Curse

Life Bringer · Jun 06, 2006, 01:28 PM // 13:28

Ive been wondering for a while whether people believe in lame builds or not. By this I mean that do you OMG they are run this lame ass build or do you take it as another build. My philosophy is that it is not what you play but how you play it however there are ofcourse some builds I dislike.

Also I would like to address the spike hate I have seen from some of the members of this forum. A lot of people seem to say all you are doing is counting 3.2.1 and say that it is skilless. Im sorry but there is infact a lot more to spiking that that and it requires a lot of skill and so if you can get beaten by people just counting 3.2.1 then quit GW becuase its pretty embarrasing to get beaten by just counting (as some people seem to believe it to be).

fb2000 · Jun 06, 2006, 01:35 PM // 13:35

the sense of this eludes me, but anyway Ive noticed people talk of "gimmick" builds (take a look at JR-s posts regarding stuff like Touch rangers ^^)

personally, i dont see much "skill" in guildwars..

JR · Jun 06, 2006, 01:53 PM // 13:53

The reason why some people consider spiking skill-less is simple.

Running a spike build is aiming to beat people quite simply with your build. Killing them fast enough with a simple system of counting and pressing buttons. The downside of builds like this is how inflexible they are. If you can get the other team on a map with very little room to move, you have a huge advantage. Again an example where Spike is favoured not by skill, but by a secondary factor.

Not that I am saying 'no skilled guild runs spike', as that would be a generalisation, and I don't hold well with generalisations. However; if you look at any guild that consistantly does well in tournaments, chances are they don't regularly run a pure spike. To some people their builds may seem weak and very basic, what they don't notice is how well balanced they are. This allows for a huge deal of flexibility and room to out-play your opponent with skill and strategy instead of just spiking.

Spike is a great way to farm rating on the ladder, where you have influence on what the map will be and your opponents can't just build directly against you. In a tournament style situation where it really will be straight up competition between two guilds, the Spike guild will get kicked out nine times in ten.

This argument seems slighly flawed given the success of FoC spike in the final rounds of the GWFC, but I consider that a bit of a freak given the state of Imperial Isle at the time. Another factor is that fact that EW are not a pure spike guild, they run balanced builds and spike equally well. Had iB been in that situation against a team that had run nothing but FoC spike all season I am sure they would have decided to pack in a lot more counters.

So basicly; Guilds that run spike all season generally don't fare well in tournament style play, as that is all they know how to run. In a tournament you need be diverse enough that the opponent will not be fairly certain of what you will run, and counter it. And tournament play really is the best show of skill.

Yanman.be · Jun 06, 2006, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Hey Lifebringer I think we faced RnS in a gvg once. We were playing our degen build.
In my opinion, you should spike whenever you can ( I don't mean builds designed to spike ). Just 2 warriors unleashing their skills, a mesmer with shatter enchantment...just to kill him. That's the danger of running mixed pressure-spike... you never know what will happen. Monks that handle pressure, will often make more mistakes, and miss the spikes, giving an advantage to the pressure-spikers instead of pure spikers. Let me put it this way: Take a regular bone ( Thigh ) and try to break it. If you just put pressure on both ends, it won't break. Now if you put pressure, but you also smash, it'll break in may pieces. If you only smash it, it will break in two pieces.

yesitsrob · Jun 06, 2006, 06:12 PM // 18:12

I'm personally guilty of moaning about lame builds whenever I see 6 necros on the enemy team

.. Especially if I was facing them on burning isle or something... it strikes me as a scenario where they will beat teams better than them when they get their home map and do one hell of a lot worse in other situations... like say on isle of medetation..

Win or lose, I tend to simply just enjoy games a lot less when facing outright spike teams (excluding adrenal spikes).

I see why a lot are popular though - especially fast cast air spike, as it's not a great option to split up both your monks against such, and it copes with warriors quite well... wow i hate fast cast air spike >_<.

And I'm sure at RnS level there is more to it than 3 2 1 no skill. But at lower levels, truth is, it is just 3 2 1 no skill, this really shows in tombs more than anything... I've been in some damn right awful groups that have gotten extremely lucky and managed to spike out their problems while clearly not really intending to, proven by how much they may suck on other matches.

And I've seen it on observer mode when the lesser team has scraped a win by coming against a better team who wasn't quite prepared buildwise and were fighting on the imperial isle (old imperial isle) thus at a severe disadvantage from the start.

I also think, that in quite a lot of cases, that people who can run balanced well, can probably also spike well.... Where as people who spike well, may not be able to run a balanced build as effectively. Very different styles of play, one of which I found much easier to adapt to... If I was to come across EW spiking I'd not really bitch about the build because i know they are a good team. But I'm not at all impressed with guilds I see do nothing but spike to get up the ladder

And I'm quite aware it's a lot of people with this impression

Life Bringer · Jun 06, 2006, 07:29 PM // 19:29

You make some very good points rob but when you say:"But I'm not at all impressed with guilds I see do nothing but spike to get up the ladder". i have a slight problem with this statement in that spike is far far far from unbeatable and so when you say they use it to get up the ladder I personally view spiking as just another type of build because if your a balanced team and you cannot beat the spike (assuming wasnt bad luck err7s or anything etc") then I think that it will be a deserved win and if they can beat other guilds with a simmilar rank with the spike fair enough. So what I am trying to say is I think it is unfair to say that people use spike just to get up the ladder.

JR · Jun 06, 2006, 07:40 PM // 19:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Life Bringer

So what I am trying to say is I think it is unfair to say that people use spike just to get up the ladder.

But they do? With the underdog mechanic of map selection, you can run a Guild up the ladder being fairly certain the majority of matches that matter will be on your map.

Put two equally skilled guilds together; one running spike, one running 'balanced'. Match them up on the Burning Isle. The spike guild will win 90% of the matches.

Running spike on a map like that simply does mean you have the advantage over standard builds. They have no real ability to do anything but face you 7/7, or fall back to their Guild Lord. They can kill Sentinels to split, but that leaves them down players for a good while in a map where they can't just run you around to make up for it.

It is a case where build and map choice can make up for lack of actual player skill, and it is an easy way up the ladder. Not that it matters hugely, in tournament play you will get rocked unless you do actually have some diversity.

Wasteland Squidget · Jun 06, 2006, 07:58 PM // 19:58

I think the question isn't entirely clear. By 'lame' builds do you mean builds that people consider unfair or that require no skill, or builds that people consider to be bad?

I certainly think there are a lot of bad builds in Guild Wars, which even good players won't do well with. If I see someone playing Hamstring + Aftershock I'm not going to laud them for coming up with a creative build, I'm going to laugh at them for playing something stupid that doesn't work.

As far as 'cheap' builds, JR's pretty much pegged it. Teams are welcome to run gimmicky builds that either bypass or overload one aspect of the enemy team (ie: Spike, IWAY, 5 N/Mos with spirit spam, ect) but they won't really do well in a tournament situation. They're taking advantage of the randomness of the ladder to win with a gimmick, but when it comes time to actually play the game against prepared teams they're usually not that impressive.

On a personal level, I've always disliked spike. I've never liked running it or fighting it. I'll give a GG to spikers whether we win or lose and I don't blame them for running the build, but I'd personally find the game a lot more interesting if the rules were somehow changed to remove pure spike teams from the game, along with more possibilities to supplement a balanced offense. Unfortunately, Guild Wars is what it is and I'd much rather spend my time trying to counter teams than cry about them.

I wouldn't say though that all spike requires no skill. Something like FoC spike does require a lot of player attention, because of all the different tasks a player might have to do. Over any given period a player is going to have to spike, heal, and hex, which means a lot of target switching and a lot of room for mistakes. It would probably be a much more difficult task if the necros actually had to manage energy though. They can afford to make a lot of mistakes because they have (had?) a functionally infinite supply of energy.

Edit: Adds

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

Put two equally skilled guilds together; one running spike, one running 'balanced'. Match them up on the Burning Isle. The spike guild will win 90% of the matches.

This comment seems a little odd to me, since I'm certain I've heard you say in other threads that splitting isn't the ideal tactic to use vs. Spike and that a good team should be able to beat them with disruption 8v8. However, saying that spike teams on the burning isle almost always win seems to indicate otherwise.

Of course, the sort of balanced build you're running does come into play. If you're using two mesmers or a lot of other disruption I can see taking out a spike team 8v8 by disrupting their spike long enough to pressure them out. If your build isn't as disruption-heavy, you split. If you can't split, you die. Does that sound about right?

JR · Jun 06, 2006, 09:03 PM // 21:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

This comment seems a little odd to me, since I'm certain I've heard you say in other threads that splitting isn't the ideal tactic to use vs. Spike and that a good team should be able to beat them with disruption 8v8. However, saying that spike teams on the burning isle almost always win seems to indicate otherwise.

It was taken from my own perspective. A team of eight clones of myself, vs another team of eight clones. I am pretty damn sure the eight clones running spike would win. It's not entirely down to the lack of being able to split on that map, but also due to the geography of it. It offers very little room to manouver, there is a fair amount of open space in critical areas, retreating is difficult, the Bodyguards and Archers can easily be spiked by a non-LOS spike... and so on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

Of course, the sort of balanced build you're running does come into play. If you're using two mesmers or a lot of other disruption I can see taking out a spike team 8v8 by disrupting their spike long enough to pressure them out. If your build isn't as disruption-heavy, you split. If you can't split, you die. Does that sound about right?

Exactly.

Thom · Jun 06, 2006, 10:49 PM // 22:49

There are lots of gimmick builds out there which take advantage of some skill and overload you in some way. You just have to learn to bring counters or simply "deal". Good teams can lose to a gimmick if they aren't ready for it. No one likes going into a battle with a huge disadvantage where you have to work very hard for a close loss.

Facts on Spike:
1)Good spike teams can split.
2)Good spike teams can win on any map.
3)Good spike teams move well and press their advantage.
4)All top teams have run some element of spike at some point.
5)Top teams could spike if they wanted to.
6)At least 2 r-spike guilds have been top 10.

JR · Jun 07, 2006, 12:09 AM // 00:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

Facts on Spike:
1)Good spike teams can split.
2)Good spike teams can win on any map.
3)Good spike teams move well and press their advantage.

All fair points, but I can't help thinking applicable guilds would do better if they learnt how to play a more balanced build. It allows you far more flexibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

4)All top teams have run some element of spike at some point.

Goes without saying. Even 'balanced' builds will adren spike.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

5)Top teams could spike if they wanted to.

That's like saying top teams could run Pallyway if they wanted to. They don't for a reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom

6)At least 2 r-spike guilds have been top 10.

Because as stated; it is easy to farm ladder rating with spike. Hell EP held the number one spot with their ranger spike for quite some time a few seasons back. In a tournament situation they got whipped by teams that had a more diverse experience though.

icemonkey · Jun 07, 2006, 01:48 AM // 01:48

Having played against RnS FC air spike and what i will (non) affectionately call DEER spike, and lost plenty of rating i feel i deserve to have back to their spikes I will try to explain to you why these builds are lame.

The 'standard' (balanced) 2 warrior build is a build that is generally supposed to be prepared for everything, thats why people run it, it has strengths in a wide wide variety of situations that come up in general Ladder GvG. People give this build respect because it takes plenty of skill and coordination to run effectively.

The FC air and DEER spike that are around today are finely tuned anti balanced teams, the 'standard' team. therefore you win against a balanced regardless of skill,(for the most part) This game is Rock Paper scissors, its easy to spec against something if you know what to expect, you are speccing against the ladder, and winning. You would in general not be where you are on the ladder if you didnt run an anti ladder build.

So people are mad that you have basically specced against them, but not in a way that is superior but only one that slips by, as is agreed you would go no where if people knew ahead of time what you are running.

This however does not mean that the ladder can generally spec against these gimmick spikes. Too much disruption to the 'Standard' build would result if they specced against blood spike, FC air spike, FOC spike, Ranger spike, IWAY, Thumpway, other mesmer spikes, other ele spikes.
So instead of speccing against you they go for another response, movement, one of a balanced teams strength's to try to beat you. Since the spike isnt flexible they attempt to take that option off the table with the guild hall choice. So with these spikes you corner an opponant and beat them, there is little they can do about it, you are shooting fish in a barrel. That is something that is not considered fair.

And, these builds do not take the skill and coordination that a balanced team does,

FC air isnt a 3 2 1 spike its 3 2 gale the target and both their monks 1 spike. Someone could arguable write a program to do that.

Ranger spike... the ranger's whilring defense lasts longer than most teams do against them.

and dont even get started with spirit spamming Rits and rangers, its in a word L A M E

Lord Dark Genie · Jun 07, 2006, 08:39 AM // 08:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by icemonkey

The FC air and DEER spike that are around today are finely tuned anti balanced teams, the 'standard' team. therefore you win against a balanced regardless of skill

What's wrong again with building against the meta-game ?

JR · Jun 07, 2006, 09:26 AM // 09:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by icemonkey

...

I can't say I agree with you. The only time I think Ranger Spike or any other has a real advantage over 'standard ladder builds' is on maps that force you into an 8 vs 8. And even then good teams will often be able to disrupt and wear down the spike to eventually take the advantage after a few losses.

DEER does run a very good spike, and their success says more about their experience of running it than imbalances in the build it's self I think. After all, if Spike was imbalanced to the point that it was as powerfull as you say; wouldn't every competitive guild be running it?

Spike, as I said, is a good way to farm average guilds on the ladder. That is about it. You can do the same by running a 'balanced' build well, it just takes longer.

Life Bringer · Jun 07, 2006, 10:10 AM // 10:10

im sorry but what you are saying is completely unreasonable: if you believe fc air spike to be an anti-ladder build as Genie said it is completely reasonalbe to meta-game and run it. Also if you dont believe spike to be skillful then why arent all the other random teams running it sitting on the same spot on the ladder as we are. We as a guild prefer spike but people like EW don't run balanced cos they dont want to piss people off with spike: they do it because yes it is more flexible than pure spike and they find it works better for them. "as is agreed you would go no where if people knew ahead of time what you are running". You can say that about any build e.g if we knew u were running a melee heavy build we would run something with lots of blinds snares etc. This is why if any team who makes the playoff will tend not to run their standard ladder build for the majority of the games.

Egg Shen · Jun 07, 2006, 05:25 PM // 17:25

I'll admit to being confused by the 'gimmick' hate around here, especially from people whose mantra is "Play to Win." To me, there are just builds. All builds are attempting to exploit some weakness. A balanced build is jack of all trades, master of none (expect perhaps mobility). A spike build is a focused cannon, but lakes flexibility. A pressure or degen or hex build attempts to overwhelm you in whatever their chosen fasion is. Pretty straightforward.

Sure, spike builds are very difficult to beat on certain maps. Why wouldn't they press that advantage? What kind of players/builder wouldn't take advantage of terrain? But certainly balanced builds are difficult for spike builds to cope w/ on certain maps as well? Does that not seem healthy for competitive gameplay?

And all builds want to use the most 'broken' skills. When balanced build warriors were focus swapping and abusing a broken Gale mechanic, was that gimmicky? Or was it playing to win? Was it cheap? Did it require some special skill?

Finally, worrying about the ladder is silly, IMO. Running a spike build on certain maps is an option available to everybody. Packing more spike hate so as to face them down in an 8 vs 8 is an option for the top balanced teams. And as many good players here have stated, all but the best spikers can't handle the top balanced builds at the top level of play. . . so what's the problem? Doesn't it all sort of work itself out in the end?

I don't get it.

Wasteland Squidget · Jun 07, 2006, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Egg Shen

I'll admit to being confused by the 'gimmick' hate around here, especially from people whose mantra is "Play to Win." To me, there are just builds. All builds are attempting to exploit some weakness. A balanced build is jack of all trades, master of none (expect perhaps mobility). A spike build is a focused cannon, but lakes flexibility. A pressure or degen or hex build attempts to overwhelm you in whatever their chosen fasion is. Pretty straightforward.

I agree to an extent, in that I think a lot of hate towards spikes is misdirected. If spikes are a problem, they're a problem created by Arenanet for making a game where you can spike. The players are just playing to win and running the builds that help them win ladder games most effectively.

It's totally okay with me if RnS, DEER, or any other guild want to run spike. I wish the rules of the game were designed such that those sorts of ranger/caster spikes weren't feasable, but it is the way it is and we all have to deal with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Egg Shen

Sure, spike builds are very difficult to beat on certain maps. Why wouldn't they press that advantage? What kind of players/builder wouldn't take advantage of terrain? But certainly balanced builds are difficult for spike builds to cope w/ on certain maps as well? Does that not seem healthy for competitive gameplay?

I think the biggest issue with spikes on the fire map is that they give a massive advantage compared to other maps and other builds. It's so bad that if you're running a build without heavy disruption on the fire map and you go against a halfway-competent spike team, you may as well not even play the match.

This sort of counter doesn't happen much when dealing with other kinds of builds. Even if you're playing against something like a hex-heavy team when you don't have Convert/Purge/Expel, it's still possible to win the match with player skill. Spike teams are the only kind of team that almost guarantees victory to a less coordinated team.

Given the setup for the ladder, it's very easy for a good spike team to get the Fire map in most matches that will actually prove difficult. They can roll higher ranked teams through a build and map advantage, and beat lower ranked teams on other maps through a skill advantage.

This issue doesn't necessarily have to be solved by removing spike. Arenanet could just as well change the Fire and Jade maps to allow for splitting and they'd go a long way towards solving the problem of spike.

Patrograd · Jun 07, 2006, 07:01 PM // 19:01

Why is it "ok" for 2 warriors and 2 air eles to go "3-2-1 spike", and then perform various utility roles before the next target is called, whereas it is considered lame for 4 rangers or 4 mes/eles to do exactly the same thing? Why is one considered a balanced build when the other is a lame gimmick?

If anything the 2 warrior/2 emo is the more overpowered build because it can split and because warriors have the sickest spike in the game, often only requiring two of them to perform an insta kill.

*shrug*

Egg Shen · Jun 07, 2006, 07:28 PM // 19:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

I agree to an extent, in that I think a lot of hate towards spikes is misdirected. If spikes are a problem, they're a problem created by Arenanet for making a game where you can spike. The players are just playing to win and running the builds that help them win ladder games most effectively.

. . . snip . . .

Given the setup for the ladder, it's very easy for a good spike team to get the Fire map in most matches that will actually prove difficult. They can roll higher ranked teams through a build and map advantage, and beat lower ranked teams on other maps through a skill advantage.

Which puts them right where they belong, no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wasteland Squidget

This issue doesn't necessarily have to be solved by removing spike. Arenanet could just as well change the Fire and Jade maps to allow for splitting and they'd go a long way towards solving the problem of spike.

But see, I don't understand how this is a huge problem, as the ladder sorts itself out in the end. If a guild HAS to be the underdog in order to get the map they need for spiking, aren't they susceptible to the very same tactic from underdog balanced teams? An Underdog balanced team of comparable, or even slightly more, skill should then be able climb right up the spikers backs on the ladder by picking the ice map as their base. And so on and so forth until the best combo of build/map/team-skill are exactly where they belong. It's not possible to be anywhere OTHER than where you belong based upon how the ladder works. In my opinion. Especially as every guild can choose the same options as every other.

To me it's all about the metagame. And an evolving metagame means a healthy life for the product. If every map allows a split, and the best teams all agree that a balanced build is superior, the metagame will start to stagnate, and that's not good for GW. If some builds allow for a slightly less skilled guild to beat a more skilled guild given the right circumstances (which are often under their control), well, sorry. It's the only way for a game like this to work, and to me it makes sense.

Wasteland Squidget · Jun 07, 2006, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrograd

Why is it "ok" for 2 warriors and 2 air eles to go "3-2-1 spike", and then perform various utility roles before the next target is called, whereas it is considered lame for 4 rangers or 4 mes/eles to do exactly the same thing? Why is one considered a balanced build when the other is a lame gimmick?

If anything the 2 warrior/2 emo is the more overpowered build because it can split and because warriors have the sickest spike in the game, often only requiring two of them to perform an insta kill.

*shrug*

I think the biggest difference is that even the best warrior spike in the world is counterable. The monks can see it coming and they can prevent it. Thus, if the opponent is getting kills through a warrior spike it's because your monks made an error, or because they were overpowered. Very few warrior spikes are so perfect that the monks can't see them coming or counter them, and certainly I've never seen a team that can do spikes like that consistently with warriors.

On the other hand, a caster/ranger spike bypasses monks completely. Even the best monk simply can't counter a good caster/ranger spike. It's all down to whether you disrupt them or not.

In other words, a warrior group overpowers your defense, while a spike group just ignores it. Whether that's a good or bad thing for Guild Wars is certainly open to debate, but it's a crucial difference between the two kinds of spike.