Curse

Mr Seph · Jan 30, 2007, 04:52 PM // 16:52

Know im spamming the forum now, but w/e

Quote:

I dont know if its been mentioned, but why don't ArenaNet revert HA back to 8v8 (as most real HA players want) and then introduce a new 6v6 arena to the battle ilses (with some other type of reward and/or title) to keep the people that enjoy 6v6 happy? 'cause the way I see it, keeping 6v6 or jus reverting to 8v8 only, will probably create even more problems.

The 6v6 arena thingy, already proposed to anet, no feedback whatsoever, will have to see in the future. Lets concern first on how HA will be fixed, then on what to do with 8v8 and 6v6 and maybe making a new 6v6 arena.

Quote:

Thanks for info Alex! The test weekends are really a good idea, and I'm glad that we will have the opportunity to test the changes yet again. Hopefully our posters this time will give even more constructive feedback on the event. Also, we will be able to see what proposals posted here were taken into consideration...

Agreed. I think we can all be happy that anet is actually letting the HA-players test all this, and not leave it to the oh so small population of PvP-alpha-testers.

axe · Jan 30, 2007, 04:59 PM // 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Seph

Tell me this:
If you wanna test out some game-mechanics, and you would reïnstitute 8v8 on those tests, would it help the testing if you had 20 people with sandstorm, invoke lightning, all kind of aoe dmg. Imo, it wouldnt, you would only see deaths, and you wouldnt be able to see if the changes in game-mechanics would work out fine.
Now, i do not know what these changes will be, but we shall see. I know its hard to keep faith in what these devs are all doing, but maybe, somewhere, they are trying to fix it. And imo, by telling them to admit they made a mistake by making it 6v6, its just not gonna help them. I know there are reasons everywhere why 6v6 isnt as good as 8v8, but rubbing it in their faces isnt gonna solve the problem.
By now, they are most likely well aware of the 6v6 vs 8v8 issue. And we will get the news on it. But well, as unpleasant as it is, we will have to wait for it.
Don't jump to conclusions, as they are actually trying to fix the problem, which is already a step forward

Hey Seph, I like that you are showing your support for Anet. I too think that they do a wonderful job, my only point is this.

If they would have put this much time, effort, and community relation into switching it to 6v6 (instead of a drastic overnight flip of the switch) then we would probably not be seeing such a lack of participation in HA today. I love the fact that they are taking their time in making a rational decision based on months of data mining and research, and listening to the HA community. This kind of care should have been taken in the first place.

8v8 with 20 sandstorms would be a HUGE problem. Which is why if 8v8 was never changed it would be one of the first skills to see a nerf.

In my opinion the mistake was NOT the change to 6v6, it was not having an informed decision that was the problem. Arena net is actually doing the RIGHT thing now by taking their time on the party size decision. So I congratulate them for staying strong despite CONSTANT flames and even the scary fact that HA is rapidly losing players. To me its a sign of GREAT things to come and I am glad that they are including us this time in their decision making process.

Also I wish I had some advanced notice on this test weekend, my brother is getting married this weekend and the Superbowl is happening. I could have saved money on a tux had I know I was going to be playing GW. Oh well I guess I'll just play GW in a tux then. I hope my brothers wedding goes smoothly

Mr Seph · Jan 30, 2007, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Quote:

If they would have put this much time, effort, and community relation into switching it to 6v6 (instead of a drastic overnight flip of the switch) then we would probably not be seeing such a lack of participation in HA today. I love the fact that they are taking their time in making a rational decision based on months of data mining and research, and listening to the HA community. This kind of care should have been taken in the first place.

Well, the biggest mistake Anet made, was hold a poll after the double fame weekend (with 6v6), where everyone voted massivelly for 6v6. This is not the bad thing, the bad thing is that most people that voted there were most likely PvE'ers, or GvG'ers, that wanted to tomb before their last person got online. Thing is, if everyone can vote on a poll, actually everyone will vote, and the voice of the HA-community will not be heard. Thus, this lead to the 6v6 drama. The less-skill people liked it, but didnt really play much HA, the higher-skilled people didnt like it, and left, leading to a HA dead zone.
Imo, never base your decision on a poll where everyone can vote, and thats what went wrong there. They listened, but to the wrong crowd.

Mirado · Jan 31, 2007, 12:52 AM // 00:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Seph

Well, the biggest mistake Anet made, was hold a poll after the double fame weekend (with 6v6), where everyone voted massivelly for 6v6. This is not the bad thing, the bad thing is that most people that voted there were most likely PvE'ers, or GvG'ers, that wanted to tomb before their last person got online. Thing is, if everyone can vote on a poll, actually everyone will vote, and the voice of the HA-community will not be heard. Thus, this lead to the 6v6 drama. The less-skill people liked it, but didnt really play much HA, the higher-skilled people didnt like it, and left, leading to a HA dead zone.
Imo, never base your decision on a poll where everyone can vote, and thats what went wrong there. They listened, but to the wrong crowd.

My thoughts exactly

Oren The Destroyer · Jan 31, 2007, 01:08 AM // 01:08

took it back --"

luilui · Jan 31, 2007, 11:00 AM // 11:00

it doesnt mean those changes are going to be permanent right?

Cass · Jan 31, 2007, 11:35 AM // 11:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Seph

Tell me this:
If you wanna test out some game-mechanics, and you would reïnstitute 8v8 on those tests, would it help the testing if you had 20 people with sandstorm, invoke lightning, all kind of aoe dmg. Imo, it wouldnt, you would only see deaths, and you wouldnt be able to see if the changes in game-mechanics would work out fine.

20 people? Random number generator?

It seems to me you can test skillchanges just fine on most of the HA maps in an 8v8 format. True, a 3-way killcount map probably makes it a little chaotic, but that win mechanic need not be permanent. Balance isn't an HA-only matter anyway, 1on1 8v8 is also used in GvG. In other words, there is no pressing reason to test everything in 6v6 format, as far as skills are concerned. In fact, I could quibble and say that what works in 6v6 may not work in 8v8, and if Anet thinks this too, it makes it more likely that 8v8 will not return... as their tests are not indicative of it. This is more or less what I hinted at in my previous post.

Quote:

Now, i do not know what these changes will be, but we shall see. I know its hard to keep faith in what these devs are all doing, but maybe, somewhere, they are trying to fix it. And imo, by telling them to admit they made a mistake by making it 6v6, its just not gonna help them. I know there are reasons everywhere why 6v6 isnt as good as 8v8, but rubbing it in their faces isnt gonna solve the problem.
By now, they are most likely well aware of the 6v6 vs 8v8 issue. And we will get the news on it.

I am not telling them to admit to 6v6 being an error, please read more carefully. I said I would like to see some information on their considerations to stall 8v8 in HA, given the overwhelming vote in favor of it. And that giving this info would yield a more favorable impression of their motives in the eyes of the public.

Quote:

But well, as unpleasant as it is, we will have to wait for it.
Don't jump to conclusions, as they are actually trying to fix the problem, which is already a step forward

By whose authority are you declaring that "we will have to wait for it"? Anet has been forthcoming with listening to the community, so perhaps they are not so unwilling to share the info I asked for.

Hirum · Feb 01, 2007, 06:53 AM // 06:53

What kind of quetion is that!?

Of course Anet cares about HA. But what people fail to understand is that HA cannot be as controlled as GvG as far as multiplayer pvp. It has to allow people of all playing capabilities to play.

Its really not a format created for organized guild team play. I believe the major reason it is set up as 6v6 now is so that it is easier to form a full team. Face it, its more difficult to get a team of 6 going over a team of 8.

While it allows 2 more slots for utility, or offense, or whatever, and most certainly makes it more diverse and interesting, having an 8 player team is a more advanced and difficult mode of pvp that isnt designed for most casual players.

And yes I agree, 8v8 is better, but Im going to give them a chance with 6v6 first. There is a whole new chapter coming out soon, and a few huge changes coming up this weekend.

Dancing Blade · Feb 01, 2007, 07:44 AM // 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riotgear

As far as bringing 8v8 back, without changes to the altar mechanics and skills, it would probably be worse than ever. Some builds like JB hex/spirit spam and AOE pressure get stronger with increased player count. More-pressing issues like changing the objectives and getting the skills back in line are what's called for first, changing player count in the middle of all that would add even more variables to what is already a mess.

I think he has a really good point there, the current ha fotms which nightfall generated would all be much worse in an 8v8 environment. Generally all gimmick builds that utilize soul reaping, paragon-synergy, aoe or spike become more imbalanced with increasing player count and the 1 additional utility slot for balanced teams doesn't counter this sufficiently

Imho maybe it's the best solution to totally redesign the ha maps and objectives specifically balanced for 6v6. This way everyone will win - the gvg/pvers will get the advantage of faster group forming and the 8v8 supporters will get the fun gameplay they desire (since i don't think ppl really care about the actual number "8" but really want a balanced and skill based ha).

JoeKnowMo · Feb 01, 2007, 09:25 AM // 09:25

If Anet's master plan is not clear, lemme spell it out for you. They do not want any division between pve and HA and gvg.

They got PvP players to play PvE by having certain items available only in pve.
They got pve players to play HA by allowing heroes and making it 6 v 6.
They make DoA feel like pvp due to low flexibility in builds, tight group coordination, etc.
They chased HA players away to turned them onto gvg by messing up HA.

The next step is farming zones where teams start from opposite ends and fight their way to the middle by killing monsters where they try to hold the altar while running a flag. Half the team will have to be composed of heroes who will attack the other team's monks and will scatter from AoE dmg. I hear the green drops will be awesome tho ;P

Alfrond · Feb 01, 2007, 04:11 PM // 16:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Seph

Well, the biggest mistake Anet made, was hold a poll after the double fame weekend (with 6v6), where everyone voted massivelly for 6v6. This is not the bad thing, the bad thing is that most people that voted there were most likely PvE'ers, or GvG'ers, that wanted to tomb before their last person got online. Thing is, if everyone can vote on a poll, actually everyone will vote, and the voice of the HA-community will not be heard. Thus, this lead to the 6v6 drama. The less-skill people liked it, but didnt really play much HA, the higher-skilled people didnt like it, and left, leading to a HA dead zone.
Imo, never base your decision on a poll where everyone can vote, and thats what went wrong there. They listened, but to the wrong crowd.

Well, if Anet were to hold another poll, what kind of restrictions would you like to have on who participates? What qualities should a player have to allow them to express their opinion in a vote?

luilui · Feb 01, 2007, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Like the gw online store, i think they can have another section for online poll every account can vote once for a particular suggestion/change (i.e. 6v6 or 8v8, hairdresser or no hairdresser, open up UW/FoW ... etc). Each vote is weighted by much time u spend on the particular game type, i.e. for a HA issue if that's a person who play a lot of HA like 30 hours a week then his vote times by 3 and for a person who rarely HA just 1; and for a gvg issue those who gvg more are weighted more. (note it's time spent not rank or champion title so purely by how much u play, no elitism is involved.) So everyone can have a word but also those who were affected the most can say more. Everyone can check the poll anytime they want.

vapor311 · Feb 01, 2007, 05:46 PM // 17:46

Polling is a more complicated science than alot of people think. It requires crafting the right questions to get the information you want out of the people that you are asking. Weighing one person's opinion more because they idle in ID1 is a foolish idea. Revitalizing HA is as much about pleasing the hardcore player as it is about creating opportunities for newer players to enter and be involved.
A successful poll would break down the players into different demographics based on their playing style, time spent playing and interests. This way you can get a broad idea of what appeals to each type of player, break down barriers that may be prohibiting some people from playing (real or imagined) and create a better user experience that allows the environment to become vibrant again.
General polls on the fansites do not accomplish this. The information that they provide should only ever be used as the most general of guidelines as they are not qualified by another other criteria other than the fact that the person has a registered account on a website.

Thom Bangalter · Feb 01, 2007, 07:33 PM // 19:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeKnowMo

The next step is farming zones where teams start from opposite ends and fight their way to the middle by killing monsters where they try to hold the altar while running a flag. Half the team will have to be composed of heroes who will attack the other team's monks and will scatter from AoE dmg. I hear the green drops will be awesome tho ;P

That actually sounds like a really fun format.

Quote:

Originally Posted by luilui

Each vote is weighted by much time u spend on the particular game type, i.e. for a HA issue if that's a person who play a lot of HA like 30 hours a week then his vote times by 3 and for a person who rarely HA just 1; and for a gvg issue those who gvg more are weighted more.

This hardly makes sense. I have a minor in political science and sociology, does this mean my vote for president should be 3 votes? In a game where everyone is encouraged to play every format, why should someone else's vote be worth more? I'd rather see an "I don't know" option, because while I would certainly vote for a return to 8 man, why bother if my vote is the equivalent of 1/3 of your vote simply because HA is terrible now and I don't like to play a game that isn't remotely fun?

Mr Seph · Feb 01, 2007, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Quote:

This hardly makes sense. I have a minor in political science and sociology, does this mean my vote for president should be 3 votes? In a game where everyone is encouraged to play every format, why should someone else's vote be worth more? I'd rather see an "I don't know" option, because while I would certainly vote for a return to 8 man, why bother if my vote is the equivalent of 1/3 of your vote simply because HA is terrible now and I don't like to play a game that isn't remotely fun?

lui is just trying to prevent that meaningless people that hardly participate in HA should have a vote less worthy, i think. There is no point for a person to vote on HA-issues when he barely plays it, just like a person from europe would not vote for an american president.
For example, take GvG'ers, they like 6v6, cuz it promotes faster lil groups, so they can do this while waiting for GvG, and not for playing this seriously. While if you give these kind of people a full vote, they will always vote in their own best interest and not care about how serious HA players feel. All they would care about, is their lil 5 minutes of fun before GvG starts. (This is just an example, do not take this as any kind of offence or anything)

Mental Leteci · Feb 01, 2007, 08:00 PM // 20:00

Seph is my bitch so he's probably right.

Thought, I'd do it this way: If you don't have at least rank 6 you can't vote and end of story. Rank 6 is 1000 fame and it's enough to kinda understand mechanics of HA. Also, players without rank 6 (maybe rank 9) maybe never even played 8v8 so wouldn't be fair for them to vote.

Franco Power · Feb 01, 2007, 08:13 PM // 20:13

I agree with Leteci, besides why are you so offended, if you don't have 1000 fame it's obviously that you don't HA much...

Yunas Ele · Feb 01, 2007, 08:54 PM // 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mental Leteci

Thought, I'd do it this way: If you don't have at least rank 6 you can't vote and end of story. Rank 6 is 1000 fame and it's enough to kinda understand mechanics of HA. Also, players without rank 6 (maybe rank 9) maybe never even played 8v8 so wouldn't be fair for them to vote.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Ultimatum

I agree with Leteci, besides why are you so offended, if you don't have 1000 fame it's obviously that you don't HA much...

oh em gee!111 rank elitism!111111 besides what if ppl IWAYed or b-spike their rank!?!?!? thats so biased cuz they only want 8v8 back so they can play their scrub builds!1111

Thomas.knbk · Feb 01, 2007, 09:28 PM // 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

This hardly makes sense. I have a minor in political science and sociology, does this mean my vote for president should be 3 votes?

That would actually be a great idea. Or something like everyone who wants to vote needs to take a certain test to make sure they actually know what they talkin' about. More intellegent people should have a heavier vote in the president's elections. It would at least make sure the people who actually buy all the s*** in the campaign ('democrats want to raise taxes and make this country a heaven for terrorists,' to just name an example. It happens on both sides) are not allowed to vote.
Please do continue talking about heroes' ascent though

Franco Power · Feb 01, 2007, 09:31 PM // 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yunas Ele

oh em gee!111 rank elitism!111111 besides what if ppl IWAYed or b-spike their rank!?!?!? thats so biased cuz they only want 8v8 back so they can play their scrub builds!1111

... because you never played IWAY before.

Unless you were being sarcastic I don't get your point