Curse

The Ernada · Dec 28, 2006, 08:53 PM // 20:53

Okay you're not even reading what I or even yourself has said. Go back to play AB some more.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 08:56 PM // 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Ernada

No, demanding that ANET shutdown HB just to give in to your theory that more servers will make you join AB battles faster is idiotic. Idiotic because you're asking to shutdown one aspect of the game some people enjoy for your selfish reasons.

Please refrence yourself to two previous post ive made to tell people why the Hero Battles comment was made.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 08:59 PM // 20:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimsonfilms

More servers for people not playing.
Yes 3 touch rangers and 8 random teammates is a form of metagame. It is very different.

So yes you have to deal with Ai. Point being? Better than Touch rangers and 8 random builds.

So your statement is just to tell me that HB metagame and AB metagame is different and that you have a prefrence of having complete control over your team.

Zinger314 · Dec 28, 2006, 09:02 PM // 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orphan Anthem

Please refrence yourself to two previous post ive made to tell people why the Hero Battles comment was made.

And The Ernada is referencing why your idea is completely and utterly inane.

Alliance Battles are beyond repair. ArenaNet gave up on the Faction system.

Today, I was in an AB (for 10k Kurzick Faction quest), and the General chat was interesting. One person yelled at us for using a Touch Ranger, and eventually ragequit. Another called me a "running noob" for running away from 2 Warriors and 1 RaO. And, of course, there were W/Mo with Mending, Healing Hands, and Power Attack.

And you want to improve that?

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 09:03 PM // 21:03

Im going to mod my origional post so people that can only understand what was said not why it was said can stop flaming.

Thorondor Port · Dec 28, 2006, 09:06 PM // 21:06

hvh and aspenwood/quarry suck.

imo

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 09:09 PM // 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

And The Ernada is referencing why your idea is completely and utterly inane.

Alliance Battles are beyond repair. ArenaNet gave up on the Faction system.

Today, I was in an AB (for 10k Kurzick Faction quest), and the General chat was interesting. One person yelled at us for using a Touch Ranger, and eventually ragequit. Another called me a "running noob" for running away from 2 Warriors and 1 RaO. And, of course, there were W/Mo with Mending, Healing Hands, and Power Attack.

And you want to improve that?

As it is with any random style of play there are going to be a few people that spoil it for everyone else. There is no way to patch people like them so its of no use. But the first point of my post was a very valad point. To try and stop this OBVIOUS problem. Leaching and people just simply ragequiting is a problem and really does need to be taken as such. So far as of my knowledge Anet hasnt made much strides twords fixing this. Implamenting a more strict polacy twords these acts would defanitly cut down this stuff happening. You yourself talked about someone ragequit during your game. Now if that person did it he would now have a temp ban, if he keeps doing it the ban time will increase.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 09:13 PM // 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thorondor Port

hvh and aspenwood/quarry suck.

imo

Personally i enjoy a change in objectives. I welcome a change in style, ive ammounted over 1 million balthazar faction and im getting really bored with the current PLAYABLE forms of pvp and id like to see improvements to the non playable forms.

Hell Marauder · Dec 28, 2006, 09:14 PM // 21:14

As much as I want to sympathize with OP's viewpoint, HB does deserve a place in GW, even though it's not as well received as AB was when Factions was released.

Imho Anet should organize GW's pvp into three main categories: individual play (HB), random grouped play (FA/AB/RA), and organized grouped play (HA/GVG). All three should receive equal amount of attentions, as they all attract a good number of followers. And please, no more of those "my pvp is deeper than your pvp" BS. Any pvp that can give birth to flavor-of-month or cookie cutter builds is never deep; pvp should be about fun, not about winning some Nobel Prize.

crimsonfilms · Dec 28, 2006, 09:23 PM // 21:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orphan Anthem

So your statement is just to tell me that HB metagame and AB metagame is different and that you have a prefrence of having complete control over your team.

Let me spell it out for you.
Touch Ranger is not a metagame but an actual syndrome for the lack of metagame (notice where there is an actual viable GW metagame, there are lack of touch rangers?).

2/3 randomness of your team is not a metagame. You can't create a meta in such environment since you have no control over a basic factor in GW meta - the build.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 09:35 PM // 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimsonfilms

Let me spell it out for you.
Touch Ranger is not a metagame but an actual syndrome for the lack of metagame (notice where there is an actual viable GW metagame, there are lack of touch rangers?).

2/3 randomness of your team is not a metagame. You can't create a meta in such environment since you have no control over a basic factor in GW meta - the build.

Touch ranger IS a metagame choice. Touch rangers have a decient ammount of DPS while still able to servive long enough to kill. This is in no way a complete support of touch rangers im just saying in a metagame where serviving long enough to kill is better then killing within 5 seconds touch rangers are king.

but really this descussion wasnt about AB v HB or else i would have said so in my origional post. Because people have took it as such i have edited my post so it is more PC for people who fly off the handle because "ZOMG MY HB HAS BEEN THRETENED, SOUND THE TRUMPETS!"

I say again ORIGIONAL POST HAS BEEN EDITED, THREAT LEVEL LOWERED TO GREEN, ABORT LAUNCH!

Winstar · Dec 28, 2006, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

And The Ernada is referencing why your idea is completely and utterly inane.

Alliance Battles are beyond repair. ArenaNet gave up on the Faction system.

Today, I was in an AB (for 10k Kurzick Faction quest), and the General chat was interesting. One person yelled at us for using a Touch Ranger, and eventually ragequit. Another called me a "running noob" for running away from 2 Warriors and 1 RaO. And, of course, there were W/Mo with Mending, Healing Hands, and Power Attack.

And you want to improve that?

The things you mention aren't problems with the actual format but the bad players who play in those formats. Thats a problem with just about every format and something sadly ANET can never fix

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 09:56 PM // 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winstar

The things you mention aren't problems with the actual format but the bad players who play in those formats. Thats a problem with just about every format and something sadly ANET can never fix

If they created a punishment system for things like this it would completly raise competative play. Less falme/leach/rage means less of a reason to take a break because the fun of it has run dry. people would be more incline to keep playing and raising their overall skill level. I dare even say a GOLDENAGE of Guildwars. No more gunting and waving you fist at some random guy leaving constantly, now if only you can get the delorian back up to 85 miles per hour.

lennymon · Dec 28, 2006, 10:24 PM // 22:24

not true, obviously.
your objective was clearly to comment about *not* current forms of pvp which are in an old chapter and *not* available from core. Anet will not improve anything in factions period, bug fixes maybe. get over it, cry in the dark w/e but don't try to bend over the happy pvpers who arent stuck living in the 70s with badly flawed logic and arguments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orphan Anthem

My objective was to start a discussion about the current forms of PvP and possable ways to improve them. Alliance battles just happens to be a huge letdown and what i feel acould be so much better then it is.

As i stated before that shut down hero battles was less about killing it and more about improving the ones we have.

Muk Utep · Dec 28, 2006, 10:40 PM // 22:40

I didn't read the whole thread, but in response to one of the OP's suggestions:

You can't put a severe penalty on rage-quitting. The game can't tell if you quit a match because you're crying over a death or because you needed to leave in a hurry for an entirely different reason. I wouldn't mind seeing a mild penalty, say -1000 Balthazar faction or something, so that quitting whenever things aren't going your way isn't profitable, yet having to leave for RL issues once in a while isn't going to get you in big trouble. But a 3-hour ban because something came up that forced me to leave an RA match? And 6 hours next time it happens? No thanks.

In fact, I just thought of something that might work:

If you leave a match more than twice within the span of an hour, or more than ten times in a day (these numbers can be discussed), you get a "leaver" flag, similar to how the anti-farming code works. This flag does the following:

People can see the flag when they look at you, just as a title. Should wear off after a while.
You can't enter PvP matches for a period of time, I'm not sure how long would be fair.
You lose an amount of faction depending on how many times you've left matches. This isn't simply substracted from your faction pool, but becomes a "buffer" that you have to work through until you can earn faction again. Difficult to describe, but the best example is how death penalty works for xp in Everquest2.

This means that regular players who might have to leave a match once in a rare while won't get punished (if you're interrupted so often that you have to leave more than twice an hour on a regular basis, you shouldn't play PvP) but frequent quitters will quickly get slapped with the leaver-stick. The penalty is harsh but not so severe that you can't recover, it just takes boring waiting time or extra work. Should make leaving matches unappealing. If PvP upsets you so much that you think you must leave every other match, PvP is not for you, play something where your emotions do not affect the enjoyment of other players.

Edit to add:

Leechers is a bit tougher, I think. I'm not sure exactly how it works since I don't play in the "PvE arenas" and it doesn't seem common elsewhere - I've actually never seen a real leecher. I've heard that people use a botting program that automatically joins matches and just stands there. Maybe you'd have to type a verification code to enter a match, something that a botting program wouldn't be able to do? It could be simple, like a randomized 4-digit number that you see on your screen and have to type to get in, something that anyone with eyes can do and doesn't take more than a second.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 10:44 PM // 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by lennymon

not true, obviously.
your objective was clearly to comment about *not* current forms of pvp which are in an old chapter and *not* available from core. Anet will not improve anything in factions period, bug fixes maybe. get over it, cry in the dark w/e but don't try to bend over the happy pvpers who arent stuck living in the 70s with badly flawed logic and arguments.

Okay yet again another flame against me because my comment dosnt have relavence to the new chapters. But when the new chapter comes out and Hero Battles is in a sad sad state of disrepair and eliteist roam free "ZOMG I OWNED YOU HAHA IR R3 YOU R1 N00B!" you might start and think where did we go wrong.

lennymon · Dec 28, 2006, 10:46 PM // 22:46

good ideas, but probably more than necessary. all thats needed is a leaver flag, which only gives you + 2 matches (the next two which you dont leave) give you no xp/faction. this way if you keep leaving, you keep accumulating (perhaps with a max cap) games you'll have to clear before you can gain anything from them. this flag should reset after a day or two also, or at least you lose no point matches gradually over time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muk Utep

I didn't read the whole thread, but in response to one of the OP's suggestions:

You can't put a severe penalty on rage-quitting. The game can't tell if you quit a match because you're crying over a death or because you needed to leave in a hurry for an entirely different reason. I wouldn't mind seeing a mild penalty, say -1000 Balthazar faction or something, so that quitting whenever things aren't going your way isn't profitable, yet having to leave for RL issues once in a while isn't going to get you in big trouble. But a 3-hour ban because something came up that forced me to leave an RA match? And 6 hours next time it happens? No thanks.

In fact, I just thought of something that might work:

If you leave a match more than twice within the span of an hour, or more than ten times in a day (these numbers can be discussed), you get a "leaver" flag, similar to how the anti-farming code works. This flag does the following:

People can see the flag when they look at you, just as a title. Should wear off after a while.
You can't enter PvP matches for a period of time, I'm not sure how long would be fair.
You lose an amount of faction depending on how many times you've left matches. This isn't simply substracted from your faction pool, but becomes a "buffer" that you have to work through until you can earn faction again. Difficult to describe, but the best example is how death penalty works for xp in Everquest2.

This means that regular players who might have to leave a match once in a rare while won't get punished (if you're interrupted so often that you have to leave more than twice an hour on a regular basis, you shouldn't play PvP) but frequent quitters will quickly get slapped with the leaver-stick. The penalty is harsh but not so severe that you can't recover, it just takes boring waiting time or extra work. Should make leaving matches unappealing. If PvP upsets you so much that you think you must leave every other match, PvP is not for you, play something where your emotions do not affect the enjoyment of other players.

lennymon · Dec 28, 2006, 10:50 PM // 22:50

no, the hero battles are core and will continue to be supported at least until they are no longer core. I'm not flaming you at all, just your argument. Nor do I care who you are, how cool you are, or how competent your grasp is on 1337speak. The statement was clearly not true based on the scope of your OP, that is all.
life IS change, the only difference between happy people and unhappy ones is how well they've learned to adapt and flow with the changes which are out of their control.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orphan Anthem

Okay yet again another flame against me because my comment dosnt have relavence to the new chapters. But when the new chapter comes out and Hero Battles is in a sad sad state of disrepair and eliteist roam free "ZOMG I OWNED YOU HAHA IR R3 YOU R1 N00B!" you might start and think where did we go wrong.

coleslawdressin · Dec 28, 2006, 11:18 PM // 23:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orphan Anthem

*whine*

Kinda OT but... Take the guild out of your tag.. Someone invited you randomly from RA and you never played GVG with us.. Once they finally got around to kicking you..... you went nuts and tried to give our vent out in obs mode.

Orphan Anthem · Dec 28, 2006, 11:23 PM // 23:23

As far as i know this problem has been arround for a VERY long time yet no long term solution or course of action has been taken to solve it. Bot ban was a HUGE step forwerd. next?