Curse

FoxBat · Mar 11, 2007, 06:22 PM // 18:22

They might be working on a modified or alternative to kill count before reinstating 8v8. Or maybe that's wishful thinking...

Bread Fan · Mar 11, 2007, 07:16 PM // 19:16

It just goes to show you that they are a poorly run company. Anet starts a poll and asks for feedback and says the changes will be made at the end of February (almost 2 weeks late and counting). Not once has Anet being on time and they insist on doing "major updates" instead of just balancing a single skill when it is clearly over powered.

Anet has a great track record of screwing up HA. Heroway anyone? Yes GREAT idea making it an IA battle!!! Anet if you have an inadequate staff perhaps you should do some house cleaning and hire someone that would actually be beneficial to the company. I suggest less puff puff pass and come back to reality, please understand you do have a company to run.

As for the diehards that are still around, move on there are better games that have been released since GW.

Death_From_Above · Mar 12, 2007, 12:13 AM // 00:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurse With Wound

Please, calm down people. Anet are preparing new changes, mostly based on our requests/ feedback. The reason why their rep are avoiding our lovely forums, is the hard time they are getting here....

I know thats not fair that we have to wait for so long, but the changes are coming, and even if thats too late, please be patient, and dont flame them so openly and so often. Otherwise, we are going to be avoided, and Gaile and Alex will be posting only on noob GWO, and they will get all the info/polls and whatnot.

Just chill out a little.....

I understand completely what your saying but a part of me cant let this down. Anet have been saying were preparing new changes this and that based on feed back an requests. But its all just complete rubbish. Its like they say it just to keep us quite. Not one change since the dam 6v6 has been what we have wanted. Oh they removed kill count from HA, so happy. If they actually looked at the feedback they would see we want it gone completely.

There just lieing to use i feel to make themselves look good (oh we listern to our players) when really they dont. There just as bad as blizard. I have to wait 8 months before you fix what you messed up? As i said before Galie does not need to replie if shes affraid, but at the end of the day you reap what you sow. You cant have orange juice without the bitterness inside. Anet have wound up the HA community and now it is time they were held accountable for their actions. The company who is serious and wants to fix what they have broken would try to win back their customers no matter what the costs.

They wont lock themselves from them. If anet are affraid of getting burned then they obviously dont care about the HA community which i have now been lead to believe, or its just like if we lose these players it dont matter anyway we should risk anything trying to consol them. You cant say stupid things like i think kc has been a success epecially when the HA community is angry as it is. And have said no it isnt ect. And expect us to remain silent. 8 months we have been waiting now, 8 months. Thats not a short time, its almost a year. 9 months it takes to have a child. thats the time frame were looking at. 8 months of the HA community being wound up. All we want to know from anet is whether they are simply going to give us what we want. OR if their going to play cat and mouse.

Because if their not serious about what we want. then just tell me so i can uninstall gw because right now it takes 3 gb or space on comp which is not worth it. and let me move on like many other HA players. Im fed up on this false hope weve been given. Anet used 2 be so punctual, so good, a company i could actually applaud. But now, its become one which has only made me regret i spent my money on. Im sorry for the harsh words but thats how i feel about this matter. And i feel this must be said if anet think they can continue doing what their doing to the HA community, and expect us to be all smiles and silent about it.

l Batman l · Mar 12, 2007, 01:49 AM // 01:49

I don't care about the party size. I'd much rather have the 2+ player maps revised. Also, shorter time on relic maps.

Randomway Ftw · Mar 12, 2007, 02:00 AM // 02:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by l Batman l

I don't care about the party size. I'd much rather have the 2+ player maps revised. Also, shorter time on relic maps.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the time limit on relic maps, I don't find it very long, and it can be fun for the entire 10 minutes if its close. It isn't like teams can prolong it very long without any possibility of winning, as matches that last till the end are usualy close, or non competitive and end quickly.

The only questionable tactic on relics is when both teams have the relics near their ghosts and wait till the absolute last second to cap, however that's very minor and not really a problem.

ANET should not fix things that aren't broken, we all know what happens when they do that.

coleslawdressin · Mar 12, 2007, 02:50 AM // 02:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bread Fan

Anet starts a poll and asks for feedback and says the changes will be made at the end of February (almost 2 weeks late and counting).

As for the diehards that are still around, move on there are better games that have been released since GW.

Where exactly did they promise that? I don't doubt it just want a link/quote.

Also, what game compares to anything close to what GW --could-- be. I have found some other good stuff but nothing that fills the void of GW.

On another note, Izzy was on WOC (radio show) today but the question about 6v6 or 8v8 wasn't asked because of the dipshit host Kestrel refusing to. If Izzy has to jump through so many hoops to appear and make public statements, somebody with a real interest in the PVP community should be selecting questions.

Alleji · Mar 12, 2007, 04:26 AM // 04:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by coleslawdressin

Also, what game compares to anything close to what GW --could-- be. I have found some other good stuff but nothing that fills the void of GW.

None, yet...

jevN the unknOwn · Mar 13, 2007, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Come on, get back 8vs8!
HA is NO fun with 6vs6.

Zenos Squad · Mar 14, 2007, 07:24 PM // 19:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by coleslawdressin

Where exactly did they promise that? I don't doubt it just want a link/quote.

Also, what game compares to anything close to what GW --could-- be. I have found some other good stuff but nothing that fills the void of GW.

On another note, Izzy was on WOC (radio show) today but the question about 6v6 or 8v8 wasn't asked because of the dipshit host Kestrel refusing to. If Izzy has to jump through so many hoops to appear and make public statements, somebody with a real interest in the PVP community should be selecting questions.

Lol, noob kestrel.

Anet must realize that when they don't put changes up to date for us, they slowly lose players everyday, the more we wait the faster they lose players than they get.

vapor311 · Mar 14, 2007, 07:38 PM // 19:38

Actually, I'm pretty sure Kestrel's show is GvG only, so why on earth would he or his listeners care if HA is 6v6 or 8v8?

Alleji · Mar 14, 2007, 08:35 PM // 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

None, yet...

Hm, did all the discussion about fury after this post get deleted?

Interesting.

Death_From_Above · Mar 14, 2007, 08:42 PM // 20:42

why how many fury posts where there?

coleslawdressin · Mar 14, 2007, 08:59 PM // 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by vapor311

Actually, I'm pretty sure Kestrel's show is GvG only, so why on earth would he or his listeners care if HA is 6v6 or 8v8?

Izzy should only appear on Wednesday WOC if Kestrel will outright ignore important questions based on his own personal preference.

Tea Girl · Mar 14, 2007, 09:17 PM // 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Death_From_Above

why how many fury posts where there?

Um about a page. It's time for a new game for me too =)

GG. HA.

Death_From_Above · Mar 14, 2007, 09:34 PM // 21:34

why did they deleate them. ANETS bassicaly asking HA players to go somewhere else so they can attract more pvers am i wrong?

Nurse With Wound · Mar 15, 2007, 12:19 AM // 00:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

Hm, did all the discussion about fury after this post get deleted?

Interesting.

I didnt delte them Alleji, i moved them to a separate thread, because they were offtopic...

If you're interested, heres the link http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10129831

Alleji · Mar 15, 2007, 03:33 AM // 03:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nurse With Wound

I didnt delte them Alleji, i moved them to a separate thread, because they were offtopic...

If you're interested, heres the link http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...php?t=10129831

Ah... posting a message when you do that kind of thing would help a lot :P

I thought Gaile came in and decided to randomly censor us because someone peed in her cornflakes or something...

Zenos Squad · Mar 22, 2007, 06:10 AM // 06:10

Can Gaile at least post something back to inform us about anything? Its great they focus on PvE a lot, but not all of us enjoy PvE as much as PvP.

Anything will do....

Selket · Mar 22, 2007, 05:44 PM // 17:44

The main problem with 8v8 is the fact that matches are way to defensive with 3-4-4.5(defensive utility) defensive character backlines causing matches to be far too drawn out.

With 6v6 the most you'll ever see is 3, and in doing so one is sacrificing a large portion of offensive capabilities.

While HA is nothing like it once was in 8v8 with different objectives, I think that the current objective based hall of heroes is much more balanced towards 6v6 all things considered.

Take the current murderball for example, with 6 people, you designate 2 runners, have your monks near the altar and have the last two people bodyblock/snare/delay the opposing teams.

With 8 you'd have another 6 people (2 per team) doing the same thing, creating almost impassible blocks/complete map lockdown for both teams, making the game far less enjoyable, less about team-based tactics and more about simply stopping the other teams entirely.

With Capture Points, your splits get a lot more defensive, since you can split a monk off to each point and so can the other team, essentially requiring one to simply send back more people to catch points rather than being able to actually eliminate enemies (or at least somewhat-easily eliminate enemies).

For king of the hill, it makes holding that much easier, making it harder to knock any team off the altar, potentially creating 1-sided matches.

With the current HoH, I just can't see how anyone would prefer having more defensive, longer, and just plain boring halls matches. I strongly prefer 6v6's kill based style over 8v8's defensive, boring, and outright lame style. I would think that HoH would need a lot more work to be balanced properly.

Though these comments more than likely fall on deaf ears, I thought I'd still throw them out there.

Bastian · Mar 22, 2007, 06:29 PM // 18:29

I must applaud you for receiving the Gold Ribbon for arguments for 6v6. This is by far the best post actually trying to defend the benefits of 6v6 (of which there are some). Hopefully, I can debunk these points though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Selket

The main problem with 8v8 is the fact that matches are way to defensive with 3-4-4.5(defensive utility) defensive character backlines causing matches to be far too drawn out.

With 6v6 the most you'll ever see is 3, and in doing so one is sacrificing a large portion of offensive capabilities.

This may have been true for 8v8 in the alter capping/holding system, however, it is not a good style of gameplan with the new mechanics. Assuming we are only talking about party size and not a change in mechanics, this would most likely mean an auto-loss in places like kill count maps.

Additionally, purely defensive teams typically do not offer much pressure against offensive teams with a 2 monk backline. If (like me) you prefer to run something much more aggressive and offensive then you are not posed with much of a threat from a team like this. Of course, this may create a lengthy battle - but the team with more offense should be able to win if they can coordinate attacks and tactics and take down the biggest defensive shutdown character. Typically, a team like this will far apart quickly after a few kills because they don't have enough pressure to actually cause the offensive team to have to stop pushing hard.

Quote:

While HA is nothing like it once was in 8v8 with different objectives, I think that the current objective based hall of heroes is much more balanced towards 6v6 all things considered.

Take the current murderball for example, with 6 people, you designate 2 runners, have your monks near the altar and have the last two people bodyblock/snare/delay the opposing teams.

With 8 you'd have another 6 people (2 per team) doing the same thing, creating almost impassible blocks/complete map lockdown for both teams, making the game far less enjoyable, less about team-based tactics and more about simply stopping the other teams entirely.

I think that 8v8 with HoH objectives is actually more fun. From a 6v6 perspective there isn't much change in general tactics. Using the relic running example: typically you have 2 runners, 2 monks, and 2 characters dedicated to stopping other runners. This doesn't really change no matter what type of build you are running. However, in 8v8 you would have many more options which would keep the gameplay from getting stale. You could use 4 characters to just lineback - freeing up space to run as much as possible without worrying about the other team. You could dedicate 4 characters to just stopping the run, leaving the monks to keep your own runners up. Or you could do any combination of things. Quite simply, more character = more options for tactics/utility.

Quote:

With Capture Points, your splits get a lot more defensive, since you can split a monk off to each point and so can the other team, essentially requiring one to simply send back more people to catch points rather than being able to actually eliminate enemies (or at least somewhat-easily eliminate enemies).

Again, this does change the tactics of the game - but does not make the game any better/worse. I actually think that 8v8 was fun with capture points because you can choose to run more than 2 groups for capturing. I normally don't run a 3 monk backline, we would split 4 and 4, but I would love to split 3/3/3 as well for capping. Either way, it makes for much more interesting gameplay with 8v8 IMO.

Quote:

For king of the hill, it makes holding that much easier, making it harder to knock any team off the altar, potentially creating 1-sided matches.

But if you get knocked off the alter - then how hard is it to get back on? True, the holding team will have an advantage - but they always do.

Quote:

With the current HoH, I just can't see how anyone would prefer having more defensive, longer, and just plain boring halls matches. I strongly prefer 6v6's kill based style over 8v8's defensive, boring, and outright lame style. I would think that HoH would need a lot more work to be balanced properly.

Though these comments more than likely fall on deaf ears, I thought I'd still throw them out there.

Actually, what is changing the defensive minded teams to offensive minded teams are the changes to HA's mechanics - not party size. If you are new to HA, you may have forgotten SoMW, The Paragon Holding Teams, Zergway, Etc. As long as the mechanics promote holding, then there will be defensive teams no matter what size party is used.

IMO, there needs to be a happy middle ground between the old mechanics and new mechanics. 8v8 allows for more utility and is better because GW is balanced around 64 skills in a team. Mechanics and overpowered skills determine what types of teams you will find in HA.