PDA

View Full Version : The (un)offical HA Changes thread



megages
18-01-2007, 17:58
I do not see the solution being to disallow heroes(Hero teams), nor do I see the answer being to remove things like the relic run. Instead, I see the answer being in either:

Restricting players to only 1 of each class for example, only one monk but NOT only one /monk.

Creating larger, more diverse, and more hazardous enviroments, making games harder to win

Splitting Heroes ascent into either tiers based on rank/fame or into diffrent styles of arenas.

Allow me to elaborate, You can build a SF build with only 1 elementalist, but why bother? all the other /elementalists will be weaker in comparison. This 1 class type only would not only make people think more about balance, but give MANY people, and there classes a chance to shine. Ritulists can cast healing spells too. Warriors can defend party members too. By restricting what people can bring, people would be forced to think more about how they play their cards(team), than how many elementalists are in district 2.

Harder Heroes ascent means just that, make it a final challenge for the elite players. Giving them something to focus on, and/or hone there GvG skills. As good as most players think they are, being a great player takes time and dedication, not just a new build because the last one lost. It would also ring closer to the true theme, "Heroes ascent", because only worthy teams would ever make it through harder challenges.

Games based on fame/rank. New people need a place to start, experienced players need challenges to hone there skills. At the moment all rank is for, is making nice circus animals, and bragging about "how good you are" because you sat back and healed for the last 1000 games. No offence to anyone who worked hard for there rank(including healers who work hard). This would also remove the need for "Seeking Rx players for team" from the old reasoming being "if there Rx then they probably know what to do by now" to being something more constructive. This would in my honest opinion, help alot of people in alot of ways.

Or splitting arenas for the same reasons but allowing people to choose with match they want to play. Good at relic matches? try your hand in a relic match. Like big deathmatches? do the map against 4 teams. This means people know what to expect beforehand in there type of match, and also allow them to have a game when they want to, not to have to play through a series of games.

I encourage, and welcome all kinds of feedback on my ideas, I only ask that you are as discriptive as possible in your arguements and that you are prepared for my long replys. :grin:

I posted this in another topic but decided to make it a seperate topic in itself. When the ANET team look for our ideas this weekend, we need to have a place where we can direct them that is full of constructive critisism that they can actually use to improve the game. I won't elaborate on what i wrote above, but i do ask that you post all ideas in this thread. And that you are as accurate as possible.

Also team size increase will not be looked at during this weekend event.

B Ephekt
18-01-2007, 18:56
Restricting players to only 1 of each class for example, only one monk but NOT only one /monk.Stupid idea. It's too restricting and would only make the arena less fun. I dont' want to run ****ty necro healers when I could run monk primaries.

megages
18-01-2007, 21:26
Stupid idea. It's too restricting and would only make the arena less fun. I dont' want to run ****ty necro healers when I could run monk primaries.

And Ritulists cannot heal? While I said I would not elaborate on my original post, the point I made was Heroes ascent could be turned into a place for Elite pvp players who like a challenge, and to face well thought out, well designed builds. The event (at time of posting) Isn't until another 24hrs, maybe you could use that time to think about WHY Heroes Ascent is in need of aid, and what changes you would ask to see implimented.

B Ephekt
18-01-2007, 21:42
I already know what I want to see done in HA, but that's not the issue here.

The suggestion I quoted is simply bad and poorly thought out. It's far too limiting to really promote balanced builds. For example, you would be unable to run a domination mesmer and a degen mesmer, or a thumper and an interrupt ranger... or even two monks. That doesn't sound very fun to me.

The logical way to promote balanced builds is to create game types that encourage it, not force teams into taking one of each profession.

And, yes, rits can heal, but they can neither heal nor protect as well as a monk primary can. Monks are just more efficient at their jobs than other classes. Maybe I'm just biased since I play monk, but I much prefer a 2/3 monk backline to a necro healer or rit healer.

megages
18-01-2007, 22:10
Having just lost a HA game, I fail at finding ways to make it more fun. All I can think of is, replace it with the christmas snowball game. While alot of people would welcome that, I think I'll have to wait and see what ANET produces. I think the main reason alot of people do not find HA fun is the fact it can take awhile to find a good pick-up-party. Then on the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd defeat if you are unlucky enough to lose that many games early (or in a row as-is sometimes the case) then the team will disband, and you will have made a whole 1 fame, 3 if your lucky. Still, I can think of a worser place to be right now...

Not enough rage. You need more rage. Not enough rage. You need more rage.
Not enough rage. Target needs to be in front of you. You are dead.

:listen: I heard Burning Crusade came out a few days ago...And warriors got "nerfed". Not directly related to this topic but I wonder (and worry) about this proposed skill balancing .

quago
19-01-2007, 00:04
Creating larger, more diverse, and more hazardous enviroments, making games harder to win.

Good luck with that

CassiusDrehyg
19-01-2007, 08:59
I do not see the solution being to disallow heroes(Hero teams), nor do I see the answer being to remove things like the relic run. Instead, I see the answer being in either:

Restricting players to only 1 of each class for example, only one monk but NOT only one /monk.

Creating larger, more diverse, and more hazardous enviroments, making games harder to win

Splitting Heroes ascent into either tiers based on rank/fame or into diffrent styles of arenas.

Allow me to elaborate, You can build a SF build with only 1 elementalist, but why bother? all the other /elementalists will be weaker in comparison. This 1 class type only would not only make people think more about balance, but give MANY people, and there classes a chance to shine. Ritulists can cast healing spells too. Warriors can defend party members too. By restricting what people can bring, people would be forced to think more about how they play their cards(team), than how many elementalists are in district 2.

Harder Heroes ascent means just that, make it a final challenge for the elite players. Giving them something to focus on, and/or hone there GvG skills. As good as most players think they are, being a great player takes time and dedication, not just a new build because the last one lost. It would also ring closer to the true theme, "Heroes ascent", because only worthy teams would ever make it through harder challenges.

Games based on fame/rank. New people need a place to start, experienced players need challenges to hone there skills. At the moment all rank is for, is making nice circus animals, and bragging about "how good you are" because you sat back and healed for the last 1000 games. No offence to anyone who worked hard for there rank(including healers who work hard). This would also remove the need for "Seeking Rx players for team" from the old reasoming being "if there Rx then they probably know what to do by now" to being something more constructive. This would in my honest opinion, help alot of people in alot of ways.

Or splitting arenas for the same reasons but allowing people to choose with match they want to play. Good at relic matches? try your hand in a relic match. Like big deathmatches? do the map against 4 teams. This means people know what to expect beforehand in there type of match, and also allow them to have a game when they want to, not to have to play through a series of games.

I encourage, and welcome all kinds of feedback on my ideas, I only ask that you are as discriptive as possible in your arguements and that you are prepared for my long replys.


Let's start by breaking this down.



I do not see the solution being to disallow heroes(Hero teams), nor do I see the answer being to remove things like the relic run.


Yes the answer was to remove heroes. People below rank three still don't realise why the use of heroes was counterproductive, and by the looks of your post, never will.



Restricting players to only 1 of each class for example, only one monk but NOT only one /monk.


Absolutely ridiculous. You can use multiple monks in PvE and GvG, but not HA?



Creating larger, more diverse, and more hazardous enviroments, making games harder to win


Now this I'm all for.



Splitting Heroes ascent into either tiers based on rank/fame or into diffrent styles of arenas.


We had to lose at HA/Tombs when we were lowbies, why can't the people who are there now?



Allow me to elaborate, You can build a SF build with only 1 elementalist, but why bother? all the other /elementalists will be weaker in comparison. This 1 class type only would not only make people think more about balance, but give MANY people, and there classes a chance to shine. Ritulists can cast healing spells too. Warriors can defend party members too. By restricting what people can bring, people would be forced to think more about how they play their cards(team), than how many elementalists are in district 2.


Nobody cares about SF noobs, or whether there are any Ritualists in ID1.



Games based on fame/rank. New people need a place to start, experienced players need challenges to hone there skills. At the moment all rank is for, is making nice circus animals, and bragging about "how good you are" because you sat back and healed for the last 1000 games. No offence to anyone who worked hard for there rank(including healers who work hard). This would also remove the need for "Seeking Rx players for team" from the old reasoming being "if there Rx then they probably know what to do by now" to being something more constructive. This would in my honest opinion, help alot of people in alot of ways.


I would in theory, like to see this. You're not going to stop pugs though by creating more rank discrimination in the knowledge that you can only accept people of your own rank into your team. Some of my friends are R10/11/12, and I wouldn't be happy if I as a R9 couldn't play with them because my rank was too low.



Or splitting arenas for the same reasons but allowing people to choose with match they want to play. Good at relic matches? try your hand in a relic match. Like big deathmatches? do the map against 4 teams. This means people know what to expect beforehand in there type of match, and also allow them to have a game when they want to, not to have to play through a series of games.


Keep the random map mechanic. In my opinion, the less relic runs, the better.

Hopefully ArenaNet will surprise us and balance HA in a way we can all agree with, but until tonight, that remains to be seen.

Buddah
19-01-2007, 18:20
In my opinion, the less relic runs, the better.
:angry: Relic runs were one of the better parts of HA. The only gripe I had was how the winner was decided in a tie. Should have been relic respawn at their start and then sudden death, first to make an offering wins..

Ranger Nietzsche
19-01-2007, 20:30
relic runs are awesome.

instead of sudden death, how about the team taht caps first gets priority?

So you cap, your winning.
THen they cap, you're still winning cuz you were earlier.


that removes teh "lets cap last" mentality

megages
20-01-2007, 00:21
Event is now LIVE. Share your views on HA here!
Skill updates can be posted as well, so people do not have to look in 2 seperate threads.

megages
20-01-2007, 00:22
Word of Healing has changed: If target is below 50% health, heal for an additional X .With 12 points you heal for an additional 100 instead of 50.

megages
20-01-2007, 00:33
http://www.guildwars.com/support/gameupdates/

All skill updates are here, cuts down on forum spam.

Diage
20-01-2007, 03:55
I must say, i dont like the end parts of hoh.. theyre so unclimatic. At least the old way of holding, almost anyone could win up to the last 5 seconds.. now.. you will more times then not see the winner of the match within the first minute or so and the entire rest of the match is jus a waste of time! the kill count is also idiotic.. i mean, its gonna bring about alot of degen and aoe teams since theyd have the best way to make the most damage at once allowing you to get the last hit, i mean all it is is the last hit gets the point.. and aoe/degen would b perfect for that. For the murderball one, i like that idea, cept to make it more interesting and intense, i think the ghosts should be taken to the bottom of the steps so that points can be scored faster and perhaps make them move slower with it, more bodyblocking, more chaos, more interesting to watch in my opion.. there weould be alot more swapping etc etc. i have no problem with the third one, i do like that idea. This new system is a decent adition, however i do not feel this will help at all.. it may last a few daysm but in the end it really didnt solve anything.

Ranger Nietzsche
20-01-2007, 10:54
Killcounts are infinitely better than Altar capping. I'm so incredibly glad that highly defensive builds are pretty much worthless now. Bye bye sig of mystic wrath

The node capping thing in HoH is sort of meh

murderball is just hilarious

Mathius Clarkus
20-01-2007, 14:14
i emjoy most of the heroes ascent changes not most of the others, but the only heroes ascent change i am sad about is the removal of the capture alter map which lead to great 3-way battles. Also the fact that it is a promotion for the failure of heroes battles is unescapable - they want people to play that way and will change the maps to do it and hope more people wil then go to the arena. This seems a bit.... not good for the game as a whole...

Midnight De Blood
20-01-2007, 21:45
I like the random HoH and enjoy the kill count (everyone for them-selves) it instead of the gank the altar holder and as far as 6v6 thats good too. 8v8 makes me think Zergway +2 other classes which would be just another cookie-cutter build and the skill changes that would need to be done would be more of a PVE hell sure it would help PVP but this game trys to balance the two, and does a over all good job

Diage
21-01-2007, 01:47
after more observation, people wanted to see alot of variation in builds, people hated fighting the same kind of build, holding builds that is.. there will still be very defensive builds, but after noteing, two of the battles to the way up are kill counts, and finaly understanding how to figure out who gets the point (whoever did the most damage) makes aoe/degen builds oddly overwhelming, altho i personaly have been running spikes, im getting slightly annoyed already with finding nothing but degen and aoe

Midnight De Blood
21-01-2007, 11:21
i have found a few melee heavy builds in HoH but more so do i see 1 melee 3 spike and 2 healers but rarely do i see 4+ different groups using the exact same build which is nice