Curse

RandomEngy · Jan 06, 2007, 10:16 AM // 10:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

Sorry, with no disrespect, it is not at all "obvious." The only thing that is obvious is that a large number of players want the change to party size, that that does not make it the obvious or correct choice. (You have only to look at politics to see that "majority" often != "the correct choice."

)

Let's all keep an open mind and do the testing and see. (And I have to say, let's remember that the team working on this has dozens of years of design and balance experience and a commitment to make changes that are true improvements.) Maybe the party size will change; maybe it will not. But there are many other things that might and should change, so let's focus on them first. You know, for what it's worth, it might be said that focusing all the attention on party size is shortsighted, because simply changing the party size is like putting a bandaid on something that is more than "just a flesh wound." (ah ha! Third MP reference in an evening, I am pleased.

)

Because we already know that that single change will not fix the problems of FotM, will not incorporate the newer gameplay elements we want to include, will not reinvigorate HA. People look back at 8v8 and see it throught rosey-coloured glasses, but in all honesty, there were problems with 8v8, too, remember? Rather than bouncing back from one less-than-perfect solution to another, the team would like to make strides forward.

You have no idea of how much I want to hug you right now.

phasola · Jan 06, 2007, 10:30 AM // 10:30

Why didn't you try these "exciting" changes in 8v8 ?
Why kill it first then repair it ?...

Quote:

Sorry, with no disrespect, it is not at all "obvious." The only thing that is obvious is that a large number of players want the change to party size, that that does not make it the obvious or correct choice. (You have only to look at politics to see that "majority" often != "the correct choice."

I'm sorry Gaile, but what about the change to 6v6 ? Why does this logic apply here and it didn't apply there ? Makes no sense to me...

Lord Mendes · Jan 06, 2007, 11:29 AM // 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by phasola

Why didn't you try these "exciting" changes in 8v8 ?
Why kill it first then repair it ?...

I'm sorry Gaile, but what about the change to 6v6 ? Why does this logic apply here and it didn't apply there ? Makes no sense to me...

I would also love to hear the answer to these questions.
Why revamp all the maps to 6v6 instead of keeping it 8v8, just so you can prove that it was a good decision in the first place?

Morgoth the dark · Jan 06, 2007, 11:48 AM // 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by CassiusDrehyg

Sorry, were you one of those people who couldn't get into groups in 8v8 because you weren't R3 yet? FOTMs are everywhere. They are in HA, GvG, RA, and can anyone say heavy melee pressure in HB?

: WTS :

R9 account - UAX
got R2 champion and Skillz, no PvE stuff on this account.

R6 account - UAS
got the two ring titles at level 1
got a godly PvE monk with FoW armor, an assortment of Crystalline Swords and an amazing +5 20/20 enchants Serpent Axe.

If I'm disappointed with these changes, these accounts will seriously appear on eBay.

nope i were not, and i easily beat every iway/vimway groups i've met. I'm playing gw for a looong time so i kinda know what was bad and what wasnt. The thing is, iways wasnt FoTM it was RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing FoT year. and i dont like fighting same builds all the time.1 time i fight iway, next time vimway and then bspike again. Geez this is entertaining. not.
maybe you liked iwaying for fast fame farm, but for me it was horrible to fight same builds all over the time (not hard to beat but you get bored...).
btw i got my r4 in old tombs where was no iway and similar shit...
just pure balanced and so on

i miss that old times.

Thom Bangalter · Jan 06, 2007, 11:52 AM // 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

You see, the first wave of changes will involve swapping out and refreshing the mechanics of Heroes' Ascent. From map revisions to victory conditions,

See, they still love you.

The victory condition change is all that REALLY matters, it'll be interesting to get more details. I might HA for the first time in months.

Julen · Jan 06, 2007, 12:08 PM // 12:08

So, how bout you tell us all those exciting changes, as frankly, im not too excited atm.

-AnGeL- · Jan 06, 2007, 12:27 PM // 12:27

-__- We just want 8vs8..nothing else...is it hard to find out? ~~

Quote:

for me it was horrible to fight same builds all over the time (not hard to beat but you get bored...).

wah -__- so what builds you have now? jagged=>zergway=>jagged=>jagged=>spiritway=> sandstorms with dervish.....

Morgoth the dark · Jan 06, 2007, 01:28 PM // 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by -AnGeL-

-__- We just want 8vs8..nothing else...is it hard to find out? ~~

wah -__- so what builds you have now? jagged=>zergway=>jagged=>jagged=>spiritway=> sandstorms with dervish.....

that's exactly i want these new chances to come out soon.
but in later 8v8 there was nothing more than those builds (iway/vim/bspike).

TMWNN · Jan 06, 2007, 01:40 PM // 13:40

map changes have much potential to make HA awesome than simply making it 8v8 and leaving as is.

gg anet and gg gaile for keeping us up to date, Anets been ona roll with sweet updates of late, im feeling posoitv in a big way.

Stupid Shizno · Jan 06, 2007, 01:57 PM // 13:57

8on8 allows more dynamic synergy of balance builds, nothing more.

fotm will exsist no matter what.

i am just glad that hoh wins will not be dependent on alter holding.

Patrograd · Jan 06, 2007, 02:08 PM // 14:08

The main issue with HA has always been that the final map, the one that hands out the prizes and gets your name up in lights, is an altar map. Fix that and it might hold some interest and get rid of alot of the boring holding builds, whether 6v6 or 8v8.

Seems to me that HA atm is pretty busy. 5 international districts night before last, 4 last night. Doesnt seem quite as dead as some would have you believe imo

Alazare · Jan 06, 2007, 02:09 PM // 14:09

I'm sorry, but i see these "new map changes but not changing the party size" only as avoiding to admit that you made a huge mistake (6v6), and trying to make (pardon my expression) shit smell better.

Kratos Angel · Jan 06, 2007, 02:24 PM // 14:24

I totally agree with Alazare, it's just an excuse in order not to recognize their terrible mistake. Can even bet they won't restore 8v8 as a lot of people will try out those changes they are gonna say "woot we did it, a lot of people went back, not needed to put 8v8 back" yeah of course ....

Franco Power · Jan 06, 2007, 02:32 PM // 14:32

I think people should stop posting posts like:
They aren't bringing 8vs8 back
Anet messed up
Anet doesn't what to do
insert flame here

as these kind of posts are useless, contribute nothing to the thread and most of all, unless you work for Anet I don't see how can you know what they are doing/are going to do.

Alazare · Jan 06, 2007, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Well it my logic that, If I was going to put 8v8 back I test the changes in a 8v8 envoironment and not 6v6.

gasmaskman · Jan 06, 2007, 02:51 PM // 14:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Legendary Ultimatum

I think people should stop posting posts like:
They aren't bringing 8vs8 back
Anet messed up
Anet doesn't what to do
insert flame here

as these kind of posts are useless, contribute nothing to the thread and most of all, unless you work for Anet I don't see how can you know what they are doing/are going to do.

Maybe those kind of posts are why Anet goes to the Guild Hall to look @ what to change?

JR's post about the quality of the HA section didn't change anything. It's still filled w/ idiots -.-

At least Gaile told us we're getting some type of update, and they ARE listening.

tacitus · Jan 06, 2007, 03:43 PM // 15:43

First off thanks for letting us know what is happening.

It seems in the last few months people have said 3 main areas to HA they want changed. Il put them in level of importance.

1)Team size restored to 8v8
2)map changes
3)fame rank reset. (not going to say anything more on this ridicules request)

The first point is where most people are focused it limits what builds can be taken in and the sort of games that will be played. This is what requires attention most of all.

Map changes are important because holding builds will always be popular in the current format and hopefully this will change in the test period otherwise there is little point in making things look shiny.

If HA continue to favor defensive teams with 6 man party size during this test nothing of importance will have been changed. The changes would be superficial and some players may say “ooh ahhh look at shiny” but it would be all superficial.

So far you have said no to 8v8 at least for this test, I just hope the map changes are good enough to offset this. Tho even if they are it will make HA inferior to GvG and no longer the high end area it once was.

Yunas Ele · Jan 06, 2007, 03:54 PM // 15:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Teh Mighty Warrior

Just please, whatever you do don't remove a map other than scarred. If I log on and find out underworld was removed from the map rotation I just might kill myself.

Scarred earth has to stay. As disliked as it may be its by far the hardest map for pure defense 0 offense teams. If they removed it... well 6 maps b4 hoh. 2 of them are alters. Why run anything other than a holding build???

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgoth the dark

nope i were not, and i easily beat every iway/vimway groups i've met. I'm playing gw for a looong time so i kinda know what was bad and what wasnt. The thing is, iways wasnt FoTM it was RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOing FoT year. and i dont like fighting same builds all the time.1 time i fight iway, next time vimway and then bspike again. Geez this is entertaining. not.
maybe you liked iwaying for fast fame farm, but for me it was horrible to fight same builds all over the time (not hard to beat but you get bored...).
btw i got my r4 in old tombs where was no iway and similar shit...
just pure balanced and so on

i miss that old times.

Wait wait, let me get this straight. You don't like fighting same builds over and over but you like 6v6? Oh lets see, sandstorm/dervishway, 2 mending w/mos, 2 firestorm eles, 2 heroes, jagged bonesway, then another sandstorm/dervishway, then jaggedbonesway, then a zergway (or walrusway as I like to call it), then rinse and repeat. OMG THATS SO MUCH BETTER THAN B4!11111

I played old tombs (pre-IWAY) too. There were fotms back then too. Honestly the fact that you say there was pure balance makes me question if you really did play tombs back then.... There always have, and always will be fotms in HA. There are in GvG too. Perhaps move onto another game if they make the game so boring for you....

ToxicWasted · Jan 06, 2007, 03:55 PM // 15:55

Thanks a lot for sharing this to the Guru community Gaile, I for one still have faith in Anet and am sure you know what you're doing. Don't let me down.

Can't wait till the 19th.

Best regards and good luck.

Gimme Money Plzkthx · Jan 06, 2007, 05:38 PM // 17:38

Quote:

Sorry, with no disrespect, it is not at all "obvious." The only thing that is obvious is that a large number of players want the change to party size, that that does not make it the obvious or correct choice. (You have only to look at politics to see that "majority" often != "the correct choice." )

Not trying to be inflammatory here, but how about anet starts PvPing before they go around changing party sizes. To the people the avidly played HA and have a thorough understanding of the HA mechanics, it is clear that 8v8 needs to come back. Why? Because if you have 8 or more players, it doesn't matter how many fotms there are, how screwed up the maps are, whatever, as you can fit in a counter to pretty much everything. 8v8 needs to come back, and the majority wants it too. More importantly, the 6v6 change never should have been made.