Curse

Randomway Ftw · Jan 10, 2007, 10:10 PM // 22:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

HA was dying before the 6v6 change. 6v6 was an attempt to make HA more accessable. None of this worked because party size was never the problem. The problem was altar maps and zero objective maps which benefit holding and overload tactics (including spikes). GvG doesn't suffer from this because VoD kills holding tactics and splitting can normally kill overloads.

If HA includes 1/3 split maps, 1/3 annialation maps and 1/3 holding maps, I think the balance would work better. Split maps would require multiple control points not unlike relic runs. Further more the altar claiming should all be done with either flags or faction style claims. If players had to be equally prepared for all three game types, than things would be more interesting. If HoH rotated its game type, much of the holding issues would be gone.

Lol to the above, go back to GvG, please tell me how altar maps make HA less accesable, not why you think they suck. HA was not dying before the change,HA 8v8 had many people who enjoyed it despite the fact that people like Thom continuosly demeaned it.

AB/Flag capture mechanics should not be brought into HA, they already have problems of their own, and I don't think that they would work well in a three way endgame map. Something to note, there is no problem with teams holding halls for long times as long they are not abusing actual broken mechanics (i.e. bugged, or impossible to counter), skill updates should be made to deal with overpowered skills used in holding. Just because people do not like having their ghosts bodyblocked/interupted does not mean the mechanics need to be replaced.

Please stick to GvG instead of trying to turn HA into a form of GvG.

Alleji · Jan 10, 2007, 10:21 PM // 22:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

AB style altar capping will severely reduce or eliminate the need for monks in HA (or at the very least, on those maps). As a monk who likes to HA I have a problem with this.

Oh, please. Monks are probably least in danger of disappearing, the class is even more ubiquitous than warriors. A completely unbacked estimate, but I'd say about 95-98% of all PvP teams have one or more primary monks. (HA, GvG, TA)

But just in case 100% of the meta reverts to IWAY, you could always learn to C+space.

Quote:

Furthermore, it will force teams to ball up on the altar, which would make skills like Spiteful Spirit, Sandstorm, and smites more powerful not on their virtues as skills but as a function of the required capping tactics. If they change it to AB-style altar capping I don't see why it would be worth it to run anything other than ele ball.

Ever played alliance battles?

No.

Well, go play and tell me the size of the "capping area".

EDIT: I don't really want the ghostly to be dropped in favour of AB capping, I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument again.

Divineshadows · Jan 10, 2007, 10:53 PM // 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

AB style altar capping will severely reduce or eliminate the need for monks in HA (or at the very least, on those maps). As a monk who likes to HA I have a problem with this. Furthermore, it will force teams to ball up on the altar, which would make skills like Spiteful Spirit, Sandstorm, and smites more powerful not on their virtues as skills but as a function of the required capping tactics. If they change it to AB-style altar capping I don't see why it would be worth it to run anything other than ele ball.

Thom's suggestion for people capping altars in HA (like in ABs) was not for a single altar. You wouldn't have to ball up on the altar. There would be multiple altars to promote splitting and going to easier altars to cap that aren't bogged down with a ton of AoE damage.

Thom · Jan 10, 2007, 10:59 PM // 22:59

Few points:
-The fact that you need two skills in two different professions in order to successfully cap an altar that you control in all other ways is part of the problem in my mind. You already have 4 required professions of 12 (2xMo, E, P) before you start building. Honestly, I've pretty much GvGed since factions so I'm not up with the latest HA meta. Some things don't change though, capping and defending the ghostly hero remains central to the meta.

-As long as monks remain the most efficient healer, they'll remain useful in PvP. Monk usage has increased in GvG due to the power creep and efficient monk flaggers.

-Altars are capped while the altar is within the aggro bubble. This is more than enough room to prevent AoE balling. The mechanic isn't the best for other reasons... namely it turns the match into a simple kill objective.

-I fail to see the problem with flags or orbs used to cap the altar. Perhaps this is too close to GvG, but that mechanic tends to work quite well. It also creates more control points since the flagger must run the flag from a spawn point to the altar. The whole thing would feel a bit more like a relic run than the current altar maps.

-Issues with NPCs: Kiting-- no human would stand their and take the damage the lord takes. Path finding-- compare a GvG flag runner to a ghostly hero. Mitigation skills-- other key characters use mitigation skills if they know they are a priority target. The idea of knowing exactly who your primary target to attack/heal really limits effective strategies. In GvG the flagger is an important target, but I don't know exactly how the flagger will respond and the oppoent can always switch who they have running flags.

-HA has always been about great micro. This benefits people who learn builds like machines and master specific situations. While this is good, it doesn't lend itself to being a very accessable or long last game type. It also means that it is harder hit by skill releases and rebalance. GvG players, especially those in "movement/split" guilds can take most any build and be fairly successful in GvG without great micro. HA needs a bit more of that strategic flexiblity to have some strategy offset build/micro. Moving away from things like the micro of interrupting a hero would be a good start.

Wasteland Squidget · Jan 10, 2007, 11:06 PM // 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

AB style altar capping will severely reduce or eliminate the need for monks in HA (or at the very least, on those maps). As a monk who likes to HA I have a problem with this. Furthermore, it will force teams to ball up on the altar, which would make skills like Spiteful Spirit, Sandstorm, and smites more powerful not on their virtues as skills but as a function of the required capping tactics. If they change it to AB-style altar capping I don't see why it would be worth it to run anything other than ele ball.

That depends on the radius of the altar itself. If the capping radius extended to most of the HA room you'd have a lot of space to fight. The downside is that it would further encourage ultra-defensive builds, since you wouldn't even need to bring interrupts to deal with other Ghostly Heroes.

Thom · Jan 10, 2007, 11:16 PM // 23:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

Lol to the above, go back to GvG, please tell me how altar maps make HA less accesable, not why you think they suck. HA was not dying before the change,HA 8v8 had many people who enjoyed it despite the fact that people like Thom continuosly demeaned it.

AB/Flag capture mechanics should not be brought into HA, they already have problems of their own, and I don't think that they would work well in a three way endgame map. Something to note, there is no problem with teams holding halls for long times as long they are not abusing actual broken mechanics (i.e. bugged, or impossible to counter), skill updates should be made to deal with overpowered skills used in holding. Just because people do not like having their ghosts bodyblocked/interupted does not mean the mechanics need to be replaced.

Please stick to GvG instead of trying to turn HA into a form of GvG.

Numbers of people and the amount of skips was falling before 6v6 was implimented. I still occasionally played HA then and distinctly remember this very forum complaining about dropping participation and empty districts. Last year this time, HA always had several active districts with PuGs and ranked teams. It simply wasn't that way before the 6v6 switch. The fact that your friends still played does not deny that very few new players were joining the community and many players would quit once they got their tigers. If the community was healthy and growing, Anet would not have implimented substancial changes.

Teams hoping for a skip (or timing a skip) so that they can impliment a build which is only suitable for holding is a problem. If a good team holds for an extend period by their own merit, I congratulate them. When they do so by playing at dead hours with "holding builds", the mechanism is broken.

GvG is a highly successful game type. HA is a floundering gametype which has been monopolized by a fairly small group of players, compared to GvG. Most GvG players have played HA in the past and left for GvG. I would argue that for these reasons, adopting some GvG mechanics while maintaining some of the character of Tombs will improve the game type.

Divinus Stella · Jan 11, 2007, 01:20 AM // 01:20

Altars are gimped anyway, elimination and relic runs are both good fun, 90% of the stress in teams is down to altars, id like to see them re-done completely.

selber · Jan 11, 2007, 01:29 AM // 01:29

Thom - as much as I tend to agree with your posts normally - you are wrong here, IMO. The Arcade-Style-"Beat'Em'Up"-character is one of the biggest differences which seperates HA from GvG and it should be remain this way.

Making HA a mode that requires alot of thinking, splitting and tactical blingbling sounds interesting and would solve alot of problems for sure, but it is neither wanted nor needed, because it would lead to a "poor-mans-version" of GvG.

I changed my mind there lately and to be honest - I have no clue how 8v8 could work out without multiple objective-maps. That's maybe one of the reasons the designers try to stick with 6v6, since you can bypass this point via partysize and make HA what it is really about.

I really hope they fix HoH and remove the need to run those very boring defensive-builds and encourage the players to run offensive shit.

Sorry for my english.

Randomway Ftw · Jan 11, 2007, 02:01 AM // 02:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by selber

Thom - as much as I tend to agree with your posts normally - you are wrong here, IMO. The Arcade-Style-"Beat'Em'Up"-character is one of the biggest differences which seperates HA from GvG and it should be remain this way.

Making HA a mode that requires alot of thinking, splitting and tactical blingbling sounds interesting and would solve alot of problems for sure, but it is neither wanted nor needed, because it would lead to a "poor-mans-version" of GvG.

I changed my mind there lately and to be honest - I have no clue how 8v8 could work out without multiple objective-maps. That's maybe one of the reasons the designers try to stick with 6v6, since you can bypass this point via partysize and make HA what it is really about.

I really hope they fix HoH and remove the need to run those very boring defensive-builds and encourage the players to run offensive shit.

Sorry for my english.

One of the major complaints about HA is the supposed need to run boring defensive builds, in order to be succesfull, now the latest version of this is the dual paragon holding build, now this build was nerfed, and is currently countered by the metagame. A build similar to this would have a hard time in 8v8, because the amount of shutdown prevalent, and the amount of og spike, which ignores armor, and goes through incoming (at least the life stealing does.) At primetime, or at least what could be called prime time (not as many people playing now) I don't see people holding for very long, if HA is flooded with ultra-defensive holding builds they're pretty bad ones.

In, 8v8 if you had the right utility/plan you could hold with just about anything, you didn't need a holding build, people even held with IWAY.

Please, please do not encourage overly offensive gameplay, we all no waht that leads to...

Thom Bangalter · Jan 11, 2007, 02:24 AM // 02:24

If they turned HA into a competitive AB, I'd be so happy.

Also, @thom: monk runners are neither good nor efficient.

Apok Omen · Jan 11, 2007, 02:31 AM // 02:31

6v6 was actually never a problem. It gimped both gimmick and balanced groups in every aspect. It was the lame timer for halls skips, boring defensive builds that guilds used and paid off players to let them get there, and small size of HA stages that was the problem.

Once the long-waited skill balance comes, I'm sure we will see a definite change in the metagame. Right now, Anet is dealing with a bunch of problems and skills just out of Nightfall. Give them the time they need to restore HA instead of thinking that 8v8 will heal all.

If Anet just made every decision based on the majority of the community telling them what to do, this game would be in deep chaos (more that is in now, actually) They know more about the game than the community, so saying "8v8 NOW!!" is just wasting away your keys. If they haven't changed it back to 8v8 yet, that usually means that they had debated the pro's and con's, made tests, and made the agreement that it won't do any good.

Believe me, they have looked at the reasons that we have posted, so repeating yourself will just be echoing back and forth. Juat say it once and move on.

Randomway Ftw · Jan 11, 2007, 02:37 AM // 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Apok Omen

6v6 was actually never a problem. It gimped both gimmick and balanced groups in every aspect. It was the lame timer for halls skips, boring defensive builds that guilds used and paid off players to let them get there, and small size of HA stages that was the problem.

6v6 not a problem loooool, everyone knows that 6v6 has created the build wars situation that currently exists today, even Izzy knows. Who should I believe Izzy, or random forum guy?

Also, what are these phantom unkillable defensive builds that I keep hearing about dominating HA?

Apok Omen · Jan 11, 2007, 03:53 AM // 03:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw

6v6 not a problem loooool, everyone knows that 6v6 has created the build wars situation that currently exists today, even Izzy knows. Who should I believe Izzy, or random forum guy?

Also, what are these phantom unkillable defensive builds that I keep hearing about dominating HA?

Go ahead, believe whoever you want to believe. Perhaps, in order to remove some confusion, I should have pointed out that it was never a problem in my opinion. I never had any problems facing in 6v6, 6v6v6, or 6v6v6v6 matches, probably because I though to myself "thank god, now only 6 people to kill to move on".

Also, pure defense builds were never unkillable, just very annoying and took more coordination (from PuG's, mind you) to penetrate their defenses. (I honestly do not care if you were trying to be sarcastic or not, just wanted to let it out in the open.)

Nadia Roark · Jan 11, 2007, 04:34 AM // 04:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

Oh, please. Monks are probably least in danger of disappearing, the class is even more ubiquitous than warriors. A completely unbacked estimate, but I'd say about 95-98% of all PvP teams have one or more primary monks. (HA, GvG, TA)

Yeah? How many monks do you see in AB? Care to guess why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

Ever played alliance battles?

No.

Well, go play and tell me the size of the "capping area".

Who the hell put the sand in your vaseline? I've played AB (and PvE) and I'm well aware of the size of the capping area. It doesn't make AB style altar capping in HA any less of a ridiculous idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alleji

EDIT: I don't really want the ghostly to be dropped in favour of AB capping, I'm just pointing out the stupidity of your argument again.

Funny, you've done nothing of the sort from where I stand. All you've said is "PvP teams carry monks" and "You haven't played AB." Swing and a miss.

Riotgear · Jan 11, 2007, 06:25 AM // 06:25

I don't think having a simple control shift like AB would be a great idea because all that really does is make spike mandatory. The easiest way to have the most influence by player count is to kick out one of theirs immediately.

However, some sort of progression towards capping or losing it would certainly be better than the current method.

Quote:

How many monks do you see in AB? Care to guess why?

Because there aren't enough monks, duh. Same reason for the lack of monks in RA, because they're a disproportionately small part of the population. Also because survival is non-critical when you can die and return with no DP repeatedly many times in a game.

Quote:

everyone knows that 6v6 has created the build wars situation that currently exists today, even Izzy knows.

Did you even watch the championship? Practically every team running SP spike = build wars at its finest. Do you really think things like JB letting everyone spam 10e spells on recharge under QZ is something that 8v8 will get rid of, or even reduce? Build wars exists mostly because of overpowered Nightfall abilities. Notice how almost every FoTM since the release has been built around a Nightfall skill, be it Steady Stance, JB, SF, or RaO.

Yes, 6v6 magnifies the problem, but it is certainly not what is creating it.

Nadia Roark · Jan 11, 2007, 06:40 AM // 06:40

Riot, with all due respect I think you're overlooking the fact that PvP characters can play in AB's. It's not that there aren't enough monks, it's that nobody rolls them because they're fairly pointless in AB.

Granted, it would probably be a little different in HA. In AB the only characters that are readily accessible through a monk's party screen are the ones that happen to be in his "cell." To heal anyone else would require manually selecting them from your field of view, which may or may not be the reason they're not used.

I just think, all things considered, that AB style altar capping will result in a gross increase of "no contest" altar matches where no one wins. You'd either have to turn the time way up on altar matches or institute some kind of sudden death policy.

Apok Omen · Jan 11, 2007, 06:40 AM // 06:40

EDIT to original post to prevent my definition on something.

@ the multiple altar caps suggestion... In AB, the side that captures all of the Altars first gets a one minute delay until they win, no matter what, or until the other side nuetralizes an Altar. In Halls, there is only one Altar and the team who is holding after the time runs out is the victor.

Now, Altar caps have been around in HA...since the beginning of Guild Wars, but there are many kinds of Altar caps. The Halls one is kind of broken as it favors the side that has the best defensive build, and almost no full out damage build can hold. But if Anet made it so that there are multiple Altars to cap, then problems will ensue.

What I am going to suggest may bleed some top-PvPers eyes, so cover your eyes if you are sure you do not want to see it:

Perhaps the new Altar cap program they could put in could have it so that you do have many Altars you could cap, but that doesn't mean you win automatically. My suggestion is make it kind of like AB in the sense that you gain some protection/power after capping a certain Altar, then duke it out. The idea was also brought to my attention from facing Shiro in NF PvE(gets flame suit on).

Riotgear · Jan 11, 2007, 07:52 AM // 07:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadia Roark

Riot, with all due respect I think you're overlooking the fact that PvP characters can play in AB's. It's not that there aren't enough monks, it's that nobody rolls them because they're fairly pointless in AB.

I know very well that PvP characters can play there, especially since almost all of my time there is spent on a PvP char. I should clarify that it's sort of a combination of the two: Because they're non-essential in a field of play where there's no DP and the rez timer is 30 seconds, and because of that, people would rather just get going. A monk is certainly beneficial, most people would rather have one in their groups, but the lack of one is not a death sentence like in most formats.

And as far as pointless, the best group you can have in AB is two high-damage melee, a nuker, and a healer. By far.

Quote:

I just think, all things considered, that AB style altar capping will result in a gross increase of "no contest" altar matches where no one wins.

Like I said, it would probably just mean spike teams would dominate because the more time you spend with a superior player count, the more likely you are to cap the altar. And spike can generally guarantee a superior player count of 1.

Personally, I think the best thing altar maps could use is a longer time limit, complete revision of the Claim Resource mechanic (making everything revolve around a 5-sec ability is completely stupid). Preferably something that allows control to be wrestled away from a holding hero without being required to flat-out kill them.

Multiple objectives may be a good solution as well. It can reduce the viability of FoTM crap because FoTM builds are generally very poor on a split, not to mention reduces the absolute chaos of current altar capping.

Nadia Roark · Jan 11, 2007, 08:44 AM // 08:44

I don't think we disagree on any particular point... the spike factor is an important one because even if the other team rezzes quickly it doesn't matter; the team that spiked got that three second one-man advantage and as long as they can mantain it victory is guaranteed. Again, an ele ball with a spike seems to be the only build worth running under this altar-cap format.

Multiple objectives has a nice ring to it, but then we run the risk of making tombs overly complicated. I don't think the 'problem' of the FotM is going to be solved thusly, since the new FotM will be one that can operate (and win) under the new format. "FotM crap" will, unfortunately continue to exist regardless of the format. I think the real question here is one of balance and utility; a problem to which the most commonly advocated solution appears to be the return of 8v8.

phasola · Jan 11, 2007, 11:14 AM // 11:14

Quote:

-As long as monks remain the most efficient healer, they'll remain useful in PvP. Monk usage has increased in GvG due to the power creep and efficient monk flaggers.

Guess you don't observe HA much. What's more popular atm ? Monks or N/Mo(Rt). Take a wild guess.