206 replies to this topic

[KodakMoment]

deluxe, on 07 May 2013 - 06:23 PM, said:

So another month has passed, has anything changed for the better?

No nothing has changed and I wouldn't get your hopes up. Anet releases 1 patch a month which 99% of the time is a pve patch it's quite simple math.

I constantly get pitted against full premades consecutively with a pug. It seems the matchmaker doesn't like putting a premade up against another premade. I don't get how anet thinks this is fair and there wasn't a lack of players because this was during the busy hours. 3 different premades yet the system can't match these premades against each other. Then there are the leavers/afkers but lets not punish them at all

Edited by KodakMoment, 14 May 2013 - 03:37 AM.

[EyeOfBast]

The general banter in the Temple of Balthazar in GW1 tends to be about the good old days of HA tournaments. It's possible, if enough people went back there, an HA tournament could be held. But at the moment, most everyone is too busy complaining about GW2 to try. GvG is still quite active, with a lot of guilds taking it very seriously and most of them are tight knit as ever. I haven't had a chance to look at AB, but the faction boundaries still move around regularly. The Jade Quarry is sparsely populated but you still hear banter, same with RA.

Just some friendly suggestions if you want something to do until things pick up in the new game. The old one still functions.

[The Shadow]

GW2 PvP

Good things:

- Tournaments
- Necessitates communication
- Necessitates individual skill
- Necessitates knowledge/ understanding of all classes/ builds and roles
- Can relatively easily switch builds/ gears/ class (though templates would be lovely)
- Allows you to progress; Leaderboards, as a player, as a certain class, at communication etc...

Bad things:

- SPvP
- RNG for gear
- Most maps suck
- There are objectives on most maps that are simply annoying
- There are too many hot-join heroes in soloq
- It's unfair to pit pre-made teams against randoms (I say this as someone who enjoys premade and soloq)
- It's un-rewarding to play the important builds in soloq (why run bunker? Not like you'll get any glory)

I think perhaps the worst thing about GW2 PvP is the ranking system. I've seen rank 50s who suck ass and rank 10s who have been really quite good. I don't think rank should matter. I think your win/ loss ratio should dictate your rank not how many hours you spend in hot-join spamming skills against bad players in order to rank up.

Other than that, they simply need to offer more variety. I like GW2 PvP but I can see why a lot of people don't. Why aren't there 1v1s, 3v3s, 5v5s, GvGs, TDM, SDM, KoTH, CTF?

It's not as though these things would be hard to implement. I just don't see what anyone could possibly have against more variety as it would be optional content anyway.

[EyeOfBast]

Quote

It's not as though these things would be hard to implement. I just don't see what anyone could possibly have against more variety as it would be optional content anyway.

The Guild Halls, stock maps, and skill/class balancing (general user banter is that this last part would be necessary before new content is released) take resources to put together. Nobody is positively sure what the team is up to right now, but most people think it's still more PvE. No one is against having more PvP content, but the question is whether or not the dev team is putting resources into it.

[The Shadow]

EyeOfBast, on 14 May 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

The Guild Halls, stock maps, and skill/class balancing (general user banter is that this last part would be necessary before new content is released) take resources to put together. Nobody is positively sure what the team is up to right now, but most people think it's still more PvE. No one is against having more PvP content, but the question is whether or not the dev team is putting resources into it.

It's an MMO. Balance will always be in flux. So that's not really a valid concern. Otherwise we'll never get any new PvP content.

As for developing other content, well, that's not really a good enough reason. With the amount of staff Anet has access to it seems ludicrous that they can't afford to develop all parts of the game, even if it is little by little.

The point I'm making is, with custom arenas, you can already artificially create a 3v3 or GvG or TDM. Why can't these minor changes be part of the game naturally. It wouldn't take much dev time at all and would offer a setting for those who say; "GW2 has no real PvP" or "GW2 PvP sucks in comparison to GW1" or whatever else. Not to mention the fact that it would incentivize people who haven't previously PvP-ed to give it a go.

Minor changes would make a major difference. I just hope Anet come to the same conclusion sooner rather than later or else everyone's "GW2 will die" concerns may be validated.

[KodakMoment]

The Shadow, on 14 May 2013 - 04:54 PM, said:

GW2 PvP

Good things:

- Tournaments
- Necessitates communication
- Necessitates individual skill
- Necessitates knowledge/ understanding of all classes/ builds and roles
- Can relatively easily switch builds/ gears/ class (though templates would be lovely)
- Allows you to progress; Leaderboards, as a player, as a certain class, at communication etc...

Bad things:

- SPvP
- RNG for gear
- Most maps suck
- There are objectives on most maps that are simply annoying
- There are too many hot-join heroes in soloq
- It's unfair to pit pre-made teams against randoms (I say this as someone who enjoys premade and soloq)
- It's un-rewarding to play the important builds in soloq (why run bunker? Not like you'll get any glory)

I think perhaps the worst thing about GW2 PvP is the ranking system. I've seen rank 50s who suck ass and rank 10s who have been really quite good. I don't think rank should matter. I think your win/ loss ratio should dictate your rank not how many hours you spend in hot-join spamming skills against bad players in order to rank up.

Other than that, they simply need to offer more variety. I like GW2 PvP but I can see why a lot of people don't. Why aren't there 1v1s, 3v3s, 5v5s, GvGs, TDM, SDM, KoTH, CTF?

It's not as though these things would be hard to implement. I just don't see what anyone could possibly have against more variety as it would be optional content anyway.

Yes it is true rank doesn't mean much but when you get rank 1's on your team that type in chat what do i do then there is a problem...

[Lordkrall]

KodakMoment, on 15 May 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

Yes it is true rank doesn't mean much but when you get rank 1's on your team that type in chat what do i do then there is a problem...

Why?
For all you know they have another account that is rank 50.
Or they are simply very good.
There were after all people just a few days after release that were quite good, why wouldn't people like that still exists?
Rank has NOTHING to do with skill, just time spent.

[Illein]

Lordkrall, on 15 May 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Why?
For all you know they have another account that is rank 50.
Or they are simply very good.
There were after all people just a few days after release that were quite good, why wouldn't people like that still exists?
Rank has NOTHING to do with skill, just time spent.

Because in 99.999% of the cases they are simply rank 1 - as in, they haven't ever played in SPvP before and aren't some top-notch player on his in cognito Solo Q Adventure.

C'mon, don't be THAT person each and every single time.

[Lordkrall]

Illein, on 15 May 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

Because in 99.999% of the cases they are simply rank 1 - as in, they haven't ever played in SPvP before and aren't some top-notch player on his in cognito Solo Q Adventure.

C'mon, don't be THAT person each and every single time.

Possibly. The fact that people were good a few days after release (with very low ranks) would go against that 99,999% though.

But assuming that someone don't have a clue because they are low ranked is quite silly. Just as it is silly to assume someone with high rank know what they are talking about.

Edited by Lordkrall, 15 May 2013 - 08:38 AM.

[Illein]

Lordkrall, on 15 May 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

Possibly. The fact that people were good a few days after release (with very low ranks) would go against that 99,999% though.

But assuming that someone don't have a clue because they are low ranked is quite silly. Just as it is silly to assume someone with high rank know what they are talking about.

The only ones who were good were those who had alpha access, or played the living crap out of those beta weekends, theorycrafting in between them.

And sorry, but no. Assuming that someone has no clue who has an sPvP Ranking of 1(!) is perfectly reasonable. I mean - if they never played spvp, how would they know? Even if they spent the last 8 months 24/7 playing WvW - it doesn't necessarily make them good sPvP players right from the get-go. Usually quite the opposite, as it simply has other objectives that matter.

High rank only says that the person has played very much. I am on one page with you - he could be just as oblivious as a rank 1 player. But that will be the 0.001 % of players in reverse.

In,I don't know how many many, tournament games I've pugged - you can bet your ass and that of your buddy's, that there was not ONCE a rank 1 who did have a clue. I think it's a douchenozzle move to queue up at level 1 - but that's another story. Point is, it is just unrealistic to expect a rank 1 player to be anything but a rank 1 player and that's that.

Edited by Illein, 15 May 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[Lordkrall]

Illein, on 15 May 2013 - 08:47 AM, said:

The only ones who were good were those who had alpha access, or played the living crap out of those beta weekends, theorycrafting in between them.

And sorry, but no. Assuming that someone has no clue who has an sPvP Ranking of 1(!) is perfectly reasonable. I mean - if they never played spvp, how would they know? Even if they spent the last 8 months 24/7 playing WvW - it doesn't necessarily make them good sPvP players right from the get-go. Usually quite the opposite, as it simply has other objectives that matter.

High rank only says that the person has played very much. I am on one page with you - he could be just as oblivious as a rank 1 player. But that will be the 0.001 % of players in reverse.

In,I don't know how many many, tournament games I've pugged - you can bet your ass and that of your buddy's, that there was not ONCE a rank 1 who did have a clue. I think it's a douchenozzle move to queue up at level 1 - but that's another story. Point is, it is just unrealistic to expect a rank 1 player to be anything but a rank 1 player and that's that.

Incorrect.
There are people that are fast learners and that don't actually need to actively play in order to learn stuff. If someone knows how the skills and the maps work they can quite easily figure out strategies and plans to counter an enemy and win, no matter which rank he/she is.

No, it is not reasonable to assume someones skill is based on the rank, since the rank have nothing at all to do with skills. I have seen quite a few rank 1-2 players that have owned rank 20 players, but going by your logic that would be impossible because they are 19 ranks lower?

[Illein]

Lordkrall, on 15 May 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

Incorrect.
There are people that are fast learners and that don't actually need to actively play in order to learn stuff. If someone knows how the skills and the maps work they can quite easily figure out strategies and plans to counter an enemy and win, no matter which rank he/she is.

No, it is not reasonable to assume someones skill is based on the rank, since the rank have nothing at all to do with skills. I have seen quite a few rank 1-2 players that have owned rank 20 players, but going by your logic that would be impossible because they are 19 ranks lower?

It's like talking to a box of rocks.

Read what I wrote not what you want to argue against. Interpreting, rather simply written, paragraphs to suit your argument is not really a basis on which I am interested in discussing with you.

[The Shadow]

Illein, on 15 May 2013 - 10:12 AM, said:

It's like talking to a box of rocks.

Read what I wrote not what you want to argue against. Interpreting, rather simply written, paragraphs to suit your argument is not really a basis on which I am interested in discussing with you.

While it may seem that Krall is arguing just for the sake of arguing I do believe there is some merit to what he's saying.

It's quite a well known fact; the EU Team Paradigm have accounts on NA servers and vice versa. I also happen to know that the top 100 on the EU leaderboards doesn't actually consist of 100 different players.

I myself want to buy a second account in order to play on NA servers and try out the different metagame.

While I agree that WvW/ PvE skills aren't entirely transferable to PvP I do believe it's possible to have a good enough understanding of the game to be rank 1 in soloq and not be absolute derp. Also, there are a lot more "incognito douchenozzles" than you'd expect.

[Illein]

The Shadow, on 15 May 2013 - 12:31 PM, said:

While it may seem that Krall is arguing just for the sake of arguing I do believe there is some merit to what he's saying.

It's quite a well known fact; the EU Team Paradigm have accounts on NA servers and vice versa. I also happen to know that the top 100 on the EU leaderboards doesn't actually consist of 100 different players.

I myself want to buy a second account in order to play on NA servers and try out the different metagame.

While I agree that WvW/ PvE skills aren't entirely transferable to PvP I do believe it's possible to have a good enough understanding of the game to be rank 1 in soloq and not be absolute derp. Also, there are a lot more "incognito douchenozzles" than you'd expect.

Sorry, but no.

How long do you think these TOP100 Players are staying on level 1 with their alt-accounts?

The chances that the R1 Player you got jumbled up with is just one of those are probably at LEAST 1:500. It's like saying "You shouldn't scoot pebbles across the street, because chances are one of them is a reborn Hindu."

I am not saying every rank 1 player is a disadvantage for you if you pug - but 99.999% simply are because they are in fact new players and not disguised boy wonders out to make your day.

[The Shadow]

Illein, on 15 May 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

Sorry, but no.

How long do you think these TOP100 Players are staying on level 1 with their alt-accounts?

The chances that the R1 Player you got jumbled up with is just one of those are probably at LEAST 1:500. It's like saying "You shouldn't scoot pebbles across the street, because chances are one of them is a reborn Hindu."

I am not saying every rank 1 player is a disadvantage for you if you pug - but 99.999% simply are because they are in fact new players and not disguised boy wonders out to make your day.

You honestly think, an absolute beginner, r1, even knows what soloq is?

By joining soloq, you know what you are participating in. It's a step above hot-join. I find it very hard to believe any actual rank 1's intentionally soloq. I also see it as being un-likely that they'd join soloq by mistake.

New players hot join.

Maybe beginners jump in to tournies straight away on NA servers, but on EU servers you very rarely see rank 1's and when you do, they often know what they're doing. You simply don't come across the same garbage in soloq that you find in hot-join. Don't get me wrong, you get heartseeker spammers and what not, but they're still a step above the people you find in hot-join who don't know how to dodge and still button mash.

[Illein]

The Shadow, on 15 May 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

You honestly think, an absolute beginner, r1, even knows what soloq is?

By joining soloq, you know what you are participating in. It's a step above hot-join. I find it very hard to believe any actual rank 1's intentionally soloq. I also see it as being un-likely that they'd join soloq by mistake.

New players hot join.

Maybe beginners jump in to tournies straight away on NA servers, but on EU servers you very rarely see rank 1's and when you do, they often know what they're doing. You simply don't come across the same garbage in soloq that you find in hot-join. Don't get me wrong, you get heartseeker spammers and what not, but they're still a step above the people you find in hot-join who don't know how to dodge and still button mash.

That's the whole issue. They do NOT hot-join. Maybe a great majority of them do, but you get PLENTY of R1s when you solo-que and they are definitely not the ones you described from what my experience is.

I wish new players would get the basics down in hot join, but that's just not how I witnessed it. And I am playing on a EU server as well, so I can't back that up.

Might just as well be a "bad streak" if you want so - but to say that even a significant portion of rank 1 players are not exactly what one would think - is quite frankly absurd.

[The Shadow]

Illein, on 15 May 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

That's the whole issue. They do NOT hot-join. Maybe a great majority of them do, but you get PLENTY of R1s when you solo-que and they are definitely not the ones you described from what my experience is.

I wish new players would get the basics down in hot join, but that's just not how I witnessed it. And I am playing on a EU server as well, so I can't back that up.

Might just as well be a "bad streak" if you want so - but to say that even a significant portion of rank 1 players are not exactly what one would think - is quite frankly absurd.

I find that really odd tbh.

Most of the time I'm pitted against rank 40s+

Maybe that's because I'm in a pre-made but even then, whenever I soloq I very rarely get people below rank 10.

[KodakMoment]

This happens to me a lot I mostly solo queue because most people I play with quit or timezone/work differences. They were a full premade btw. There also isn't a secret society of people buying other accounts playing on rabbits it is extremely rare

Edited by KodakMoment, 16 May 2013 - 02:18 AM.

[Illein]

Rank 1, Rank 2 and a leaver(?). Sad to say, but a lot of solo Q games end that way.

Edited by Illein, 16 May 2013 - 08:21 AM.

[The Shadow]

Well, I don't see why there can't be some restrictions.

i.e. Can't join soloq until you reach rank 20.

Alternatively, when someone leaves, have another person who is soloqing join the game.

But even if such rules were in place, you'd still end up with leavers, bad players and be in a disadvantageous position, especially against a premade.

Other than that I suppose the only thing you can do is join a premade or spam "Rank x lfg r x+" in the mists.

[Chicago Jack]

The Shadow, on 16 May 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

Well, I don't see why there can't be some restrictions.

i.e. Can't join soloq until you reach rank 20.

I do. For the very same reasons why you're arguing against these people: People who are naturally talented shouldn't have to grind to lvl 20 just to play in spvp.

The game should just match up ranks in a relative sense. In general, a level 1 soloq should never see a level 40 and a level 40 should never see a level 1 (unless intentionally playing with/against one on a premade team). The person who is talented and lvl 1 will level up a lot faster than the rest. If they get a few people together, they wont have to deal with the trash builds that people make in hot-join.

Edited by Chicago Jack, 21 May 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[The Shadow]

Chicago Jack, on 21 May 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

I do. For the very same reasons why you're arguing against these people: People who are naturally talented shouldn't have to grind to lvl 20 just to play in spvp.

The game should just match up ranks in a relative sense. In general, a level 1 soloq should never see a level 40 and a level 40 should never see a level 1 (unless intentionally playing with/against one on a premade team). The person who is talented and lvl 1 will level up a lot faster than the rest. If they get a few people together, they wont have to deal with the trash builds that people make in hot-join.

Having a minimum rank entry of 20 guarantees said person will have a basic grasp of PvP that many sub-20s might not have, though some might.

Also, it's not like rank 20 takes particularly long to get. Especially if they are talented and get 400+ glory per hot join.

[Aether]

Honestly, I am very disappointed with the current state of GW2 pvp. I find the current capture point style of sPvP to be very dull. It is like they took Hero Battles, arguably the worst pvp mode in GW1, and chose to use it as the base for the only standardized form of PvP in GW2.

Who thought this was a good idea? I think even GW1 random arenas were much more engaging than GW2 sPvP.

What GW2 pvp needs, beyond class and skill balance, is a greater variety of PvP game modes. I hope ANET stops trying to push the capture point style sPvP, and puts other game modes like guild battles and heroes ascent into GW2. I would even be happy to see a death-match style random arenas be added.

Although, it seems like it will be quite a while before anything like this will be added. It wasnt included at launch, and ANET doesnt seem to to talking about any other PvP modes in development.

[man with club]

The problem isn't the professions or play style, its the game type, although they kind of just handed you the only optimal builds and no room to tinker which sucks for people who like to mess around.

This capture the flag is just lame. But how do u bring in the awesomeness of 8on8 without a backline profession to make the fights last less then 5 seconds due to ridiculous aoe on every class?

[Chicago Jack]

Aether, on 24 May 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

What GW2 pvp needs, beyond class and skill balance, is a greater variety of PvP game modes. I hope ANET stops trying to push the capture point style sPvP, and puts other game modes like guild battles and heroes ascent into GW2. I would even be happy to see a death-match style random arenas be added.

The problem with this is how the game is structured with no set front, mid, and backline. If guild battles were enacted, there is a good chance the meta would devolve into just zerging. As much as I loved Guild Battles in GW1, in GW2 we just don't have the same structure to support such map types.

Death-match style systems would devolve into burst builds. Thief infestations would be everywhere.

In a nutshell, GW2's combat system has pigeon-holed itself into what we have today. If things are to change, the dev team needs to get creative.

[Aether]

Chicago Jack, on 24 May 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

The problem with this is how the game is structured with no set front, mid, and backline. If guild battles were enacted, there is a good chance the meta would devolve into just zerging. As much as I loved Guild Battles in GW1, in GW2 we just don't have the same structure to support such map types.

Death-match style systems would devolve into burst builds. Thief infestations would be everywhere.

In a nutshell, GW2's combat system has pigeon-holed itself into what we have today. If things are to change, the dev team needs to get creative.

The combat has certainly changed from the first game, but I believe other game types beyond conquest are still possible and should be implemented. I believe it would be a shame to see Guild Wars 2 pvp limited to just conquest.

Variations would need to be made, but older game types could make a return. For example, perhaps 3v3 deathmatch could be implemented. I dont believe the return of an 8v8 GvG may be viable, but perhaps a 5v5 version of it is a possibility.

Of course, any game couldnt be a direct copy of what was seen in the first game, but, like you suggest, perhaps with some creativity a great PvP mode reminiscent of something we once knew could be implemented.

Beyond that, totally new game types could also be welcome additions. Ive always been a fan of the idea of gladiator type arena which could be suited for various team sizes from solo to small group. You be pitted against other players and tournaments could also be held. In addition, it could potentionally appeal to PvE players if challenges against monsters were included in a different game style. We can already see small examples of this in game, but this would expand on it.

While I find this idea interesting, Im not saying it will be implemented. But, I do think that game types such as this or altered ones of old could be added to Guild Wars 2 revitalizing its PvP.

[Chicago Jack]

I just think its sad they reverted to this CoD bullshit we have now - it clearly doesn't work well for a competitive mmo.