Curse

krakenstar · Mar 22, 2007, 05:24 PM // 17:24

There's a lot of thoughts on balancing skills - so I thought I'd start something a bit different to help the metagame a bit.

1 - Random maps for GvG. Hopefully this will help to minimize gimmick builds.

2 - No more than 2 copies (or 1) of the same skill in a team.

3 - A 2 skill "sideboard". Each character may bring 2 skills they can swap in during the battle, and sideboarding will occur at specific time during GvG. (5 mins, and 15 mins in). This is to bring some very specific to counter certain annoying builds in the current metagame.

Randomway Ftw · Mar 22, 2007, 05:33 PM // 17:33

Learn to play and suck less, changes like this are stupid, they make would make the game completely retarted, gimmick builds have been around forever and people have always found ways around them, we don't need anet to restrict skills, or allow skill swapping to deal with gimmicks.

Div · Mar 22, 2007, 05:43 PM // 17:43

If all maps were random, then the defending team wouldn't have that much of an advantage anymore...say they run a split build and the stronger team runs a hex pressure, and it "random'ed" to burning isle. gg.

Also, no more than 2 copies of the same skill? Mending touch? Holy Veil? RoF? Rez sig? Bulls' strike when running 3 warriors? Avatar of melandru with 3 dervishes? It'd be a disaster even for balanced teams. Having no more than 1 copy is even funnier.

Sideboard? This isn't magic: the gathering. what're you gonna do? pause the game at 5 minutes and give people 30 seconds to switch in some skills? This doesn't work in theory and wouldn't work in practice...also 2 skills can drastically change a character from ganker to heavy pressure, and having that freedom to change is insane.

Sure these things might stop some gimmicks, but it's going to destroy a lot of good balanced builds too, and also destroy much of the gameplay with random maps and sideboard...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

Learn to play and suck less, changes like this are stupid, they make would make the game completely retarted, gimmick builds have been around forever and people have always found ways around them, we don't need anet to restrict skills, or allow skill swapping to deal with gimmicks.

lol, what I said, except more direct...

Blame the Monks · Mar 22, 2007, 06:55 PM // 18:55

Just because people suck doesn't mean the game isn't IMBA. While I agree his solution isn't ideal, SOMETHING needs to be done about the persistent flawed mechanics that promote gimmicks and spikes.

Ensign · Mar 22, 2007, 08:22 PM // 20:22

Some sort of randomized or predetermined map mechanic for tournament play is required at this point. As is maps are part of people's builds and it's potentially a huge advantage in what is supposed to be an even match.

Every other change suggested hinges on "because Arena.net cannot balance their game"...a lot of the suggestions seem pretty radical at glance, and of course would be completely unwarranted if Guild Wars was being balanced, but because it's not and there is a long enough history for us to assume that it won't be, you might as well accept weak balance and start suggesting other mechanical workarounds, like skill swapping.

Peace,
-CxE

kvndoom · Mar 22, 2007, 09:39 PM // 21:39

Weekly skill balances, and "emergency updates" when exploits are found. There are enough skills and combinations that a patch per week could easily be done. If it breaks something or makes something imba, fix it immediately if it's severe or fix it next week if it's not game-breaking.

USE the feedback when you ask for it... this has gotten so deep under my skin. So many useful suggestions were made during the test periods and so little has been done since.

Only a steady, reliable pattern of balance updates will improve PVP and keep it from being so stale.

Having said that, I'm going to wake up now. Some dreams will never come true.

FoxBat · Mar 22, 2007, 11:48 PM // 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by holymasamune

Sideboard? This isn't magic: the gathering. what're you gonna do?

Well, I think something like that would be good for ATs actually, assuming they stick to the 3-game match. Pick your build before the first game which is "locked" for the entire match, along with 2 optional sideboard skills (per char). After game 1 and before game 2, you can swap in these two skills (and them only.)

krakenstar · Mar 23, 2007, 12:12 AM // 00:12

I'm not saying that those are the solutions, I'm here just to get the discussion started. I'll also ignore the "suck-less" type replies, as whether I suck or not, these are some of the concerns mentioned by some of the top players in the community.

My post also assume that the skills will never be balanced, and that gimmick builds will always exist. I'm also assuming that ANet continue with their current rate of balancing, and does not want this game to always be static - IE the metagame is there by ANET design and designed to be constantly shifting.

Sideboard mechanism can be easily achieved with a simple window, drag and drop the skill you want to replace before the 5/15 min, and it will happen at that time. There is a reason why sideboard exist in most games like Magic - it's the only way for gimmick builds not to dominate. It's also a LOT less consuming then balancing all the skill combinations, specially if the maps are not random. Since you can only bring 2 copies of each skill, its *much* harder to abuse those few broken skills.

Does that mean you'll have the flexibility to change from spike to pressure ? sure it does. For melees it probably makes sense to do so. However for most of the other characters in your build you'll probably want to bring extra enchantment/hex removal or some such to counter the current gimmicky meta. (or god forbid, a new skill that can remove weapon skills).

It also means that yes, you can't have Gole on all the monks, 4 copies of aegis. Is this a bad thing? Not unless you're trying to promote gimmick builds. Balanced builds can survive changes like this with the fewest changes in comparison, and we might see some more skills in play in the meta.

The res signet is a good point - perhaps it can be exempt. If it isn't though, it really would make the game a lot more exciting. I think a lot of builds don't use res sigs on all characters already atm (ie no hard res or soft res).

I'm not here to nikpik specific situation and/or skills, but I think the game should change for the better overall if some of those 3 ideas were to be implemented.

Vermilion · Mar 23, 2007, 12:33 AM // 00:33

Would the sideboard include elite skills? Itd be really annoying to run a hex build and have monks switching off their rc for divert midmatch. You can't change off a migraine for an MoR dom or something, so youd get screwed in that case.

But yeah, *something* needs to done..at least you're thinking.

tunabreath · Mar 23, 2007, 10:48 AM // 10:48

ability to "thumbs down" 3 maps each > random maps imo.

krakenstar · Mar 23, 2007, 02:35 PM // 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tunabreath

ability to "thumbs down" 3 maps each > random maps imo.

There we go, that *is* a lot better than random. How about the attacking team gets to thumb down 3 maps and the defending team gets to choose from the rest? That means the defender still get some advantage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vermilion

Would the sideboard include elite skills? Itd be really annoying to run a hex build and have monks switching off their rc for divert midmatch. You can't change off a migraine for an MoR dom or something, so youd get screwed in that case.

I think either way is fine. The ability to sideboard an elite means the change is bigger, while if you cannot the change is less drastic. Remember tho, they can only have 2 copies of divert at best, so sub in signet of humility and power return for example.

Patrick Smit · Mar 23, 2007, 03:14 PM // 15:14

Thom Bangalter came with the idea of the thumbs down on certain maps in another topic. Now what would be the trick to deal with it, is (I think) that 8 maps will be favored, and 8 maps will be disfavored. It is very unlikely that with 16 maps they will choose opposing maps. if u really want to make it work and avoid any chance they would need to redo the procedure u could suggest 7 disfavored maps, while 9 are then automnatically favoured. There will be perse a match that could be accaptable to both parties. See it more like a duel on "neutral" territory then a defender versus attacker.

Byron · Mar 23, 2007, 03:52 PM // 15:52

Randomized map selection would be the best (and a most refreshing) option at this point. I'd be much happier with a luck factor over a scrub factor.