Curse

sno · Aug 22, 2006, 12:57 AM // 00:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrograd

i was under the impression that this kind of behaviour was very frowned upon. IIRC Anet are Ok with smurfing (kinda) as long as people play to win in smurf. Deliberately losing strikes me as being ladder manipulation.

Both senarios are a form of ladder manipulation, although it's the lesser of two evils to resign spike against a team ranked much higher than you. Say you start a smurf of a rank 50 guild. Right now you're rank 800, and you come against a rank 200 guild. Normally if you beat them they would stand to lose 8 or less points, but as the rank 800 team if you beat them it would tank them 23 or so. With the lower rank, you're "more likely" to lose to them, so doing so is just going along with the odds.

Bah... I typed all that out and then noticed Wasteland's post, which basically says the same thing... Meh.

timmyw29 · Aug 22, 2006, 01:03 AM // 01:03

Well I've already said I'm not fussed if the title stays or goes, but building on the "No points for guests" idea, I realised that Anet has already done something (be it very small) to discourage guild-hopping. Change the title to be disallowed for guests in a gvg? Sure. Okay the problem is still not solved because people will guild hop. So if you change guilds, you have to wait for two full weeks in that guild before you can gain title points with them in GvG.

If the title has to stay in, that's what I would do.

pigdestroyer · Aug 22, 2006, 01:54 AM // 01:54

everyone on the top200 its using that QQ rank farming build, it got annoying quickly...

Dren · Aug 22, 2006, 02:37 AM // 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katina

That's hot.

I agree with whoever it was who said GvGers deserve their "rank" like HA people do. Honestly, anyone who makes a guild that requires the Champion title doesn't deserve anyone's time anyway.

GvGing has totally lost its creativity, once someone uses a build, everyone must use it, good example is obviously the Iway of GvG, thump way, and lets not forget about Derv Way. What rank are EnS and Spearmen now?

I totally respect anyone who runs a decent balanced, and its sad that its come to that in a GvG.

14th Ectos And Shards EnS Am 1579 138 36

I like the bit about no champ points for guests that someone else said, though I do like how easy it is to get a guest now that there are champ points.

gimpy wimmer · Aug 22, 2006, 03:06 AM // 03:06

1200 rating for the first champ title then 1300 for the second title and 1400 for the third or something like this to make the title atleast mentionable cause farming is ftl

JR · Aug 22, 2006, 07:14 AM // 07:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by pigdestroyer

everyone on the top200 its using that QQ rank farming build, it got annoying quickly...

A shame only QQ can run it properly...

Patrograd · Aug 22, 2006, 08:14 AM // 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by sno

Both senarios are a form of ladder manipulation, although it's the lesser of two evils to resign spike against a team ranked much higher than you. .

Well, I cant agree with this at all.

I'm not a huge fan of smurfing, but its not like there are thousands of smurf guilds around. We play them from time to time, sometimes we win, sometimes we lose, thats life. Smurfs, PUG teams, high rank guests on low ranked teams, its all the same.

Deliberately handing a win to a team that just got beaten not only tanks your smurf's rating which is a very dodgy practise imo, but it boosts the other teams' rating by giving them a win they didn't get, giving their players faction/champion points they didnt earn. We're not talking about the nett result of the battle being no change to the ladder, we are talking about deliberately losing your smurf points, and deliberately giving the other team points they didnt win, based purely upon your arbitrary distinction of what a high rating is. This sucks. if you are going to smurf, play to win and win if you can, if you dont want to do that then just dont smurf.

if a low ranked team had a couple of high ranked guests on should they also resign if they beat a higher ranked team? Of course not.

The ladder is broken enough as it is without people further breaking it with this kind of practise imo. At least if everyone plays to win the ladder has some pretence at accuracy. if they are a good team and beat your smurf, they have earned the points, if they lose, they didnt. Eventually your smurf will reach its correct ELO, if it is anywhere else then there is a big issue.

Mighti · Aug 22, 2006, 09:07 AM // 09:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by timmyw29

Well I've already said I'm not fussed if the title stays or goes, but building on the "No points for guests" idea, I realised that Anet has already done something (be it very small) to discourage guild-hopping. Change the title to be disallowed for guests in a gvg? Sure. Okay the problem is still not solved because people will guild hop. So if you change guilds, you have to wait for two full weeks in that guild before you can gain title points with them in GvG.

If the title has to stay in, that's what I would do.

I believe that solution would solve the problem pretty much and as Anet will most probably never even waste a though on removing the title completely, it's the best solution we can hope for.

Thom · Aug 22, 2006, 10:58 AM // 10:58

Realize that resign spiking will also keep your smurf's ranking unfairly low. What about those developing guilds who are trying to get into the top 100/200/500? While they may not be as invested in rank, they deserve to play against comparable competition. By keeping ranking artificially low through intentional surrenders, you are making the game less enjoyable for casual players.

If everyone plays to win, fewer of these "ethical disputes" would occur. The ladder is designed for competition, not charity. As much as I respect selfless acts outside of competitve play, I feel that the kindest course of action in a competitive environment is to be competitive.

Any styles of play which aren't designed to attempt victory in every match goes against the spirit of a ladder in my mind. Almost by definition a ladder is designed to reward win quality, not quantity. If teams are playing for volume over quality, changes should be made in incentives.

Wasteland Squidget · Aug 22, 2006, 11:30 AM // 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrograd

Eventually your smurf will reach its correct ELO, if it is anywhere else then there is a big issue.

The thing to understand about smurfs is that their ability is always going to vary dramatically. One day a team might be testing a change in a build they're relatively proficient with. Another they might be testing an entirely new build which may or may not work out. On yet another they may just be messing around taking in 8 Cripshot rangers. Unlike a standard guild, a smurf doesn't have a 'real' consistent ladder ranking, so even if they always play to win there will probably be a lot of fluctuation.

Having struggled in both the top 300 and the top 50, it is vastly easier to make up a -10 in the top 300 than a -25 in the top 50. It's the difference between a single game and an entire night's worth of play. I'm not trying to be disrespectful to lower ranked teams, but it's just much easier to gain back rating when the 'easy' matches are all +12 instead of +5.

The rating change for resigning against a high ranked guild is pretty negligible. Usually they'll get between +5 and +10 and you'll get the same dropped. Given the time it normally takes to beat such a guild, they probably could have gone into two matches and gained more rating if they hadn't met the smurf.

*shrug* I guess everyone's welcome to play this their own way, but that's what makes sense to me.

sakura75 · Aug 22, 2006, 11:56 AM // 11:56

First there was an Emote for HoH players. That was a bad move. Young/new players dont get good group to play with. Secondly, there was a PvE title. When I see someone with a survivor title in the group I will leave the group, cause this guys sicken the group.
Now there is a title for GvG. ;-(
I was in a rank 12 group in HoH, FTW (not). Never seen such noob players in HoH. There will be ebay accounts for Champions for sale!

I totally disagree with any title in GW. I wish I could sell my fames ingame. Wow, I would be really rich ;-)

Patrograd · Aug 22, 2006, 12:58 PM // 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

The thing to understand about smurfs is that their ability is always going to vary dramatically.

Well, an ELO rating reflects a team's mean performance level, taking the good and the bad into account. But it only does that if everyone tries to win every game. In this way, smurfs and PUGs have a minimal impact on the ladder, there is a little bit of afterwash as they climb the ladder but it is pretty easily corrected over time, this is how ELO works, as long as everyone plays to win.

At the end of the day, a team in the top 50 has to earn their right to hold their position EVERY BIT AS MUCH as a team ranked 1000. If they are fighting for the playoffs or a silver cape then DOUBLY SO. How would you feel if you were rank 16 and on the last night some PUG or smurf resign spiked against the rank 17 team giving them YOUR cape and YOUR place in the playoffs when they had actually lost that fight? The other way around, and you are rank 16 and you lose to the smurf of the rank 1 team, well, you lost the fight, get over it, no-one handed the spot to the other team but you, you lost it, and wouldnt have won the playoffs anyway if you cant even beat the smurf guild of one of the other competitors

Now of course a smurf's rating is unlikely to be as high as a main guild because it is used when something other than the A team is on, or when people feel like relaxing instead of grinding, and for recruit/build testing, but it should still be as high as the team can possibly make it under those circumstances, for their own good as much as anything else. Whats the point in a top 100 guild build testing or recruit testing at rank 500? You arent going to learn anything relevant to your main guild.

JR · Aug 22, 2006, 01:31 PM // 13:31

I think a distinction has to be made between actual smurf guilds, used by guilds to test builds and potential recruits, and PuG guilds, used for messing around.

On an actual smurf you would never really want to resign, because ideally you want it as close to the rating of your main as possible to have the most realistic situation in which to test.

On a PuG guild you gain very little from winning, so against guilds who are top 20 material you may aswell resign and save them a potentially huge rating hit at the cost of giving them a tiny gain.

still.mojo · Aug 22, 2006, 06:47 PM // 18:47

I dont think tere is way out of this situation.
If Anet brings back 1500^ points system <that was only respectable one>, what can we face, pug parts of alliances dedicated to tanking and farming?

Thats a reality that can happen, since it would be hard to keep your own guild up, and search for those hard matches in 1500^ above area with a pug.
Only solution is, play your own game, if u loose, deal with it by playing more and better.
Champ points wont get anyone nothing but 1 more useless tag, who finds it amusing, hell farm it as some ppl farm poor trolls.
1200^ is pathetic line, and title became such with it.
That title wasnt originaly meant for majority of population before anyways, and ppl that have most to loose, are those that can compete for top 16.
Personally i think thet biggest loss would suffer their own guilds, since activity in pug guild, means mother guild inactivity, and for what, meaningless title.
There can be only 1 gold at end of season, and this gimmick period shouldnt be taken as future to be, since major guilds dont consider it serious.

Saphatorael · Aug 22, 2006, 07:06 PM // 19:06

The best thing that could be done is just to remove all kind of 'pvp elitism'-titles.
No more Champions, no more Gladiators, no more Hero's, i wouldn't even mind seeing the rank emotes disappear.
This entire titles thing has gone out of hand... compare it with poverty: Poor people stay poor and have alot of trouble getting above that 'poverty line' (=the minimum 'requirement' to get into a group), the rich people just get richer (rank 13, within a month prolly someone with r14 already) by just always playing together (elitism, discrimination of lower ranked people).

HA isn't about talent anymore, it's about having connections, or perhaps even real life money (ebay accounts).
I'd hate to see the same thing happen to GvG.

As a replacement, perhaps some items or something would be nice, or a decoration for the guild hall instead of a title. A GvG is something that's done by a guild, and for a guild, and perhaps it would be best to only reward the guild, not the players, as it will give them a feeling of elitism/arrogance.

Deer emote ftw, btw... but i wouldn't mind losing it if all the crap of the 'leet' players would disappear.

kitiara · Aug 22, 2006, 07:32 PM // 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saphatorael

The best thing that could be done is just to remove all kind of 'pvp elitism'-titles.
No more Champions, no more Gladiators, no more Hero's, i wouldn't even mind seeing the rank emotes disappear.
This entire titles thing has gone out of hand... compare it with poverty: Poor people stay poor and have alot of trouble getting above that 'poverty line' (=the minimum 'requirement' to get into a group), the rich people just get richer (rank 13, within a month prolly someone with r14 already) by just always playing together (elitism, discrimination of lower ranked people).

HA isn't about talent anymore, it's about having connections, or perhaps even real life money (ebay accounts).
I'd hate to see the same thing happen to GvG.

As a replacement, perhaps some items or something would be nice, or a decoration for the guild hall instead of a title. A GvG is something that's done by a guild, and for a guild, and perhaps it would be best to only reward the guild, not the players, as it will give them a feeling of elitism/arrogance.

Deer emote ftw, btw... but i wouldn't mind losing it if all the crap of the 'leet' players would disappear.

Give up trying to get rid of leet there will always be fags/idiots out there who will be part of it. As for the hoh title i know it means nothing but i still enjoy mine

so i dont exactly want it to disapear but i would like the GvG title and Ta to be fixed/removed either way works as long as one happens.

Dzan · Aug 22, 2006, 09:36 PM // 21:36

I love the fairy tale land people live in who assume that elitism is tied directly to title and emotes, as if those things were taken away suddenly elite pugs would start inviting them to tomb with them, or that top GVG guilds would whisper them to guest.

Sorry to tell ya, the good players will still play with the other good players and the bad players will continue to whine about not getting good groups.

Ss Executioner · Aug 22, 2006, 10:00 PM // 22:00

It all comes down to the fame / gladiator points.

People would NOT be running builds like thumpway (gvg) or vim/iway in tombs, because it is just ef'in boring! However.... if they just REMOVED those things... including emotes. The PvP world would be a better place.

People would be playing TO PLAY! They would be playing to TEST something new or for fun you know? Of course I am referring to tombs atm, which is unbarely to play with it as it is. Don't get me wrong, I am r8 and play with very high ranks including 12's. So don't reply with wow just because you can't get your bambi yet. Once again though. FAME and GLADIATOR points. Are ruining the pvping world.... It hasbecome like pve... you must farm!

Legendary Battousai · Aug 22, 2006, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Nerf the builds used to farm raiting (obviously games are weighted more likely as a win for those who run it than a "balanced build"). Remove champ points for guests, and problem is partially solved. Everyone just loves to say Champ points are all bad and evil but it helps good guilds find good gvgers, assuming these farming builds are nerfed. Removing it all together, including emotes, titles, and everything else, I would have nothing to work towards thus pvp would become even more dull and lifeless than it already is. This game has been beaten with a giant stick and had its eyes poked out with a sharp stick; its gonna take a hell of a dream update to pick itself back up to being "fun" again, contrary to the season's apparent name.

Main message for people too lazy to read the whole thing: Farming isnt as bad if builds it includes arent any more powerful than a practiced build without farming intent. Everyone is trying to attack the reason why farmers farm (title points), but to take away the method in which they farm, they no longer can.

stueyman2099 · Aug 22, 2006, 10:32 PM // 22:32

I really don't think that nerfing the farming builds will do anything to solve the problem. Lets say they nerf the crap out of thumpway. Ok, so whats the next fastest way to power through matches? Ok, lets nerf that now. Ok, next fastest?

It really won't change anything. People will find another fast build, and exploit the crap out of it.