Guild Wars 2

Anet is aiming for this to eventually become an e-sport. That means balance is centered around TPvP. The next time something ludicrous happens in a hot join, rather than running to the boards to cry, but take a deep breath and count to 10 – things that work with 8 unorganized lone wolfs are not the same as things that work against 5 coordinated players communicating via VoIP. I know this won’t do anything, but it had to be said.

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

evilapprentice.6379

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

Um, it’s pretty much the same as every other MMO with official forums.

Noctred.6732:

evilapprentice.6379

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

Um, it’s pretty much the same as every other MMO with official forums.

In other games, I could expect about 50% of the front page posts to be kittening at any point in time. Here, it’s usually about 75%, and that’s taking into account there’s already a consolidated thread for kittening about a particular class.

evilapprentice.6379:

Anet is aiming for this to eventually become an e-sport. That means balance is centered around TPvP. The next time something ludicrous happens in a hot join, rather than running to the boards to cry, but take a deep breath and count to 10 – things that work with 8 unorganized lone wolfs are not the same as things that work against 5 coordinated players communicating via VoIP. I know this won’t do anything, but it had to be said.

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

You bring up a good point.

However, it does no good to build a competitive game that’s balanced around a format that most players aren’t able or interested in playing.

8v8 hotjoin is the most accessible form of sPvP and the format most players will use to base their opinion on the current state of PvP.

Oh look its another post by evilapprentice saying balance is fine XD

Boloth.6879:

evilapprentice.6379:

Anet is aiming for this to eventually become an e-sport. That means balance is centered around TPvP. The next time something ludicrous happens in a hot join, rather than running to the boards to cry, but take a deep breath and count to 10 – things that work with 8 unorganized lone wolfs are not the same as things that work against 5 coordinated players communicating via VoIP. I know this won’t do anything, but it had to be said.

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

You bring up a good point.

However, it does no good to build a competitive game that’s balanced around a format that most players aren’t able or interested in playing.

8v8 hotjoin is the most accessible form of sPvP and the format most players will use to base their opinion on the current state of PvP.

By the same token balancing the game around hot-join would cause problems in TPvP. I’m assuming that since ANet’s goal is eventual e-sport, TPvP balance will be more important.

ehtom.5047:

Oh look its another post by evilapprentice saying balance is fine XD

Yup, it is. Because it is.

Balance is actually fairly decent, regardless of what most people say. As soon as the bugs get fixed, balance would be even better.
But yes, the game should be balanced around tPvP where people actually know what the heck they’re doing.

Just remove downed state from PvP or reduce damage from skills. It’s ridiculous, you have to wait almost 10 seconds to kill someone with a ridiculously high cast to finish, while he hit you with dmg 10x higher than a ranger, with dots and others things.

I can’t believe GW2 reduced the entire pvp feature to ‘buddy up to win’

Spvp: the master strategy has about a 3/10 skill cap. Alot of times all you need do is run away when outnumbered and herd on a less balanced point. Tpvp takes that to the next level with voip and a command structure, but pugs, casuals, and even tourney players who just wanna play solo are completely lost in a system that demands communication, coordination, responsiblity, leadership, and loyalty. That stuff doesn’t come instantly in the middle of battle, especially between people who don’t even know each other. Thus, spvp is always a mess, and the community turns on each other. 3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am). And isn’t it obvious business sense that we can’t just throw away the most accessible mode to chaos?

Tpvp and balance: I actually think class-to-class balance is much better than perceived. However, conquest is about staying alive and taking points, not being equal to other classes in combat. Thieves will always excel in this mode by killing and simply getting away, and their entire escape/mobility mechanic would need to be balanced against their damage to change that. Guardian imba is 2 fold: if their attacks were as low as their defenses were high, they’d be defeatable 1v1, but with ‘conquest OP’, no class will be more effective at this ‘holding points game’ (except maybe other extreme bunker builds.) And any class that can move their entire team from point to point with a portal: priceless.

Tpvp conquest is a mode for devoted, organized teams who want to focus on something besides combat: objectives. I got into this game to fight, not hold points. Why not build the community with a basic, fair, combat-focused mode to balance the classes with, and then worry about going for the e-sport gold with an option for super-duper team players who wanna give and take orders while people watch them coordinate forces?

Finally, I’m playing all 8 classes and have over 1200 matches in. Some classes are easier and more successful than others, but I’m less concerned with that than I am class bugs. As former military, I bolded what it takes to be a team player, and I enjoy doing so in the right format. But I want to measure myself, not a team, in a fair and straight up battle.

tl:dr The Midas Touch of e-sports is unattainable without a solid pvp game. 3v3 DM would immediately bring in more players, solve alot of problems, and make others clear for correcting. So you didn’t reach the highest golden apple out the gate: it is time to attain some of the low-hanging fruit, gaining the prosperity to try another day.

Master Charles.7093:

Spvp: the master strategy has about a 3/10 skill cap. Alot of times all you need do is run away when outnumbered and herd on a less balanced point. Tpvp takes that to the next level with voip and a command structure, but pugs, casuals, and even tourney players who just wanna play solo are completely lost in a system that demands communication, coordination, responsiblity, leadership, and loyalty. That stuff doesn’t come instantly in the middle of battle, especially between people who don’t even know each other. Thus, spvp is always a mess, and the community turns on each other. 3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am). And isn’t it obvious business sense that we can’t just throw away the most accessible mode to chaos?

The DotA 2 system demands communication, coordination, responsibility, leadership, and loyalty. It demands sacrifice and selfless expenditures for the good of the team to truly operate.

Pugs don’t have it there either, and that game’s thriving. My own guess is that it’s because they blame each other for losing and not the game. The incentives are also about the same as playing casual golf: looking for that perfect game that feels good.

Odds are 3v3 TDM would result in cheese 3s dominating, creating a stagnant/boring/frustrating meta.

How do I know? I don’t, but I figured I’d join in if we were going to sling around conclusions based on unjustified assumptions.

Cogbyrn.7283:

Master Charles.7093:

Spvp: the master strategy has about a 3/10 skill cap. Alot of times all you need do is run away when outnumbered and herd on a less balanced point. Tpvp takes that to the next level with voip and a command structure, but pugs, casuals, and even tourney players who just wanna play solo are completely lost in a system that demands communication, coordination, responsiblity, leadership, and loyalty. That stuff doesn’t come instantly in the middle of battle, especially between people who don’t even know each other. Thus, spvp is always a mess, and the community turns on each other. 3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am). And isn’t it obvious business sense that we can’t just throw away the most accessible mode to chaos?

The DotA 2 system demands communication, coordination, responsibility, leadership, and loyalty. It demands sacrifice and selfless expenditures for the good of the team to truly operate.

Pugs don’t have it there either, and that game’s thriving. My own guess is that it’s because they blame each other for losing and not the game. The incentives are also about the same as playing casual golf: looking for that perfect game that feels good.

Odds are 3v3 TDM would result in cheese 3s dominating, creating a stagnant/boring/frustrating meta.

How do I know? I don’t, but I figured I’d join in if we were going to sling around conclusions based on unjustified assumptions.

Isn’t Dota a slow, 2D RTS game? Apples and Oranges, bud

“Odds are 3v3 TDM would result in cheese 3s dominating, creating a stagnant/boring/frustrating meta.”

^Thats what we got now

But what would these forums be if Cogbyrn didn’t try to debase all the constructive opinions being given to help the game make more money and players have more fun? As usual, it’s in total blind defense of every move Anet makes, and neither accepts nor provides an attempt to resolve issues for everyones benefit.

“How do I know? I don’t, but I figured I’d join in if we were going to sling around conclusions based on unjustified assumptions”

I can see by your signature you think you are a god here to lay your wrath on man. This is the only warning I will give you to stop attacking my personal character.

—The amount of complaining about OP professions is not really any greater here than most other game forums.
—I have no information, but I’m going to guess that there are somewhere between 10 to 20 times as many casual sPvP players than serious tourney players. Wouldn’t you expect to see 10 to 20 times as many posts from them?
—As stated in many other threads, tournament balance is fairly decent right now but the casual scene is not very good.
—I think a simple TD is usually good for casuals just hopping on to PvP for half an hour. I’m not sure GW2 is ready for that because some professions are not real great at fighting but have viability for point control. So, 3 person TDM would not really see anything other than the four current casual professions.

Edit: that probably sounded a little negative toward the 3-man TDM idea. I actually think it’s a great idea, just probably can’t be implemented for several months.

NevirSayDie.6235:

—The amount of complaining about OP professions is not really any greater here than most other game forums.
—I have no information, but I’m going to guess that there are somewhere between 10 to 20 times as many casual sPvP players than serious tourney players. Wouldn’t you expect to see 10 to 20 times as many posts from them?
—As stated in many other threads, tournament balance is fairly decent right now but the casual scene is not very good.
—I think a simple TD is usually good for casuals just hopping on to PvP for half an hour. I’m not sure GW2 is ready for that because some professions are not real great at fighting but have viability for point control. So, 3 person TDM would not really see anything other than the four current casual professions.

Agreed, but wouldn’t it be more practical to balance the professions against each other (for combat) instead of for one single mode, effectively boxing the whole game in?

This is the only warning I will give you to stop attacking my personal character.

Did you threaten me on the Guild Wars 2 forums? I’m astounded. I wasn’t even assaulting your personal character, just the things that you said in your post.

You said the following:

3v3 DM would immediately bring in more players, solve alot of problems, and make others clear for correcting.

That’s what you said. I’m talking about what you said. You also said:

3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am).

Is it too much to ask to hear some elaboration?

If you’re keeping that close of an eye on what I’m saying, you’ll notice I believe ANet has a lot of work ahead of them. It’s a very complex problem, and the solution sort of hinges on exactly what goals they have for the game. I’m not talking about them wanting an e-sport, I’m talking about what kind of e-sport. Can professional players use it as a source of income? Will it just be competitively sound and offer in-game leaderboards? You can take “e-sport” and twist it to mean the whole range of potential ideas, from just a game that has competitive potential to a game players can make a living from.

I’m all for additional game modes. If ANet doesn’t deliver more in the way of casual PvP content beyond WvWvW, I’ll be disappointed, and that’s coming from someone (me) who loves spending hours in WvWvW. I’m following the competitive/structured community because I’d love to become a spectator for this game, and I like seeing how the competitive meta develops.

Also, the quote’s from True Grit, spoken by Rooster Cogburn. It also represents my mentality in WvWvW, as it’s very, very amusing to watch the front line of the enemy zerg break around your assault and give ground instinctively. It’s almost like a psychological experiment, but it works, and is ultra fun.

I’d be happy to hear more about why 3v3 TDM would help the game, but you’ll need to be open to prying criticism. The only way to strengthen your opinion is to have it challenged.

Master Charles.7093:

NevirSayDie.6235:

—The amount of complaining about OP professions is not really any greater here than most other game forums.
—I have no information, but I’m going to guess that there are somewhere between 10 to 20 times as many casual sPvP players than serious tourney players. Wouldn’t you expect to see 10 to 20 times as many posts from them?
—As stated in many other threads, tournament balance is fairly decent right now but the casual scene is not very good.
—I think a simple TD is usually good for casuals just hopping on to PvP for half an hour. I’m not sure GW2 is ready for that because some professions are not real great at fighting but have viability for point control. So, 3 person TDM would not really see anything other than the four current casual professions.

Agreed, but wouldn’t it be more practical to balance the professions against each other (for combat) instead of for one single mode, effectively boxing the whole game in?

Yes. Come to think of it, no one cares about point control in casual PvP anyway so they may as well just switch it over to TDM. It will be the same four professions, but at least they won’t have to pretend to capture stuff. For that matter, the tourney community doesn’t really seem to like point control either (translate: “point defense is OP!”).

Cogbyrn.7283:

This is the only warning I will give you to stop attacking my personal character.

Did you threaten me on the Guild Wars 2 forums? I’m astounded. I wasn’t even assaulting your personal character, just the things that you said in your post.

You said the following:

3v3 DM would immediately bring in more players, solve alot of problems, and make others clear for correcting.

That’s what you said. I’m talking about what you said. You also said:

3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am).

Is it too much to ask to hear some elaboration?

If you’re keeping that close of an eye on what I’m saying, you’ll notice I believe ANet has a lot of work ahead of them. It’s a very complex problem, and the solution sort of hinges on exactly what goals they have for the game. I’m not talking about them wanting an e-sport, I’m talking about what kind of e-sport. Can professional players use it as a source of income? Will it just be competitively sound and offer in-game leaderboards? You can take “e-sport” and twist it to mean the whole range of potential ideas, from just a game that has competitive potential to a game players can make a living from.

I’m all for additional game modes. If ANet doesn’t deliver more in the way of casual PvP content beyond WvWvW, I’ll be disappointed, and that’s coming from someone (me) who loves spending hours in WvWvW. I’m following the competitive/structured community because I’d love to become a spectator for this game, and I like seeing how the competitive meta develops.

Also, the quote’s from True Grit, spoken by Rooster Cogburn. It also represents my mentality in WvWvW, as it’s very, very amusing to watch the front line of the enemy zerg break around your assault and give ground instinctively. It’s almost like a psychological experiment, but it works, and is ultra fun.

I’d be happy to hear more about why 3v3 TDM would help the game, but you’ll need to be open to prying criticism. The only way to strengthen your opinion is to have it challenged.

So you got your attack-dog philosophy from a movie? Ok. I still won’t be controlled by fear. If you’re gonna troll me out, I will defend myself until they close this thread, but I won’t stop trying to make the game better for everyones benefit. Thats the warning.

3v3 Team Deathmatch would be much better for pugs, casuals, and any player that just wants to solo for a bit (say at 3am).

“Is it too much to ask to hear some elaboration?”

The whole post was elaboration. If you or anyone else wants more, please click on my name and read all my posts.

“I’d be happy to hear more about why 3v3 TDM would help the game, but you’ll need to be open to prying criticism”

No, I won’t be open to your criticism. Not like this:

“How do I know? I don’t, but I figured I’d join in if we were going to sling around conclusions based on unjustified assumptions.”

Here, you are using flowery speech to imply my argument is invalid and should be discarded. I jump to conclusions, don’t have a leg to stand on, and haven’t collected any verifiable data. Basically, I’m either stupid or a liar, right?

You need to criticize ideas, not people. Obviously, you said you don’t know, so I don’t care for your opinion of why TDM wouldn’t work. Your reply was just poisonous and counter-productive.

And lastly, I tried to warn you that I wouldn’t tolerate deformation of character by defending myself likewise. But you tried to paint that as a bodily threat:

“Did you threaten me on the Guild Wars 2 forums? I’m astounded. I wasn’t even assaulting your personal character, just the things that you said in your post.”

by deflecting attention away from your accusations and back onto my original point, which you never really tried to contend: not fooled. Now attack ideas, not people.

evilapprentice.6379:

Anet is aiming for this to eventually become an e-sport. That means balance is centered around TPvP. The next time something ludicrous happens in a hot join, rather than running to the boards to cry, but take a deep breath and count to 10 – things that work with 8 unorganized lone wolfs are not the same as things that work against 5 coordinated players communicating via VoIP. I know this won’t do anything, but it had to be said.

In all the online games I’ve ever played, I’ve never seen kittening of this magnitude. Especially in a 2 month old game.

How about no? I reserve the right to write on the forums when I feel something may be out of balance. Your opinion on the matter doesn’t remove my right as a paying customer, no more than me telling you that you can only post complaints based only on spvp play (because more people play it).

You misunderstand. I don’t want people to back down, I want them to step up. I want a conversation with substance, not just the usual “These are my ideas, they would fix the game.” Sometimes my frustration injects itself into a comment, but I’m used to conversing with very strong personalities, and we fire at one another as a secondary sport during arguments all the time.

I never intend any personal insult. Period. That comment of mine was inflammatory, and it’s my fault for starting the rapport off on the wrong foot. For that particular part, I apologize.

However, if this were a conversation around a table, would you be able to use the argument “Well I explained myself to other people the other day, so ask them about it if you’re interested in learning more”? I get that forums allow me to look at your previous posts, but why do I have to assume that you’ve explained your ideas in another thread? I don’t have time to go hunting for previous posts to try to get the full story, and there’s no reason each thread can’t be treated like a brand new conversation. In such a scenario, you might as well fully support your idea, or at least link to the explanation. I feel like the explanation in your post here had gaps.

As it turns out, I just happened on another of your posts here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/sPvP-needs-new-game-types-for-example/first#post534874

For starters, casual conquest doesn’t require all of the top-tier bits such as communication, etc. You can just run to points that aren’t capped, leave when they are, and find fights. Is it the most effective way to do it? Of course not, but it’s casual mode. I often find myself capping side points and getting in smaller skirmishes, or if I want, I’ll find the “zerg” and engage in a larger scale fight. I hardly ever pay attention to the score unless it’s really close, at which point I’ll try to “win” for fun. Otherwise, I’m just looking for fights, which are typically centered around points (except sometimes, when I find them in the middle of nowhere).

If you implement 3v3 TDM, the most efficient way will be to have leadership call targets, communicate when you need peels, assign certain responsibilities to your teammates based on role, etc. If we’re going to compare apples to apples, competitive Conquest and competitive 3v3 will require the same sort of competitive qualities.

If you queue up for 3v3 with someone you don’t know, how will you respond to their play? What if the DPS just goes running in expecting you to support, and dies? You’re mad at him, he’s mad at you, and the community still turns on one another. How long should the match last? How will respawns be taken into account? What happens when one team just decimates the other and camps their spawn area for 10 minutes?

In an ideal world, you’d have an ongoing even fight between 6 players that’s nicely back and forth, just for fun. However, in a mode even more about just killing people, what is stopping the majority of players from still going glass-cannon and trying to kill people in a few seconds? I can’t personally think of anything.

These are my concerns. It sounds like you just like Deathmatch formats better, and that’s fine. I think it would be ultra healthy for the game to offer more sPvP formats than just conquest, and like I said, I’d be intensely surprised if ANet doesn’t go down that road. The problem lurking in the shadows is that people who like their format best will probably request tournaments. They’ll want the game balanced for their preferred mode, and I understand, but I’m not sure how balancing for TDM will impact Conquest balance, or CTF balance, or whatever-have-you. That rifts the community even further, as people chomp at the bit to have balance catered to their mode.

However, that’s the negative side of the coin. The positive side is that more options allows more people to play how they want to play, and at the end of the day, I think that’s worth it. If there was TDM, I’d play. If there was CTF, I’d play.

I want diversity too, but I think it’s healthy to explore pros AND cons.

But I think this is starting to get off-topic, so if you care to flesh out some details you had in mind about specifics and how to best avoid the frustrations inherent in any PvP mode, I’d love to hear them, whether it’s PM or the other thread you posted in.

Whatever the format of the game, people will complain when a 1v1 situation seems clearly unbalanced. Most players play solo with no voice communication. You get complaints on balance when the 1v1 balance is not a priority. “Balancing around teams” leaves the majority of players unsatisfied. WoW was way more popular when it had ranked 2v2 arenas, which were closer to 1v1. The popularity of duels should be a strong indication that most players want competitive 1v1 in a balanced 1v1 environment.

I misunderstand things, like all humans, but not this discussion.

Regardless, I appreciate your apology and our return to civility.

I would, however, point out that my entire (first) post in this thread was to draw contrast to the inherent flaws of conquest, (tpvp being the only version allowed to matter), as compared to TDM. In other posts, I flesh out how it would still require teamwork, just not as much to simply do your part and help allies. As I’ve stated here and elsewhere, I believe it would go a long way to even out the extreme imbalances of offense vs defense. In closing, you really didn’t provide any cons with your initial reply.

Still, I appreciate you providing a link to my other discussions: I can’t really state my whole case each post, nor can I disrupt every thread to defend myself when it gets twisted. I’m not interested in PMing you, or carrying on further elsewhere, but thanks and good luck.

Now back on point: tpvp is the only thing that matters: is that profitable/cool?

I personally think for an e-sport to exist, it must be balanced at the competitive level. In this case, we would be talking tPvP. That isn’t to say that they should completely ignore lower-level players, but I can’t think of a game that doesn’t have gimmicky strats that can tear apart lower levels while fading to uselessness or very situational use in competitive play.

My main curiosity is: how much imbalance can the casual population tolerate in a game like GW2? How much is too much for a gimmick/cheese?

Thief and mesmer classes are already overplayed in spvp. Most people who are new think that getting killed in 2 seconds is just part of learning how to pvp so they put up with it for a while or they quit. Once some of them realize that it is only 1 class doing that kind of damage, they simply roll that class and join the fun. Now we have a situation with every team having 3 or more thieves with the goal of ganking anyone new over and over. Maybe I’m missing something but I don’t see how this is good for tpvp.

If we are only concerned with tpvp, why are we giving everyone the same gear in spvp? Shouldn’t we be forcing everyone new to use scrub gear and take their beatings while they learn to cope with more powerful opponents? If we are only concerned with prepping people for tpvp, should we really be giving them the option to play with balanced classes at all? The class that they use until level 30 should have 50% less damage and 50% less durability so they will be forced to learn to avoid attacks from more powerful oponents in .1 second. Isn’t that exactly what is happening already? Do people think this is really good for the game in the long term? How are they going to remain profitable when the majority of people won’t stick around to be ganked continually?

I admit that I have played a ranger and engineer from the beginning but recently jumped on the thief bandwagon. I am just as guilty of ganking noobs because the game makes it so easy. It beats having 1-5 minute fights on my ranger!

We didn’t start the fire!