Curse

Thom · Jun 26, 2006, 07:28 PM // 19:28

Lots of people enjoy the intensity of guild wars PvP, but get burnt out by the long stretches of this very intense play. My guild isn't exactly making a tournement run, but we are playing 20-30 matches a week for fun and practice.

What can Anet and players do to adjust the tournement schedule so that their are fewer fatigue casualties? Things I'd consider:

1)Allow 10-12 active from each team to participate in the champion tourrnement, creating an environment where subbing players is accepted.

2)Take more teams to the championship.

3)Give automatic enters to teams winning sesonal tournements so a team can focus on a single seasonal tournement.

fallot · Jun 26, 2006, 08:16 PM // 20:16

Slightly off topic but a different kind of PvP would help a little. Personally I find it difficult to get 8 people together on a regular basis for GvG. Maybe if there were a few more PvP options such as an expansion of 4v4 this game wouldn't be so demanding.

Aug · Jun 26, 2006, 08:39 PM // 20:39

I think the ladder would be improved if there were a "qualifying" score to attain, and however many reach the qualifying score are taken into a single-elimination "pre-tournament" to pare the number of teams down to the desired amount.

Quantity of wins doesn't necessarily dictate quality. Some real contenders are quite likely being excluded from tournaments simply because they don't have the time to play enough GvGs, not because they lack the skill to win.

zoozoc · Jun 27, 2006, 05:59 AM // 05:59

A really easy way to help would be to simply increase the length of the seasons.

Guillaume De Sonoma · Jun 27, 2006, 06:27 AM // 06:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoozoc

A really easy way to help would be to simply increase the length of the seasons.

I really like this idea. The downtime in between seasons is understandable, but occurs entirely too often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aug

I think the ladder would be improved if there were a "qualifying" score to attain, and however many reach the qualifying score are taken into a single-elimination "pre-tournament" to pare the number of teams down to the desired amount.

Quantity of wins doesn't necessarily dictate quality. Some real contenders are quite likely being excluded from tournaments simply because they don't have the time to play enough GvGs, not because they lack the skill to win.

Edit: I would also like the way that the first championship to come back with only 2 teams from each region:

Region 1=America
Region 2=Europe
Region 3=Korea
Region 4=Japan and Chines Taiwan

Take the top 8 qualifiers and pair up everyone in based on their guild rank. So team #1 (who is the highest ranked team to qualify) will face team #8 (who is the losest ranked team to qualify). It will be a traditional 8 man bracket and might be a good way to discourage gimick builds meant for ladder climbing.

The Real Roy Keane · Jun 27, 2006, 06:50 PM // 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallot

Slightly off topic but a different kind of PvP would help a little. Personally I find it difficult to get 8 people together on a regular basis for GvG. Maybe if there were a few more PvP options such as an expansion of 4v4 this game wouldn't be so demanding.

I totally agree with you here. I have no suggestions for said expansion of 4x4, but I really hope they take it into consideration for the third chapter.

TheOneMephisto · Jun 27, 2006, 07:42 PM // 19:42

4v4 on mini-GvG maps complete with thiefs, gates, catapults, NPCs, and flagstands.

THAT would be interesting...

torquemada · Jun 29, 2006, 07:33 AM // 07:33

/signed

More forms of PvP, including more "casual" PvP but for god sake not random...

Xanthar · Jun 29, 2006, 02:21 PM // 14:21

I think that this thread has strayed a bit off course - The OP pointed out that in order to get into the world championship, a team must participate in an obscene amount of GvG, enough to take the fun out of it.

A good solution here is not easily found. Most likely the entire mechanism of qualifying must be refactored. The ranking ladder as it is today, especially with as short seasons as we have, is biased for plentiful play against weaker opponents. The following suggestions are not optimal, but maybe somewhere a descussion can begin:

* Maybe some kind of "cup" structure can be implemented, but that would only be feasible for the top-ranked teams that can put together a full team at a given time several times every week... This means that the cup would have to be fed new teams between each season from somewhere. That somewhere could be a long-running ranking system. The purpose of not resetting the ladder is to allow the ranking to stabilize, thus removing the pressure for the top ranked teams to "farm" so much. Of course, in order for this to work, the teams already in the cup would not participate in the normal ranking system.

* Another idea is to keep the ranking system as is, but limit all guilds to a certain number of ranked matches during a rolling 7 day period. This has the unfortunate side-effect that a loss can take a long time to recover from, but the upside is that once the quota is full, one has some time off from the game.

Out of ideas for now

master_of_puppets · Jun 29, 2006, 04:48 PM // 16:48

yeah to be in the tournament your guild has to pretty much only do GVG, no time to do anything else.

Quote:

2)Take more teams to the championship.

I agree with that, top 16 is like less than 0.1% of all pvp guilds

romO · Jun 29, 2006, 06:00 PM // 18:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

1)Allow 10-12 active from each team to participate in the champion tourrnement, creating an environment where subbing players is accepted.

Well, that is a very idealistic suggestion, but the fact is that most guilds see their core eight players as the best in their guild without any arguement. Subbing in different players to play different positions due to changing builds would probably work out for the better, but any more than two substitutions (the max under the current system) would probably be unnecessary, as each guild has their own play style and they would not be shifting it entirely from one game to the other. Even if you could have 24 players on the tournament roster, enough for different players in each game, the majority of guilds would still only play with eight and the maximum anyone would ever see is nine or ten.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

2)Take more teams to the championship.

Personally, I think 16 was a fair break point. It is up in the range where all of the guilds will be very competitive and still need to be the best of the best to get in, as many other good teams will be left out. Offering lower ranked teams a chance at the playoffs opens the door to a number of teams who will recognize that they don't have a chance to win legitimately and will just flood the tournament with more and more gimmick builds, and needless to say, we don't need any more of that. Now I don't want to generalize and say that all of these lower ranked teams will do this, as many genuinely want to compete. However, if a team could not finish in the top 16 during the season, I really don't see them winning in the playoffs and I really don't want a number of teams in there whose entire gameplan is "Let's see if we can knock off EvIL with IWAY!".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

3)Give automatic enters to teams winning sesonal tournements so a team can focus on a single seasonal tournement.

One of the themes that Anet wanted to stress through this entire tournament was guild longevity. In fact, if eight of your core ten members from a previous season didn't stay, then a guild was ineligible despite meeting all of the other criteria. The emphasis of long term competition creates rivalries, prevents zerg guilds, and rewards consistent skill. Who would you rather see in Germany: Te, a guild who has participated in each of the seasonal playoffs and have shown how badly they want to win through the entirety of the tournament, or some guild (sorry, I'm not too keen on giving specific negative examples in this case) who ran nothing but soul barbs spike through the last season and ended up winning the playoffs? Although winning the playoffs is a magnificent feat, I believe the consistency and flexibility is more admirable, and thus, should be rewarded, as is the case within the current system.

Each of your suggestions could be fun and good for the game, and I could be wrong. I would be rather interested in having Anet implement some of them to see how they turn out. I guess we'll see what the rules for the next tournament are. GWNFC, anyone?

Ensign · Jun 29, 2006, 07:44 PM // 19:44

The number of teams that you let into the playoffs really isn't important, because there is a huge emphasis on getting the #1 or #2 slot in your region on the ladder. If you aren't cracking top 8 consistently you aren't getting those ladder points and are in really bad shape come ranking time.

Peace,
-CxE

Thom · Jun 29, 2006, 10:44 PM // 22:44

The current system tends to lead to more of a racing/grinding mentality, which leads to much of the fatigue. Bottom line is that you need to play more than 100 games each season in order to be considered. Because you are resetting, the first 20 or so games are fairly worthless as an indicator because the board is shaking out (I think many good teams don't play the first few days, because it is easier to climb once the ladder has some structure). In the current system there is no room to take a week except during breaks, which is kind of ridiculous.

I really don't think this is what anet had in mind. Longevity is nice, but the current system just isn't fun. 16 is a good number for seasonal tournements, but the final tournement should be a bit larger having the top 6 come to Germany.

It amazes me how a basketball or football team can play different guys for different situations, but GW which is incredibly flexible has 8 guys which are the best regardless of the situation.

cleric · Jun 30, 2006, 12:27 AM // 00:27

to be conisdered you have to have a lot of gvgs espically with the number that go to VoD. My guild got rather high ranking but the reason i think we were not top 16 was because the number of gvgs. I think Anet could expand it and have the top 8 teams from 4 seasons. World Cup style from there. Look at iGi they were up there but now its all gone.