User talk:Andrew Patrick/archive 4

Hero Battles

→ moved from User talk:Gaile Gray

I know this is a question about PvP, but Andrew and Izzy aren't exactly active on the wiki and I'm not sure where else to get any real answers. Basically I was wondering if we should expect any updates for Hero Battles in the (very) near future, or at all? It's been almost a year since the last real update and despite the obvious problems with the format and complaints from the community there haven't been any changes since then. There are a ton of small issues with the AI and the shrine capping mechanics that could have been ironed out by periodic updates but unfortunately that didn't happen. That said, even a small update that only deals with the shadow stepping and morale meter problem could already significantly improve HB. I'd just like to know if Anet is simply too busy with other things to continue to support the format, because it's pointless for the community to continue to compile bug reports and discuss ideas on how to solve the problems with HB if nothing is ever done with it. --Draikin 01:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Balance updates are still occuring, and if I recall correctly, there have been some recent changes to address problems in HB. I always pass on the feedback I receive about Hero Battles onto the designers. I will say though, that quite often the reports I get are not bug reports, or problems with the mechanics, they are more people saying they do not like the format, or specific mechanics within it. When there are bugs, of course we want to be made aware of them. I recently passed on a bug regarding the ATS map rotation, and I am grateful for the reports that brought that to our attention. But if someones complaint is "I don't like that Hero Battles rely on my heroes" or "I don't like the capping mechanic" you have to understand, that is what Hero Battles are. It would be like saying "I don't like that basketball requires me to throw this ball through that hoop." If that's the case, it would be more productive to play a different arena (such as Team Arenas or Alliance Battles) than it would be to suggest Hero Battles be remade entirely.

Again, I want to stress that I am not talking about bug reports. If there are broken mechanics by all means report them. I have passed on concerns regarding capping AI and balance issues recently, and would love to pass on other issues like those. But if you are suggesting Hero Battles be remade from the ground up, please understand that different people have different opinions on the subject, and what would be an improvement for you would be a horrible change to another. I will gladly pass on any bug reports, or concerns about broken mechanics, or mechanics that are not working well or as intended. And if you have suggestions for improvements, I will gladly pass those on as well, I just don't believe the designers are planning any major changes to the format. --Andrew Patrick 18:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't Recall any recent changes for HB, the last real change was the March 7, 2007 update (pun intended). There have been skill balance updates but they had zero impact on the format (except the assassin nerf, which only happened because they became a problem in GvG). I understand that if someone complains about Hero Battles it doesn't necessarily mean the format itself is actually broken. However, when that someone is called Ekelon or Jamesb R I think they might be worth listening to. I've never seen a top 100 player post on any forum saying they like the format the way it is now, everyone agrees that it's completely broken. It's not that we don't like the capping mechanic, we simply don't like the fact that it forces us to run gimmick builds and that it allows you to win without making any kills. We don't like shadow stepping in HB because it's ridiculously overpowered and there's simply no counter to it. You either end up running the same gimmick builds or you quit playing. I did report broken mechanics (like the trick/exploit which basically turns Return into Recall) but they never get resolved.

I'd also like to clarify that I'm not asking for a complete rebuild of Hero Battles at all, like I said even small updates would help. I do have suggestions for improvements but at this point the HB community, or what's left of it, simply needs to know whether or not HB is a dead format or not. You can't start a discussion about solutions for HvH when the reactions you get are comments like "HB is dead. Anet will never fix it". Anyway regarding suggestions for improvements, there's my AI bug fixes wishlist thread and my solution for the shadow stepping problem, and the last pages on the Hero Battle Thoughts thread have some good discussions on the problems with the morale meter and possible solutions. And thanks for sending that Jennur's Horde bug report to QA. --Draikin 01:45, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I need to add to this topic. I've been very unhappy about Hero battles for a very long time now, seeing as the set-up atm rewards players with little skill or playing ability. The HB game atm revolves too heavily around capping, and using shadowsteps to manoeuvre quickly, however the skill shadowmeld is creating a huge problem because now players can capture points all over the map with exceptional ease, and little good play. That is my comment upon skill balance, because over than shadowsteps I fell the build diversity is greater than what it used to be with the old SP build. HOWEVER, the main qualm I have with Hero Battles, are the infuriating AI bugs which lose battles for players through no fault of their own. This very day, in tournament A, I was playing on The Crossing (infamous for it's hero bugs) and my Mo/N would refuse to use any skills I micro'd it to use, because of this I lost the match because I effectively had 2 hero's. This bug is simply debilitating and needs to be sorted. Another bug is the body blocking of heros bug, although, I do give some le-way when a player blocks a hero, when a spirit blocks a hero's path and stops it from moving, then I have my worries.. It's seems simple enough to fix, the hero AI just does not work when it comes to walking around corners. Also, on the map "The Crossing" heroes abandon their flags often randomly, or, as I experienced today, do not run to the flag at all. I flagged my ritualist to the cultist's shrine, yet rather than run to the flag, it merely stood still at the battlecry shrine. This is simply not on, and means that the HB game, and thus my enjoyment of GW's is broken, however, I'd like to think not beyond repair, I hope I can entrust Anet to finally sort out the minor bugs in HB, and sort out shadowsteps, but with all the GW2 "hype" I don't see it happening. I hope you actually read this comment, because it seems to reflect most of the HB player community... Anet, plz... listen--77.98.129.168 02:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC) (account name=Rainbow Hates Hb)

The "exploit" in which u use return on a hero and canel recall at the exact same time isnt an exploit, it takes timing and coordination to pull it off, at i have respect for people that do that. One issue i do have with HB is Capway. Rename hero battles to hero Capping, and ill be fine then. 24.141.45.72 19:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No real skill needed, and it allows 2 people on one team to travel a very long way across the map(imba), plus the skills do not read return to target ally's teleported location, it's just there actual location.--77.98.129.168 06:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC) (account name=Rainbow Hates Hb)

If you think it takes skill to use the Return + Recall "technique" then you're doing something wrong. Just click the Shadow Meld/Aura of Displacement/Recall enchantment icon once, hit the key assigned to Return and click the icon again. Anyone can do it and you can easily create a macro for it if you want to make it even easier. It's a completely broken mechanic, I told Izzy and informed tech support but as you can see it's still in the game, together with all the other broken mechanics that turned the format into "Gimmick Battles". Before GW:EN was released Izzy admitted that Hero Battles is imbalanced and that he was looking for solutions but progress was slow since they were working on GW:EN. We're 2008 now and instead of "slow progress" we simply get to hear there are "no plans" at all. That's why I'd like to know what exactly Anet plans to do with HB. --Draikin 17:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

/agree, Anet simply don't care about HB any more, it's quite clear, from the fact that, not only is Andrew not active here and has not responded to these comments, but also the fact that the recent updates including bug fixes, failed to address any of the problems revolving around HB. The bugs which involve minor flaws in the hero Ai should not be very hard to fix. I can't believe Anet aren't aware of the problems, and the fact that the community is crying out for change! Seriously, HB needs to be fixed.--77.98.129.168 15:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC) (Rainbow Hates Hb)

Hey, Andrew, HB cannot be compared to a basketball game, and believe me, if most of people want changes, even basketball will change. I bet if we make a poll (a new one) asking people about if they want to return to capture center shrine only, not all shrines, the yes option will win. Now, don't look old polls because could show exactly the opposite, people was just sick about holding builds that days, but now are even MORE sick about everyone doing the same, running everywhere, it's worst now, you should know that, we are not asking ArenaNet to make everything from zero, at least not me, I just want a return to original idea of capturing center only, even when I was one of the supporters of fixing the holding center problem, I changed my mind with one year of capturing all shrines. --NeHoMaR 11:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to let you all know that I removed the other repetitive threads on this topic. The last I heard from Isaiah was that he is aware of the concerns about Hero Battles and is trying to find ways to improve it. He does not have an ETA to share with me so in turn, I do not have one to share with you. However, I am aware of your concerns, he is aware of your concerns, so there is no need to create a new thread reiterating those concerns every week. If you want to elaborate, please do! But if you are just posting to ping me because you think I forgot, you don't need to, because, well...I didn't. I just don't have any new news to share on this, but as soon as I do, I will. Thanks for your patience. --Andrew Patrick 17:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I honestly think we've waited long enough. Is it's really too much to ask for even the slightest bit of information regarding what changes Anet is planning on implementing, especially considering how long we've been waiting for them? The reason you have people constantly complaining about the same thing is because the problems simply aren't being solved. So yes, eventually people are going to get frustrated. Just take a look at the username of the player that won the MaT, and I can point you to several other top 100 players with similar names. I can't believe Anet is going to double the rewards next month without doing anything to fix these problems, so I can only hope you have some news to share very soon... --Draikin 19:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Any chance of implementing a scrimmage feature into Hero Battles? Not like unrated matches, but being able to challenge someone to a battle. This wouldn't give faction, rating, or commander points but would allow for testing and the ability to challenge a friend to a fight.--David Lupin

Observer for Hero Battles has been down. Any chance of fixing this?

To be honest Andrew, and the rest of the Anet staff involved in PvP balance I hope you're happy you ruined and ignored a vast community of players. Your own idleness and inability to acknowledge requests is the sole cause of hero Battles turning into and remaining the worst and most imbalanced format EVER! You CHOSE! to ignore complaints and suggestions and in turn have lost every HB player's faith in Anet and imo GW2. if anyone who was a top 100 HB'er decides to give you revenue in the future by paying money for GW2 I will be shocked. You don't deserve anything from me as a player of your game you failed to listen to the community. Oh, and btw idc about "NPA" or w/e cos Anet's inability to even acknowledge making any HB changes is beyond a disgrace. And the staff concerned deserve to be fired..

Skill bugs

I was wondering about a few skill bugs that have gone unnoticed for a long while. Izzy doesn't seem to be posting on his page anymore so thought I'd bring it here, sorry if it's a bother. One is Shattering Assault - the bonus damage on this skill isn't actually armor-ignoring, so it becomes alot weaker against wars, paragons, or other armored targets. Strangely, the damage is increased by 15%damage inscriptions but not by customized daggers. It's been bugged like this for many months now. Another thing is Patient Spirit's recent buff - it'd go very well with Healer's Boon but, the healing isn't actually increased by it....not sure if that was intentional or not though. P A R A S I T I C 06:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I think its intentional, cause when used with healers covanent it makes no difference either 24.141.45.72 01:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

SA isn't a bug. You'll notice it says it does ____ damage, instead of + _____ damage or _____ additional damage. --71.229.204.25 01:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Since when are attack skills affected by armor though? The only skill I could think of is Chilling Victory, but it clearly states the cold damage, and still has +dmg attached to it. It's even more awkward for a sin who's damage is mainly armor-ignoring or done through conditions. SA getting a damage increase by 15%dmg weapons also doesn't seem normal. I really doubt it's intentional. P A R A S I T I C 03:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Explain to me why 2x 40 armor-ignoring damage plus 2x enchant removal every three seconds isn't overpowered and then I'll accept it isn't a bug, kk? --71.229.204.25 10:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Bugged or not has nothing to do with the power of the skill. Zealous 10:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, this seems to have gone a bit off topic. What is it that you feel is a bug? --Andrew Patrick 18:39, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The skill description clearly states that you deal a set amount of damage (and no unconditional bonus damage like most other attacks). This means that it shouldn't be increased by the 15% damage weapon inscriptions but at the moment it is. When you're wielding a 15>50 weapon, you deal 47 damage @ 12 dagger mastery instead of the 41 damage you should be doing. --Draikin 13:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Apparently sundering mods also increase the damage. The question is if the damage mentioned in the skill description is meant to replace the base damage of your weapon, in which case the 20% customized mod should increase the damage as well. I don't think this skill actually needs a buff like that. --Draikin 13:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

EotN Skins at Tolkano

Considering that the addition of "GWEN Stuff as Tournament Rewards" has been on the WIP list since late September[1], is there any expectation of this being implemented in the near future? --Lemming 20:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I will follow up on this today. --Andrew Patrick 19:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Any news?

Currently being QA'd on the Dev Server. I imagine they will be added very soon, and if not, I will follow up again. --Andrew Patrick 19:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Omg name thief! --Lemming 19:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, you're 64 times better than that other Lemming. -- Hong 06:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

So.... What do you mean with very soon?

any word on the items/armors being unlocked soon? i heard rumors from friends but never got the official word. -- I Need Energy

Any word on the better rewards for CM's?

Andrew any word on this? I asked 3 months ago and you said you would discuss this in your Community Summary thingo-ma-bob. There seemed to me much agreement with my proposal but there hasn’t being a peep out of you for all this time.

To refresh your memory on what I stated 3 months ago was to make the rewards more like Alliance Battles, here is what I proposed (A)Make Kills in competitive missions (CM's) 10 Balthazar faction per kill and (B) make the reward for winning 1500 Luxon/Kurzick Points , in essence doubling them.

In case you forgot my main reason for this proposal was to increase people playing CM's.. My final comment would be is you have everything to gain and nothing to loose with this idea. Why have I you got nothing to lose you might ask? The reason is that no one plays CM’s.

As a PvP Community Coordinator for Guild Wars, I recommend you think about this one more time..... --58.107.47.95 08:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

/agree, CM's own; but I hardly ever do them because of the lack of any real reward, if they were like AB, I'd play them all the time, they truly are fun! 77.98.129.168

/agreed with the above two posters, i wont do CM's either due to the crap rewards when compared to Alliance Battles--220.245.179.133 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I think CM's should basically be treated as another official form of AB. Besides increasing the faction rewards, it'd be nice to have some Fort Aspenwood/Jade Quarry npc's in the gh for anyone to access. Quarry is dead 24/7, Aspenwood has a few people sometimes, but AB just dominates when it comes to popularity. Besides the reward, I think part of it is that pve chars can visit AB anytime where the others require you to travel there. P A R A S I T I C 04:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

There are no plans to change Competitive Missions at this time. If that changes, we will make an announcement. --Andrew Patrick 19:15, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Not even a few bonus weekends? Pretty please? Nicky Silverstar 20:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I fail to see how upping the rewards could possibly hurt. FA is at a decent state of balance I think (still way to reliant on different things, kurzicks on monks, luxons on nukes and enchant hate, but better than it has been), and with jade/amber prices crashed with no probable chance of recovering, and FFFing still being the number one way to gain faction, whats wrong with increasing rewards so we can get more people in there? I play lux side even though im kurz cause of the waits now.--Ryudo 20:34, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright guys, I'll fight the good fight for you. ;) How much of an increase to the faction reward do you think it would take to make CMs equal to AB and FFF in regards to faction accumulation? I can write up a proposal to try to make this happen, but I could use some specific numbers to show the current imbalance. Someone mentioned above that doubling them would work well, do others agree with that? Thanks! --Andrew Patrick 21:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

What a coincidence! I've been doing some research on this very subject in the form of a poll. It looks like AB needs 2x to 3x more faction gain to keep up with HFFF (it may still be a bit slower, but much more fun), and CM's would need even more... But with the current state of JQ, it's impossible to find out! -- Alaris 22:52, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know what FFF or HFFF means or stands for but all i know is that the rewards need to be increased either way to bring people back to CM's. I am saying this from a PvP prospective not a PvE one--58.107.47.95 23:07, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

For Fort Aspenwood: I think the Kurzicks should gain 5+ faction for each percent of God's Vengeance complete, and an additonal 1k per win. Luxons gain 100+ faction for each gate breached at least once, and an additional 1k per win. With that setup, it's equal to AB. Not really sure about Jade Quarry since I've never really played there. P A R A S I T I C 03:10, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Something drastic, like a special event, needs to happen to get JQ up and running. No one plays it because of the old glitches, even though they are fixed. It may sound drastic, but I think a 3x bonus weekend for JQ only could really fix the slump, maybe rekindle interest in it.--Ryudo 03:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I did some polling and some personal research, and here's some numbers I hope you can use (for forum link, see above):

• HFFF = 15-20k, 18k probably more representative
• Alliance Battle = 4k
• Fort Aspenwood = 1-4k
• Jade Quarry = 4k if you get in!!!
• Vanquish = 4-5k per hour
• Boss farm = 24k per hour (split team)

It's very difficult to get numbers for CM's... guesstimated numbers below are based on 50th position and 12min runs, not counting bonuses.

• Altruum Ruins = guesstimated at 3.7k
• Amatz Basin = 1.5k afk, guesstimate at 3k active
• Zos Shivos = guesstimated at 1k
• Aurios Mines = guesstimated at 5k

Recommendations

• Don't touch HFFF - everyone says that this title is very slow to get, even for an account-based title. Don't change the max requirement either.
• AB x4.5
• FA x5
• JQ x6 until people repopulate, then x4.5. Announce it as well that JQ gets an extra boost temporarily to restore its popularity.
• Vanquish x4, but only as a reward at the end of the vanquish to avoid boosting boss farm, or x5 on non-bosses only
• CM's x5, keep it lower than AB, JQ, or FA to avoid botting (to equate, it would be about x6)
• Triple or quadruple faction maximum to compensate. Hopefully spiking won't be a big problem given that the rate of faction gain will be increased as well. -- Alaris 17:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Looking at what you just did there, why not just decrease HFFF faction (or at least nerf it to where you have to physically be there yourself). This will solve all the problems with a simple fix. Ekelon 03:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Three reasons: (1) as stated above: "everyone says that this title is very slow to get, even for an account-based title", and people don't think that 300+ hours spend HFFF'ing is "too little" to earn a title, (2) it's harder to justify decreasing a standard value such as rewards for a quest than rewards for CM's or AB, and (3) it's easier to re-adjust rewards than to re-program a quest. -- Alaris 13:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Andrew here is more proof that people want drastic changes to CM's [2]--58.107.47.95 02:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Andrew any word on these changes everybody agrees something must be done, and as our pVp CR guy we recommed you follow this up ASAP--220.245.179.132 02:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Any news on this? I'll soon be deciding which title to work on next. Thx. -- Alaris 17:29, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

If I hear anything about this you will be the first to know! Not every suggestion is going to be implemented immediately, or ever for that matter, but I did pass along your feedback (which is very detailed, so thank you by the way) and I did get the attention of a few of the designers. I will ask again next time I get the chance. --Andrew Patrick 17:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It's a pleasure to be doing some "volunteer work" for my favorite gaming company! *Scribbles something on CV* -- Alaris 18:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've found that usually its more fun if everybody plays sticks to one particular mode of play, and have come to the opinion, it may in fact, not so beneficial to have "perfectly" balanced pay offs from playing each. Rather, i think the game would be made more interesting, if rewards were periodically cycled between: increased rewards for only one particular mission, then only alliance battles, then not at all.--WikiWu 14:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

We do have special weekends for that. More to the point, there is a trade-off between everyone playing the same thing, and everyone playing what they want. For example, I've heard a few times people doing HFFF and being resentful that this was the fastest way to max the title. I hope it will be fixed if and when I start working on that title, because 300+ hours of HFFF is not my idea of fun. Similarly, I don't think people would appreciate being "forced" into AB or any other sub-game except for special weekends. -- Alaris 14:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Andrew. Any news on this? There's lots of players who would rather max this title rather than other farming titles, but consider HFFF way too mind-numbing. I'll soon reach the point where I have to make a choice too. Any word would be appreciated, even if it is "no", for planning purposes. Thanks. -- Alaris 15:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

tourneys

Tourneys are predictable, and to split friendly.. i think throw in a random map rotaion and add near-unsplittabel maps like burning isle 24.141.45.72 01:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hero Battle QP

Hi try to pm you in game, but never a response, just wondering why the hero battle qualifier points have not yet been reset, as people who haven't earned their 20 qp will be able to enter the February mAT. If any changes it should be done soon.

Thx (Beastin Shen)--BMShen February 20, 2008

I'd also like to add that players that haven't played in a rated match for more than 90 days still aren't being reverted to N/A on the ladder either... --Draikin 18:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Qualifier points were not reverted due to a bug in the system, so rather than doing it this late into the month, we are not going to reset them this month. Which means if you earned QP for last month or early this month you will be qualified to participate in this months MAT (provided you have enough QP). The bug has been fixed so this should not occur again.

As for the ladder, thank you for bringing that to our attention. I have let the person in charge of that know and he should fix that soon. --Andrew Patrick 19:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Random arenas and their amazingness

For quite some time i have been wondering, why i get matched against teams with 2 or even 3 monks so regularly, infact, so regularly that it doesn't look random to me. Can't you make a change somewhere, where matching primary professions don't get in one team so frequently? It would certainly help to lessen the *lame levels* quite noticeably. And don't point me to TA just because i flame RA. RA can become finer place to be if you make some minor improvements to it, that is the point of this message.

a bit of flame, take it both seriously and as a joke: While i am talking about RA, what i would also suggest, rather late in the GW life though, is to add some sort of quiz, that covers basic stuff of GW. If you fail it, all PvP locks and makes you to repeat it. Make it so it teaches players how to recognize if they are being useless or useful, also enlighten them on using proper and effective builds, with sense - a.k.a "don't run w/mo mending". And other light stuff like that. Also, to attract their attention into doing the quiz, implement a reward upon "huge success" - like an ecto ot some ammount of gold, it's should make a nice bait.

It would certainly help increse the quality of GW players, with insignificantly minor ammounts, but it would still be something. Then, collect the results and put up charts on your website with estimated average results... so we can enjoy them. And after that, if they still run w/mos, just auto-ban them for some hours.

Thanks... <3 dragNdrop her 18:12, 25 February 2008 (GMT)

Random arenas are, as the name implies, random. Placing team restrictions would deviate from the randomness of the arenas. And the name "some-what random, but not really" arenas doesn't have a very nice ring to it. ;)

As for your quiz idea, being as much of what some would consider fact is actually opinion it would be difficult to come up with questions that truly had one clear "right" answer. Not to mention, RA is the first form of PvP players are introduced to. Much of the common knowledge you feel should be a prerequisite for joining in RA is often learned through trial and error in that very format. Restricting access to one of the best places to learn basic PvP knowledge to only those with that basic PvP knowledge would greatly limit players possibilities to enter PvP. -Andrew Patrick 20:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Why not just implement a filter system that tries to not pair up identical classes? Antiarchangel 22:32, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd often thought RA would be much better if class pairing were 'weighted'. Like, if there's a monk available there should be one on your team. Then if there's a melee-based primary, one of those, and fill the other 2 with whatever else is available, with no repeats if possible.

If those combinations are not available, then it'd still fill your group, though, so you'd still end up with 3-monk groups, or groups with no monk, or all midline-support characters...but it'd be less often. Which would be great. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 22:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

That is not random...that is carefully balanced groups of strangers being placed on teams together. The functionality/code required to do that does not exist, and since it would make random arenas cease to be random, I doubt it would be implemented. In fact, this has been suggested in the past, and the answer is always the same: "If we did that, it wouldn't be random anymore." The name is quite literal; 4 players are randomly selected and placed on a team together against a random opponent made up of another 4 randomly selected players. And as far as I have been told, there are no plans to change that. --Andrew Patrick 23:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Totally agreeing with you Andrew, this game should offer different options for anyone particular tastes. Another good reason to bring back COSTUME BATTLES!!! Ichiko 15:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

So it seems that a lot of RA_ing can make you lose your mind and become paranoic :p . Because, i swear in my mother, ... Oh well. While we're here, i was wondering what happened to skill templates, like the fi_boon, w/mo stuff, ivex traps, etc. What if you bring them back? Build a rich DB with a lot of different builds, that are popular/updated. I see a lot of players running stuff that is weirder than the "Barbarella" movie. A nice DB of builds with clear explanations might help them orient a little better and boost their... evolution... with several light years ahead. Apart from being RA, it is also area for developing players, who are entering the Macho side of the game, so such features _should_ help the advancement. But from another PoV - would that help? With access to observer and web sites like: pvpx, gwWiki; a build DB might be redundant, because everything is already there playing on replay for you to absorb, and those who create them irrational builds and strategies just don't care at all... dragNdrop her 19:00, 26 February 2008 (GMT)

To be honest, as quickly as the meta shifts there would be no way for us to keep up-to-date templates in-game without constantly updating them. Rather, a number of community-ran template sites such as PvXwiki or GWShack keep an up-to-date database of builds that are created and posted by players. And with the new template system that allows you to pass templates from player to player, we feel providing our own templates would be unnecessary since the community is already doing such a good job of it. --Andrew Patrick 19:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I enjoy the RA's even though it can lopsided at times but that is the nature of the beast. I can enter quick without having to wait for a team build but there is a possibility that I wont have a healer but the other team will. The problems isn't in the randomness of RA, it's the healing class in GW. Any class that can heal others makes a game unbalanced. If there is a hierarchy or food-chain (attack Monks first then Rits>Paragons>Mesmers>etc), then the game is not balanced...common sense 101. You shouldn't have to put all your money on the Interrupt Ranger when he is facing an Elementalist. You shouldn't have to put all your money on the Warrior when facing a Ranger. Your skill bar should decide the outcome...not the class. For a game that is supposed to be based on skill, it takes no skill for an interrupt Ranger to beat an Elementalist with all those long ass cast times. You get the idea. (note: The sucky Ele class has the highest energy pool but the only class that has to resort to wanding...haha, think about that for a sec!)

You should not be able to know your first target; rather, you should have to decide who is the bigger threat. As it stands, healers are always the biggest threat. Healers ruin this game (thus the problem with Random Arena when facing a healer team). As for PvE, you can't do a damn thing unless you are a "glf 2 monks then we go." If your class has skills that can heal others, then it can be a heal class (even though Paragon is support). I have seen Derv's and Rit's act as better healers than Monks...jfc man, how many healing classes does a game need? So you can see, it's not the idea of RA that is the problem...its the healing class. 24.106.177.50 12:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

TA So Much Less Active Than RA

If you ask just about anyone that ever complains about RA (a huge amount of people) why they don't just go to TA, you just about always get the same answer. "There aren't enough people there to make a decent team". And this is absolutely true. At any given time, even when the very most people are active, if you were to try to go to TA and try to make a team of 2 thumpers, 1 rit, and 1 monk, you couldn't do it within a reasonable amount of time (half an hour or less). If you don't believe me, just try it. Go to TA, don't use any names that people know you as, or anything to suggest you're anything besides a normal player, and try to make any common team of anything besides randomway. Try making a team with 3 eles and 1 monk. Try making a team with 4 rits. Try making a team with 1 warrior, 1 mesmer, 1 elementalist, and 1 monk. It just isn't possible because not enough people go there. Why? Because people would rather RA and not bother having to make a team out of the very slim selections in TA. Pretty much all you ever play against in TA is RA teams or guild teams. I think TA should always have a reward advantage over RA. Not just a 1 weekend thing, but something like double faction or double gladiator points always. That would actually motivate people to go into TA and start making pugs. Maybe then TA would have as many or close to as many people in it as RA. VegaObscura 05:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Problem there is if TA was TOO much better than RA, no one would RA anymore. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 13:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Pugs in TA usually just get farmed for glad points, that's why everyone is in RA :p --Tankity Tank 15:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Costume battles can give you an instant action play mode and you get away from gimmicks to focus on playstyle. (am I really spaming about this concern?) Ichiko 15:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's off topic and nonconstructive. Your answer will lie within the costume brawl section and spamming other sections to promote your view doesn't help the discussion at hand. I think it's been said that these are special events by Gaile and there's no immediate movement to bring them to stay but I'm sure Andrew and Gaile has seen the interest in the special arenas. Also, judging from your posts, you seem fairly PvE oriented and you should know by now that decisions on skills are balanced mostly according to top tier GvG usage and complaints. PlacidBlueAlien 18:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's well known that TA/RA and costume battles are Pve oriented, I'm stupid sometimes. I'll go back to read Gaile Gray and Frog talks on guru forums, sorry. Ichiko 19:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Are we really going to degenerate back to the PvE vs. PvP debate? Yes, skills get balanced for PvP (mostly related to GvG), yes skills get balanced for PvE (mostly related to farming/exploits). Is one playstyle inherently catered to more than the other by ArenaNet? I don't think so. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 18:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

It is indeed more difficult to create a team in TA since, you know...all you need to do is hit "enter mission" for RA. ;) But many of the people who play TA do so with guildies or friends rather than relying on a pug. Have you considered trying to round up a few players off of your friends list of guild roster and creating a build together? It really makes the TA experience a whole lot more fun IMO. --Andrew Patrick 19:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'm known for creating a very powerful build (when run correctly) known as gothspike or shovespike, and I do run it with my guild and people from friends periodically and just keep winning until someone has to leave, with over a 50:1 win:loss ratio, but I don't think we should be forced to do that. I think we should be given enough people to make a team out of the people there. I don't think you should be forced to RA if you don't have enough people online in your guild or friends. VegaObscura 04:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Apart from shutting down RA, ANet can not give you "enough people to make a team. If you want more people in TA and want ANet to do something about it, suggest a way to achieve it. Sitting here complaining wont help. --Xeeron 13:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I did make a suggestion, I said give TA double faction or double gladiator points. VegaObscura 20:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd go as far as saying, once you unlock TA, RA should be treated like the Zaishen Elite in terms of faction - 6k cap per day. (and no glad points) — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 21:22, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I would not. Zaishen challenge & elite are capped because they are not PvP, they are simulated PvP, and as such are too easy to abuse. RA and TA are both PvP, except different styles. -- Alaris 21:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The way I see it, in both RA and TA you are fighting enemies on equal ground in the sense that, in TA, it is organized team vs organized team, and in RA, it is random team vs random team. I don't think it is the reward that makes TA less popular that RA...I think it is simply the ease of group forming, or rather, the lack of group forming in RA that makes it have a larger player base. Raising the reward in TA simply to try to, for lack of better words, force people to move over there doesn't seem practical. People should play the format they prefer, not feel obligated to play a certain one because the reward is significantly better. The reward should be a bonus for playing the format you enjoy, really. I can ask if we want to do something to make TA a bit more attractive, but honestly, I don't think the reward system is the reason for a smaller player base. --Andrew Patrick 19:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

You have to work to get TA (learn PvP and get 5 wins in RA), you have to work to put together a team in TA (either pug or design with friends), it's universally regarded as harder to win at TA than RA...why SHOULDN'T TA have a bigger prize? — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 19:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes I agree even if it's just double balthazar faction I'd be happ(y/ier)--Underwood 19:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Izzy is going to look into this to see if it is possible. Thanks for your feedback. :) --Andrew Patrick 19:41, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Any news? — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 21:01, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

In theory TA is "fighting enemies on equal ground" , however in reality half the teams you fight/farm are auto transitions from RA with no vent, co-ordination etc. so it's quite unfair for them. Many of them don't even realize they are suddenly in TA. Ernie

Since this is already about TA activity - Dear Andrew, I'd love to see a small section for watching TA games in the observer. There's one for GvG, one for Tombs, even one for HB... it can't be so difficult to add a few lines for TA? Even if it would be only to see your own TA matches again (like you can see your own guild's GvGs again in observer too). Wouldn't this be possible for TA as well? You could also change the Observer's overview by adding categories like: ATs - GvGs - Tombs - HBs - TA/Own Games. Or something like that... Animate 19:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Obelisk Flag Stand

do they even work? i think you guys should rethink this part of the game or make it so you get an area affect because right now they are mostly useless.

What are you even talking about? GvG? RA? What? In any case - no, they're not useless, they ADD pressure to your opponent. No, they won't spike-kill your opponents outright, but if they did, they'd be in dire need of the nerfbat. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 22:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

my point is 90% of the time they don't add enough to make a difference nor do the change the game play to reflect them being there. i think they should have a monster skill and not fireball so it could be something that they can control and not get nerffed or buffed with skill blance

They help somewhat in TA, wait for the other team to cap first then cap and hope the one of the other team runs back to recap. But personally I'd rather have a moral boost shrine instead. Antiarchangel 23:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

In GvG they can largely sway the battle, especially at VoD, but in arenas they really don't do much of anything. I agree they need a damage boost. VegaObscura 23:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

i haven't seen it used much in ha eather... i do however see how if they changed it to be more powerful people might get pissed but then my question to them would be what is the point of those kind of maps?

I don't think the intention of these is to be a massive game-altering world effect, but rather, a little extra pressure for the team that gets the flag stand. I do see people using it in TA, HA, and GvG, so it does seem to be meaningful enough to be "worth it" in battle. How much of a change are you proposing? --Andrew Patrick 19:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure as I haven't timed it, but they seem to do about 30 damage every 3-5 seconds? If you multiply by 4 people, that's 120 damage/5s, or about 24dps...24dps is pretty crappy. I'd say just push them up closer to like 40dps, maybe even 50 if you think that wouldn't be too strong. Obviously, this would be more dps in GvG/HA if your whole team was in range - but you also have more room to get out of range, and additional slots to put monks in...so it'd balance. — ( ɔ \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 19:31, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Fix this one first.--Underwood 19:33, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes if you fix that and boost the power bit, and change the fire skill to one that is a "monster skill" and raise the damage. for the most part when ever i see it used or played its just to distract n00bs. i am just saying that i would like to see it be more focused on that then how it is now. were you can still win the match with out eather party capping it. and i think part of that is because it dose not do enough.

i see you have no plans to change this75.165.122.205 20:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

i just played a few runs of HA and everytime i got the one map with the flag stand (which was like 4 times) nether team bothered to cap i caped it 2 times. and saw no one on the other team to make an effort in caping. so please give this a buff or just take the maps out of the rotation for ha atleast.

please make some sort of change to this. it would make pvp so much more intresting.75.165.99.144 22:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

GWEN Henchmen

Why isnt there rits, sins, derv, or pragons as henches?--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.165.122.205 (talk).

Because, there are already rits, sins, dervs, and paragons as heroes, and if you have heroes, why on earth you want henchies? I would, however, like to see increase number of heroes slots, BUT ONLY for PvE, of course :D .--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:213.91.181.103 (talk).

Because havening 3 fire eles > havening a team of a rit sin derv, or para. i would like to see henches for each profession... its usefull when playing a pargon to have the para hench so he can keep ecos going....--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:75.165.122.205 (talk).

PlayNC Store Upgrades

Dear Andrew: I have a question about account upgrades. I notice that on this page http://gw.gamewikis.org/wiki/Online_store it says that at the online store you are able to purchase things such as Extra character slots, Skill unlock pack, PvP access kit, PvP item unlock pack, Prop One Million Edition upgrade, and Proph GOTY editon upgrade. However after going to the store at https://secure.plaync.com/cgi-bin/Store.pl I noticed there is no option to purchase some of these upgrades like char slots, pvp item pack, million edtion upgrade, and goty upgrade. Are they still available? Second Question: If they are still availble, I was wondering if there were anyways to purchase the /bonus and /preorder upgrades from the other campaigns (besides the two listed above). I know myself and many otheres like me would be happy to pay the extra $10 dollars (or more) a piece for each one. I am also interested in the collector's editon upgrades as well. Things like the divine aura upgrade, collectors editon weapons, and the new dances. Is there anyway to add them as an upgrade for sale as well? You could suggest it and make anet a TON more money on a game that is unlikely to make many "new player sales" with GW2 comming out. Its just sometimes when you spend so much time in a game (like gw), and have done everything there is to do (many times), you want your account to be absolutely complete with everything, and I believe the add ons would allow people like me to do that. I mean you already have the technology to do it, and you have done it before (I.E. the two edition upgrades listed above)... so why not make the upgrades available for all of them :D It would also make ANET a ton more money, and make many of us crazy GW adicts soo soo happy :D Please Please Please!! (I'm going to beg)... Please Please PLEASE!!! Your awesome if you do!!! You will be a hero to anet for making them so much more money!! You will make us gw adicts soooo sooo happy!! Pleaseeeee!!!!! This game is going to be dead or dying soon....give us a chance to really really complete it with everything possible :D Do it for the game freaks like me, who in order to really beat a game need to have done everything in it before they can move on happy :D <3

numerus times has gaile said no to the CE as a upgrade you can buy in the store how ever much i would love to have the other dances they are not going to do it ever prity much also plz use less smiley faces in your posts. STOP EDITING MY POSTS! 75.165.122.205 03:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Those upgrades are only purchasable from the In-Game Store. — Galil 03:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I think its a great idea I like this idea because it will discourage people from selling accounts. Right now there are people paying hundreds of dollars for collectors edition accounts on ebay. I know this type of sale is illegal but it is still happening. I think if you give people a way to get these upgrades legally through anet, then it will stop alot of account selling and virutal item sales for real money.

The entire point of collectors edition is to have something rare, something that not everyone has. Unused CD keys for proph collectors edition cost approximately $500.00USD right now. To devalue Collectors Edition so much would be a huge slap in the face to everyone that bought CE when it was available. VegaObscura 05:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

thats not what i posted way to edit it....Galil i see that you did it in the history....75.165.122.205 05:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Nope I didn't. It was the anon that edited it after me. — Galil 11:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The bonus items and CE items are special items given to those that purchased the required game, upgrade, etc. during the time it was available. They were part of a limited time offer, and I do not know of any plans to offer them again. --Andrew Patrick 20:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Dervish spike in GvG

Hi Andrew, i know there is talk of a skill balance this week but im afraid that the current build of choice in GvG will escape the balance changes. Im not entirely sure what part of this build is the most broken, its toss between shadow stepping (very hard to pre prot and allows even the worst callers to get sharp spikes) and the dervish build (grenths + pious), but the combination of both is as im sure youve seen on observer is incredibly nasty, the build is evolving into another "Eurospike" as people are taking increasing amounts of defense (2xBsurge/Ward/2xAegis/DA!). I must say that the meta is an improvement on Assassin Split, but its going to the other extreme of burning isle wars.--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:194.82.121.38 (talk).

We are aware of the issue with Dervspike and there will be balance changes to address it in this week's build. --Andrew Patrick 03:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

AB game trouble

Hi Andrew, I have a question for you. Are ArenaNet rigging games so Kurzicks will win? Its just that everytime I go on AB I always end up in Grenz Frontier (mostly) of Ancestral Lands. Why is this? I go on AB once everyday for 7 days a week and always end up on thse 2 arenas. Can this be stopped? I dont go in Kannai canyon or Etnaran Keys for weeks at a time. Please, please, please let let the luxons win by giving them the canyon and the keys.--Burning Freebies 20:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Remember to sign...but onto your issue, the problem is most likely because you are logging in around the same time, and the map fluxation just happens to be on that map. play AB for any length of time, and you will notice that if you lose alot of games, the map will be pushed back. The luxons must be winning alot of battles on saltspray beach, so the map keeps getting pushed back to grenz.

imho the maps should be balanced, I think that would fix alot of issues with AB....but thats another issue.--Ryudo 17:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

There's alot about AB mechanics we don't really know about such as the momentum bonus. Either way, things should be changed so that map switches back and forth. No one wants to stay on ancestral or kanaai for 6+ hours which I hear most of the complaints coming in from. Also, minor edit to your post Ryudo to fix indent. PlacidBlueAlien 18:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

RPTs trouble

Hey Andrew, idk who to go to about this, but i won some reward points from the february tournament voting,but i cannot retrieve them from the agent. can you do anything about this?-Insane Maestro 00:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

If you contact support or tournament@arena.net we can help track down the issue. --Andrew Patrick 03:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

i sent an email today.-Insane Maestro 13:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Reporting Leachers

Due to the not-so-informed nature of the people in RA, it is quite rare for leachers to be reported. Normally no one would care about this, except theres one problem. If one person does indeed report a leacher, more times than not the rest of the team will fail to report that leacher, causing the one person acting correctly to recieve dishonor instead of the leacher. VegaObscura 04:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The person you report gets dishonor for everytime someone reports him, no matter how many people report him. The only thing is half of your team just needs to report him so that you don't get dishonor. Besides, it says at the beggining of every match how to report a leacher. — ク Eloc 貢 17:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes I'm aware it tells at the start of every match how to report someone, but most RA players are still too stupid to do it. VegaObscura 23:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

ATs and forfeit

I scrubbed to best of my ability to find if this topic has been brought up previously, but suprisingly - i find nothing. If it has been discussed in the past, pls delete :)

So, seeing "Won by forfeit" (WbF) standing next to A LOT of guilds, in the begining and during the ATs, i was wondering, woudn't be better if you just make it like that: The guilds that WbF get to play on the _*same round*_ against the other WbF guilds. So, the system just rearranges the WbF guilds and lets them play against eachothers. Possible minuses will be, of course, matching against uneven guilds, more rarerly - matching against one and the same guild again... but that is way more better than just not getting to play, and be forced to kill time with ladder gvg or w/e.

dragNdrop her 13:00, 08 March 2008 (GMT+2)

A more logical solutions with no visible downsides is to have a short timer before the initial 5 minute "join" timer. This first timer would have a button on it that your team leader would press to confirm that your team is there and ready, and then once that timer is up, the tournament then starts and it matches up all those guilds that did confirm, and then start the normal 5 minute "join" timer. VegaObscura 12:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, some people will even push that button and state that they are ready, but stuff happens and they may forfeit even like that, it happens to everyone all the time. ALso, the "register for tournament" button has this function already, so no matter how many buttons you stack, forfeits will not disappear.dragNdrop her

I think the main reason for most of the first round forfeits is the fact that teams register somewhere in the 1 hour registration period, but by the time that hour is over some of their players have already left. I agree it wouldn't get rid of forfeits entirely, but it would severely cut down on first-round forfeits. VegaObscura 00:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

You can check "17 PVP in GW: rest in peace?" and my last message at the end. You can also search in archive1 from september 2007. Then you can wait forever for something to happen. Sorry but this has been debated for so long and nothing is done. Ichiko 04:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't assume this is not still being discussed. Because...it is! I haven't heard any confirmed plans, but I do know it is something the designers continue to discuss. --Andrew Patrick 19:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

It's an interesting can of worms, in an ideal situation you would expect a team that forfeits to loose a rating point, because they don't that loophole is being exploited. However if you introduced a forfeit penalty, you wouldn't get as many guilds registering for an AT, so it wouldn't look very good. Ernie

Life Stealing

I don't know If this is the best place to put this, tell me If I need to put this on another place.

Life stealing is a powerful type of skill:

• It causes a powerful damage that is not considered damage so overrides all types of protection.
• It's not considered healing so it overrides Deep Wound effects and some other hexes.
• It ignores armor.

So, If you use skills like Angorodon's Gaze with some condition on you: you heal yourself, make armor ignore damage, protection ignore, with no energy cost and with only 5 secs recharge. Don't you think is a little bit overpower skill?

If you compare life stealing skills with skills doing armor ignoring like some of smiting prayers you can see a larger recharge and cost. Balanced? I don't think so - lina talk 17:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Angoro's gaze is pretty good, but only if you have a condition on you. Otherwise, its cost is high, quite higher than most smiting prayer skills. All I see is pro's and con's, unless someone can point out some specific examples. BTW, take into account this pro/con: they are also skills across professions, meaning for example a Mo/Me can bring smiting skills but not necro skills. -- Alaris 17:27, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

No. Life stealing is very ineffective as a build. It's basically just a means of balancing combat. It's difficult to actually win matches with it due to the cast times, requisites, sacrifice or recharge times. --Reklaw 17:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

High recharges? lol. Sacrifice? too few skills and remember that you life steal, so it makes no sacrifice. Requisites? Well requisites are easy to accomplish and remember: It overrides all types of protection + armor ignore lina 10:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Life stealing skills generally have low DPS capabilities in comparison to their non-life stealing counterparts. The only exception to the case is Angorodon's Gaze. VegaObscura 13:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

As others have said, Life Stealing skills are all balanced to have sufficient "cons" to weigh against their "pros." You can certainly make a useful build out of it, no doubt about that, but I don't really see how it is overpowered. I know Izzy has been monitoring the meta to see if the 1energy skills cause any issues, but as far as I know no such issues have presented themselves. --Andrew Patrick 20:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Well at last I get the nerf of Angorodon's Gaze that I need. -- lina 21:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Screen Shot for the wiki

Just realized that there is no screenshot of your character "Monastery Scribe" for this wiki. If you could drop "Rave Monk" a line sometime so he could take and upload one, or upload one yourself? pretty please?--Ryudo 20:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Friends List

Being an active PvP'er yourself, you are probably experienced with this probably. Friends Lists are just too small to have a decent number of friends for guesting in GvG and HA. Half the people I've asked about this say their friends list is entirely full, and 90% of the people I've asked have said their ignore list is full. Also it would be nice to be able to sort your friends list into groups, for example HA guests, GvG guests, PvE friends, TA guests, etc. VegaObscura 05:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Gladiator Title Emote or Other Reward(s) for TA

This has probably been mentioned before, but I'd like to hear some concrete answers. Out of all pvp forms, TA is the least active, due to imo the little amount of rewards involved with doing it. From a pvp only perspective, AB (if you even consider it pvp) has the whole faction thing, with pve skills, ect..HA has the ever so exclusive emotes. HB/gvg both have ladder/tournaments/RL prizes. RA has the benefit of just pressing enter and going in, and possibly getting some glad points(you can't really farm them in RA unless thats all you do).TA/Gladiator has nothing, no rewards: ladder/tournys/prizes/emotes, ect...other than a title. Though no changes will probably be made, at the very least some map changes would be somewhat polite.--84.168.93.100 11:08, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I hoped for a hero battles type of ladder play in TA, with 4 humans. It would have been amazing. With less objectives, and kept simple. It would have been an amazingly powerful PvP, unforgivable, no room for any imperfections on the high-end. But yeah, hero battles instead, the designers/developers will burn in hell for this. Hope they won't make such terrible mistakes with GW2. Having a game like GW in your hands, with amazing concepts, and not making the most of them, well, it's a shame--dragNdrop her 21:00, 20 March 2008 (GMT2)

I think that ladders for TA would be nice. Personally, I think most achievements like KoaBD and different types of PvP should get their own emotes. I love how emotes makes it possible to display your achievements in a way that titles get missed most of the time. However, there are plenty of people that enjoy hero battle, and how it gives them complete control of their team. I see no reason to dismiss that. I see no reason to remove hero battles, TBH, not even to make place for what you would prefer to have. It'd be better if we could have both. -- Alaris 20:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I do RA more than TA for one reason...instant access. I don't feel like waiting around for monks/healers and for others to agree to certain builds. I just want to turn on the game, get my pvp rush and not have to wait 30 minutes before my first battle. So, yeah, a nice little emote would be great. 24.106.177.50 11:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

So i hierd u play BF2

Whats u re PID? ~ SCobra 01:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

First, the QQ style and humor of writting doesn't go well here, also it won't be appreciated/understood by the majority of users. Second, learn GW first and then move on to BF2. Leaving unfinished business is not good, it's like making love to a beautiful virgin girl for 5 minutes, and suddenly interrupting the act without finishing. And last, any BF after BF1942 is a failure.--dragNdrop her 18:16, 24 March 2008 (GMT2)

Who, virgins! what?! 70.3.115.73 15:04, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sentinels on Burning Isle

I only realized this a few days ago, but the Lesser Flame Sentinels on Burning Isle die long before VoD. It seems kind of pointless to have them there if they just die out anyway. If they die at all, shouldn't it be after VoD triggers?

Also, the gates on Uncharted Isle have been bugged for over a year. Please get someone to fix them. ~Shard (talk / Nerf List) 09:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I guess you should keep up to date with the update notes, that change to the sentines was implemented ages ago, somewhere after the swtich from *Flame Sentinels* to *Lesser flame sentinels* (or at the same time, w/e). The point is, of course to ease split teams on such a non-split friednly map. Now that they degen, killing them is more easy and rangers can solo them faster.--dragNdrop her 15:24, 21 March 2008 (GMT2)

i see that gvg guilds are lacking we keep playing the same guilds all the time and theres a huge wait time for my guild to find a game may i suggest that a chest spawns after every gvg to the victor and depending on the rank of the loser the drops would vary, it might draw in some pve'ers and maybe help form more competition since everything is reward based :D--The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:69.86.160.1 (talk).

You already have faction for this. Exchange it for zkeys or unlocks. Even if you add such a reward, it won't draw players into pvp play. $100,000 world championships, as far as i remember, didn't attract players on a scale, that you and i would want. It's a 2in1 game (PvP and PvE), some ppl are playing just for PvE and don't care for PvP, the other way arround is true also. If a PvE player would like to get a PvP exclusive item, he won't go trough the trouble to study the game and get good at it, he will just buy it with the millions he got from farming. The problems with the wait times and competition doesn't come from lack of rewards, but from age of game, and somewhat the history of PvP - it's ups and downs; but that's a topic that can span dozens of pages of long and boring discussions. So, as finale, the game is amazing as it is at the moment, given it's age and competition on the market; of course, there are millions things wrong with it, but you just have to settle down and accept it's flaws/try to addapt. Please, fix those a/d spike madness, good thing you adjusted Fox's Promise, but now we have amazing Dark Apostasy, which is even more nasty. Or w/e, i am quite anxious to see what will happen on this mAT - a/d spike; 4necros with enffeble and wail of doom for amazing shutdown and degen; sinsplit from the japan.... well, it will be an amazing festival :) ..--dragNdrop her 18:10, 24 March 2008 (GMT2)

I guess I'm the only person who thinks it's dumb to allow splitting on a non-split map. I never take other teams to VoD on this map, so that's why I never noticed the sentinels die quicker. I lost to a Searing Flames team (zzz) who split at 14 and we though they wouldn't get past the sentinels (which were already dead, but we didn't know at the time). I just think it's pointless to have the sentinels die at an arbitrary time instead of a time that makes sense. 72.235.48.41 07:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Kruzick and Luxon Faction uses.

i think it would be nice if made it so each time you get a higher rank in the title the cap is raised like how it is with bath faction. so with the new raised cap you should also be able to do more stuff with it like get npcs for your hall. i think if you allowed that it would give a guild more functionality and would also promote pvp.75.165.99.144 03:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Never refer to AB as pvp. AB is a playground. 69.137.78.47 19:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

And HA is just FotM Spike or "---way" builds. Dont belittle other peoples opinions.--Ryudo 07:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I also think this would be nice, its quite annoying that the cap needs to remain at 10k if it changes for high level Bath people. You win 2-3 matches in AB you will probably need to turn faction, on bonus weekends you are turning in faction after almost every win. Get sick of always having to turn in at 5k and get it close to 10k? Hope you dont get stuck with a group leader that enters battle before you can turn in, and end up losing out on the next matches faction basically. On the IPs note, never really understood how AB isnt considered PvP either. Its Person versus Person. While you cant always have the best groups or best organization in AB, its still a PvP option for those who dont have big/active guilds. I am the only person in my guild who PvPs, its a tad hard to do GvG that way :P--riceball 17:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

you should get in a new guild... and if you say "Never refer to AB as pvp. AB is a playground." then maybe something needs to be done with ab. also you should get some faction or steal faction when you gvg. ie a kurzick and luxon guild fight the wining team gets like 500 faction each. and if its luxon vs luxon then they steal 500 faction from that guild.75.165.99.144 00:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

AB needs to be cleaned from mobbing so it will bring back the good games. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:80.61.115.39 (talk).

Guild Hall Henhmen

i know they dont have much use anymore since heroes but i think it would be cool if you could get any of the henches unlocked for you guild hall and that some of them could be hall specific. so if you have a nightfall hall you can get a few henches that are just from nightfall. 75.165.99.144 03:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a waste of time. 69.137.78.47 19:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds cool having more hench in the hall will make scrimmage 1v1 more fun :)--Fox007 19:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

/Wins

Be really nice to have a feature that told you what ur current streak is in RA and TA and for HA how much this win will give youin fame.--The Gates Assassin 19:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Unlock/buy guild hall stuff with faction

i for one don't understand why you can only buy npcs with money i guess most of them don't have much pvp use but for the ones that do. you should be able to get them another way like faction. 75.165.99.144 00:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sell Ziashen Keys. Pluto 11:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Skill over Grind in PvP titles

Almost all the titles have become grind titles. This is fine in PvE, because it is PvE, but in PvP people are trying to use these things to differentiate between skilled and unskilled players and at the moment an unskilled player can easily get to the same title level as a skilled player by just grinding the hell out of the titles. Guild wars is supposed to have an element of skill over time in game, so I was wondering about a few changes to how titles work in PvP. For example, the Gladiator title track could be split into two titles, one for RA, one for TA, where instead of getting points per win, it simply displayed your longest streak. While an unskilled player could get lucky and get a long streak, it is much more likely that a skilled player would have a longer best streak and a good player could get a better streak playing much, much less than a poor player in comparison to grinding the title in RA, which is what everyone does now. A similar approach for the fame title would be to change it so that it showed the highest stage someone had gotten up to, or their most consecutive wins in halls. This would let you know if someone had at least gotten through the first map before so you would know if they could count down before rushing the Zaishen and give you an idea of where they could get to. This would also kill a lot of gimmick HA builds as what is the point in running a gimmick that can't get past the relic run if your title is already up to relic run? Hero title track could be linked to current ranking or rating. Ok, I realise people have put a lot of time and effort into grinding these titles, so it's a bit late to change everything now, but something similar to this strikes me as a good idea for GW2, otherwise if it were to go into GW it would probably have to go in paralell to the current system to prevent mass QQing. Misery 17:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that plan totally kills the possibility of casual, 10-30 min PvP players. We already have the Champion title. If that title isn't skill-requiring enough, I don't know what is. And, BTW, an unskilled player(i.e. me) can't get the titles as easily as you imply. I have about a 5:90 Win:Loss in HB; there's no way I'll ever be able to get even the first title at that rate. I haven't won a battle for months. >.< Your idea isn't bad, it's just that it really shouldn't replace any current titles. It would make good new titles, though.(Why change the HB title, though? You don't see that many people saying "HB R6 LFG," do you?) Kite 21:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the Champion Title does show skill, but you kind of need to prove yourself before you can get anywhere near even starting that particular title track. 5:90 Win:Loss would be no problem if you were one of those crazy ass people who seem to be able to play 8 hours a day. I sort of agree with the fact that old titles couldn't be wiped as I said above. Yeah, you don't see people using the Hero titles to LFG, but some guilds have realised that gladiator ranks are bunk by now and have started recruiting using HB titles because they realise, or hope, that it requires some skill to get it as you can't rely on anyone else. You're all alone, so you have to do it yourself. You can still grind it all by yourself though. Don't know if this is still the right place for this rant though considering the post below, I guess if Andrew notices it he'll tell me, otherwise maybe it's time to copy and paste to Izzy's page. Anyway, best of luck Andrew. Misery 07:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I *do* play about 8 hours a day...which is really, really sad, now that I think about it. Anyway, I do think being able to display best winning-streaks, HoH holdings, and other PvP accomplishments would be pretty cool. I'd never have any of them, but it'd still be pretty cool. I don't know if it would work as a title, though, and it might cause PvP elitism, which scares me a little, cause I'll never be able to get into a serious group (that might be for the best, though. =P ). Also, why wouldn't people just pay a group to let them in and use an easy wiki build, and hold HoH for a while? At least the extra money flow would boost the economy, I guess. =P

Also, with my Rating, I can't even get into a HB battle outside of tournaments. =P Kite 12:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)