Curse

Patccmoi · Jan 08, 2007, 12:10 AM // 00:10

I'm mostly interested in the victory condition changes. Personally victory conditions always bothered me a lot more in HA than 6v6 vs 8v8. Mostly i despite the fact that holding builds are the best thing to run in general as they're both boring to run and face imo. In 8v8 the problem was exactly the same and holding builds were the popular stuff once you reached end maps just as much (one of the main reason Blood spike was so popular was because of its holding power after all, when they didn't even have to spend 1E on spiking but could use every little bit of it to heal/prot with a bunch of monk elites).

From what's hinted in Gaile's posts, it seems like they plan to do something about holding builds through map mechanic changes and mostly victory condition changes, so i'm kinda hopeful. Victory condition isn't the same as adding a lever, it changes the full dynamic of a map since the way you play a map depends totally on the victory condition there is.

Anything that limits the interest of holding builds would be a big improvement for me, no matter the player amount in there. I can understand why people want 8v8 instead of 6v6, though it's not something i care much about personally, but 8v8 was far from perfect (HA wasn't really more popular in the last weeks before the change to 6v6 than it is now, maybe your friend list was though so you didn't notice) and i think it lies more in the mechanics than anything else.

There will definitely always be FotMs NO MATTER what ANet does, be it 6v6 or 8v8 (and i find the variety of teams in HA similar atm to what it was before). That's a player thing, not a dev thing. Even if 100000 viable options are there, a large part of the player base (and about 99% of PuGs) will just look at the first one that work and copy it until they see another one that seem to work better or is easier to run. But game mechanics and victory conditions can also encourage certain FotMs in a very significant matter and i'm happy to see ANet looking at it seriously.

I think a good mod to mechanics has the potential to revitalize HA, and if it stays 6v6 or 8v8 from there is another matter (atm i gotta say i'm pretty neutral on that cause i see advantages on both sides). I'm interested in seeing the current changes (and a damn skill balance already!) first.

Bacon Goes Monk · Jan 08, 2007, 01:41 AM // 01:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alazare

I dont understand why dont you want to bring 8v8 back if the community is simply SCREAMING for it. If you wish to appeal to this community then simply give us what we want, and what we want is written in almost every single post on this forum. 8v8. The whole community is begging you to fix a mistake.

I don't understand it either. It's pretty obvious most of us hate 6v6 and want 8v8 back.

infymys · Jan 08, 2007, 02:15 AM // 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gaile Gray

And Infymys, I'll try to stop saying "exciting changes" even if it kills me. I've heard the details, I do find the thought of them exciting, and I honestly believe that players will like many of them (although I know you guys well enough to know not everybody will love everything). It's sort of difficult to speak flatly--"changes coming"--without tossing in something beyond the boring recitation of facts. But if the currency of enthusiasm has been misspent, I'll see if I can try not to engage in opinion quite as much.

As you obviously have experienced, a lot of people misconstrue what you say and take it to heart. What you deemed "exciting map changes" was akin to me finding a month old stick of gum underneath my car seat. It's like, "Oh wow, look at what we have here. Oh wait, it's just garbage." At least that's what I thought of the changes. And these additions (actually more like substractions) have resulted in a massive loss of a once loyal playerbase.
Sometimes I wonder if the development team or anybody officially associated (re: You, Izzy) with ArenaNet and Guild Wars do any extensive testing before a live roll of these changes and actually truly think they are deemed worthy of the enthusiasm that you approach it with. Whilst I have little doubt that testing is done but it's one of those "What the hell were they thinking when they came up with this decision?" type of situations. Much like how I wonder why Superman 64 was created and I'm sure a lot of gamers know how that turned out. The upcoming beta is a good albiet, small attempt to revitalize HA. But, is it too little, too late, especially for the once loyal Tombs/HA playerbase?

Nadia Roark · Jan 08, 2007, 02:40 AM // 02:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messner

In all fairness Dagny, just because you're used to 8v8, doesn't mean everyone else still is. What the majority of players in this thread are saying is that we've adjusted to 6v6 and after seeing its effects, we want it back to 8v8.

I hear you, but it's not going to happen like that (at least not right away). If I'm interpreting what I've heard so far from ANet correctly, they will attempt to streamline HA 6v6 first. I'm simply arguing that we should be open to the possibility that 6v6 HA can work. Don't dismiss the changes they attempt to make out of hand simply because it may not include an immediate return to 8v8 tombs.

I think most of the people here (not so much you Crystal) aren't really understanding what I'm trying to say. If you think 6v6 tombs is unbalanced that's a fine starting point but don't complain because "build diversity doesn't exist anymore" because it is there albeit in a different format; therefore our complaint becomes what we should be earning Fame with. Why not keep 6v6 and make a different set of titles for it, if we want to move 8v8 tombs back into the game? Is it mutually exclusive to be pro balanced 6v6 PvP and pro tombs 8v8? 6v6 HA is the only current 6-man PvP format and I kind of like the idea, although everyone seems to agree that profound changes are in order.

tacitus · Jan 08, 2007, 02:53 AM // 02:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

I hear you, but it's not going to happen like that (at least not right away). If I'm interpreting what I've heard so far from ANet correctly, they will attempt to streamline HA 6v6 first. I'm simply arguing that we should be open to the possibility that 6v6 HA can work. Don't dismiss the changes they attempt to make out of hand simply because it may not include an immediate return to 8v8 tombs.

I think most of the people here (not so much you Crystal) aren't really understanding what I'm trying to say. If you think 6v6 tombs is unbalanced that's a fine starting point but don't complain because "build diversity doesn't exist anymore" because it is there albeit in a different format; therefore our complaint becomes what we should be earning Fame with. Why not keep 6v6 and make a different set of titles for it, if we want to move 8v8 tombs back into the game? Is it mutually exclusive to be against the existing 6v6 format and pro tombs 8v8? 6v6 HA is the only current 6-man PvP format and I kind of like the idea, although everyone seems to agree that profound changes are in order.

people liked the way HA was, that was a high end pvp arena that was not a substitue for GvG. It was an alternative to GvG that worked very well for a long time as it did. The changes to HA making it 6v6 changed that and its not working well at all. The fact that changes are coming show its flawed as it is and needs fixed. Even if 6v6 ends up working well which i doubt it will HA will not be the alternative it was before its simply somewhere to go when you dont have enough on for GvG.

Thats even if it works which i doubt it will.
Yes new objectives may kill off the existing FOTMs but a weekend is not enough time for new ones to catch on. The short respite from them will not continue for long after the claims that the weekend was huge success.

Nadia Roark · Jan 08, 2007, 03:04 AM // 03:04

OK, now that's a little bit better than most of what's been said to me so far: it hadn't occured to me about the duration of the test but now that you mention it; that probably would make a significant difference.

I'm not disagreeing that 6v6 doesn't need some far-reaching changes; but there might still be a place for it in the game if it can be balanced correctly.

Randomway Ftw · Jan 08, 2007, 03:13 AM // 03:13

Who really cares if 6v6 HA can work, that's not the point. Many people don't want it to be 6v6, if it changed to work better for 6v6 it would not be HA anymore it would be a different arena with a HA sticker slapped on it. We don't want that we want HA back.

Nadia Roark · Jan 08, 2007, 03:19 AM // 03:19

I understand, but I don't necessarily agree. I'm currently on the fence re: 6-man tombs vs. 8-man tombs; and I'll accept 6-man if ANet can make it work. If you're dead set against that possibility that's your perogative, but I'm willing to give ANet a second crack at 6v6 tombs with the new skills and professions. I don't necessarily think that turning it back to 8-man is the only way to "fix" tombs and I'm willing to approach the proposed changes with an open mind. Who knows, maybe after the trial weekend I'll turn diehard 8v8 too?

Apok Omen · Jan 08, 2007, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patccmoi

.....

Agreed.

The number of players does not annoy nor bother me. What does (besides everyone crying about Anet not loving them anymore) is the many map changes they made for 6v6 did not fully suit well for the new party size.

Scarred Earth (yes, I am going back to this again, I just have so much hate built toward this stage...) was too large for 6v6v6v6. Everytime I go there, my teammates open the lever, the other team fighting one runs away and we end up chasing them for 6 minutes. THEN we have to beat the other team, just to get a little bit of fame.

Hopefully these new mechanics will make current HA a better place. If not, then I am half-certain Anet will not revert back to 8v8, but half-certain they will. During the weekend, we can only play and pray...

Bread Fan · Jan 08, 2007, 03:25 AM // 03:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

I think most of the people here (not so much you Crystal) aren't really understanding what I'm trying to say.

Actually no one really cares. You have already proven that you have no idea how the HA fundamentals work and keep suggesting 8v8 is for GvG.

Nadia Roark · Jan 08, 2007, 03:36 AM // 03:36

Quote:

Actually no one really cares. You have already proven that you have no idea how the HA fundamentals work and keep suggesting 8v8 is for GvG.

4v4 is for RA/TA.

6v6 is for HA (currently).

8v8 is for GvG (obviously) since it's our only current 8v8 format. The people who want the added build diversity already play GvG.

I was just stating the facts as they exist in their most obvious form in the game at present. I don't know why exactly you in particular have jumped to the "he thinks HA and GvG are the same thing" conclusion, since I wasn't drawing a strategic comparison to GvG and tombs anymore than I was drawing a strategic comparison between TA/RA and tombs. If you read my posts again and not just the first sentence or the first sentence of every paragraph you'll discover that I point out at least once that there is (currently) a logical progression in party size as you move up the PvP "ladder." All I've done is express sympathy for the 6v6 format and that I think it can be made to work somewhere in the game. Whether I want that format to be tombs I will not decide until the weekend is over.

Christ.

Wilhelm · Jan 08, 2007, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

4v4 is for RA/TA.

6v6 is for HA (currently).

8v8 is for GvG (obviously) since it's our only current 8v8 format. The people who want the added build diversity already play GvG.

I was just stating the facts as they exist in their most obvious form in the game at present. I don't know why exactly you in particular have jumped to the "he thinks HA and GvG are the same thing" conclusion, since I wasn't drawing a strategic comparison to GvG and tombs anymore than I was drawing a strategic comparison between TA/RA and tombs. If you read my posts again and not just the first sentence or the first sentence of every paragraph you'll discover that I point out at least once that there is (currently) a logical progression in party size as you move up the PvP "ladder." All I've done is express sympathy for the 6v6 format and that I think it can be made to work somewhere in the game. Whether I want that format to be tombs I will not decide until the weekend is over.

Christ.

We've discussed this on GC, but I completely agree with what you've posted, and in the end HA will still be there whether it stays 6man, or 8man, and I'll still be there, because it's the most accessible, quality PvP environment.

I frankly do not understand why everyone has had their panties all bunched up, and has suddenly caused this uproar in regards to the party size in HA. (Even worse than when it was implemented). There are far bigger problems IMO, with the HA arena, which will hopefully be fixed during the upcoming weekend.

Someone explain to me why, everyone can't just play the game without all this complaining. Just be happy, that you have a game to play....I know I am.

-Wilhelm.

lishi · Jan 08, 2007, 04:27 AM // 04:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

Because it seems like 8-man has a lot of fans and GvG is the only current way to play it? If you don't like the pace or strategy of GvG then tough beans I guess: no 8-man for you unless ANet brings it back.

lets put in this way.

lets forget the number of player.

we have the old HA style and the new HA style.

We want the old HA style becouse we think was better ok?

we dont think 8v8 is better then 6v6 we think 8vs8 HA is better then 6vs6 HA

Quote:

My point is that you people aren't mad you can't play 8v8 anymore, you're mad that you can't earn flashy emotes using the same builds that have worked until very recently. If you (personally) could still bloodspike in tombs we would not be having this argument. If you (personally) could rangerspike in GvG we wouldn't be having this argument either. But we are. Why? Because you can't find a way to enjoy 6-man and you're not happy about it. That's fine; I mean if you don't like it you're more than welcome to say something about it--that's sort of what this thread is for and I'm sure Gaile is looking for some feedback. That does not give you or anyone else the license to hurl your weak-ass ad hominems at me in the hopes that they'll defeat my argument.

your opinion are 6v6 HA is better then 8v8 HA ,ok fine.

but please dont presume random stuff. not all of us play bloodspike or ranger spike.

myself i can tell of my 8200 fame i made about 100-200 with ranger-necro spike or iway everthing else are made balanced.

Quote:

The complaints I've been seeing about 8-man tombs are (for the most part) far from comprehensive. For example, the main complaint seems to hinge around the fact that there "aren't enough builds" (convienently ignoring the fact that there are now 5+ dominant fotms instead of 2); but if that's the real complaint GvG still affords 8-man build possibilities. The diversity is there, just not in the PvP mode you want to play right now.

GvG and HA are not the same thing.

there arent the same kind of gameplay.

lets make a example

one day they decide baseball should played be reduced to 6vs6

people start to complain.

you say "why you complain? go if you like the 9vs9 go watch softball"

Quote:

But wait! That's probably not the real reason we want 8 man tombs. We want 8-man tombs because it's what we're used to--it's a convention of PvP. We want it back because the game doesn't seem right without it; and 6-man builds operate under a radically different dynamic that many of us either dislike outright or do not have the interest to get used to.

We want 8v8 becouse (other then all the reason posted before)

we played 8v8

we played 6v6

after we played a loth of both we find 8v8 better then 6v6

Quote:

If you walked into RA/TA one day and saw someone complaining that they wanted to PvP weith 6 people; you'd probably tell them to HA. Imagine your surprise if they accuse you of marking those two modes of PvP as identical, and then proceed to burrow up your rectum and post all kinds of underhanded, snipish bullsh!t like I've been seeing from your evidently very angry keyboard.

again , please dont put presume what we would have said.

if someone what a random 6v6 PvP HA is the last place i will point

if someone what a team 6v6 PVP where the the focus is the destruction of enemy team HA dont fit.

Quote:

What the hell is your problem? I'm allowed to express my opinions like anyone else; if you don't like them you don't have to read or respond to them: if you think they're unbelievably stupid leave it at that and let the post speak for itself (like what I did with your very civilized first reply to me). Getting this bent out of shape over someone expressing a contrary opinion (gasp!) is alarming, to say the least.

someone may have made a harsh reply and they should not done that.

but this is a discussion board having your opinion questioned is what you shuld expect.

EDIT i checked again your first post

Quote:

Someone linked to this thread in our guild announcement and I initially thought I'd end up sitting this one out but the sheer weight of stupidity in this thread has compelled me to throw my previous intentions out the window.

if you dont start a flame yourself it help

Quote:

I don't honestly understand where you folks getting the idea that I "don't know the difference" between GvG and HA: the differenes are so profound that anyone with eyes can see them; and since I'm typing with a reasonable degree of accuracy I think we can assume I have the required equipment. I am not telling you GvG and HA are the same, I am telling you that it may be time to move on to a new mode of PvP if you dislike this one so intently. I don't blame you or anyone else for pushing for 8v8 tombs if that's what you want (and I'll be fine with that if you succeed) but Christ man, try to have a little bit of tact.

GvG and HA require 2 different type of commitment.

A Good GvG guild have a schedule time where the member are supposed to come online , it need a guild with realiable player etc etc etc

HA is less scheduled. Having a guild who play at your same timezone may help but you can log on , gather people from guild/friendlist/PUG and play anytime.

so even if someone what to change some cant.

and btw even if they did why they cant hope to have the HA they liked restored?

lishi · Jan 08, 2007, 04:35 AM // 04:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilhelm

Someone explain to me why, everyone can't just play the game without all this complaining. Just be happy, that you have a game to play....I know I am.

-Wilhelm.

well last time "we just played the game " we got 6v6 witch by our opinion ruined HA

Dragonious · Jan 08, 2007, 06:47 AM // 06:47

I haven't played much since the change to 6v6, but I can perhaps deal with it if these game mechanic changes are really good. That's all I'm asking for. New maps and objectives and not a gank lever.

The Silver Star · Jan 08, 2007, 08:42 AM // 08:42

This update may be good however, there has never been a good update to PvP yet as far as i can remember so i dont have much faith in A-net atall at this being a good change. However it could be a turn for the ebst and first in-line of a long line of needed game updates.

Nadia Roark · Jan 08, 2007, 08:43 AM // 08:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

lets put in this way.

lets forget the number of player.

we have the old HA style and the new HA style.

We want the old HA style becouse we think was better ok?

we dont think 8v8 is better then 6v6 we think 8vs8 HA is better then 6vs6 HA

That's fine. I'll be happy with 8-man tombs but I think 6v6 is worth keeping somewhere. Still, I wouldn't close the book on 6v6 HA just yet. See what ANet has in mind for the 19th and decide from there. I'm perfectly amenable to 8v8 tombs but let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

your opinion are 6v6 HA is better then 8v8 HA ,ok fine.

That's not what I said at all. 6v6 HA as it is right now needs an overhaul about as badly as a New Orleans cathouse after Mardi Gras. I'm not sure it's fair to consider the comparison until we see what changes are in store for us map-wise and skill-wise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

but please dont presume random stuff. not all of us play bloodspike or ranger spike.

I was speaking to him personally. I said "If you (personally) could play bloodspike..." I used those particular examples because I'm familiar with the builds he prefers to run and they really don't work the same anymore.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

but this is a discussion board having your opinion questioned is what you shuld expect.

Dissent I can handle. Disrespect is entirely different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

if you dont start a flame yourself it help

Saying that some people have said some stupid things in this thread is hardly a revelation worth admonishing me for. Someone with a guilty conscience may assume I was speaking directly to them and a couple have responded accordingly. There's a distinct difference between suggesting that some pretty dumb things have been said, and saying in effect (as has been said to me) that "your posts are retarded" or "you don't know how HA works" or whatever else. The latter is flaming, what I said was unpleasant news at worst.

Quote:

GvG and HA require 2 different type of commitment.

Well, yeah. I wasn't asking to define the difference, I was wondering why so many people I thought the differences didn't exist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

A Good GvG guild have a schedule time where the member are supposed to come online , it need a guild with realiable player etc etc etc

HA is less scheduled. Having a guild who play at your same timezone may help but you can log on , gather people from guild/friendlist/PUG and play anytime.

Now that you mention it, I don't think it's been any quicker (on average) for me to form groups in 6v6 tombs vs 8v8 tombs. How peculiar. It still seems like it takes a while.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

and btw even if they did why they cant hope to have the HA they liked restored?

Well, it probably wouldn't be "the HA they liked" (in the strictest sense) if it were brought back tomorrow; the changes will likely be profound enough that the same build and/or operational strategies may not work anymore. We already know that changes are coming so why can't we just start from there?

Look guys, I'm not just saying all of this to piss you off. I'm saying this because I know how to get administrators to change gameplay procedures. I am one of them for a different game and we do actually listen to the players, but saying things like "why don't you bring 8v8 back because we're screaming for it" or "I'll quit if you don't bring 8v8 back" are surprisingly counterproductive.

drekmonger · Jan 08, 2007, 11:22 AM // 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Silver Star

there has never been a good update to PvP yet as far

Reconnects
The introduction of Balth faction
The subsequent increases to Balth faction
Observation Mode
various changes to GvG mechanics and maps
various skill updates (such as ending ranger spirit spam
the equalization of PvP and PvE equipment
PvP equipment screen
Templates
the Battle Islands themselves

I could go on. And on. And on.

luilui · Jan 08, 2007, 12:07 PM // 12:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

Look guys, I'm not just saying all of this to piss you off. I'm saying this because I know how to get administrators to change gameplay procedures. I am one of them for a different game and we do actually listen to the players, but saying things like "why don't you bring 8v8 back because we're screaming for it" or "I'll quit if you don't bring 8v8 back" are surprisingly counterproductive.

If would be great if you can tell us/ME why it's so counterproductive, since it's not just one person saying "why don't you bring 8v8 back because we're screaming for it" but many. I think it's pretty logical that if you made this game for these people then you should give them what they want. Maybe the crying/moaning level of this forum will go down if you inspire us.

CassiusDrehyg · Jan 08, 2007, 12:17 PM // 12:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by drekmonger

Reconnects
The introduction of Balth faction
The subsequent increases to Balth faction
Observation Mode
various changes to GvG mechanics and maps
various skill updates (such as ending ranger spirit spam
the equalization of PvP and PvE equipment
PvP equipment screen
Templates
the Battle Islands themselves

I could go on. And on. And on.

Reconnects - Useless unless you can actually connect to the game.
More Balth faction per kill - Less skills back when Balthazar faction was originally implemented.
Observation Mode - Agreed.
Changes to GvG mechanics - Yes, there are still spike teams in GvG, and no, Eurospike is *NOT* Balanced.
Skill Updates - Agreed, but ANet needs to come up with a skill balance for Nightfall.
Equal equipment - Agreed.
Equipment screen - It wasn't much trouble anyway to send items from one character to another, provided they weren't custom.
Templates - Rerolling wasn't that painful.
Battle Islands - It wasn't hard to get to the original tombs.

Wow. By typing that, I realised that Anet managed to make three (3) changes that were actually useful/had any point at all to them.

gg