Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * - - 7 votes

When will GW2 get real PvP?


  • Please log in to reply
239 replies to this topic

#211 wuzzman

wuzzman

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 198 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 04:02 AM

Its the only mode people care about. Deathmatch with a lose condition was the basis of Guild Wars 1 pvp, which had achieved esport status, League of Legends, extremely strong esport status, and every other esport in existence. People like head to head. And real talent generally follows what people actually like to play and what proves without a doubt that one player is better than the other. Capture point doesn't do it.

Edited by wuzzman, 12 July 2013 - 04:04 AM.


#212 Arewn

Arewn

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1068 posts
  • Location:Ontario, Canada
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 12 July 2013 - 06:01 AM

View Postwuzzman, on 12 July 2013 - 04:02 AM, said:

Its the only mode people care about. Deathmatch with a lose condition was the basis of Guild Wars 1 pvp, which had achieved esport status, League of Legends, extremely strong esport status, and every other esport in existence. People like head to head. And real talent generally follows what people actually like to play and what proves without a doubt that one player is better than the other. Capture point doesn't do it.
League of Legends is heavily objective based, as are many esports. The fact that you would use League of Legends as an example for "esports not being focused on objectives" tells me you don't really know what you are talking about in regards to the esports scene.
While I didn't play GW1 PvP, I have run into enough of these discussion to have at least watched some old GvG matches on youtube. From this I have learned that objectives are important, they are a key component to your team's strategy and eventual victory. Elimination of the enemy is one victory condition and a major component of any match, but important objectives such as running flags, or simply attacking(not necessarily killing) the enemy Guild Lord/NPCs are important objectives that lead to victory. You can't simply say "it's mostly deathmatch". And Guild Wars 1, while being a heavily PvP game, didn't have very much of an esports scene. Competitive? sure. Esports? not really.
Even something like Star Craft 2, a game where you partake in direct 1v1 battles, has strong objective based elements. Though these elements are for the most part player driven/created, they're there none the less. It being an RTS kinda makes the classification of 'deathmatch' off, so I suppose it's not the best example.
Competitive games that are not objective based are generally fighting games, which by their nature do note have objectives beyond directly fighting your enemy, and arena shooters such as Quake. Though even on the side of shooters, games like CSS had important objectives, it's not a scene I followed much though so I'm unclear on just how important these objectives were to its game play.

You also have to consider that a game striving for esports needs to be interesting and comprehensive to watch from a spectator's view point. Death match really does not lend itself well to this. Though I agree that the first step is to get people actually interested in playing your game at a high level.


But if you want to know what would happen in GW2 deathmatch, go play hotjoin Foefire and head to mid point, where you have 5 people from each team zerging sanctum in a big clusterf***. It's a fairly accurate picture of what 5v5 deathmatch would be.

#213 Conkers

Conkers

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 117 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:01 AM

View Postwuzzman, on 12 July 2013 - 04:02 AM, said:

Its the only mode people care about. Deathmatch with a lose condition was the basis of Guild Wars 1 pvp, which had achieved esport status, League of Legends, extremely strong esport status, and every other esport in existence. People like head to head. And real talent generally follows what people actually like to play and what proves without a doubt that one player is better than the other. Capture point doesn't do it.

Not really, it is the only mode a small minority of people who can't grasp what 'versus' means, whine about in any game. As mentioned above LoL is packed full of objectives, as indeed are most "e-sports" (MOBA's, RTS, etc) even for a shooter like CS the most commonly used "e-sports" maps have an objective (bomb defusal) rather than a simple deathmatch, only really fighting games have no objective.

Indeed if you look at some of the games that have tried to go the zero-objective route, then you will see failure as an "e-sport", WoW for instance, failed, despite having a huge userbase, I guess watchign people run round columns, endlessly reset fights and having cheese comps that simply changed based on how bad Blizzards balancing was that year, did not cut it. Same goes for Bloodline Champions, whilst objective based MOBAs like LoL, DOTA 2, even HoN in comparision had success, Bloodline Champions arena based system flopped.

Deathmatch / Arena type things are just too simple, so they don't hold most people's interest, computer games are not like actual sport, because there is no visual artistry, no visual subtlety, etc, they need some complexity to add interest, the visual impact of what is the real world equivlent of a 1v1 deathmatch - boxing is just not there, so that needs to be replaced.

In regard to GW2 specifically the class / combat design is terrible for something like team deathmatch (it is in fact terrible for nearly everything other than some sort of point holding / capture), you would just get total cheese like 5 thieves perma stealthing then insta-ganking, or 5 mesmers filling the screen with illusions, some classes are only kept in check by the fact a point forces a fight to an extent and that disengaging means a loss.

Edited by Conkers, 12 July 2013 - 11:21 AM.


#214 Phadde

Phadde

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Profession:Elementalist
  • Guild Tag:[SWE]
  • Server:Seafarer’s Rest

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:40 AM

View PostConkers, on 12 July 2013 - 11:01 AM, said:

Indeed if you look at some of the games that have tried to go the zero-objective route, then you will see failure as an "e-sport", WoW for instance, failed, despite having a huge userbase, I guess watchign people run round columns, endlessly reset fights and having cheese comps that simply changed based on how bad Blizzards balancing was that year, did not cut it.

Sorry? SORRY? Arena is considered by the big majority of PvP players to be the most challenging and fun form of PvP. It's far, far better than both BGs and RBG. Sure, RBG has it's charm, but it's more of a Guild-experience more than a straight up PvP experience.

Arena is simple at first glance, yes. Kill the other team. But that makes the combat so much more complex. You need to know Every important mechanic of the opposing team's classes. You need to know what the spells does, you need to know all of the many important CDs.

If you don't have that knowledge, or whenever you forgets some part of it that will prove useful before you remember it again, you better hope that the enemy fails to use that correct ability at that time, or you're going to lower your chances of victory. Because of the simplicity of the Arena objective, it gives all the focus to the combat. I love GW2s combat, but it's PvP is nowhere near WoW's Arenas. It has far more potential to make such a Game mode succeed - The plague that is dedicated healers in Arenas is gone. The Dmg/Support/Control -combat philosophy that GW2 was meant to follow is perfect for Arenas.

#215 wuzzman

wuzzman

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 198 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 12:41 PM

I'm sorry but let me bring some of you to school. LoL and GW1 pvp revolved around deathmatch with a lose condition. The lose conditions end the game, the deathmatch wins it. The strategy in those games revolved around simple give and take decision making, you can either focus on completing the objective by splitting up, but risk losing to a big center push, or you can focus on winning the team fight in the center, but risk too many objectives being destroyed when you do.

This allowed for differences to the entire way you approach the game, some teams favoring split oriented teams that focus on winning the game by completing the objectives as fast as possible, while other teams focus entirely on winning the center map fight and ending the game in a big push across mid. Of course you have plenty of ways to go about making one team or another, since both LoL and what used to be the GW1 pvp scene provided players with hundreds of options and combinations. And there was balance teams that focused on neither of the extremes, but instead won games based on situation awareness and having few glaring weaknesses.

In fact LoL hasn't reached the zenith of discovering all aspects of its metagame because its champ pool and game mode allows for far more variation than the kids that play high tier LoL realize.

Now look at GW2 and what its "objective based" pvp has brought us. Ring around the **** rosy. It doesn't get any blander than that.

Dedicated healers isn't a problem....though coming from a wow arena boy I can excuse your view point, since wow healers are poorly designed as with the rest of the game.

Edited by wuzzman, 12 July 2013 - 12:46 PM.


#216 Conkers

Conkers

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 117 posts

Posted 12 July 2013 - 02:51 PM

View PostPhadde, on 12 July 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

Sorry? SORRY? Arena is considered by the big majority of PvP players to be the most challenging and fun form of PvP. It's far, far better than both BGs and RBG. Sure, RBG has it's charm, but it's more of a Guild-experience more than a straight up PvP experience.

Arena is simple at first glance, yes. Kill the other team. But that makes the combat so much more complex. You need to know Every important mechanic of the opposing team's classes. You need to know what the spells does, you need to know all of the many important CDs.

If you don't have that knowledge, or whenever you forgets some part of it that will prove useful before you remember it again, you better hope that the enemy fails to use that correct ability at that time, or you're going to lower your chances of victory. Because of the simplicity of the Arena objective, it gives all the focus to the combat. I love GW2s combat, but it's PvP is nowhere near WoW's Arenas. It has far more potential to make such a Game mode succeed - The plague that is dedicated healers in Arenas is gone. The Dmg/Support/Control -combat philosophy that GW2 was meant to follow is perfect for Arenas.

So you say, yet WoW even with a huge playebase (granted most of which is PvE focused) failed as an e-sport, people endlessly reseting fights, cheese comps, running round pillars,etc is dull, Bloodline Champions, failed whilst LoL, DOTA and even HoN to an extent succeded, you may want arenas, seems most players don't.

There is nothing inherently compex about Arenas, all they are are teamfights, you get teamfights in most PvP formats, so you get whatever "complexity" you think is in Arenas, plus a whole lot more.

The GW2 class design / combat mechanics would be truly awful for Arenas, you would have all thief teams & all esmer teams cheesing it.

Oh yes the 'v' in PvP stands for 'versus', PvP does not simply equal combat, Arena is not any more PvP than any other format, all it is, is simplistic and prone to cheese comps.

People are deluded if they think the problems with GW2 is the format, it is the entire class / combat design which is simply way too simplistic, too spammy and lacking variety, those asking for Arena remind of those of think their button mashing, brainless mini zergs in WvW constitutes GvG like in GW1 and want a "GvG" map, you will never have GvG like in GW1 unless the game is re-written.

Edited by Conkers, 12 July 2013 - 03:02 PM.


#217 dEPy

dEPy

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 20 posts
  • Location:Slovenia
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:12 AM

View PostConkers, on 12 July 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

People are deluded if they think the problems with GW2 is the format, it is the entire class / combat design which is simply way too simplistic, too spammy and lacking variety, those asking for Arena remind of those of think their button mashing, brainless mini zergs in WvW constitutes GvG like in GW1 and want a "GvG" map, you will never have GvG like in GW1 unless the game is re-written.

WORD! Exactly my thoughts!

In gw1 you did a few mistakes or over extend and !!BAM!!, you were dead. I think most of the new MMOs are just too forgiving.

#218 skooterodin

skooterodin

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 101 posts

Posted 17 July 2013 - 03:25 PM

no worries we will get a new backpack skin soon to fix everything.
All sarcasm aside I love guild wars 2, but the fluff patches and nerf patches are killin me. I do miss the build diversity of gw1 and the random kill em all matches of gw1. I dont mind a little capture point or capture flag matches but when all ya have is capture point then you cater to bunker builds.
All the classes imo Ive played em all and have 4 80's. Just seem to be missing something. I mean I don't feel like a real necro( not much raising the dead or true life leach or DOT and forget abilities)  I dont feel like a true elementalist more of a stick and move caster wich is cool, but with a staff I don't feel like the caster who brings hell fire and fireballs, or huge AOE snaring blizzards, or stunning lightning storms. Rogues with their stealth any time and infinity is broken and should be a out of combat stealth for positioning, and one blinding powder vanish to get out of jail. Mesmers do there job of confusing the hell out of ya, Warriors/gardians need shield to give flat chance to block all melle damage for using a shield. Rangers need their pets to be able to attack on the move and their eagle eye trait to bring back range of shortbow. Engineers seem fine now never took one past lev 10 so not to sure.
   I dunno I just wish they would focus more on class defining and diversity instead of fluff patches. I wish there was a DAOC like darkness falls instance to fight over in WvW to get cool class runes and sigils, like a rune that adds 25% runspeed if socketed in boots, or sigil of burning that adds fire animation to weapn and a 20% chance to proc 3 sec burning on crit. I don't want to feel god like on my toons, but i do like to feel powerfull and not nerfed to cannonfodder.

#219 Delta Blues

Delta Blues

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:06 PM

Pvp in gw2 is clearly lackluster.
I mean just analyze it, we have:
structured PVP that failed to become an eSport and it's almost more of a "catch the point" run than an actual fight.
WvW is dominated by big organized zerg where nothing matters but to run around in as many people as possible to capture useless dots surrounded by walls that you don't really need for anything and don't reward you in any way. Ofcourse if you're in a really organized guild you can maybe win vs a big zergs, but that's really about it.
Epic fights are rare and 90% of the time end up with a faction escaping in fortresses.

You might say that's what wvw is about, capturing fortresses and not about fighting and as much as you might be right well I still find that annoying, unrewarding and simply boring.

What do we have left?
No wars between guilds (guild wars? lol? where?)
No pk
No real world pvp

The only way to enjoy some proper fights is roam in small groups/duos and hope to fight some other decent small group maybe over camps untill a big zerg passes by and wipe everything off
And all this filled with hack tools that are still undetected and unbanned after 1y

So yeah, my 2 cents are that the gameplay can be enjoyable and I play now and then and have fun, but the game modes are just plain stupid.
They should try to put some new decent pvp/gvg mode that actually makes sense, maybe a new map with things to do with open pvp or the possibility to declare war between guilds idk

#220 happydale

happydale

    Fahrar Cub

  • New Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:38 PM

View PostdEPy, on 17 July 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

WORD! Exactly my thoughts!

In gw1 you did a few mistakes or over extend and !!BAM!!, you were dead. I think most of the new MMOs are just too forgiving.

To quote Ramin Shokrizade  "You will see that the latest generation of casual gamers is actually somewhat crippled in their ability to master even simple games compared to the previous generation. I propose that this is because this generation is so over stimulated compared to previous generations that the reward mechanisms for games have to be stronger and more quickly delivered to capture the attention of contemporary audiences or otherwise they get bored/discouraged much more quickly. "

http://www.gamasutra...Game_Dosing.php

#221 dEPy

dEPy

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 20 posts
  • Location:Slovenia
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 17 August 2013 - 12:00 PM

View Posthappydale, on 02 August 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

To quote Ramin Shokrizade  "You will see that the latest generation of casual gamers is actually somewhat crippled in their ability to master even simple games compared to the previous generation. I propose that this is because this generation is so over stimulated compared to previous generations that the reward mechanisms for games have to be stronger and more quickly delivered to capture the attention of contemporary audiences or otherwise they get bored/discouraged much more quickly. "

http://www.gamasutra...Game_Dosing.php

Good stuff. Well said. Guess this means we'll never go back to good old times. :)

#222 deluxe

deluxe

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 04:45 PM

So one year after release and GW2 is still a hopeless pile of garbage...
I highly doubt i'll ever play this game again, GW1 is still installed though..
Even Random Arenas PvP is still deeper than anything GW2 has to offer.

#223 Misty Six

Misty Six

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 05:06 PM

View PostDelta Blues, on 02 August 2013 - 02:06 PM, said:

Pvp in gw2 is clearly lackluster.
I mean just analyze it, we have:
structured PVP that failed to become an eSport and it's almost more of a "catch the point" run than an actual fight.
WvW is dominated by big organized zerg where nothing matters but to run around in as many people as possible to capture useless dots surrounded by walls that you don't really need for anything and don't reward you in any way. Ofcourse if you're in a really organized guild you can maybe win vs a big zergs, but that's really about it.
Epic fights are rare and 90% of the time end up with a faction escaping in fortresses.

You might say that's what wvw is about, capturing fortresses and not about fighting and as much as you might be right well I still find that annoying, unrewarding and simply boring.

What do we have left?
No wars between guilds (guild wars? lol? where?)
No pk
No real world pvp

The only way to enjoy some proper fights is roam in small groups/duos and hope to fight some other decent small group maybe over camps untill a big zerg passes by and wipe everything off
And all this filled with hack tools that are still undetected and unbanned after 1y

So yeah, my 2 cents are that the gameplay can be enjoyable and I play now and then and have fun, but the game modes are just plain stupid.
They should try to put some new decent pvp/gvg mode that actually makes sense, maybe a new map with things to do with open pvp or the possibility to declare war between guilds idk

Pretty much sums up all my thoughts..

I wish an ArenaNet dev would read this... or anyone.

Anyone who would "understand" our dilemma .. or concern.

(Please)

Edited by Misty Six, 18 August 2013 - 05:14 PM.


#224 Illein

Illein

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2037 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 05:39 PM

Uhm, we already knew there'd be no "player killing" and no "open world pvp" (btw - that's the same, where I come from). So I am not sure why anyone would whine about it not being in the game, ever.

Edited by Illein, 18 August 2013 - 05:39 PM.


#225 Misty Six

Misty Six

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 45 posts

Posted 18 August 2013 - 06:30 PM

Well I didn't know that. But still, would be nice to have. We just / I, hope, that a little diversity will come to the game, in the future..

#226 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 07 September 2013 - 10:41 PM

View Posthappydale, on 02 August 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

To quote Ramin Shokrizade  "You will see that the latest generation of casual gamers is actually somewhat crippled in their ability to master even simple games compared to the previous generation. I propose that this is because this generation is so over stimulated compared to previous generations that the reward mechanisms for games have to be stronger and more quickly delivered to capture the attention of contemporary audiences or otherwise they get bored/discouraged much more quickly. "

http://www.gamasutra...Game_Dosing.php

Wow, Ramin published that? Replace dopamine with snake oil and you'd basically have the same article :P

I can't believe someone who has worked in the sciences would write something of this level. There's far too much conjecture and assumption that's being sold as fact.

#227 Kovares

Kovares

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 117 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:34 PM

View PostFeatherman, on 07 September 2013 - 10:41 PM, said:

Wow, Ramin published that? Replace dopamine with snake oil and you'd basically have the same article :P

I can't believe someone who has worked in the sciences would write something of this level. There's far too much conjecture and assumption that's being sold as fact.

Agreed. While it is clear that dopamine is something that is in work while gaming, the article fails to explain it's assertion that every game has a "corresponding dopamine dosis", which is constant for every customer. Of course it's a metaphor, but I think it is distorting important differences. For instance, the examples he gives are simply equating his concept of "dosis" to complexity and that's it. Where would you place chess on this scale? Or slot machines?

#228 Featherman

Featherman

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1028 posts
  • Location:Frolicking in Kalos

Posted 08 September 2013 - 01:07 AM

View PostKovares, on 07 September 2013 - 11:34 PM, said:

Agreed. While it is clear that dopamine is something that is in work while gaming, the article fails to explain it's assertion that every game has a "corresponding dopamine dosis", which is constant for every customer. Of course it's a metaphor, but I think it is distorting important differences. For instance, the examples he gives are simply equating his concept of "dosis" to complexity and that's it. Where would you place chess on this scale? Or slot machines?
The imprecision of his the concepts he speaks about is what set of flags for me as well, as did the overall wording of the article. I think the lack of evidence and proper citation is just apalling when writing these types of papers. He does explain that his approach was to facilitate discussion further down in the comments, but if that were the case I think it would have been better to specify this piece as an op ed or interest piece as a disclaimer at the beginning of the article. Furthermore I think it's rather facetious or at least missing the point to say that it was rejected due solely to the controversial nature of its contents. I'm only writng this out of surprise since Ramin usually does some very insightful, well-written work.

Anywho I don't want to completely derail this thread any further than it already is, so here's a post by Jonathan Sharp on sPvP design. Given the what they said during PAX and their focus on class balance rather than gameplay modes, I'd recommend not getting your hopes up for "real PvP" if you dislike the current one. Capture point is here to stay, and since so much work is going into balancing around it, I doubt the developers would abandon it for a new mode.

Edited by Featherman, 08 September 2013 - 01:10 AM.


#229 deluxe

deluxe

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 28 posts

Posted 10 November 2013 - 10:43 PM

So, it's been almost a year since i've made this topic..
GW2 have any decent PvP yet?

#230 Cube

Cube

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 516 posts
  • Location:Norway _| ̄|○
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Server:Ring of Fire

Posted 10 November 2013 - 10:58 PM

no

12chars

#231 Phadde

Phadde

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Profession:Elementalist
  • Guild Tag:[SWE]
  • Server:Seafarer’s Rest

Posted 06 December 2013 - 10:38 AM

View PostConkers, on 12 July 2013 - 02:51 PM, said:

So you say, yet WoW even with a huge playebase (granted most of which is PvE focused) failed as an e-sport...


...There is nothing inherently compex about Arenas, all they are are teamfights, you get teamfights in most PvP formats, so you get whatever "complexity" you think is in Arenas, plus a whole lot more...

...People are deluded if they think the problems with GW2 is the format, it is the entire class / combat design which is simply way too simplistic, too spammy and lacking variety, those asking for Arena remind of those of think their button mashing, brainless mini zergs in WvW constitutes GvG like in GW1 and want a "GvG" map, you will never have GvG like in GW1 unless the game is re-written.

Couldn't disagree more. WoW went with the "flavor of the month-class" and "Rock-paper-scissors-balancing", they didn't prioritize esports as much as their wicked ideas of balancing. Not to mention the immense importance of your attributes, and the mindless, unending grind that came with it.

The thing about an Arena-type game mode is that it puts full emphasis on deciding which team is better at killing the other, fair & square. What makes this so desirable is that it pushes the importance of knowing your enemy in combat; know every build, mechanic and playstyle in order to best the other. You can't just retreat, or wait for backup like in Conquest...

I've always thought that GW2 had a perfect combat-design for Arenas: There's no pesky healers, the combat is nice, modern, free and fluid, and if you want to derive from "button mashing", go play a complex build! It's every innovation I've wanted from other games with arena-type game modes - And then some!

Edited by Phadde, 06 December 2013 - 10:39 AM.


#232 Conkers

Conkers

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 117 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:55 PM

View PostPhadde, on 06 December 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

Couldn't disagree more. WoW went with the "flavor of the month-class"...

Which is different from GW2 how? We used to have teams stacking eles, then we had teams stacking rangers, of late we ahve had teams stacking warriors... Same goes for things like mesmers, we had a mesmer in nearly every team for the first 8(?) months, then s/d theives and necro buffs happened and mesmers virtually disappeared.

The only two classes that have not really been FOTM are bunker guards and thieves, because guards are basically OP in terms of bunker/support so have been in every team since day 1, whilst thieves are OP in the sense their core design is basically superior to anything else in terms of glass cannon, because of how well they engage->do damage->disengage, so have always been well represented. Oh and engies, but then they have also been virtually non-existent at points just like warriors, necros, mes, eles have all been.



View PostPhadde, on 06 December 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

and "Rock-paper-scissors-balancing"

You mean like Diamond Skin...

View PostPhadde, on 06 December 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

The thing about an Arena-type game mode is that it puts full emphasis on deciding which team is better at killing the other, fair & square. What makes this so desirable is that it pushes the importance of knowing your enemy in combat; know every build, mechanic and playstyle in order to best the other. You can't just retreat, or wait for backup like in Conquest...

You don't have to have any more in depth knowledge for deathmatch than you do for any other mode, nor is it an more "fair and square", it is just more simplistic, with a lower skillcap. you could remove all the objectives, all the map awareness, etc from LoL or DOTA and jsut have a big punch up, guess what that turned out to be not so popular, and that is with a game that is often lauded for having the best combat (Bloodline Champions).

View PostPhadde, on 06 December 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

There's no pesky healers, the combat is nice, modern, free and fluid, and if you want to derive from "button mashing", go play a complex build! It's every innovation I've wanted from other games with arena-type game modes - And then some!

At the core level, I agree the combat is very fluid / responsive in GW2, on the other hand it is still spammy, requires less knowledge than other MMOs, no class is that complex, so it doesn't really matter what build I play, they are all simpler than say my Chlorodom was in Rift and some classes are just mind numbingly simple full-stop (warrior for example).

You may not like healers, but they do give another play style and I'd say they make balancing easier, in several ways:

- When a class gets overbuffed in terms of damage, healing takes the edge off that.

- Healing can compensate for differences in effectiveness that are down to core class design, for example in GW2 engy is never going to be good going the zerker glass cannon route like rifle / static discharge, because the equivalent glass cannon builds on thieves and mesmers are simply far more effective due to their core design -  mobiltiy, vertical mobility, stun/immob breaks (including the pseudo ones like phase retreat), teleports, stealth etc... An engy would just be a sub-par thief/mesmer and also get eaten alive. If the game had healing (real healing) then that could be compensated to an extent.

- Having a game with class defining roles, rather than classes that can do everything is easier to balance in that you are effectively balancing fewer classes against each other (normally), where as in GW2 theoretically having 8 classes that can all be damage dealers is going to be impossible to balance even in just TPvP, let alone WvW or PvE, and Anet's "method" of balancing so far seems to be massively  overbuffing classes in order to compensate for weaknesses of their core class design (e.g necro, warrior), which then just results in other classes being pushed out, no balance.

The simple fact is the entire class design is based around conquest, which I guess is why they have been so reluctant to add other modes, least of all deathmatch, where it is abundantly obvious certain classes are going to be far more suited for that than others (thief, mes, guard), at least if we are talking 5v5.

Edited by Conkers, 14 December 2013 - 08:09 PM.


#233 konsta_hoptrop

konsta_hoptrop

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 313 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 05:07 PM

View PostIllein, on 18 August 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

Uhm, we already knew there'd be no "player killing" and no "open world pvp" (btw - that's the same, where I come from). So I am not sure why anyone would whine about it not being in the game, ever.
open world PK is terrible design . We are asking for arena 4v4 2v2 8v8 deathmatch mode. Nothing more. King of the hill is so boring . 1 guard bunker mid point others just run all game to cap other 2 points... .. nothing like GW1 awesome pvp

#234 scaur

scaur

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 30 January 2014 - 10:17 AM

whenever I read this topic, it reminds me of this each time don't  know why

Edited by scaur, 30 January 2014 - 10:17 AM.


#235 Howl

Howl

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1457 posts
  • Location:Buenos Aires
  • Server:Stormbluff Isle

Posted 06 March 2014 - 02:45 AM

Every few months I come back to the PvP subforum hoping for the best and I always end up on this thread, it's really sad to see a game that I absolutely love so dead on the PvP side.

How could the same people that did that amazing PvP game that the original Guild Wars was, do this kind of crap ? Or maybe they aren't the same ? I don't really know, but it's still bullshit.

Still hoping one day we get real PvP, that's the only thing I need to come back and play again.

PD: Excuse my poor english.

#236 Scirm Andric

Scirm Andric

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 1 posts
  • Location:Poland
  • Profession:Ranger
  • Server:Blacktide

Posted 20 March 2014 - 12:42 AM

It would be great to see something like JQ again.

#237 I post stuff

I post stuff

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 31 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 05:33 PM

View Postdeluxe, on 05 February 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

If you can't understand or read my OP, don't bother replying please.
If you don't know what GvG is, don't bother replying please.
If you did not play GW1, which you obviously haven't, you have no idea what i'm talking about.
Generic "If you didn't X then don't Y" comment.

The guy has a point, WvW is closer to actual war than what GW1 had to offer. It saddens me to see all of you act like GW1 PvP was perfect when back in the day you did nothing but complain about it.

RA sucked for you. TA sucked for you. HA was imba "somethingway" fest and GvG was broken. You say 7 years but I'm willing to bet you were one of those people who called that game completely dead 3-5 years before it was actually dead.

Yeah, GW1 had a decent PvP I guess. Lots of skills were nice even though a good chunk were useless during every meta. But it was far from perfect.

Want real PvP? Consider trying LoL or Dota2 for example. Those games have loooooots of room for skill and are widely considered actual sport for a good reason.

Edited by I post stuff, 10 April 2014 - 05:39 PM.


#238 MCBiohazard

MCBiohazard

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 105 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:00 PM

View PostI post stuff, on 10 April 2014 - 05:33 PM, said:

Want real PvP? Consider trying LoL or Dota2 for example. Those games have loooooots of room for skill and are widely considered actual sport for a good reason.

It's telling that the lead designer for LoL came out of GW1 and clearly is once bitten twice shy about many of the things that were baked into GW1 PvP for good reason.

#239 raspberry jam

raspberry jam

    Vigil Crusader

  • Members
  • 4742 posts

Posted 10 April 2014 - 11:08 PM

View PostMCBiohazard, on 10 April 2014 - 11:00 PM, said:

It's telling that the lead designer for LoL came out of GW1 and clearly is once bitten twice shy about many of the things that were baked into GW1 PvP for good reason.
GW1 PvP was initially just fine because so much of it was self-balancing. Simply put the skills themselves were built along the idea that if you used the skill wrong it would be at best a waste and at worst harmful for yourself, while if you used them right they had a quite strong effect. That idea of self-balance could not be maintained across all the updates though and a couple of years later it was a nightmare to balance the game. It didn't help, of course, that the talent was running away from the company.

#240 Veji

Veji

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 447 posts

Posted 11 April 2014 - 02:20 AM

View Postscaur, on 30 January 2014 - 10:17 AM, said:

whenever I read this topic, it reminds me of this each time don't  know why


LOL, for me its this:



It ain't got REAL PVP unless it got BOOM! HEADSHOT!!!

(sorry, i fail at embedding)

Edited by Veji, 11 April 2014 - 02:21 AM.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users