that by the amount of people playing it, obviously this means that whether what you see is true or not, it is not a productable way to have HA. Its like saying im a manger of a buisness in product design, i can do something my way which is better and more effiecent *cough not that kill count or any of the changes anet have made to HA are *cough*. Sorry bad cough there, anyway so if i decide to do it my way and people however dont like it. Does it mean i should still do it the most effiecent way possible and get low customer sales or should i change to to how the majority of customers like it and get high product sales.

Understand what im getting at now?

Skuld · May 20, 2007, 10:57 PM // 22:57

You speak for the majority eh?

yesitsrob · May 21, 2007, 09:19 AM // 09:19

You say the Majority didn't like 6v6, when you are talking about the majority - do you mean the majority of HA players are the majority of PVP players? The majority of PVP players don't like HA... >_> - They will try things out to make more players play HA, so what if they fail.

HA has barely gotten more popular since it was made 8v8 again. It sucks just as hard.

Kill Count vs Altars - wow talk about 2 immense evils and having to pick the lesser. Altars were horrible and encouraged some of the most atrociously dull builds ever to be ran. Kill Count makes it a bit of a Spikefest or Smashface type builds.

Fixing Heroes ascent, which has never ever been close to perfect is such an immense task that it will not happen. Because they have important things to think about. Like Hero Battles lololololol

Bread Fan · May 21, 2007, 09:41 AM // 09:41

Why do you people continue to argue about HA? You really think they are going to remove kill count? You guys look like a bunch of chumps for sticking around this long. Move on to a better game and boycott future NCsoft products.

lucky k · May 21, 2007, 09:49 AM // 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bread Fan

Why do you people continue to argue about HA? You really think they are going to remove kill count? You guys look like a bunch of chumps for sticking around this long. Move on to a better game and boycott future NCsoft products.

Ya man im really trying hard to find reasons to log in to gw. This game has hit the skids... Anet takes forever to even attempt to fix anything. But what can we do this happens to all games including my alltime favorites. BF2 and Age of Empires RoR
Hey Starcraft 2 anyone? Google it

Death_From_Above · May 21, 2007, 10:17 AM // 10:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bread Fan

Why do you people continue to argue about HA? You really think they are going to remove kill count? You guys look like a bunch of chumps for sticking around this long. Move on to a better game and boycott future NCsoft products.

To be honest with you, i do think anet will eventually remove kill count just like they eventually removed alter capping. However i think this will take a while because they obviously ........... . Anyways, does anet even care about HA, that is the question. Obviously not because izzy the only supposed one in anet who knows anything about HA (pvp) in anet. *though i think my pet gold fish who forgets his memory every 5 seconds knows more* wasnt even present at that question the devs thing.

This stuff with ha is just pure sloppy now. I honestly think somethings wrong with anet, doing so well then at implimentation of 6v6 its like there track record plummets???????? Are you guys sure they havent got no new management or something. Also yesitsrob, 8v8 now sucks almost as much as 6v6 but thats because we havent got the 8v8 we want. 8v8 with alter maps. Ok many of you are like oh alter games sucked though you saw so many lame builds. Can i ask one question then, why was it i was able to get to halls on many occasions through pure skill if holding builds where such a problem. And why is it you could even go in knowing you could win it or would win it.

This nonsence about alter holding builds and alter maps being dullllll is nonsence. Why is it then i never heard complaints about oh alter maps should be gotten rid of when we had them? I believe due to the fact non of you have played alter maps for so long, your confusing its eliteness with the suckyness of kill count and 6v6. If you cast your mind back to alter maps im sure youll remember you most likely loved it.

The reason why i can make this assumption is becaus emany of you are saying holding builds on alter maps sucked ect. When this isnt even true although logicaly you would this it would be. Take healballs as an example, maelstrom and gg. Basically no holding team could withstand two teams who were decent. Holding teams where never a problem and could easily be removed off alter it just took more tatcis and more skill, and alot of the time infact you found youself playing agasint balanced teams or new builds ect. So why pretend theres a problem in a place where their obviously isnt?

One question i want you to all think about and post here in relation to. How many of you where complaining about alter maps and claiming they needed to be removed before the implimentation of 6v6. I rest my case.

yesitsrob · May 21, 2007, 10:42 AM // 10:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

This nonsence about alter holding builds and alter maps being dullllll is nonsence. Why is it then i never heard complaints about oh alter maps should be gotten rid of when we had them? I believe due to the fact non of you have played alter maps for so long, your confusing its eliteness with the suckyness of kill count and 6v6. If you cast your mind back to alter maps im sure youll remember you most likely loved it.

Ok, my mistake, I actually think fighting Signet of Mystic Wraith Spike was THRILLING. Oh wait, no, no it wasn't.

Casting my mind back to altar maps.... yeah, they suck. wow. I hate kill count, but I prefer it to shitty altars. I can see how some people _loved_ holding builds, since they'd be able to get tigers and llamas or whatever and try and convince people they aren't atrocious at the game.

Lord Mendes · May 21, 2007, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

Casting my mind back to altar maps.... yeah, they suck. wow. I hate kill count, but I prefer it to shitty altars. I can see how some people _loved_ holding builds, since they'd be able to get tigers and llamas or whatever and try and convince people they aren't atrocious at the game.

+1
..........

Randomway Ftw · May 21, 2007, 02:55 PM // 14:55

If you actually think kill count is better than altars, you are beyond saving, you are a complete and utter moron.

If you cannot beat a build 2v1, that is not based on some ridiculously broken skill you need to stop complaining a figure out what you were doing wrong.

The fact is that the major complaints about altars only became prevalent with e finale holding builds, people started making posts like "omg warrior with wars, 20 minutes matches Lame!!!!!", instead of acknowledging that the most serious issue had been dealt with after the energizing finale nerf, people continued to use holding builds as an excuse for there own inability to defeat teams holding halls. People continue to refer to this as an example of why altars suck, despite the fact that it was only an interruption of altars working fine.

If halls is going to remain multi objective for the immediate future (which hopefully will change), I fail to see how anyone could be opposed to making broken tower and courtyard altar holding. The fact is that its better than kill count, and is not the final objective of halls.

Death_From_Above · May 21, 2007, 05:41 PM // 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

Ok, my mistake, I actually think fighting Signet of Mystic Wraith Spike was THRILLING. Oh wait, no, no it wasn't.

Casting my mind back to altar maps.... yeah, they suck. wow. I hate kill count, but I prefer it to shitty altars. I can see how some people _loved_ holding builds, since they'd be able to get tigers and llamas or whatever and try and convince people they aren't atrocious at the game.

OH MY DAYS DUDE YOU obviously have lost seemed to have lost the whole idea of what HA was like. No wonder you claim kill count owns. Thought what you were sayign was a bit odd because check this out.

Signet of Mystic Wrath [edit] Signet. Target foe takes 5...29 holy damage for each Enchantment on you (maximum 100 holy damage). 2 20

Nightfall

Yes its a nitefall skill. If i recall, 8v8 with alter maps has never been played in nitefall. So what in the world are you on about. You sir are a prime example of what has happened to some of the HA community. Due to the fact they have been restricted from the amazing gametype that was the old HA. They are now hallucinating and beinging to use common knowledge or logic to assess how things where. Thats why this idea of mystic spike has come in, obviously this is from a 6v6 day correct? People assume holding builds would be a problem because they havent played it for so long, so using common knowledge holding builds would be but in reality they are not. Please come back to earth people because this is rediculous.

Secondly, very few people played holding builds lol. Yes we sometimes catered for alter maps but you often fround with altermapping the majority never ran a pure holding build. Also holding builds got owned at relic runs and stuff. Just tell me dear sir. How many times did you fight a holding build in HA. I can tell you *and yes i still have my memory,* i probaly fought one once every 3 or 4 runs. And a majority of the time they got there chops handed to them by myself and my team. If you find it hard to beat holding builds, then you are obviously just finding it hard to play the game.

I asked a question before, if alter capping was such a problem. Can you tell me how many people where here on this very forum saying anet remove alter maps please. Can you please tell me if you were even one of theses *non exsistant people.* If holding builds is your whole argument to get rid of alter capping, then your argument is seriously flawed. You dont have to get rid of the whole mechanic in order to get rid of holding builds (which were very few). All you need to do is impliment something so that skipping to HA is less likely or something or not possible so they have to go through the maps they struggle on such as relic runs. Now this would be the sensible option, its less work and it would work.

Would you not agree. Also, just to let you know, the majority dont play holding builds and so they dont get tigers ect as you assume from it.

Lord Mendes · May 21, 2007, 07:21 PM // 19:21

I promised myself I wouldn't get into quote wars because the general IQ level here is too high for normal folks like me, but...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

If you actually think kill count is better than altars, you are beyond saving, you are a complete and utter moron.
If you cannot beat a build 2v1, that is not based on some ridiculously broken skill you need to stop complaining a figure out what you were doing wrong.

Good point!
Now this is what worries me. If you think that I don't mind kill count because I was bad at altar maps, think again. I probably did much better than you did back when altars were hot, and I'll bet Rob is in the same boat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

The fact is that the major complaints about altars only became prevalent with e finale holding builds, people started making posts like "omg warrior with wars, 20 minutes matches Lame!!!!!"

Another good point!
It's not like 3 monk backlines + warder was very boring to play or play against. It's not like being forced to take (multiple) reliable (elite) interuption just for altar lead to slow and stale gameplay, and really restricted your build variety. It's not like teams ever played for skips with mass holding builds, and usually made me want to kill myself whenever I came up against them.
When someone speaks against altars, it must be because he sucked at it, right? Absolutely nothing to do with the reasons above. You got me!
Scrub.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

If halls is going to remain multi objective for the immediate future (which hopefully will change)

Ok, by this statement you are implying that halls will hopefully be changed from having multiple objective to just one (alter holding as DFA would say). If you really think that, "you are beyond saving, you are a complete and utter moron." Seriously, don't even bother. I... don't... understand...
__________________________________________________ ______

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

No wonder you claim kill count owns.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

I hate kill count, but I prefer it to shitty altars.

You sure got him!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

Secondly, very few people played holding builds lol.

Balanced builds with a warder (often with PD), two seeking arrows rangers (sometimes a Pd mesmer instead of one of the rangers), and a 3 monk backline (one with SB) WERE holding builds, whether you can get that through your thick skull or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

One question i want you to all think about and post here in relation to. How many of you where complaining about alter maps and claiming they needed to be removed before the implimentation of 6v6. I rest my case.

How the hell is that relevant? You think 6v6 made me hate altars. LOL KILLER ARGUMENT!
GG! YOU ARE TOO GOOD FOR ME!
It's funny because even though I didn't support pre-nightfall 6v6, I thought it was the most balanced altars had ever been because you either had no room to pack crappy altar utility, or packed loads of it and made it the focus of your build and got whiped in underworld.
__________________________________________________ _______
Look, my position is still the same, and you can find my post on the first page (funny how you charged into an argument, even though I am on your "side"). I am just trying to say that both modes are shit, and reverting back won't help much. AltErs are easily as shit as kill count, and nightfall is to blame for the stale meta and powercreep. Other than that, NUMEROUS builds currently work in HA, and it isn't that bad. Good balanced still beats shitty gimmicks, and I don't have to load my builds with all sorts of crap I would never run under normal circumstances.

Parting note:

Quote:

You say the Majority didn't like 6v6, when you are talking about the majority - do you mean the majority of HA players are the majority of PVP players? The majority of PVP players don't like HA... >_> - They will try things out to make more players play HA, so what if they fail.

Kill Count vs Altars - wow talk about 2 immense evils and having to pick the lesser. Altars were horrible and encouraged some of the most atrociously dull builds ever to be ran. Kill Count makes it a bit of a Spikefest or Smashface type builds.

Good night children.

Death_From_Above · May 21, 2007, 08:00 PM // 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Mendes

Now this is what worries me. If you think that I don't mind kill count because I was bad at altar maps, think again. I probably did much better than you did back when altars were hot, and I'll bet Rob is in the same boat.

Absolutely nothing to do with the reasons above. You got me!
Scrub.

Ok, by this statement you are implying that halls will hopefully be changed from having multiple objective to just one (alter holding as DFA would say). If you really think that, "you are beyond saving, you are a complete and utter moron." Seriously, don't even bother. I... don't... understand...
__________________________________________________ _______
Look, my position is still the same, and you can find my post on the first page (funny how you charged into an argument, even though I am on your "side"). I am just trying to say that both modes are shit, and reverting back won't help much. AltErs are easily as shit as kill count, and nightfall is to blame for the stale meta and powercreep. Other than that, NUMEROUS builds currently work in HA, and it isn't that bad. Good balanced still beats shitty gimmicks, and I don't have to load my builds with all sorts of crap I would never run under normal circumstances.

Dont worry its ok *pats on back,* your obviously suffering from post Hallsnoaltermapshock syndrome depression. We understand anet has made us all suffer to. If halls with alter map sucked so much and that isnt just your minority individual oppinion. Why is it less people are playing now than with alter maps. Why is it halls used 2 blossem and now its been died off? These questions are fundemental questions which remain.

My question, still answerd. Where you and many other people, where you or where you not complaining the alter mechanic needed removal when it was here? As for your alter maps forced you to pack interupts ect. Erm did it, if i recall every 2/3 teams never took loads of interupts as you claim. Many of them say took 1 and that was a shock on a war or something. Fact is you can run interupters or you can run something else, no one forces you. It was still possible to win either way it just depended on your level of skill.

Please im asking of you, come back to reality and get off that plannet with 0 gravity because alot of your points i dont understand. Yes kill count sucks, but alter maps. You and that other guy other there seem to be the only experianced pvpers who adopt this view. I remeber your guild, though i dont know if you were in it when you were in our alliance. But you guys loved HA and alter maps. Infact we even had some enjoyable macthes. Are you honestly stating that all this time you loathed it.

Divinus Stella · May 21, 2007, 08:13 PM // 20:13

Finally the troll has been banned!

Skuld · May 21, 2007, 08:24 PM // 20:24

Overfarmed for phat lewt

Randomway Ftw · May 21, 2007, 08:24 PM // 20:24

[QUOTE=Lord Mendes]

Quote:

Good point!
Now this is what worries me. If you think that I don't mind kill count because I was bad at altar maps, think again. I probably did much better than you did back when altars were hot, and I'll bet Rob is in the same boat.

Ok, I can play this game also, nice post. , seriously this thread is about halls, not RAndomway Vs. Mendes

Quote:

Another good point!
It's not like 3 monk backlines + warder was very boring to play or play against. It's not like being forced to take (multiple) reliable (elite) interuption just for altar lead to slow and stale gameplay, and really restricted your build variety. It's not like teams ever played for skips with mass holding builds, and usually made me want to kill myself whenever I came up against them.
When someone speaks against altars, it must be because he sucked at it, right? Absolutely nothing to do with the reasons above. You got me!
Scrub.

No one forced you to take multiple elite reliable interrupts, or a three monk backline plus a warder, its been proven that you didn't need those to succeed , just because that's the FOTM doesn't mean you have to play it.

Thomas.knbk · May 21, 2007, 08:59 PM // 20:59

You didn't like altars mendes? I'm surprised.
Not because I think it's a good system (I don't really have an opinion on that, because I wasn't that active in HA in the altar age, or after the altar age for that matter), but because I always thought StP was an HA guild that only got into GvG recently (the fact that I was like the only one there without a tiger might've helped giving me that impression), and why would you play HA so much if you don't even like it?

Gimme Money Plzkthx · May 21, 2007, 10:13 PM // 22:13

One reason that altars>killcount: More people would HA, which would mean more groups, less skips, easier to find a pug, and generally more fun, and winning halls (might) mean something (kind of) as you probably didn't skip half the maps. Seriously, practically nobody HAs any more. Also, altars encouraged holding but you could still do well without building completely for it, whereas killcount REQUIRES mad offense or a spike.

Divinus Stella · May 21, 2007, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Altars>Killcount, lesser of two evils.

The main issues in HA are tank builds, paragon spike and zergway are both so boring to play against, hex builds would naturally be the best response but any build without nukers and bashers is pretty RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed on killcount.

Dont listen to Mendes, once in halls he killed himeself with ether prodigy when he was running back to grab another ghostly.

Acehigh · May 21, 2007, 11:05 PM // 23:05

Altar matches were way more fun than killcount ever has been.You could take more counters to the builds that were around at the time and not have to worry about having more kills.

@Thomas:Mendes is only R7,he spends too much time on guru trolling

Lord Mendes · May 21, 2007, 11:08 PM // 23:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas.knbk

You didn't like altars mendes? I'm surprised.
[...]and why would you play HA so much if you don't even like it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

[...]But you guys loved HA and alter maps. [...]Are you honestly stating that all this time you loathed it.

Well it's not really like that. I don't loathe altars, and I never really did. It's just that some of you think it is the solution, but it isn't.
Frankly, I don't know, it's all the same shit for me, just don't think that HA will be any more populated if altar maps are restored.
If you believe HA itself should no longer be multiple objectives, then you are dumb. Case closed.