Curse

audioaxes · Aug 24, 2006, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTimTimma

It is a shame there is no 4v4 Team Arenas Ladder. It would be fun to have some competition of that sort and have it exposed. Then A-Net could sanction official 4v4 Tournaments, and it would be like the NCAA with like 100 teams going for the gold o_o;

Id creme myself if anet implemented something like this into TA :P

Even thou according to most posts ive read we, [Eat], seem to be the "dominating" TA guild. So its only safe to assume we would be near the top somewhere (if not the top).

dont get too confident. There are many guilds that can lay down the law in TA if they actually cared.

sno · Aug 24, 2006, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioaxes

dont get too confident. There are many guilds that can lay down the law in TA if they actually cared.

Oh yea, if there was a ladder the competition would increase 20 fold instantly. It's just that guilds like [Eat] and [ROFL] would have an edge, because we're already very familiar with running 4-person builds.

so anet... whataya say?

didi_killer · Aug 24, 2006, 08:01 AM // 08:01

I am gladiator 4 in europe, guilds who are goods: [Bi](mine

and the best in France), [DTS] (from england) were but they are dead, [COLD](from england) dead too.
Which are not bad: [Rezq](from france,korea and others^^), [MOJO](from england), [Pims](2nd in France).

edit: i would be interested to play with some [eat]s if they agree my acc: Kara La Moine, i can play boon or...boon.

btw, do you, [eat]s always play the same classes?

yesitsrob · Aug 24, 2006, 08:12 AM // 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by sno

Oh yea, if there was a ladder the competition would increase 20 fold instantly. It's just that guilds like [Eat] and [ROFL] would have an edge, because we're already very familiar with running 4-person builds.

so anet... whataya say?

Erm, from my experience - whenever QQ are in TA they are by far the most difficult match up (when taking it somewhat seriously), Eat dominate it now because quite frankly they are about the only team that consistently play it who are any good.

sno · Aug 24, 2006, 08:24 AM // 08:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

Erm, from my experience - whenever QQ are in TA they are by far the most difficult match up (when taking it somewhat seriously), Eat dominate it now because quite frankly they are about the only team that consistently play it who are any good.

[QQ] was always good, but they very very rarely play TA anymore. I'd also watch for [Vis], as they no longer TA either, but when they did they were always impressive. It's interesting how much random hate [Eat] gets now. It seems the more fame we get in the forums the more random guild-bashing we get in-game. It's not like we're KGYU, I'm not sure what we did to deserve it. Jealousy perhaps?

Quote:

btw, do you, [Eat]s always play the same classes?

Nope, we have several different builds that we run. I'm almost exclusively monk, but in TA I sometimes run trapper, mesmer or ele.

D E L E T E D · Aug 24, 2006, 12:54 PM // 12:54

I agree that the level of skill would go up greatly if there was a ta ladder. Many guilds would take ta more seriously.

edited to remove in-game names

Van Goghs Ear · Aug 24, 2006, 02:22 PM // 14:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioaxes

dont get too confident. There are many guilds that can lay down the law in TA if they actually cared.

shrug...why? because they have a solid tactical awareness in GvG?

w/e, TA is a whole different ballgame, and I have run into high ladder guilds running serious builds in TA and at no time did I see them transcending some new level of play into GW godliness. TA is death match, the skills that make a great GvG player aren't necessarily going to ring true for the arenas, and don't even get me started on HA players, I can't take any play style seriously that actually uses spellbreaker as a viable skill and consists of players who think choking gas is overpowered.

Quote:

Erm, from my experience - whenever QQ are in TA they are by far the most difficult match up (when taking it somewhat seriously), Eat dominate it now because quite frankly they are about the only team that consistently play it who are any good.

We've consistently beat them, and I'm sure there are many other teams who have consistently beat them as well. And don't tell me they weren't playing seriously since that run they camped the priest, extending the game to around 20 minutes long. They've also beaten us. They are definately a strong group, but they are quite beatable.

I think a lot of players run into high end guilds, and they psychologically beat themselves before the match even starts. Same is true in GvG. That attitude isn't acceptable in my guild, otherwise we would've never made it through an often difficult first season together.

still.mojo · Aug 24, 2006, 04:21 PM // 16:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by didi_killer

I am gladiator 4 in europe, guilds who are goods: [Bi](mine

and the best in France), [DTS] (from england) were but they are dead, [COLD](from england) dead too.
Which are not bad: [Rezq](from france,korea and others^^), [MOJO](from england), [Pims](2nd in France).

Hm, small edit here.MOJO is originally from Serbia, i can tell because i formed guild with some friends year ago.It cant be called Serbian any longer because we have people fom England, Finland, France, Germany, Holland, America, China etc etc...

Btw, bringing 4vs4 competition surely wouldnt bring any "godly" play by gvg guilds, but would sure make fights harder.From 10 fights per glad point, i can say u can encounter 1-2 that matter, unles u meat same team over and over.
Rest fights are usually below 1 minute borderline, and at best meaningless.

PS: And ofc mr.Sheepy is right as usuall [tart], if 4 vs 4 ever gets rated, should be choice based, or some fun u have there will be lost.

sheepysheepy · Aug 24, 2006, 04:21 PM // 16:21

a ta ladder would be a nice addition, i say addition because i'd never want it to replace normal get 4 and go kill stuff fun that we use the arenas for

perhaps before entering it could ask if you wish to play rated or unrated and only games between 2 teams that chose to play rated would count?
it wouldnt work too well if ta was divided into unrated and rated games wholely though because there arnt enough ta players for it to continue being spontaneous after 4 or 5 fights (unless the rated ta really did bring a new level of competition that attracted more people ofcourse

)

audioaxes · Aug 24, 2006, 04:55 PM // 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Van Goghs Ear

shrug...why? because they have a solid tactical awareness in GvG?

w/e, TA is a whole different ballgame, and I have run into high ladder guilds running serious builds in TA and at no time did I see them transcending some new level of play into GW godliness. TA is death match, the skills that make a great GvG player aren't necessarily going to ring true for the arenas, and don't even get me started on HA players, I can't take any play style seriously that actually uses spellbreaker as a viable skill and consists of players who think choking gas is overpowered.

We've consistently beat them, and I'm sure there are many other teams who have consistently beat them as well. And don't tell me they weren't playing seriously since that run they camped the priest, extending the game to around 20 minutes long. They've also beaten us. They are definately a strong group, but they are quite beatable.

I think a lot of players run into high end guilds, and they psychologically beat themselves before the match even starts. Same is true in GvG. That attitude isn't acceptable in my guild, otherwise we would've never made it through an often difficult first season together.

and using the same logic i have ran into both eat and ta and did not feel overly impressed that they are doing something other guilds cannot

Legendary Shiz · Aug 24, 2006, 05:01 PM // 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioaxes

and using the same logic i have ran into both eat and ta and did not feel overly impressed that they are doing something other guilds cannot

And yet, I'm assuming you lost. gg

Van Goghs Ear · Aug 24, 2006, 05:29 PM // 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioaxes

and using the same logic i have ran into both eat and ta and did not feel overly impressed that they are doing something other guilds cannot

and yet I can't say anything about your play since you have no guild tag or IGN names in your profile.

Legendary Shiz · Aug 24, 2006, 08:31 PM // 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Van Goghs Ear

and yet I can't say anything about your play since you have no guild tag or IGN names in your profile.

He's hiding

yesitsrob · Aug 24, 2006, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Van Goghs Ear

We've consistently beat them, and I'm sure there are many other teams who have consistently beat them as well. And don't tell me they weren't playing seriously since that run they camped the priest, extending the game to around 20 minutes long. They've also beaten us. They are definately a strong group, but they are quite beatable.

I think a lot of players run into high end guilds, and they psychologically beat themselves before the match even starts. Same is true in GvG. That attitude isn't acceptable in my guild, otherwise we would've never made it through an often difficult first season together.

And I've beat QQ, I didn't at all say they were unbeatable. Big deal. I've beat Eat too... also by running back to the priest many a time and dp'ing you out, actually... tbh, in that match we had what was largely a grab and go build and the fact our only warrior hate turned out to be Spirit of failure sicked a bit. From my personal perspective though QQ were the much better team, I know this has sod all to do with gvg tactics but they're extremely highly skilled individuals. And I'm just basing this on my personal record against Eat being a lot better than my personal record against QQ...

Lobotomizing Shocks · Aug 24, 2006, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Yaaaaaaaaay so much talktalktalktalk. I think its simple. Whatever you do whether its HA, TA, or GvG, people are going to be better at if they have done it more tha others. This pretains to the team knowing the meta game or the build trend, and also teamwork like Joan has mentioned.

[Eat] is successful in TA not just because they're skilled players, but because of their experience and the meta-game awareness. Also, Joan mentioned teamwork. I know for a fact that many of the people from [Eat] are from what I call the "Classic-Era" of TA where people such as E***a and Ac***n C***bo were known for their bad-ass TA teams. This means that most or even all of [Eat]'s players are either extremely experienced or have played with each other for a long time.

Also, I've read something about "there are many other guilds who can just come in and lay down the shizz in TA" well, I bet there are, but it sure as hell wont be easy catching up to what they have been missingin TA. The people who are at the top 100 reach the rank either by : Experience and Teamwork, or with an extremely successful build that is original. Why should TA be any different?

I also realize that people including me are getting too serious about this whole TA talk, but it is serious now. Not just because we like to boost our egos or something, but it seems like people are talking about TA like its a joke that anybody can get good at in a day. I agree that TA is tad bit easier than GvG to become completely good at, but saying that any guild, person, or a team can just pummel over everyone in TA is defenitely wrong. (its evolving!!)

Van Goghs Ear · Aug 24, 2006, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

And I've beat QQ, I didn't at all say they were unbeatable. Big deal. I've beat Eat too... also by running back to the priest many a time and dp'ing you out, actually... tbh, in that match we had what was largely a grab and go build and the fact our only warrior hate turned out to be Spirit of failure sicked a bit. From my personal perspective though QQ were the much better team, I know this has sod all to do with gvg tactics but they're extremely highly skilled individuals. And I'm just basing this on my personal record against Eat being a lot better than my personal record against QQ...

I don't recognize your tag, and I always recognize people who give us issues. and if our only warrior hate was spirit of failure...lol you were probably playing a joke build we were running or we were doing a test run of some sort.

We have bad days, we lose, we get out builded and we get out played, c'est la vie. I still consider my guys to be an exceptional bunch of players in both TA and GvG.

yesitsrob · Aug 24, 2006, 10:29 PM // 22:29

the tag was new, as of yesterday, which might explain that ^^.

You were running the spirit shackles + price of failure + spirit of failure + signet of humility thing, that's the key things i remembered, along with a warrior. A lot of shut down, not so much damage, we had 2 very long matches when we last played. One on the coral priest map which we won, one in the desert, which you won (ending our winning streak and sending us to bed). You may not recognize ign or tag, but you had issues.

Logan Raziel · Aug 24, 2006, 10:47 PM // 22:47

I have to agree with Joan on something, people should never believe that because you see a good tag or a famous name jumps up that there is no way you can win, they are people just like you and have no skills or items that put them at an advantage over you (unless you are running without max armor :P). I've foughten some very high ranked (gold caped) guilds in TA a lot and honestly, when Im with a full guild group of mine, we rarely lose to them. They are not bad players ofcourse, but as Joan said, there are several different elements in TA and GvG. HA...ug, I love when I see HA monks in TA, such a joke. But anyways, yes they have good team work but positioning and battle field awareness which are 2 very very important things to perfect for GvGs for example, in TA, there are different rules with what you can get away with, with positioning. Also a lot of skills that are nice in GvGs just dont work as well in TA where there is usually less hex and condition removal, and usually only one monk.

Van Goghs Ear · Aug 24, 2006, 11:00 PM // 23:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

the tag was new, as of yesterday, which might explain that ^^.

You were running the spirit shackles + price of failure + spirit of failure + signet of humility thing, that's the key things i remembered, along with a warrior. A lot of shut down, not so much damage, we had 2 very long matches when we last played. One on the coral priest map which we won, one in the desert, which you won (ending our winning streak and sending us to bed). You may not recognize ign or tag, but you had issues.

ok, I remember those matches, they were pretty good.

that was our new balance build as of 2 days ago that we are still working on so....not really a good indicator of what we run.

Divineshadows · Aug 24, 2006, 11:23 PM // 23:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by yesitsrob

the tag was new, as of yesterday, which might explain that ^^.

You were running the spirit shackles + price of failure + spirit of failure + signet of humility thing, that's the key things i remembered, along with a warrior. A lot of shut down, not so much damage, we had 2 very long matches when we last played. One on the coral priest map which we won, one in the desert, which you won (ending our winning streak and sending us to bed). You may not recognize ign or tag, but you had issues.

You must have been running with 3 guys from Servants of Fortuna. I designed the build you described two days ago in an effort to try to fit in an energy surge mind wrack mesmer (which have all but disappeared from TA) into a TA build. The motivation behind this build is to provide practice for GvGs in TA for two of the positions -- the shock axe and the surge/wrack mesmer. At the moment, I have a soft spot for the skill spirit shackles which has neat synergy with mind wrack and provides awesome shutdown to assassins (which have gone way up in popularity lately due to [Eat]'s dual assassin NR build) and rangers (thumpers included).

Van Gogh decided last night to make further modifications to the dom mesmer by dropping two of the shutdown hexes -- backfire and shame -- for mantra of inscriptions and signet of humility and swapping signet of weariness for signet of disruption. The thinking was that elite hex removal skills such as expel hexes and blessed light were hurting our ability to keep melee shutdown to the level we wanted. By dropping backfire and shame, we lost some of our hexing output for the tradeoff of disabling an elite and getting more use out of two signets.

The first match you mention on the coral priest map was actually the first one we had with these skill substitutions. Our warrior had a bit of a targetting priority problem this match. Your team consisted of a warrior, a punishing/savage/distract/apply poison ranger, an expel hexes anti-melee mesmer with spirit of failure and images of remorse, and a boon prot. The problem we ran into this match was that our dom mesmer's signets were getting constantly interrupted so we could not shutdown expel hexes. Without being able to shutdown expel hexes, our anti-melee could not keep hexes on the warrior and ranger. Without hexes on these two, our dom mesmer got killed three times getting 45 DP which was too much to recover from even on a priest map.

After the match, a couple of my guildmates were calling to scrap these alterations of the build and switch back to shame+backfire (which also provides nice shutdown on an expel hexes player when covered with mind wrack) or to run one of our two different NR builds that we are the most comfortable executing in TA. I decided to give the build another chance, because I knew we had misplayed the match and that every build test deserves more than a single try.

We win 9 matches and on match number 10 run into you guys again. This time around, Van Gogh and I order our warrior to stick an axe in the face of the ranger to limit the effectiveness of the interrupter by putting him in a "kite or die" situation. In addition, Van Gogh made better use of obstructions in order to protect his spell casts and signet use. Once we had some mild degen working on your team, several shutdown hexes on your warrior and ranger, and expel hexes disabled, we ordered a quick target switch and adrenal spike on the monk. This caused your team to retreat and in the process we did end up getting a kill from which your team never really seemed to fully recover from.

We lost our "naked" match following this though. Our three naked (sans armor) victories have all been using our NR builds. Fighting without armor against opponents with armor is quite tough as it affects the damage you take from physical and elemental, your total energy pool, your energy regen, and your attributes (loss of runes).

I am not sure what I want to do with this build we were testing -- either scrap it altogether or make further modifications such as dropping the rez sig on the dom mesmer for distortion. Distortion has horrible synergy with other mesmer stances like mantra of inscriptions

. Perhaps distortion would fit better on the other dom mesmer bar we had before.