It's not possible because everybody wants to own the others, lol. And when their char is at the "I own" stage in development, you want it to stay there. I know this very well because even if somewhere deep in my mind I understand HV stacking is too OP, I wouldn't want it to be "fixed". I like it being OP, I worked for my HV set, leveled tailoring just to upgrade the gloves and so on, so don't touch it with nerfs.
Same is true with GWFs. Beside ayroux (who now plays a GF that's basically just as OP as the GWFs people complain about) who already managed to be hated by all other GWFs, most of the guys here play it like their class is oh so balanced in PvP and "anybody can kill it", but the reality deep in their hearts is that they know how OP they are and just like it this way. What is not to like? Smashing the skulls of poor squishies is always cool for a melee, so why not.
So surely there can't be any constructive discussion on balance when the involved parties care first for their own interests, i.e. to better kill all others...
There is also the issue of where the point of balance is.
Some believe that every class, with equal gear, should stand an even chance against every other class. A great ideal that requires a balance of defense, health, and damage output between the classes to achieve. This is very popular in FPS's and many MMO's today. On the downside, this creates very little class diversity and does not support actual team reliance (which is crucial to team play) and allows teams of individual players to do well, simply because there are no real weak spots to shore up or strong spots to lean on. Want to see examples of cookie cutter operations? Guild Wars, World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2.
Still others, arguably a minority, believe that each class should be truly unique in their skills and balance, requiring creative team composition to have the right counterbalance to each teams glaring faults and strengths. This is a harder game to play, and requires far more tactical and strategic thought, thus making it generally less popular with 'the masses'. Examples of games using this? Dark Age of Camelot, Eve Online. Arguably some of the best PvP games ever made.
One is easy, quick, and ultimately, boring. That of course is my opinion. I played WoW battlegrounds for two months, maxed out, and left, because the classes and teams never really changed. The moment I heard PVP in GW2 puts all players in the same level gear, I completely ignored anything else from them. I don't want the same thing in every class and the same gear. I like diversity.
Which leads back to the question, is GWF too strong? I think it would need to be tested at the highest end, with players in equal BiS gear and of the highest caliber of play. Because regretfully, in most of the games I bring my GWF in, I'm am geared more than my opponents (arena and GG, with only a T2 pvp set, level 7 enchants, a lesser Plague Fire, and no chest enchant). The vast majority of my opponents don't have near my gear, mainly because I ask them after the fight. And I consider myself one of the better GWF's on my server, at least, in skill.
When I play against players who run equal or better gear (namely members of TSB on Beholder, because there isn't too many hardcore pvp groups out), I run even ground.
Some people argue here that, if I'm winning against multiple opponents, it's because my class is op, but if I can tell them of multiple examples of me breaking even against single opponents, it's because my skill is bad. With that kind of argument, you and others are declaring my input as a dedicated GWF to be invalid.
I argue that, if gear and skill equal out, my class is not OP (except in the case of sentinel/regen/tene, which applies more damage than tanks should, in my mind, due to the tene's). But since GS doesn't match between classes and skill is an amorphous quality, what can you use as a hard and fast definition of balance?
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
Any adversarial process punishes someone. PVE is not really an adversarial process because it expects the player to surpass the content such that they do not really have to compete with it anymore. Once you get bigger than the Orcs you don’t really have to worry about the Orcs.
PVP is not supposed to be like that. You are not supposed to be able to out-level your opponents such that they are no longer any sort of problem. But of course that is exactly what happens and it is exactly the same paradigm. Instead of levels and powers its gear and enchantments. And this can make matchups wherein one player simply cannot even oppose another in any sort of contest.
Say what you will about PVP not being 1v1, but if I am on the point and you are on the point then one of us is going to have to die for the other to get the point. Okay, I get that kiting is most of the game for low gear score players. But that rather uncovers the ugly truth about PVP doesn’t it? You want to do well in PVP, buy more stuff. Buy moar!
I think some of those that suggest brackets or gated ladders might be a little naive but they also have a very valid point. That sort of system, a system that tries to match you with people against who you should be able to compete, would be ideal for the players. But it doesn’t encourage you to buy the best PVP gear. Interestingly enough you might see a wonky class balance if they did institute that brand of bracketing. GWFs might rocket right up to a higher bracket while DCs might languish in some lower bracket. They probably do not want that sort of thing visible as well.
And then there are the people who are legitimately good at PVP. They speak its language and excel in it despite all troubles. Surrounded by packs of well-wishers and wannabes they don’t see any of this as a problem. Just one more thing to overcome and they can do it. Heck that’s why they are here. It can be hard to be heard over their clumsy cults.
The trouble you face OP is that this game just doesn’t get any development worthy of its IP. It’s a Corvette frame with a Yugo engine. So when offering that something should be rebalanced you are going to have to do the lion’s share of the work yourself. What needs to be rebalanced and how. Yes, it’s the dev’s job, but there is no one there to do it. So if you care enough to make a post and ride it this deep into the weeds then you should be ready to do whatever theorycrafting is required to make a salient point with facts and numbers. In fact, you must.
I wish I could tell you that it was about fun, or player enjoyment, but in truth I believe that its more about what can be figured out and implemented between Zen store maintenance cycles.
It’s not the PVP that is the root trouble, it’s the PVPWE.
0
pers3phoneBanned Users, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I think some of those that suggest brackets or gated ladders might be a little naive but they also have a very valid point. That sort of system, a system that tries to match you with people against who you should be able to compete, would be ideal for the players. But it doesn’t encourage you to buy the best PVP gear. Interestingly enough you might see a wonky class balance if they did institute that brand of bracketing. GWFs might rocket right up to a higher bracket while DCs might languish in some lower bracket. They probably do not want that sort of thing visible as well.
This is NOT how ladders work. DCs in a winning team would go up in personal ranking with the team ranking. Doesn't matter if they didn't kill anybody in the match.
So yes, ladders are the solution. If you perform well, you gonna encounter only people that perform just as good, no more pug hunting from premades and so on. I don't think any pro players would intentionally lose just to kill lowbies in lower end brackets.
Any adversarial process punishes someone. PVE is not really an adversarial process because it expects the player to surpass the content such that they do not really have to compete with it anymore. Once you get bigger than the Orcs you don’t really have to worry about the Orcs.
PVP is not supposed to be like that. You are not supposed to be able to out-level your opponents such that they are no longer any sort of problem. But of course that is exactly what happens and it is exactly the same paradigm. Instead of levels and powers its gear and enchantments. And this can make matchups wherein one player simply cannot even oppose another in any sort of contest.
Say what you will about PVP not being 1v1, but if I am on the point and you are on the point then one of us is going to have to die for the other to get the point. Okay, I get that kiting is most of the game for low gear score players. But that rather uncovers the ugly truth about PVP doesn’t it? You want to do well in PVP, buy more stuff. Buy moar!
I think some of those that suggest brackets or gated ladders might be a little naive but they also have a very valid point. That sort of system, a system that tries to match you with people against who you should be able to compete, would be ideal for the players. But it doesn’t encourage you to buy the best PVP gear. Interestingly enough you might see a wonky class balance if they did institute that brand of bracketing. GWFs might rocket right up to a higher bracket while DCs might languish in some lower bracket. They probably do not want that sort of thing visible as well.
And then there are the people who are legitimately good at PVP. They speak its language and excel in it despite all troubles. Surrounded by packs of well-wishers and wannabes they don’t see any of this as a problem. Just one more thing to overcome and they can do it. Heck that’s why they are here. It can be hard to be heard over their clumsy cults.
The trouble you face OP is that this game just doesn’t get any development worthy of its IP. It’s a Corvette frame with a Yugo engine. So when offering that something should be rebalanced you are going to have to do the lion’s share of the work yourself. What needs to be rebalanced and how. Yes, it’s the dev’s job, but there is no one there to do it. So if you care enough to make a post and ride it this deep into the weeds then you should be ready to do whatever theorycrafting is required to make a salient point with facts and numbers. In fact, you must.
I wish I could tell you that it was about fun, or player enjoyment, but in truth I believe that its more about what can be figured out and implemented between Zen store maintenance cycles.
It’s not the PVP that is the root trouble, it’s the PVPWE.
This is coming from someone who obviously believes that there is no skill, either in gear choice or play style, and no viable tactics as you would hop on a point 1v1 no matter what just b/c the enemy was there. Yes gear plays a large role in PvP, however what is the real difference between a R7 enchant and a R10? 115 stat points, that is not even close to an unsurmountable advantage.
There is in fact skill in both your gear and build choices and in your playstyle, evidenced by the fact that when 2 completely equally geared players of the same class fight each other one can win out over the other, even by a drastic margin sometimes. Those that simply want to complain on the forums don't want to take the time to learn how to play their class and learn the tactics that win a domination style PvP. They just want to run around and kill people and never die apparently...
I have 1 of each class at 60. Most have R7 enchants, a couple still R5's heh. Only my GWF and CW have armor or weapon enchants, and they both have lesser soulforged, CW has GPF, and GWF has lesser vorpal. I am certainly not super geared, however I have played tons of PvP, tested tons of builds, and tried many different tactics. I take the top spot more often than not in pug games one every class but DC and it certainly has nothing to do with my gear.
Until you learn how to play against good players you will just continue to complain on the forums and never get any better at PvP. Next time you find yourself against a premade and are getting crushed ask for some 1v1's and actually observe what they're doing instead of /leave and do it all over again with the next premade that crushes you.
Guild Master of <Enemy Team>
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
Yes of course, you are right. No need for superfluous caps.
Teams with more DCs will tend to suffer though, teams with more GWFs and CWs will tend to do well but there are many other variables also. You can’t say that it won’t statistically highlight the differences between the classes though, particularly as no attempt is made to ensure a good class mix.
This is NOT how ladders work. DCs in a winning team would go up in personal ranking with the team ranking. Doesn't matter if they didn't kill anybody in the match.
So yes, ladders are the solution. If you perform well, you gonna encounter only people that perform just as good, no more pug hunting from premades and so on. I don't think any pro players would intentionally lose just to kill lowbies in lower end brackets.
But how do you quantify skill in a game like this? As with all games, skill-based point systems usually leave out support (debuffs applied, heals applied, resurrections/revives, buffs applied, and communication) in favor of kill-death ratio.
I proposed a system which limits gear based on teir level. The benefit being that players of all skill ranges could pick the level of play they want to attend to, building and keeping lower-tier gear sets to play more casual play along with their high-end set. Downsides to this is that even the tier system has flaws since in some classes greens can outdo their T2, plus the addition of higher tier gear in the future, as well the problem of breaking down the player pool in too many queues.
I'm just arguing that, if you put in the skill point system (or any system, for that matter, but SP being the most notorious), players will find a way to break it. Look at one of the most comprehensive game skill calculators out there: Microsoft's TrueSkill.
I'm sounding conflicted here. I really want a tiered gear ladder, so that skill (harder to define) can still participate across brackets. The gear drive is still there, but as a player with limited game time and almost no money, I had to come to the conclusion that perfects, tene's and 10's were too much for me to achieve, and thus the uber-end arena pvp is out of my league.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
I almost wish that Arena matches required one of each class, premade or pug. As we are seeing with the preview pvp matches, this is preferred simply because it takes stacking team comp out of the picture.
I think that, even when future classes are revealed, the penalty of not allowing more than one of each class would still bring a lot more balance into the picture.
Then again, I hate going against five-man premade TR groups in Arena. One of the major reasons I don't have fun in Arena, to be honest.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
This is coming from someone who obviously believes that there is no skill, either in gear choice or play style, and no viable tactics as you would hop on a point 1v1 no matter what just b/c the enemy was there. Yes gear plays a large role in PvP, however what is the real difference between a R7 enchant and a R10? 115 stat points, that is not even close to an unsurmountable advantage.
Awww Crib, so nice to hear from you again. Do you really know what I believe? Perhaps you would be better served using your psychic skills in a lottery or perhaps a weight guessing booth. I fear they are not working well here. But you do offer some points to ponder.
There is in fact skill in both your gear and build choices and in your playstyle, evidenced by the fact that when 2 completely equally geared players of the same class fight each other one can win out over the other, even by a drastic margin sometimes. Those that simply want to complain on the forums don't want to take the time to learn how to play their class and learn the tactics that win a domination style PvP. They just want to run around and kill people and never die apparently...
Didn’t we just hear from some folks that mentioned not even engaging some other classes because they could not beat them nor be beaten by them? Are they bad players? I think the problem as espoused by the OP is not that this happens but that it happens in the exact same way every time. Perhaps you could use your prognostication powers on the OP, determine what he or she really wants, yeah, tell them what they want, what they really, really want. Some sense of balance? Some feeling that with a tactic or method any class could be beaten? Am I way off base? Perhaps my crystal ball is just as cloudy.
And it may be a method that is causing the disconnect. Perhaps the OP finds the idea that he or she should have to run away constantly distasteful. I don’t blame them but that seems to be the way of it. Anyone you can’t take by yourself you have to drag back to your buddies or harass until your buddies get there. If you want to stand in someone’s face and beast them down, well that’s just not going to work very often especially with GS disparities.
But then I am into play style now and I don’t know what the OP does playstyle-wise. I imagine it would be a rather boring dissertation of how we all commonly understand this or that class to be played. No need to demand a transcript.
I have 1 of each class at 60. Most have R7 enchants, a couple still R5's heh. Only my GWF and CW have armor or weapon enchants, and they both have lesser soulforged, CW has GPF, and GWF has lesser vorpal. I am certainly not super geared, however I have played tons of PvP, tested tons of builds, and tried many different tactics. I take the top spot more often than not in pug games one every class but DC and it certainly has nothing to do with my gear.
Until you learn how to play against good players you will just continue to complain on the forums and never get any better at PvP. Next time you find yourself against a premade and are getting crushed ask for some 1v1's and actually observe what they're doing instead of /leave and do it all over again with the next premade that crushes you.
As hard as it might be to ingest, this is not terrible advice; the bit about observation at any rate. I mentioned that some people are just really good at PVP and many of them have some good advice that can help if you are willing to give it specific attention. What I didn’t mention is that not all of them are nice. But if you can rend a bit of useful info from a seething diatribe, then good on you.
0
pers3phoneBanned Users, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
But how do you quantify skill in a game like this? As with all games, skill-based point systems usually leave out support (debuffs applied, heals applied, resurrections/revives, buffs applied, and communication) in favor of kill-death ratio.
I'm sounding conflicted here. I really want a tiered gear ladder, so that skill (harder to define) can still participate across brackets. The gear drive is still there, but as a player with limited game time and almost no money, I had to come to the conclusion that perfects, tene's and 10's were too much for me to achieve, and thus the uber-end arena pvp is out of my league.
Ladders should have nothing to do with quantifying skill. Ladders should just quantify win-loss ratio for your team and for yourself, just in case you might want to change teams. The score we see at the end of our current "arena" skirmishes is meaningless. What should matter is who won, stuff like "I had 10000 kills and no deaths" should just count for personal achievements.
So a team that wins more, goes up on the ladder, and the (future, as if...) matchmaking system would only put it against teams with similar win-loss ratios.
Of course, this would also mean one would have to register a team for Arena purposes. basically this means all Arena teams will become premades.
Simple "pug" queueing as we have now should be left in place, with no rewards at all, solely for practice purposes.
It's OK if you can't compete in the top-end Arena. Not everybody is meant to be the top dog in PvP. I'm 100% sure I won't be able to compete myself. But at least I will be able to have mostly challenging matches with similarly skilled opponents after a ladder system is in place, I will be able to queue with my team without feeling guilty that I will meet ungeared opponents that die in 2 shots, or without feeling useless by throwing my CW again and again in the hands of some uber 5-man team that will clobber me in 2 secs, just because I respect them and even as I want to quit, I'll have to remain and die valiantly because of this (probably misplaced) respect.
Not engaging b/c you cannot beat someone 1v1 is a good tactic, and a sign of a good player.
As much as anyone personally wants them to be no game can make 5 classes with completely different abilities and role's completely balanced in 1v1, however they can and did balance them as a team and this is easily shown in premade vs. premade PvP.
Obviously something must be wrong with the OP's argument as I imagine I'm not much better geared than him and yet manage to do just fine in PvP, including on a competitive level against much stronger opponents than your average pug. If he is unwilling to learn how to better PvP then he cannot simply complain that PvP is imbalanced when he sits back and does the same exact thing every game and it fails every game.
Many PvP guilds are nice people. There are always bad apples but more often than not you will get a very warm reception by asking for 1v1 or tips when you stay in the game where 2-3 of your teammates left b/c they don't want to learn, they want cryptic to nerf their enemies.
There is simply no way you can make the case for class balances when there is an underlying gear or skill imbalance that is skewing your results. When the gear and skill is properly matched the game is actually very balanced. In the PTR tournament last saturday we had a 65 minute match against another guild. The final score was something like 1000-980, but it was just constant battle at all points b/c both teams knew what they were doing.
Guild Master of <Enemy Team>
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
I have a hard time killing CWs when they constantly push back, CC, stun, freeze, teleport and use Ice Knife. Should I complain and ask for a rebalance of PvP? No, because that's how the game is. You overcome the different builds by trying new tactics. Why should it be easy for you to kill all classes? Doesn't that make you OP? Where's the balance there? Come up with a tactic. Learn the mechanics of the build you complain about and figure out a work around rather than asking for the devs to fix something because you can't kill it.
Dragon Server
Ragnos Fireborn - 18.7k GWF Half-Elf Eva Darkblood - 13.8k TR Elf Venger Force of Evil - 13.7k CW Tiefling Azaghal Belegost - 16.5k GF Dwarf Drak'ar - 13.3k HR Drow Roghthar Darkspawn - 11.5k SW Human
0
pers3phoneBanned Users, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Why should it be easy for you to kill all classes? Doesn't that make you OP? Where's the balance there?
Not easy to kill. Should be 50-50 ideally with similarly geared/experienced players with different classes. Sometimes you lose, but sometimes you win. Winning almost every time is bad, and so is losing almost every time.
Ladders should have nothing to do with quantifying skill ...
Good points. I could see this as a limited-edition tournament bracket and it working very well. But as far as an ongoing queue, I think it's a little much.
For instance, you'd have to total or average the win/loss ratio of each member of the team, because team comp would constantly shift between matches (jimmy needs to feed his cat, and becky wants a quick game). Then you'd have high skill/gear players with great win/loss (becky has won 1000 games but only lost one, while every other member of the team is generall 4 to 1) climbing the team in the ladder bracket, putting them against higher opponents. Four players getting insta-killed with one good player, in a game that doesn't have 1v1 balance, still means a losing team.
Or you could just tell a team that they couldn't play because their members aren't all online together (even when they are allowed five alternatives, the high end to a premade bracket system).
Plus, queue stacking to push a particular team into a higher W/L for scoreboard purposes would not just be a vanity cheat, but would also break the system. Much like level 50's in Halo 2. Great players were level 40's. Cheaters were the only ones that got higher.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
Good points. I could see this as a limited-edition tournament bracket and it working very well. But as far as an ongoing queue, I think it's a little much.
For instance, you'd have to total or average the win/loss ratio of each member of the team, because team comp would constantly shift between matches (jimmy needs to feed his cat, and becky wants a quick game). Then you'd have high skill/gear players with great win/loss (becky has won 1000 games but only lost one, while every other member of the team is generall 4 to 1) climbing the team in the ladder bracket, putting them against higher opponents. Four players getting insta-killed with one good player, in a game that doesn't have 1v1 balance, still means a losing team.
Or you could just tell a team that they couldn't play because their members aren't all online together (even when they are allowed five alternatives, the high end to a premade bracket system).
Plus, queue stacking to push a particular team into a higher W/L for scoreboard purposes would not just be a vanity cheat, but would also break the system. Much like level 50's in Halo 2. Great players were level 40's. Cheaters were the only ones that got higher.
OK. There is personal rank, and team rank. It would be pointless for me to elaborate on how such system works, it is detailed and explained online for WoW Arena.
New team would start at bottom of the ladder, even if Becky is ultra geared and skilled. Most likely such new teams would smash the other new teams - but this is OK - because it will only happen for a very short period. More wins will mean quick advances in ladder and matchmaking will set you up against more and more difficult teams, until a "stalemate" point is reached where your win-loss rating reaches 50-50. Then your team will be somewhat stationary.
Teams would also have more than 5 members, to deal with the situation when some persons are not online.
Not sure what you mean with queue stacking. Lame teams queueing repeatedly just to lose against designated team? Would work only for a bit, because of the win-loss ratio will propel the winning team in upper brackets, where they will meet good opponents that will stall them.
However, it is possible for teams to sell losses. This is basically a competitive sport and cheating will be present.
There should be two ladders, one for the team victories and one for the individual kills. Some ppl like to pvp for the sake of pvp-ing and won't care too much about dominating the bases. Domination is the one and only pvp that the devs offer, so the ppl who like to play pvp have to play Domination, and domination says nothing about their pvp skills.
On the other hand you have players who will jump from the bridge on a heavy-defended base, just for preventing the enemy team from gaining some points, and they will die in the process.
And then what? Two queueing systems, depending on what you like in pvp, dominating or duelling ?
Not engaging b/c you cannot beat someone 1v1 is a good tactic, and a sign of a good player.
As much as anyone personally wants them to be no game can make 5 classes with completely different abilities and role's completely balanced in 1v1, however they can and did balance them as a team and this is easily shown in premade vs. premade PvP.
Obviously something must be wrong with the OP's argument as I imagine I'm not much better geared than him and yet manage to do just fine in PvP, including on a competitive level against much stronger opponents than your average pug. If he is unwilling to learn how to better PvP then he cannot simply complain that PvP is imbalanced when he sits back and does the same exact thing every game and it fails every game.
Many PvP guilds are nice people. There are always bad apples but more often than not you will get a very warm reception by asking for 1v1 or tips when you stay in the game where 2-3 of your teammates left b/c they don't want to learn, they want cryptic to nerf their enemies.
There is simply no way you can make the case for class balances when there is an underlying gear or skill imbalance that is skewing your results. When the gear and skill is properly matched the game is actually very balanced. In the PTR tournament last saturday we had a 65 minute match against another guild. The final score was something like 1000-980, but it was just constant battle at all points b/c both teams knew what they were doing.
exactly...
one example was the nice match with the AoE guild.
they had 3 GWFs, almost unkilleable.
and we had only one GWF, the match was still nice, but we eventually won.
So how does Unkilleable gwf ruins the pvp?
we see in equal levels that it has balance.
low geared ppl, ppl that respec wrong, ppl using bad gear combinations/enchants, without skills, or that try to do things out of the limits of their classes that ruins the pvp. Because their lack of understanding of their own class and the game ruins the game if the devs eventually listen these people...
Many times when I am pugging I am called cheater, hacker, etc in my gwf because I am diehard, and i still get good kills against pugs. But I dk if i should get mad, or laugh sometimes when they do it... especially because more than once I was the only gwf in my team, and the pug team had like 3 gwfs... I wonder, if my class is so OP, how come the 3 gwfs in the team calling my class OP didn't do the damage I could do, even if they when they are sentinelas and titan/IS sets as tanks and stuff?
same thing happened other day to a rogue. He would brag himself to beat and melt many gwf on 1 x 1. the day I faced him in a match, and I managed to Win, he got so mad and whisper in an insulting tone how my class is OP and Brainless. Oh wait, i thought he could take any gwf in the game? and when he finds one that kick his ***, the class suddenly becomes OP?
Dovahkiin Gannicus, GWF Sentinel- Enemy Team Guild
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
Not engaging b/c you cannot beat someone 1v1 is a good tactic, and a sign of a good player.
As much as anyone personally wants them to be no game can make 5 classes with completely different abilities and role's completely balanced in 1v1, however they can and did balance them as a team and this is easily shown in premade vs. premade PvP.
Obviously something must be wrong with the OP's argument as I imagine I'm not much better geared than him and yet manage to do just fine in PvP, including on a competitive level against much stronger opponents than your average pug. If he is unwilling to learn how to better PvP then he cannot simply complain that PvP is imbalanced when he sits back and does the same exact thing every game and it fails every game.
Many PvP guilds are nice people. There are always bad apples but more often than not you will get a very warm reception by asking for 1v1 or tips when you stay in the game where 2-3 of your teammates left b/c they don't want to learn, they want cryptic to nerf their enemies.
There is simply no way you can make the case for class balances when there is an underlying gear or skill imbalance that is skewing your results. When the gear and skill is properly matched the game is actually very balanced. In the PTR tournament last saturday we had a 65 minute match against another guild. The final score was something like 1000-980, but it was just constant battle at all points b/c both teams knew what they were doing.
agree too.
there are classes that do better in 1 x 1s, there are classes that do better in group, and gangbanging.
that is why there is combat advantage in the game.
the game is balanced, but it has to respect the diversity of each class.
if you want to try to make the game as each class tank equally, and kill equally. what is the point of having different classes at all? better play a FPS like combat arms, where you can carry 2 guns, a sniper and a assault rifle lol.
Dovahkiin Gannicus, GWF Sentinel- Enemy Team Guild
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
0
pers3phoneBanned Users, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited October 2013
Worth mentioning, for a healthy PvP scene you need Dual Spec. I don't want to gimp my char in either PvE or PvP, I want to enjoy both aspects of the game. Right now for example my PvP suffers because I have way too many DPS and AoE feats and less freezing and control than a proper PvP mage. There's also the regen gear I want to avoid equipping, because regen should stop working in combat IMO, but in the end I will probably end up using blue <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> gear just to be more survivable, and hate it.
Also special PvP-only Resilience stat should exist to prevent stuff like IK or Lashing one shots, and special resilience gear sets as well. These gear sets should basically be mandatory in PvP or you would be extremely squishy. Resilience should be meaningless in PvE. Having known gear variables would be a HUGE help for the devs to balance PvP further... if they wish to do so.
Worth mentioning, for a healthy PvP scene you need Dual Spec. I don't want to gimp my char in either PvE or PvP, I want to enjoy both aspects of the game. Right now for example my PvP suffers because I have way too many DPS and AoE feats and less freezing and control than a proper PvP mage. There's also the regen gear I want to avoid equipping, because regen should stop working in combat IMO, but in the end I will probably end up using blue <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> gear just to be more survivable, and hate it.
Also special PvP-only Resilience stat should exist to prevent stuff like IK or Lashing one shots, and special resilience gear sets as well. These gear sets should basically be mandatory in PvP or you would be extremely squishy. Resilience should be meaningless in PvE. Having known gear variables would be a HUGE help for the devs to balance PvP further... if they wish to do so.
Yes dual spec would be awesome! I have a thread detailing this but it has faded away and I'm too lazy to go find it lol. Dual Spec would make many players happier AND make cryptic a boat load in Zen sales, sounds like win win to me
Edit: If regen stopped working in combat it would not be worth anything, PvP respawn times are at most 20 seconds and as little as 0 so there is near constant combat in a good game. I like that there is no resilience type stat in this game, that means you have to build defense/deflect/HP if you want to be tanky, and by doing that you lose damage.
Guild Master of <Enemy Team>
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
I dont understand what the obsession is with class balance. Classes in D&D are NOT balanced, they are specialized. If you dont like being killed in melee dont confront melee units... What this does is reduce all characters to the same cookie cutter <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> and takes what tiny bit of flavor and diversity that exists away.
Gentlemen. It IS self mutilation. You can either have balance (all the same toons doing all the same things) or you can have diversity.
Balance and Diversity are opposites. Just shocked at how many like these nearly identical toons soo much.
Balance will always equate to no character diversity. *shakes head*
Balance and Diversity are opposites. Just shocked at how many like these nearly identical toons soo much.
Balance will always equate to no character diversity. *shakes head*
Neh, I don’t buy the argument of balance vs. diversity.
If I had a character that insta-killed any other character but was different from any other character would that be a good thing or a bad thing? What about a character that could not be killed by any other character? Good? Bad? Its diverse, does that make it okay?
The answer of course is that it is not okay. Diversity does not sit across the table from balance. It hovers off to the side and serves the tea.
But of course when people say balanced, what they mean is balanced in relation to each other. What they do not mean is so similar as to be indistinguishable. So clearly the whole balance vs. diversity is a false dichotomy, a semantic trap into which one need not tumble. In fact, let just pretend, going forward, that whenever anyone says the word “balance” we can understand that they mean “balance in relation to other characters of similar status” and save some virtual pixel trees.
It is quite possible to have diversity and balance. What that takes is creativity and dev work. Now if you were to say that you have no confidence that the current team is capable of producing work that shows both balance and diversity, then that would be a debate worthy of these boards. And it would also be off the topic and need its own thread. But I think it would be worthy nonetheless.
again, these "1 shot" chars are against low gear scores people. am i wrong?
so the people that are better geared, more experienced have to pay the price because some 6, 7k GS dude is going on forums babycry that he got 1 shot in pvp?
OK.
Dovahkiin Gannicus, GWF Sentinel- Enemy Team Guild
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
not to mention that most of these "1 shots" skills are usually dailies skills, and to 1 shot strong people usually depends on others synergies and critical chance, and a good vorpal.
the rest of the match the "1 shot" dealers get their *** kicked.
is it fair then, lets destroy their dmg so they become crappy.
or lets nerf tank sentinels, so they kill **** and die easy too.
nerf regen, so it becomes useless stats.
its sick...
Dovahkiin Gannicus, GWF Sentinel- Enemy Team Guild
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
Neh, I don’t buy the argument of balance vs. diversity.
If I had a character that insta-killed any other character but was different from any other character would that be a good thing or a bad thing? What about a character that could not be killed by any other character? Good? Bad? Its diverse, does that make it okay?
The answer of course is that it is not okay. Diversity does not sit across the table from balance. It hovers off to the side and serves the tea.
But of course when people say balanced, what they mean is balanced in relation to each other. What they do not mean is so similar as to be indistinguishable. So clearly the whole balance vs. diversity is a false dichotomy, a semantic trap into which one need not tumble. In fact, let just pretend, going forward, that whenever anyone says the word “balance” we can understand that they mean “balance in relation to other characters of similar status” and save some virtual pixel trees.
It is quite possible to have diversity and balance. What that takes is creativity and dev work. Now if you were to say that you have no confidence that the current team is capable of producing work that shows both balance and diversity, then that would be a debate worthy of these boards. And it would also be off the topic and need its own thread. But I think it would be worthy nonetheless.
The exaggeration in your argument almost ruins your arguments. I have never once been one-shot, and I am a low HP GWF.
The 'balance vs diversity' is an argument of classes sharing equality in the defense/attack/movement pool versus classes having grossly different defense/attack/movement characteristics to the point where they have to be played completely different.
In WoW, you build any melee class and can essentially play it like any other, because despite the fact that the powers are slightly different, the ability pool is not drastically different. HP maxes are similar. Movement speeds are similar. Even damage done is ... yep, similar. Ranged classes are just alike as well, whether they be magic or not. The true point spread is so common, with almost no extremes, that your essentially the same characters with different skins for your powers and different animations.
That is not diversity. Just calling things by different names and giving them different 3d effects don't make them different.
Here, on the other hand, the HP totals can be very broad. The damage resistances are as well. Damage output hits further extremes. Even movement speeds and abilities alter drastically between classes. This means that each class almost requires you to play it completely different than any other, and have very glaring and obvious strengths and weaknesses.
That CW has so much AOE damage application, above any other class. And their teleport/dodge is extremely effective. And so far, their debuffs are very useful. But when defense is taken into consideration (outside of the teleport, which is one of the strongest forms of burst defense, considering it's a damage and cc immunity combined), they are very low.
In WoW, they would lower the damage output of the CW's, and increase their HP a little. They would intentionally make it so that the maxed out assassin rogue would not one-shot even the weakest TR. Which means, they have to lower how much damage a maxed out rogue can do. And since their damage is lowered, you'd have to then lower the tank of the biggest classes, to give a rogue a chance to fight a GF, lowering effective HP and defenses. Meaning you raise the GF and GWF's damage output a little, so that they aren't gimped in damage ...
I'm sure by this point, you see where this is going. Little changes here and there, with each class in the end being a couple hundred or a thousand or two HP from each other. Defenses having a standard min-max. Even damage having a standard, far more narrow min-max.
Or you could go with the extremes, the diversity, and enjoy having a few games that aren't all the same.
If I wanted to play WoW pvp, I would be. Instead, I'm here.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
I have found the pvp to become very boring in this game after many hours of playing and on top of that you add in people leaving and it just becomes not fun anymore.
-NightGamez GF TSB
This game is designed to make as much money as possible on a day to day basis. It is not designed to be a great long term game.
Neh, I don’t buy the argument of balance vs. diversity.
If I had a character that insta-killed any other character but was different from any other character would that be a good thing or a bad thing? What about a character that could not be killed by any other character? Good? Bad? Its diverse, does that make it okay?
The answer of course is that it is not okay. Diversity does not sit across the table from balance. It hovers off to the side and serves the tea.
But of course when people say balanced, what they mean is balanced in relation to each other. What they do not mean is so similar as to be indistinguishable. So clearly the whole balance vs. diversity is a false dichotomy, a semantic trap into which one need not tumble. In fact, let just pretend, going forward, that whenever anyone says the word “balance” we can understand that they mean “balance in relation to other characters of similar status” and save some virtual pixel trees.
It is quite possible to have diversity and balance. What that takes is creativity and dev work. Now if you were to say that you have no confidence that the current team is capable of producing work that shows both balance and diversity, then that would be a debate worthy of these boards. And it would also be off the topic and need its own thread. But I think it would be worthy nonetheless.
Yet TR's can one shot classes, lol what's the diff from not being killed to being able to one shot a player.
Sorry but when morons send 3-4 people to kill a player, they shouldn't be in pvp, the object of pvp is capture the flag,not how many people can I kill.
A GWF does his job standing there keeping idiots busy when they should be focusing on the other 2 points.
You haven't met the right people then if you have never been hit with a 30k daily or 25k encounter.
Most folks think it is a one shot when there is usually some debuffing before said one shot.
20k Lashinblades(HP-Loose!), but never seen it after FoF, only a 17k.
NEVER seen a 20k+ Ice Knife HP-Loose. ONly 18k --> <10k Hp-loose IK. So where are the 'ONESHOOTs'? The HP-loose doesn't matter if the basedamage of the skill is alone not high enough for oneshoot. And debuffs are... NO ONESHOOT, because you take damage with your 'full' life and 'reduced' life efficiency. So can one post a pic about this roars about oneshootings without debuffs?
Comments
There is also the issue of where the point of balance is.
Some believe that every class, with equal gear, should stand an even chance against every other class. A great ideal that requires a balance of defense, health, and damage output between the classes to achieve. This is very popular in FPS's and many MMO's today. On the downside, this creates very little class diversity and does not support actual team reliance (which is crucial to team play) and allows teams of individual players to do well, simply because there are no real weak spots to shore up or strong spots to lean on. Want to see examples of cookie cutter operations? Guild Wars, World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2.
Still others, arguably a minority, believe that each class should be truly unique in their skills and balance, requiring creative team composition to have the right counterbalance to each teams glaring faults and strengths. This is a harder game to play, and requires far more tactical and strategic thought, thus making it generally less popular with 'the masses'. Examples of games using this? Dark Age of Camelot, Eve Online. Arguably some of the best PvP games ever made.
One is easy, quick, and ultimately, boring. That of course is my opinion. I played WoW battlegrounds for two months, maxed out, and left, because the classes and teams never really changed. The moment I heard PVP in GW2 puts all players in the same level gear, I completely ignored anything else from them. I don't want the same thing in every class and the same gear. I like diversity.
Which leads back to the question, is GWF too strong? I think it would need to be tested at the highest end, with players in equal BiS gear and of the highest caliber of play. Because regretfully, in most of the games I bring my GWF in, I'm am geared more than my opponents (arena and GG, with only a T2 pvp set, level 7 enchants, a lesser Plague Fire, and no chest enchant). The vast majority of my opponents don't have near my gear, mainly because I ask them after the fight. And I consider myself one of the better GWF's on my server, at least, in skill.
When I play against players who run equal or better gear (namely members of TSB on Beholder, because there isn't too many hardcore pvp groups out), I run even ground.
Some people argue here that, if I'm winning against multiple opponents, it's because my class is op, but if I can tell them of multiple examples of me breaking even against single opponents, it's because my skill is bad. With that kind of argument, you and others are declaring my input as a dedicated GWF to be invalid.
I argue that, if gear and skill equal out, my class is not OP (except in the case of sentinel/regen/tene, which applies more damage than tanks should, in my mind, due to the tene's). But since GS doesn't match between classes and skill is an amorphous quality, what can you use as a hard and fast definition of balance?
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
PVP is not supposed to be like that. You are not supposed to be able to out-level your opponents such that they are no longer any sort of problem. But of course that is exactly what happens and it is exactly the same paradigm. Instead of levels and powers its gear and enchantments. And this can make matchups wherein one player simply cannot even oppose another in any sort of contest.
Say what you will about PVP not being 1v1, but if I am on the point and you are on the point then one of us is going to have to die for the other to get the point. Okay, I get that kiting is most of the game for low gear score players. But that rather uncovers the ugly truth about PVP doesn’t it? You want to do well in PVP, buy more stuff. Buy moar!
I think some of those that suggest brackets or gated ladders might be a little naive but they also have a very valid point. That sort of system, a system that tries to match you with people against who you should be able to compete, would be ideal for the players. But it doesn’t encourage you to buy the best PVP gear. Interestingly enough you might see a wonky class balance if they did institute that brand of bracketing. GWFs might rocket right up to a higher bracket while DCs might languish in some lower bracket. They probably do not want that sort of thing visible as well.
And then there are the people who are legitimately good at PVP. They speak its language and excel in it despite all troubles. Surrounded by packs of well-wishers and wannabes they don’t see any of this as a problem. Just one more thing to overcome and they can do it. Heck that’s why they are here. It can be hard to be heard over their clumsy cults.
The trouble you face OP is that this game just doesn’t get any development worthy of its IP. It’s a Corvette frame with a Yugo engine. So when offering that something should be rebalanced you are going to have to do the lion’s share of the work yourself. What needs to be rebalanced and how. Yes, it’s the dev’s job, but there is no one there to do it. So if you care enough to make a post and ride it this deep into the weeds then you should be ready to do whatever theorycrafting is required to make a salient point with facts and numbers. In fact, you must.
I wish I could tell you that it was about fun, or player enjoyment, but in truth I believe that its more about what can be figured out and implemented between Zen store maintenance cycles.
It’s not the PVP that is the root trouble, it’s the PVPWE.
This is NOT how ladders work. DCs in a winning team would go up in personal ranking with the team ranking. Doesn't matter if they didn't kill anybody in the match.
So yes, ladders are the solution. If you perform well, you gonna encounter only people that perform just as good, no more pug hunting from premades and so on. I don't think any pro players would intentionally lose just to kill lowbies in lower end brackets.
This is coming from someone who obviously believes that there is no skill, either in gear choice or play style, and no viable tactics as you would hop on a point 1v1 no matter what just b/c the enemy was there. Yes gear plays a large role in PvP, however what is the real difference between a R7 enchant and a R10? 115 stat points, that is not even close to an unsurmountable advantage.
There is in fact skill in both your gear and build choices and in your playstyle, evidenced by the fact that when 2 completely equally geared players of the same class fight each other one can win out over the other, even by a drastic margin sometimes. Those that simply want to complain on the forums don't want to take the time to learn how to play their class and learn the tactics that win a domination style PvP. They just want to run around and kill people and never die apparently...
I have 1 of each class at 60. Most have R7 enchants, a couple still R5's heh. Only my GWF and CW have armor or weapon enchants, and they both have lesser soulforged, CW has GPF, and GWF has lesser vorpal. I am certainly not super geared, however I have played tons of PvP, tested tons of builds, and tried many different tactics. I take the top spot more often than not in pug games one every class but DC and it certainly has nothing to do with my gear.
Until you learn how to play against good players you will just continue to complain on the forums and never get any better at PvP. Next time you find yourself against a premade and are getting crushed ask for some 1v1's and actually observe what they're doing instead of /leave and do it all over again with the next premade that crushes you.
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
Yes of course, you are right. No need for superfluous caps.
Teams with more DCs will tend to suffer though, teams with more GWFs and CWs will tend to do well but there are many other variables also. You can’t say that it won’t statistically highlight the differences between the classes though, particularly as no attempt is made to ensure a good class mix.
But how do you quantify skill in a game like this? As with all games, skill-based point systems usually leave out support (debuffs applied, heals applied, resurrections/revives, buffs applied, and communication) in favor of kill-death ratio.
I proposed a system which limits gear based on teir level. The benefit being that players of all skill ranges could pick the level of play they want to attend to, building and keeping lower-tier gear sets to play more casual play along with their high-end set. Downsides to this is that even the tier system has flaws since in some classes greens can outdo their T2, plus the addition of higher tier gear in the future, as well the problem of breaking down the player pool in too many queues.
I'm just arguing that, if you put in the skill point system (or any system, for that matter, but SP being the most notorious), players will find a way to break it. Look at one of the most comprehensive game skill calculators out there: Microsoft's TrueSkill.
I'm sounding conflicted here. I really want a tiered gear ladder, so that skill (harder to define) can still participate across brackets. The gear drive is still there, but as a player with limited game time and almost no money, I had to come to the conclusion that perfects, tene's and 10's were too much for me to achieve, and thus the uber-end arena pvp is out of my league.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
I think that, even when future classes are revealed, the penalty of not allowing more than one of each class would still bring a lot more balance into the picture.
Then again, I hate going against five-man premade TR groups in Arena. One of the major reasons I don't have fun in Arena, to be honest.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
Awww Crib, so nice to hear from you again. Do you really know what I believe? Perhaps you would be better served using your psychic skills in a lottery or perhaps a weight guessing booth. I fear they are not working well here. But you do offer some points to ponder.
Didn’t we just hear from some folks that mentioned not even engaging some other classes because they could not beat them nor be beaten by them? Are they bad players? I think the problem as espoused by the OP is not that this happens but that it happens in the exact same way every time. Perhaps you could use your prognostication powers on the OP, determine what he or she really wants, yeah, tell them what they want, what they really, really want. Some sense of balance? Some feeling that with a tactic or method any class could be beaten? Am I way off base? Perhaps my crystal ball is just as cloudy.
And it may be a method that is causing the disconnect. Perhaps the OP finds the idea that he or she should have to run away constantly distasteful. I don’t blame them but that seems to be the way of it. Anyone you can’t take by yourself you have to drag back to your buddies or harass until your buddies get there. If you want to stand in someone’s face and beast them down, well that’s just not going to work very often especially with GS disparities.
But then I am into play style now and I don’t know what the OP does playstyle-wise. I imagine it would be a rather boring dissertation of how we all commonly understand this or that class to be played. No need to demand a transcript.
So cool. *starry eyes *
As hard as it might be to ingest, this is not terrible advice; the bit about observation at any rate. I mentioned that some people are just really good at PVP and many of them have some good advice that can help if you are willing to give it specific attention. What I didn’t mention is that not all of them are nice. But if you can rend a bit of useful info from a seething diatribe, then good on you.
Ladders should have nothing to do with quantifying skill. Ladders should just quantify win-loss ratio for your team and for yourself, just in case you might want to change teams. The score we see at the end of our current "arena" skirmishes is meaningless. What should matter is who won, stuff like "I had 10000 kills and no deaths" should just count for personal achievements.
So a team that wins more, goes up on the ladder, and the (future, as if...) matchmaking system would only put it against teams with similar win-loss ratios.
Of course, this would also mean one would have to register a team for Arena purposes. basically this means all Arena teams will become premades.
Simple "pug" queueing as we have now should be left in place, with no rewards at all, solely for practice purposes.
It's OK if you can't compete in the top-end Arena. Not everybody is meant to be the top dog in PvP. I'm 100% sure I won't be able to compete myself. But at least I will be able to have mostly challenging matches with similarly skilled opponents after a ladder system is in place, I will be able to queue with my team without feeling guilty that I will meet ungeared opponents that die in 2 shots, or without feeling useless by throwing my CW again and again in the hands of some uber 5-man team that will clobber me in 2 secs, just because I respect them and even as I want to quit, I'll have to remain and die valiantly because of this (probably misplaced) respect.
As much as anyone personally wants them to be no game can make 5 classes with completely different abilities and role's completely balanced in 1v1, however they can and did balance them as a team and this is easily shown in premade vs. premade PvP.
Obviously something must be wrong with the OP's argument as I imagine I'm not much better geared than him and yet manage to do just fine in PvP, including on a competitive level against much stronger opponents than your average pug. If he is unwilling to learn how to better PvP then he cannot simply complain that PvP is imbalanced when he sits back and does the same exact thing every game and it fails every game.
Many PvP guilds are nice people. There are always bad apples but more often than not you will get a very warm reception by asking for 1v1 or tips when you stay in the game where 2-3 of your teammates left b/c they don't want to learn, they want cryptic to nerf their enemies.
There is simply no way you can make the case for class balances when there is an underlying gear or skill imbalance that is skewing your results. When the gear and skill is properly matched the game is actually very balanced. In the PTR tournament last saturday we had a 65 minute match against another guild. The final score was something like 1000-980, but it was just constant battle at all points b/c both teams knew what they were doing.
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
Dragon Server
Ragnos Fireborn - 18.7k GWF Half-Elf
Eva Darkblood - 13.8k TR Elf
Venger Force of Evil - 13.7k CW Tiefling
Azaghal Belegost - 16.5k GF Dwarf
Drak'ar - 13.3k HR Drow
Roghthar Darkspawn - 11.5k SW Human
Not easy to kill. Should be 50-50 ideally with similarly geared/experienced players with different classes. Sometimes you lose, but sometimes you win. Winning almost every time is bad, and so is losing almost every time.
Good points. I could see this as a limited-edition tournament bracket and it working very well. But as far as an ongoing queue, I think it's a little much.
For instance, you'd have to total or average the win/loss ratio of each member of the team, because team comp would constantly shift between matches (jimmy needs to feed his cat, and becky wants a quick game). Then you'd have high skill/gear players with great win/loss (becky has won 1000 games but only lost one, while every other member of the team is generall 4 to 1) climbing the team in the ladder bracket, putting them against higher opponents. Four players getting insta-killed with one good player, in a game that doesn't have 1v1 balance, still means a losing team.
Or you could just tell a team that they couldn't play because their members aren't all online together (even when they are allowed five alternatives, the high end to a premade bracket system).
Plus, queue stacking to push a particular team into a higher W/L for scoreboard purposes would not just be a vanity cheat, but would also break the system. Much like level 50's in Halo 2. Great players were level 40's. Cheaters were the only ones that got higher.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
OK. There is personal rank, and team rank. It would be pointless for me to elaborate on how such system works, it is detailed and explained online for WoW Arena.
New team would start at bottom of the ladder, even if Becky is ultra geared and skilled. Most likely such new teams would smash the other new teams - but this is OK - because it will only happen for a very short period. More wins will mean quick advances in ladder and matchmaking will set you up against more and more difficult teams, until a "stalemate" point is reached where your win-loss rating reaches 50-50. Then your team will be somewhat stationary.
Teams would also have more than 5 members, to deal with the situation when some persons are not online.
Not sure what you mean with queue stacking. Lame teams queueing repeatedly just to lose against designated team? Would work only for a bit, because of the win-loss ratio will propel the winning team in upper brackets, where they will meet good opponents that will stall them.
However, it is possible for teams to sell losses. This is basically a competitive sport and cheating will be present.
On the other hand you have players who will jump from the bridge on a heavy-defended base, just for preventing the enemy team from gaining some points, and they will die in the process.
And then what? Two queueing systems, depending on what you like in pvp, dominating or duelling ?
one example was the nice match with the AoE guild.
they had 3 GWFs, almost unkilleable.
and we had only one GWF, the match was still nice, but we eventually won.
So how does Unkilleable gwf ruins the pvp?
we see in equal levels that it has balance.
low geared ppl, ppl that respec wrong, ppl using bad gear combinations/enchants, without skills, or that try to do things out of the limits of their classes that ruins the pvp. Because their lack of understanding of their own class and the game ruins the game if the devs eventually listen these people...
Many times when I am pugging I am called cheater, hacker, etc in my gwf because I am diehard, and i still get good kills against pugs. But I dk if i should get mad, or laugh sometimes when they do it... especially because more than once I was the only gwf in my team, and the pug team had like 3 gwfs... I wonder, if my class is so OP, how come the 3 gwfs in the team calling my class OP didn't do the damage I could do, even if they when they are sentinelas and titan/IS sets as tanks and stuff?
same thing happened other day to a rogue. He would brag himself to beat and melt many gwf on 1 x 1. the day I faced him in a match, and I managed to Win, he got so mad and whisper in an insulting tone how my class is OP and Brainless. Oh wait, i thought he could take any gwf in the game? and when he finds one that kick his ***, the class suddenly becomes OP?
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
there are classes that do better in 1 x 1s, there are classes that do better in group, and gangbanging.
that is why there is combat advantage in the game.
the game is balanced, but it has to respect the diversity of each class.
if you want to try to make the game as each class tank equally, and kill equally. what is the point of having different classes at all? better play a FPS like combat arms, where you can carry 2 guns, a sniper and a assault rifle lol.
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
Also special PvP-only Resilience stat should exist to prevent stuff like IK or Lashing one shots, and special resilience gear sets as well. These gear sets should basically be mandatory in PvP or you would be extremely squishy. Resilience should be meaningless in PvE. Having known gear variables would be a HUGE help for the devs to balance PvP further... if they wish to do so.
Yes dual spec would be awesome! I have a thread detailing this but it has faded away and I'm too lazy to go find it lol. Dual Spec would make many players happier AND make cryptic a boat load in Zen sales, sounds like win win to me
Edit: If regen stopped working in combat it would not be worth anything, PvP respawn times are at most 20 seconds and as little as 0 so there is near constant combat in a good game. I like that there is no resilience type stat in this game, that means you have to build defense/deflect/HP if you want to be tanky, and by doing that you lose damage.
We are definitely dominating, and we are always about to win.
I think in combat regen needs to be half of what it is now, and MORE than it is now out of combat.
I agree with the dumb 1shots too.
Excellent post sir! thank you!
Neh, I don’t buy the argument of balance vs. diversity.
If I had a character that insta-killed any other character but was different from any other character would that be a good thing or a bad thing? What about a character that could not be killed by any other character? Good? Bad? Its diverse, does that make it okay?
The answer of course is that it is not okay. Diversity does not sit across the table from balance. It hovers off to the side and serves the tea.
But of course when people say balanced, what they mean is balanced in relation to each other. What they do not mean is so similar as to be indistinguishable. So clearly the whole balance vs. diversity is a false dichotomy, a semantic trap into which one need not tumble. In fact, let just pretend, going forward, that whenever anyone says the word “balance” we can understand that they mean “balance in relation to other characters of similar status” and save some virtual pixel trees.
It is quite possible to have diversity and balance. What that takes is creativity and dev work. Now if you were to say that you have no confidence that the current team is capable of producing work that shows both balance and diversity, then that would be a debate worthy of these boards. And it would also be off the topic and need its own thread. But I think it would be worthy nonetheless.
so the people that are better geared, more experienced have to pay the price because some 6, 7k GS dude is going on forums babycry that he got 1 shot in pvp?
OK.
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
the rest of the match the "1 shot" dealers get their *** kicked.
is it fair then, lets destroy their dmg so they become crappy.
or lets nerf tank sentinels, so they kill **** and die easy too.
nerf regen, so it becomes useless stats.
its sick...
Gannicus Destroyer, GWF Destroyer retired
Kate Beckinsale NB DC, Link NB GF
"There is only one way to be a champion..., Never ...ing lose"
The exaggeration in your argument almost ruins your arguments. I have never once been one-shot, and I am a low HP GWF.
The 'balance vs diversity' is an argument of classes sharing equality in the defense/attack/movement pool versus classes having grossly different defense/attack/movement characteristics to the point where they have to be played completely different.
In WoW, you build any melee class and can essentially play it like any other, because despite the fact that the powers are slightly different, the ability pool is not drastically different. HP maxes are similar. Movement speeds are similar. Even damage done is ... yep, similar. Ranged classes are just alike as well, whether they be magic or not. The true point spread is so common, with almost no extremes, that your essentially the same characters with different skins for your powers and different animations.
That is not diversity. Just calling things by different names and giving them different 3d effects don't make them different.
Here, on the other hand, the HP totals can be very broad. The damage resistances are as well. Damage output hits further extremes. Even movement speeds and abilities alter drastically between classes. This means that each class almost requires you to play it completely different than any other, and have very glaring and obvious strengths and weaknesses.
That CW has so much AOE damage application, above any other class. And their teleport/dodge is extremely effective. And so far, their debuffs are very useful. But when defense is taken into consideration (outside of the teleport, which is one of the strongest forms of burst defense, considering it's a damage and cc immunity combined), they are very low.
In WoW, they would lower the damage output of the CW's, and increase their HP a little. They would intentionally make it so that the maxed out assassin rogue would not one-shot even the weakest TR. Which means, they have to lower how much damage a maxed out rogue can do. And since their damage is lowered, you'd have to then lower the tank of the biggest classes, to give a rogue a chance to fight a GF, lowering effective HP and defenses. Meaning you raise the GF and GWF's damage output a little, so that they aren't gimped in damage ...
I'm sure by this point, you see where this is going. Little changes here and there, with each class in the end being a couple hundred or a thousand or two HP from each other. Defenses having a standard min-max. Even damage having a standard, far more narrow min-max.
Or you could go with the extremes, the diversity, and enjoy having a few games that aren't all the same.
If I wanted to play WoW pvp, I would be. Instead, I'm here.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
Most folks think it is a one shot when there is usually some debuffing before said one shot.
-NightGamez GF TSB
Yet TR's can one shot classes, lol what's the diff from not being killed to being able to one shot a player.
Sorry but when morons send 3-4 people to kill a player, they shouldn't be in pvp, the object of pvp is capture the flag,not how many people can I kill.
A GWF does his job standing there keeping idiots busy when they should be focusing on the other 2 points.
20k Lashinblades(HP-Loose!), but never seen it after FoF, only a 17k.
NEVER seen a 20k+ Ice Knife HP-Loose. ONly 18k --> <10k Hp-loose IK. So where are the 'ONESHOOTs'? The HP-loose doesn't matter if the basedamage of the skill is alone not high enough for oneshoot. And debuffs are... NO ONESHOOT, because you take damage with your 'full' life and 'reduced' life efficiency. So can one post a pic about this roars about oneshootings without debuffs?