Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
7
LastLast
  1. #81
    From a previous post where questions were asked of AJ for the reasons behind having one type of map - I believe this provides some insight into the reasoning behind this choice - albeit opinions from players external to AN:

    Q: Would you like to see any other map types made for spvp? Maybe CTF for example.

    A1 (Lyr/atrox):
    Hey, Guy_With_A_Question. Thanks for the question, guy!

    Honestly, no. While it would be fun to have different game modes, imagine the balancing nightmares that would ensue. If this game seriously wants to take itself as an eSport and take a stab at success, I think they are taking the right direction on balancing the game for one game type.

    On top of that; this game has amazing positional based PvP. What better game mode to go along with that than conquest with cool secondary objectives for each map?

    A2 (TLrotten,Rotten/Team Legacy):
    Right now, Conquest is the best mode for the game.
    As there are no dedicated roles (e.g. healers), the usual deathmatch and other common gamemodes don’t fit in. The game would have no depth other than smashing all your damage skills.
    I believe the reason they chose conquest over other modes is simple: It forces you to split into several scrimmages, creating 1v1,2v2, etc. situations where you have to use your abilities really carefully (like fearing someone of a capture point to cap it, snare someone on the way to a point, etc.)

    There are some modes that could fit into the game, as you mentioned, CTF is one of them. The issue would be that the game is balanced around conquest. I think they are definitely doing the right choice in sticking to one map type.

    I also need to add that the secondary objectives offer more possibilities to Conquest than other modes. I could imagine CTF being integrated in an actual conquest map for example.
    Last edited by dezziedc; 2012-08-13 at 06:50 AM.

  2. #82
    Not sure if it has been brought up or not, but does anyone know if a penalty for leaving a game before it ends?

    I might have just been unlucky, but more often than not, people who are on the losing side of a game with significant point differences end up leaving. And since there’s an auto-balancing feature, someone from the winning team ends up taking their spot.

    I’m honestly not entirely sure if being on the winning team gives any bonus glory or not, but it’s frustrating nonetheless.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by dezziedc View Post
    From a previous post where questions were asked of AJ for the reasons behind having one type of map - I believe this provides some insight into the reasoning behind this choice - albeit opinions from players external to AN:

    snip..etc...
    Yeah that was posted in another thread. But keep in mind that those guys are thinking straight for E-sports. Why wouldn't they, right? And if you think about it 99% (the rest) will never even be close to it. Which is my point towards (even if slowly) some other game modes, which I really believe to be possible. The nightmare of balancing is real but it's not an excuse to present only one, because I'm sure that even conquest did had it's problems and it was opted to be followed due to a more easy way of balancing, but I do believe it should be faced with others all the same.

    As far as a conquest + CTF being fairly possible it's been done, Eye of the Storm on WoW. And While it can be easy to "balance around it", keep in mind that in EoTS you could usually and easily forget about the flag and force a 3 node cap, as much as you can pretty much ignore the secondary mechanics of the actual gw2 maps and still win. I'm not asking for a CTF even tho I always liked the game mode, which seems to be rather touchy mode for most in terms of balancing and stuff, so in all honesty it falls into "bad example". But I do want other game modes presented to me, and I'll be supporting (thru gems and expansions) so I can get it of course.

    ----

    Quote Originally Posted by Laste View Post
    Not sure if it has been brought up or not, but does anyone know if a penalty for leaving a game before it ends?

    I might have just been unlucky, but more often than not, people who are on the losing side of a game with significant point differences end up leaving. And since there’s an auto-balancing feature, someone from the winning team ends up taking their spot.

    I’m honestly not entirely sure if being on the winning team gives any bonus glory or not, but it’s frustrating nonetheless.
    As far as I know there isn't and I brought this issue in some other pvp thread (there are so many >.<). I still think we could use some more tweaking in the game browsers to make it more than "It's a place to just test your build". While auto balancing is a must feature, the fact that people are really going on and off with no penalty is really annoying, which makes balancing even more impossible no matter how you see it. I do not know if penalty is the way to go about it, and the fact that what you do in the game grants you more points (potentially) than being in the winning team.

    But I do agree it's discouraging (probably one of the reasons I prefer 100% tournaments). I think it should have some kind of queue when entering the game browser, one can only enter a team if there is another player waiting on the other team side, making always even. As for quitters I'm not really sure how to handle it, but I would like to see some tweaking of how it works, as some people might feel discouraged to enter tournaments and face "unfairness" in "random" games.

  4. #84
    Herald of the Titans Ynna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Laste View Post
    Not sure if it has been brought up or not, but does anyone know if a penalty for leaving a game before it ends?

    I might have just been unlucky, but more often than not, people who are on the losing side of a game with significant point differences end up leaving. And since there’s an auto-balancing feature, someone from the winning team ends up taking their spot.

    I’m honestly not entirely sure if being on the winning team gives any bonus glory or not, but it’s frustrating nonetheless.
    I don't think there's a penalty for losing. The winning team does get more glory.
    Retired Holy Priest
    As a rule, I try to act on the internet as I would in real life. If I have offended you, feel free to point it out. Unless I meant to offend you, I will probably apologize.

  5. #85
    When a match ends, you can get additional glory for being the best player on your team in various categories such as points assaulted, points neutralized, etc. So there is some incentive to stick around until the end of a match. Also, you earn more glory for participating in the match than the win bonus and matches don't last all that long.

  6. #86
    Herald of the Titans Ynna's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Exedore View Post
    When a match ends, you can get additional glory for being the best player on your team in various categories such as points assaulted, points neutralized, etc.
    Especially fun if you are the best in all categories. Oh god, some of the teams I was in...
    Retired Holy Priest
    As a rule, I try to act on the internet as I would in real life. If I have offended you, feel free to point it out. Unless I meant to offend you, I will probably apologize.

  7. #87
    I would love to see capture the flag as a secondary objective in conquest. A example could be: Each point you control still gives you the 1 point a second I believe it is, while also rewarding you more points for each return of the flag say 5-10 points. The flag could spawn in the middle with each capture point forming a semi large triangle around the center were the flag spawns. To me this would be a lot of fun for a capture the flag set up while still keeping the feel of conquest.
    Last edited by zeelic; 2012-08-13 at 02:42 PM.

  8. #88
    The Insane DrakeWurrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Isle of Faces
    Posts
    15,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Zilong View Post
    keep in mind that in EoTS you could usually and easily forget about the flag and force a 3 node cap
    That's because of the way Blizzard balanced their map. We all know how "good" Blizzard is at balance.
    I hope you haven't forgotten my role in this little story. I'm the leading man. You know what they say about the leading man? He never dies.

    If you give in to your impulses in this world, the price is that it changes your personality in the real world. The player and character are one and the same.

  9. #89
    That's because of the way Blizzard balanced their map. We all know how "good" Blizzard is at balance.
    Aside from a Blizzard-slam for the sake of doing it, I don't get what your point is here? There were 5 objectives in EotS, holding 3 of them should win the game over holding 2 of them. Unless you want the flag to count for more the any other objective "just because"?

  10. #90
    The point is that just because that's how Blizzard did it doesn't mean that's how everyone else has to do it.

    I personally agree with the sentiment. In EOTS it's very easy and in most cases optimal to simply ignore the secondary objective and hold 3 positions. If there's going to be a secondary objective, make sure it actually counts.

  11. #91
    In EOTS it's very easy and in most cases optimal to simply ignore the secondary objective and hold 3 positions. If there's going to be a secondary objective, make sure it actually counts.
    5 objectives total. The flag DOES count, it just doesn't count more than other objectives. It would be even dumber if you could just ignore 3 other objectives and win just by holding one objective and capturing another.

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by Glytch View Post
    shit, you mean like mesmers and engineers?
    Yeah, and necros and warriors and range-- oh, wait.

    OP only cares about PvP. GW2 is the game for him; he said so himself. But he can't stand the PvP in the game, which was allegedly all he cared about. What is this I don't even.

  13. #93
    The Insane DrakeWurrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Isle of Faces
    Posts
    15,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Aside from a Blizzard-slam for the sake of doing it, I don't get what your point is here? There were 5 objectives in EotS, holding 3 of them should win the game over holding 2 of them. Unless you want the flag to count for more the any other objective "just because"?
    It's actually the case that the flag was typically worth less, I think. Or else the risk factor associated with it, and work required for it, simply was not matching the reward for it.

    There's a reason that the majority of EOTS wins involve holding 3 points instead of flag-capping.
    I hope you haven't forgotten my role in this little story. I'm the leading man. You know what they say about the leading man? He never dies.

    If you give in to your impulses in this world, the price is that it changes your personality in the real world. The player and character are one and the same.

  14. #94
    It's actually the case that the flag was typically worth less, I think. Or else the risk factor associated with it, and work required for it, simply was not matching the reward for it.
    The value changed based on how many other objectives you held, and it generally made sense. Holding one tower and capping the flag (in essence, controlling only two objectives out of 5) didn't get you a lot of points and would leave you trailing. Holding two towers and capping (controlling 3 objectives of 5) gave you a larger chunk of points and would give you a solid lead. Controlling 3 or 4 towers and capping gave a huge amount of points, just because at that point the game might as well be over.

    So it pretty much turned out exactly as you'd expect if you treated it as a map with 5 objectives that needed to be held.

  15. #95
    The Lightbringer Beazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    3,235
    Well, If anyone bothered to watch the last PvP Dev Blog video for ANet, they would know that ANet is only including conquest maps when the game ships, and specifically stated that they are working on other game types like "CTF" for post ship.......... So everyone can stop crying now. Both sides win.

  16. #96
    The Insane DrakeWurrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Isle of Faces
    Posts
    15,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Holding two towers and capping (controlling 3 objectives of 5) gave you a larger chunk of points and would give you a solid lead.
    vs

    Controlling 3 or 4 towers and capping gave a huge amount of points, just because at that point the game might as well be over.
    That's kinda the point I'm making there. There's no point in going 2 towers + flag when 3 towers is vastly superior. This was a major balancing problem, imo, that Blizzard still has not handled very well. Which doesn't matter much, I guess, because EOTS isn't available as an RBG, so it's just casual fun, but it's still annoying.

    I'd expect ANet to find a way to balance it so that the flag is actually a worthy objective. The same as killing the named NPCs on that one map is a worthy objective.
    I hope you haven't forgotten my role in this little story. I'm the leading man. You know what they say about the leading man? He never dies.

    If you give in to your impulses in this world, the price is that it changes your personality in the real world. The player and character are one and the same.

  17. #97
    That's kinda the point I'm making there. There's no point in going 2 towers + flag when 3 towers is vastly superior.
    Um, where I said "the game might as well be over" refers to holding 3 or 4 towers AND capping the flag. Just holding 3 towers and ignoring the flag will eventually win the game, but not by a huge margin and it still leaves an opening for the other team to stay in the game with one tower + flag and work on a second tower.

    Ultimately the flag in the center is just another objective - like a tower - but it frontloads the points when you cap it rather than trickling them in. Saying that it's worthless because you can't just cap the flag and win is like saying that Svanir is worthless because you can't just camp his spawn and win.

  18. #98
    The Insane DrakeWurrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Isle of Faces
    Posts
    15,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity Divinity View Post
    Um, where I said "the game might as well be over" refers to holding 3 or 4 towers AND capping the flag. Just holding 3 towers and ignoring the flag will eventually win the game, but not by a huge margin and it still leaves an opening for the other team to stay in the game with one tower + flag and work on a second tower.
    3 towers really is vastly superior. I haven't exactly tried to time how fast the average EOTS flag-cap is, but when you hold 3 towers you're getting 5 points per second. While holding two towers, the flag is only worth 85 points, and you get 2 points per second.

    You'd have to flag-cap once every 28 seconds, flawlessly, to match that. 8 of those seconds will be spent actually picking up the flag, assuming no enemy is there to interrupt it, so that gives you 20 seconds to run the flag to the tower and then pick it back up again (i forget how many seconds the respawn is).

    The best strategy was to simply hold the flag and only cap it when you need the point boost to stay in the lead, rather than using it for constant points, relying on three towers to win. Essentially removing the flag as a real factor.
    Last edited by DrakeWurrum; 2012-08-13 at 07:24 PM.
    I hope you haven't forgotten my role in this little story. I'm the leading man. You know what they say about the leading man? He never dies.

    If you give in to your impulses in this world, the price is that it changes your personality in the real world. The player and character are one and the same.

  19. #99
    It's 8v8 and not 5v5 in hot join, and 5v5 for competetive play, and something more than 5v5 when it's competetive would just fail. And if you want more people, just do WvW.

  20. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by grandpab View Post
    I think it'd be pretty interesting to see if a CTF map or black fang type map could be implemented and how well it would work, you know, with the lack of healers and tanks. It'd be a bit harder to run a flag across the map, or hold the fang for half of the game.

    Something like huttball would be pretty cool to see too.
    The have Keg Brawl in the Norn area its really fun. I personally like it more then Hutt ball, give it a try see what you think.

    Secondly interestingly enough it turns out originally ANET had a CTF map but during testing more people were interested in conquest so they decided to go full conquest and left out CTF and a few others they were working on, which is unfortunate...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •