 |
|
Jan 24, 2007, 01:57 PM // 13:57
|
#81 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Jun 2005
|
I got my r9 last a year ago december... and my r10 like 3 months after that and really hoh has gone nothing but downhill. Change it back, rework the maps a bit... and make it 8v8 is the only way that the good players will come back. Right now it's the bad players fighting worse players. Thats a great place for innovation...
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 03:35 PM // 15:35
|
#82 | |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Belgium
|
Quote:
All those builds they "nerfed" by reducing party size are coming back; Rangerspike, bloodspike, iway, vimway,... On top of that you get a crapload of builds that were extremely powerful in 6v6, that will get even more powerful in 8v8: Searing Flames teams, Zergway, Jagged bones, Spiritway,... 8v8 would definately be a game mode that brings back flexibility in builds and tactics, but i seriously doubt it that the majority of players in HA will start doing well balanced builds and thought out tactics just because its 8v8... All they prolly gonna do is buff already strong builds. My 2 cents |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 04:21 PM // 16:21
|
#83 |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Derka-Derka Land
Guild: Steel Phoenix (StP)
Profession: E/
|
You are all noob wananbees.
Everyone knows the real HAers hang out at TGH. On a serious note, I do agree with most of you, but not with the way you are trying to get your point through. I love that most people are posting in the HA section (<3 Nurse) and "our" opinions are being heard, but please, for the love of God, stop this "OmG!!! Anet listens to teh N00b farmers and GvGers more dan Uz!!!". This constant stream of QQ (which I admit to having somewhat "built") is nothing more than childish whining and complaints. I miss the smart and valid posts as to why 8v8 is better, such as those by Tiyuri, nurse, JR, David, Djinn, etc... I mean I read those and went "crap, Anet screwed up.", but I read this thread and think "Christ, no wonder they hate us." All you people seem to be doing is QQing about how Anet doesn't listens to you and that they are all retarded 12 year olds on acid. This is not the way it should be done, I'm sorry. Which is why I kindly request this thread be closed, because it is pointless whine and discouraging to those who actually give logical reasons as to how they screwed up, and how it can be fixed. /Takes breath, this is going to start some flames and I apologize in advance. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 04:54 PM // 16:54
|
#84 |
|
Hall Hero
Join Date: Feb 2006
|
There aren't a whole lot of "whiners" in this thread. A lot of these posts seem to be valid points and thoughtful opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 04:59 PM // 16:59
|
#85 | |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Derka-Derka Land
Guild: Steel Phoenix (StP)
Profession: E/
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 07:37 PM // 19:37
|
#86 |
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Aug 2005
|
All these posts complaining about Anet ignoring top HAers refuse to consider a basic fact before any discussion.
Revitalising HA can only be done by (greatly) increasing the number of people that play it. Anet has as main objective to bring more people to HA. All they do is aimed at this. The positions and interests of top, competitive HAers come in second place, and only if they do not contradict the first objective. You cant have a functional HA if only a few (admitedly great) players play it. When HA started 1.5 years ago, districts were full, 10-15 at the time. Slowly the population has decreased. Two possible explanations (there could be others): - the reduced interest in GW in general - the game does have almost 2 years you know.... - the increasing polarisation between "good", "competitive" players and "noob", "casual" players. Back in autumn 2005 you could go with an improvised build and still win some games (mostly because of the larger player base - you would still meet foes at your level) - right now it's hardly possible. "Casual" HAers still had the IWAY entry door for a while - not any more - it got replaced by gimmicks but these are not as resilient (to bad playing) as IWAY was. Anyway - I suspect Anets statistics showed a marked decrease in the Ha population mid 2006. Since then they did their best to attract non regular HAers to HA, with debatable success. You all assume that "if you bring back 8v8 - all those who left HA will come back and you will have full districts" thats absurd. Even if Anet brings back exactly the same conditions and population as in august 2006, the activa HA population will still decrease, slowly and naturally. There are three factors that can bring you the victory in a GW PvP game: Build, Skill, Luck. Anets toys with those three factors in order to cater to a population or another. In GvG, Player Skill is by far the priviledged factor for instance. A highly competitive PVPer wants nothing but skill to count. Ideally - build issues should dissapear (you have no build issues in Virtua Fighter and shooters) and luck negated. Anets wants though that casual PvPers have a winning chance too, so they did everything they could to increase the role of Build and Luck over Skill. - unbalanced skills - 3 way broken tower (Luck +) - lever in scarred - 6v6 Almost all the proposed modifications in the test weekends were also more aimed at build and luck. - 3 way slaughter fests with kill steals (Luck ++) - overly offensive builds - variable conditions on HoH, all with limits. You cant have a build capable to win all against gimicky builds. The message is clear to me. They want HA to be a low to mid level PvP area. They want to discourage strictly skill based approaches. It is normal that top HAers, who want HA to be a top level PvP area, feel frustrated, since this was directed clearly against them. Complaining and crying wont bring you anything - in fact it will just confirm that the changes worked as intended. Don't get me wrong - its not that I agree with Anet (or with those that complain) - its just my lecture of the situation. A basic conflict of perception on "what should HA be" between top HAers and Anet. Unfortunately for you guys - the power is theirs. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 08:14 PM // 20:14
|
#87 | ||||||||||
|
No power in the verse
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
|
Quote:
- player attained rank X and lost desire to play HA more and chose some other PvP gametype instead Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 09:26 PM // 21:26
|
#88 | |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Guild: [MMAD]
|
Quote:
NEWS FLASH: Back to 8v8 is not going to solve the problems of HA, whinging like a 4 year old girl who wants a pony for christmas ain't going to bring it back. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 09:48 PM // 21:48
|
#89 |
|
Pre-Searing Cadet
Join Date: Nov 2005
Guild: iTi
Profession: Me/
|
I totally agree with posters that are saying to do whatever it takes to re-vitalize HA. When I was playing this weekend, one of the more enjoyable aspects was the fact that we were hitting every map on the way to the Hall of Heroes. It was not so much mechanics and the victory conditions, but the fact that there were a lot of different teams playing, and they were running many different types of builds. When obs mode first came out, I thought it was a great thing because it would give people the chance to see what successful teams were doing to be successful, but the reality almost a year later is that everyone just copies whatever seems to be winning.
This week HA seems to be a virtual ghost town. Last night while playing, my team jumped form Underworld to HoH twice, From Burial Mounds to HoH twice, etc. We fought the same team at least three times in 90 minutes. HA has turned into a tiny little pool of sharks all feeding on themselves. Add in the trash talking and general nastiness to new players, and I completely understand why many un and low ranked players just do not bother. Also, if you were to casually read these forums, you might get the idea that most people liked HA the way it is (or was in 8v8 days), but I imagine if you pulled out all the posts from a selected group of about 20 very vocal posters that whine incessantly about "the good old days" you might remove a lot of trash from these forums. I think the reality was that people were quitting HA in droves, and changes were made in attempt to breathe new life into the format. Were those changes good and wise? Apparently not, because now the situation is worse than it was before. But, I am glad they are not just taking the knee jerk reaction of "changing it back to the way it was." Guild Wars as a game has evolved, the old days of Tombs will never come back, and I am glad that Anet is taking proactive steps to make the pvp aspect of the game more fun and approachable to a greater segment of the GW population. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2007, 11:57 PM // 23:57
|
#90 |
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Guild: Critical Chop [cC]
Profession: W/
|
I would love to see an 8v8 weekend, and watch all the districts fill up again. Why didn't Anet just keep it the same.
6v6 is pretty much all luck in winning now. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 12:12 AM // 00:12
|
#91 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Aug 2005
Guild: EaT
Profession: Mo/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 01:04 AM // 01:04
|
#92 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: May 2005
Guild: Victory on Demand [VoD]
Profession: Me/Mo
|
That is sad :/
I would actually log in GW if tombs was 8v8 right about now. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 10:41 AM // 10:41
|
#93 | |
|
Frost Gate Guardian
Join Date: Aug 2005
Guild: Steel Phoenix[StP]
Profession: Me/
|
Quote:
a) soulreaping no longer offered the full amount of soulreaping, which with just two spirits and a 20 second recharge Oath Shot (as I believe it was back then) would have been 20 energy every 20 seconds (with 10 soulreaping). I can totally see wher eyou are coming from... Yeah, not having 7+ pips of energy regen = loss b) this build would "almost always" collapse to two high pressure teams... nothing but the most overly defensive builds should be able to survive a 2v1. It would appear that you consider a non-holding build to be one that "almost always" collapses in a 2v1, and from this one would inffer that, to you, a holding build is one that can never loose in a 2v1. Historically, A.net has done it's best too keep things moving, and avoid stalenss, by changing skills that are overly used and buffing skills that are seldom used to allow for more variation. The reasoning behind this is simple: everything can and will get boring if enough time passes. That having been said, no aspect of GW has ever been as stale and sluggish as the HoH. The terrain and it's affect on play has always been the same, the win condition has always been the same, and, more importantly, the tactics and skills needed to win have largely been the same (only suffering serious modifications when new chapters come out). Each and every HA altar game has followed the same beaten path of: - wait untill around 2 minutes - go in first, use song&stability / wait for somebody else to go in first, interupt song & stability - prot&heal ghostly / strip& kill ghostly - interupt once ghostly is dead / use song&stability Yes, before factions there was no wasd of stability, and before nightfall there was no song. Feel free to replace these skills with Spell Breaker, Guardian, or whatever else was needed at the time to make sure the ghostly caps. I understand the fact that not all of the changes made and changes proposed appeal to everyone, and I think everyone agrees that many of them need tweaking. However, changes are needed. If after almost two years, you are still content doing the same thing over and over again, in an arena that never changes, where the vast majority of games are predictable down to the finest detail, then maybe the problem does not lie with any change being made, but rather with the fact that you resent any and all changes. Hell, the UW has changed more since release than HA has, and now that change is finally taking place in a positive direction, people do nothing but cry out for it to go back to square one. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 11:24 AM // 11:24
|
#94 | |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Belgium
|
Quote:
Agree 100%!!! That sentence kinda sums it up. Lets face it ppl, like Leguma said, HA in its current state simply is rubbish, and the fact that Anet did the test weekend is proof that they listened to us. They know what the problems in HA are and they are trying to get a solution. Stale maps like Broken, Courtyard and even HoH got revitalised with a new playstyle and much more. If they tweaked it a bit i , for one, would certainly welcome these changes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 11:48 AM // 11:48
|
#95 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
I agree that the HA background has remained constant, but I have not seen this as a huge problem. There has actually been a lot of change in HA over time-- because of skill balancing, but also because of new chapters every 6 months, introducing new classes and many more skills. So while the setting is constant, the players and skills change all the time, which has kept it interesting for me (talking about my time in 8v8).
I am not sure that radical changes to win conditions and the like are needed to freshen things up. Some of the most succesful PC games are set in stone. Even other games are: take Chess. That's not an unpopolar game! Or take a game like Unreal Tournament. The maps never change, the items and their powers on it never change, the player abilities nor their weapons ever change. Yet it's a blast to play to many. Sure, it's a 'simple shooter', but GW already goes way beyond that simple universe and adds the variety of classes and skills, both of which then evolve quite a bit over time. Now I am not opposed to change per se, and some tweaks to overly 'stale' maps I would welcome, but it does seem to me that Anet has a tendency to make changes that are rather radical. And while doing so, they lose sight of what makes a game fun in the long run: the reward of skill. Random win or lose situations only play to a sense of reward from gambling, which I personally do not care much for. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 11:59 AM // 11:59
|
#96 | |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Quote:
Changes are not a bad thing IMO, but is this the way to do it? Take an existing map, scrap the altar, make it an all-out DM and do the EXACT SAME for 2 other existing maps (ok, plus random other win conditions in halls)? Cut the timer short, add more loot to the chest. These are fixes of the cheapest kind. Can we not have a new map after all this time? It would be a nice change indeed if some maps got a new sister map-- you go to either one or the other (so it has no effect on skips/number of player issues). It could have different win conditions, so your team would need to take those into account as well. I think that many people would welcome that. |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 01:44 PM // 13:44
|
#97 |
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Den Haag
Guild: [cute]
Profession: Mo/Me
|
Haven't posted for a long time but here's what I gotta say about it.
There are 4 reasons why 8v8 should return: Balanced Spike Iway Experimental builds People will dislike certain builds nomatter what (most of you know to which builds I refer Virtually all of this is gone now in 6v6. When iway was being overused for a time, sure that was annoying. But folks, every build which is being overused is annoying. I was a balanced player myself and when seeing the 100th migraine mesmer it pissed me of just as much as seeing the 100th iway. Fun thing though, was that 1 month before 6v6 was implemented, the builds being played were more or less evenly divided. People in HA seemed to be content with the situation how it was. I faced more different builds in that single month than in the 2 preceding years. Lot's of players at that time were trying out new stuff or modding their current builds. Hence, there was no reason to make such a change. The HA community was (finally) changing itself. And that is how it should be. In an MMO it are the players who make the game with the content provided to them. Like in real life, changes made from above without properly consulting peoples opinion on the matter, often result in negative effects, unless a large majority welcomes the changes after a evaluationtime. The changes have been evaluated and the results are clear. My guild disbanded, my friends, some of which I knew for over 2 years, have left the game and nearly everyone seems to be angry. To conclude my post here are some facts: The amount of players in HA has dropped significantly HA is less versatile in terms of gamestyle and possible builds Not many new players decided to play HA Hardcore HA players have left mostly Usage of gimmickbuilds have increased instead of decreased Anet's reputation regarding understanding their community is ruined |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 03:49 PM // 15:49
|
#98 |
|
Frost Gate Guardian
Join Date: Aug 2005
Guild: Steel Phoenix[StP]
Profession: Me/
|
Yes, there are games that are set in stone, such as chess. However, the big difference here is that chess is a single player game, that receives no updates, no changes, there is no rebalancing of the pieces and there is no metagame. But even then, if you actually take the time to look it up there are many, MANY variations on the standard rules and many different ways in which chess can be played. Yes, the traditional game has remained unchanged, however, GW is constantly changing, in terms of meta, skills nad professions, and as such, things that were designed for Prophecies will get old, stale and even absurd several chapters down the line. If HA is to live, it needs to keep changing, if it isn;t changing, it's dead. As for the FPS games and the like, such a paralel is flawed at the most basic level. All thoose weapons deal fixed damage based on the body part they hit. that's a far cry from your damage range sword/axe/hammer. GW incorporates randomness at the most basic of levels, besides, you are comparing games where everybody has the exact same weapons/whatever to a game where there are thousands of possible combinations. HA as a permanet ongoing worldwide tournament should be constantly changing... just look at how Magic tournaments are done.
As for people not wantiing to go back to square 1, read the entire thread again. All the zOMFG WTF HAX!!111 THEY NERF HOLDING people are basically asking to go back to square 1. For the matter of new maps, all I can say is stop and think a little. What do you think is the most logical thing to do? Test the three new game types on the existing maps and see how they go and how the map would need to be changed and then make the new map, or the other way arround? Flame them all you want (with good reason) if they don't bring out new maps when the final update comes in, but not untill then. As for the matter of 6v6 and 8v8, I honestly cannot say. Before seeing the proposed changes, I would have said 8v8, hands down. After seeing the new win conditions and how you are no longer tied to skills such as song and stability, I think that it can work fine both as 6v6 and 8v8, regardless of what they decide in the end. |
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 04:25 PM // 16:25
|
#99 | |
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Derka-Derka Land
Guild: Steel Phoenix (StP)
Profession: E/
|
Quote:
The thing is, either way the maps need to be reworked to fit their party sizes, especially the hall if you want to have murderball (which I think needs to be completely reworked, or just removed). I did prefer the 8v8 days much more, but HA was more fun this weekend then it was during the entire 6v6 (even pre-nightfall). |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2007, 04:36 PM // 16:36
|
#100 |
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Apr 2006
Guild: Drunks Really Know Nothing [DRKN]
Profession: W/
|
Essentially, the bottom line in all this is A-net does care. If they didn't care Burial Mounds and Scarred Earth would still be 6 team free for alls. Instead of wasting any development resources at all on improving the gametype, we would be seeing announcements for Chapter 4.
But that is not the case. While I believe that most of us can agree that the methods and manners that have been done so far have not been as successful as anyone hoped, to say that they aren't doing anything is callous and ignorant. I believe the best way that A-net could bolster their reputation with the hardcore fan would be to do an interview spot either on Weapon of Choice or post something on their main page. Answer some tough questions, such as why was the decision made to modify the party size in HA to 6 on 6? What are your real goals when doing skill balancing, etc? An explanation as to what the thought process from the developer angle on things I think, or at least hope, would go a long way to showing us why the decisions that are made, are made. Unfortunately, there is no person, not employed by A-net who has all the facts. We base our opinions on rampant speculation and wild theorization. This does nothing but cause grief on both sides. This may not be related to my above argument, but I would also like to suggest to whoever's reading that while looking at the forums is a nice place to look for ideas and some feedback that perhaps a more global survey would be in order. An onLoad page, similar to the EULA, that pops up once someone logs in. It would only pop up once per account, and be completely optional. This would give a voice to people who don't necessarily post on any particular forum and who have an opinion but either don't know where to express it or don't speak the same language. |
|
|
|
 |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:46 PM // 17:46.
jQuery(document).ready(checkAds()); function checkAds(){if (document.getElementById('adsense')!=undefined){document.write("_gaq.push(['_trackEvent', 'Adblock', 'Unblocked', 'false',,true]);");}else{document.write("