Chapter 4: an alternative to Brute Force ?

People keep on passing off any of the builds presented as "brute force" or "gimmick" builds, but what exactly is this "balanced" build you guys are talking about?

You might want to read his post more carefully.
He's saying, that all builds that comes out are using mindless nuking, when it's not remotely the answer.
He is NOT saying brute force is the answer, he's simply saying that's all most people are coming up with.

And builds that comes out are not necessary what few people who succeed are using.

Before insulting others, you might want to step back and read again.
Your tone is very offensive.

BTW, our team consisted of Warrior, Ranger, Monks, Ritualist, Elementalist, Necros....
Only reason we didn't have Mesmers, Assassins, Dervish, Paragon, etc, is because none of our members had those professions at the end. If they did, we are more than happy to put them in.
We have completed all four of these quests, and waiting on bug fix.

So what's this cookie-cutter build you speak of?
I think our team is pretty well "balanced".

Heck, we even used heroes when we didn't have enough members!
(Had to go back an re-finish those parts, when those members WERE available )

Antheus complete misses FrogDevourer's point. Mind you, the things he says make perfect sense but Devourer wasn't talking about brute force on the part of the players, but the monsters/quest design.

Yes, he does.
But the above poster's reply was not to Antheus' misunderstanding, but to the context of what he was saying.
It seems to be a misunderstanding on an already misunderstood reply.

Yeah, I noticed. That's internet forums for you.

Yes, and no.

Brute force applies to both sides. When you first enter DoA and get hit for 400+ damage, you say: Wow!

Then you rethink. Where did this damage come from. Aha, melee, casters, levels, ...

After adapting to that, you cut damage down in half to one quarter. Then you realize that a lot of damage can be prevented. Then further realize that a lot of virtual damage or whatever its called can be either inflicted or negated.

And at that point, DoA becomes a challenge mastered. Not easy. But at least the "Dead on Arrival" statement is no longer true.

Yes, the damage you face the first time is extreme. It's there exactly for that reason. To make you rethink your build. To force you into trying other tactics than just nuking. And at that point you realize that DoA, while hard indeed, isn't about brute force, but unlike all other NF areas, needs different aproach, than just scaling your own DPS.

City is prime example. You're dealing almost exclusively with casters, dealing insane damage. But casters are also extremly easy to shut down, not to mention there's no mob-wide condition or hex removal (none that I noticed, or found on guildwiki).

So isn't this skill? Isn't this the alternative to brute force? When the scaling of damage is no longer as efficient as rethinking the entire aproach? When rather than taking 3 MS nukers, you just take one, and add two different classes in there?

There's a difference between extreme damage and brute force. All damage in GW can be negated. Brute force is a method. It applies to pure damage without any hint of tactics or strategy. Brute force also relies on one single tactic: tank holds agro, nukers nuke, healers heal. This works everywhere in GW. With slight exceptions of THK, Gate of Madness, DoA, FoW. And those are the places that do, or have frustrated people most.

In that respect your assumption of DoA being brute force fails. Yes, there are other ways to do it, but if DoA failed, is there still room for smarter enemies? DoA enemies are dumb, and can be countered. And even at that there's an outcry about difficulty. Look at what happened when casters were overkiting. Did anyone even try to bring any kind of snares? No, it needed to be fixed. That was indeed a bug, but still.

When is something too hard, and when is something bugged or needs a nerf? When exactly does brute force apply, and when is it simply too much damage?

Look at current pvp SF builds. They are brute force. And here again, the camps split. Some say they are trivial to counter, just spread, interrupt, e-deny, others are screaming for nerf.

GW is primarily about challenge. Challenge of overcoming difficult mobs or competing players. It's about convenience second. Where GW shines is that really few aspects of the game are indeed broken, especially with regard to game design. Anything can be countered, roles can be changed on the fly, grind has no impact. Wow takes different aproach. It's designed to make you win if you play long enough. Same strategy doesn't work in GW.

I play GW for the challenge. If I get wiped repeatedly, I step back, rethink my build, my strategy, then look at other team members, and try to improve myself. It's why I love GW. At the same time I understand many play differently. There is a single thing in GW, that I'm powerless against. And that is err7. Everything else, can be overcome, including DoA.

Bravo. Exceptionally executed. You are very right. Random is key. The fear of the unknown is greater than anything Guild Wars can currently throw at the player. That is why PvP is generally a far more rewarding experience. PvE needs this to happen eventually, or suffer content that only excites on the first date.

Regarding some of the other posts surrounding the first; A flower in a pot of dirt...?

Antheus, what you say makes sense, and I agree with you all the way.

However, that is not the point the OP is making out.
Of course, you don't use brute force to counter brute force.
Duh. I know that, you know that, and obviously the OP knows that.

He's simply stating that, he wants an alternative challenge where the enemies use smart AI instead of brute force.
I don't necessary agree or disagree with that, it has to happen and I need to experience it before I make an decision whether I like it or not.
But regardless of how I feel about the issue, I can tell you that you're missing the point just a tad.

Yup.

Yup.

I agree with both, and i also went off topic about player tactics.

First of all, i did not want and did not intend to directly insult Antheus. My reply, and supposed "rant" was in reply to his overexaggerated and out of context arguments. The "Backfire better then 3 nukers" comment, or the "brute force is useless in DoA" comments are just did not hold water.

The only thing i said that could be construed as an insult is when i said that a certain line was "possibly the funniest line i have heard in a long time"... Even that was justified. The way he originally worded it was simply put; Backfire > 3 Nukers in DoA. Which is just blatently wrong. Intelligent builds CAN be better though, but we all know that. And yes, nuking is NOT an absolute for DoA, but it is proven as a cookie cutter method. Therefore, that is one of the only ways an average player can experience the elite. Antheus provides context and admits that Backfire is not greater than, it is COMPLIMENTARY to, in his reply to my post. MY point was that DoA is too focused on cookie cutter builds. It encourages it, without a doubt.

I did not mean to offend, to insult or annoy anyone. I did not quote Antheus to flame him. I quoted him to try and help clarify some things and maybe better help better understand what i believed to be wrong in his statements. If my "tone" was offensive, i have no way of changing that, as 'tone' through text is in the eye of the beholder (reader) and out of my hands...

Lets now clarify my points again. Backfire is not more effective then 3 nukers, it is complimentary and very useful; i had never said it was useless either. Balanced groups are not useless, but DO take many more hours then ai exploit/nuker builds. Being able to do things in DoA in 4 hours helps make it accessible to a MUCH larger player base = a good thing. HOWEVER, just cause i talk about pure brute tactics being effective in DoA, does NOT mean i condone them. The cookie cutter mentality as i said, is becoming all too hard set for this zone. And WHY? Because the zone itself is just pure brute harshness itself. And that is where it comes back to the OP's point.

In regards to Antheus' response, i do not appreciate being told what i have and have not done. I have been in DoA zones many times now, tried the first time with guildies, and since then with pugs. I have experienced many builds and know numerous tactics. But again, it was better pointed out by Aohige, you are completely missing the OP's point. I was refuted just a few statements that i disagreed with you, which also went off topic from the OP. I do not want to turn this into a flamewar.

Again. I apologize to anyone that was offended. Please continue to debate the OP's topic specifically, rather then about builds, experience and player tactics. There is no denying that DoA is indeed doable. However, i still totally agree with teh OP's point. In addition, i will continue to reiterate that the zone is uncreative, uninspired, unchallenging, and unimpressive. I expected creativity over, recycling and multiplying.

Guess i'll just stop now before i dig too deep of a grave for meself.
Cheers.

I think anything discussing Chapter 4 should be deleted.

Overall a great post thanks

/agree

I'll try to tie this together, and why I wasn't either off-topic, nor why the comments I made weren't irrelevant. I just skipped a few missing steps I figured were obvious.

New PvE:
- Challenging through time limit
- Random spawns
- Requiring adaptive player strategy
- Completely random mob placement/skills/composition
- Reliable, balanced builds for diverse situations encountered

I hope this sums it up.

This all was stated as completely void from DoA, and somewhat emphasized for SF.

SF is insanely exploitable, with 4 person teams requiring essentially no skill whatsoever to run. Solo W/N farming. Besically, little real challenge.

DoA, although opinions, even in this thread diverge, apparently is open not only to non-cookie-cutter builds, but also to a wide variety of classes.

But look at the list of your "ideal" challenge. DoA requires only 2 of those.:
Adaptive player strategy (proper agro management of patrols, handling runaway mobs, selecting targets to counter, moving in and out of casting range to avoid getting hit, kiting if attacked, using terrain).
Reliable and balanced builds to handle different situations. Once again, a point in case for DoA. There are MoF and trapper gimmicks. The alternative is to actually bring different sets of skills as complement (yea, the infamous backfire) and break away from cookie cutter.

Adding random spawns, requiring even more player skill and adding even more unpredictable elements to gameplay - would this really be well received?

Back to DoA example. I tried to present some, based on experience, strategies on how to handle it without the usual cookie cutter build and without exploiting the AI or bugs. I also tried to argue that certain skills can incredibly speed up the process. And yet, this was extremly badly received.

And this was only with regard to two of your suggestions.

Random spawns, or random patrols are historically proven to not work. This is based on all MMOs that used different types of randomness in mobs. It prevents writing of walkthroughs, it can create impossible situations, and it's difficult or impossible to balance. This is unfortunately something that needs to be considered as a fact. Even FPS games don't use random spawns, but use a fixed set of spawn points. Other MMOs use spawn areas, which are clearly defined. (disclaimer: This is written in designer books, tought in courses, and blogged about by every single MMO and game designer out there. You may argue with them, but please not with me. Some do use randomness, but a completely different type of randomness)

But above all, DoA demonstrated that players don't want challenges. Everyone is just waiting for cookie-cutter build, which simply won't emerge. The only alternative are inefficient dps builds, with nobody really trying to find something new. But unlike other areas which do force players into skills, DoA simply requires positioning, kiting, strategy, interrupts, shutdowns, etc. All the very basics of GW. And when presented with alternatives, they get shutdown for even suggesting them. It's not the game that forces cookie-cutter builds - players demand them, even when they are the worst possible option and attempting to prove otherwise results in lots of hate.

So my whole point was, that your suggestions merely expand on top of what DoA did. It may not be directly obvious, especially if you dislike DoA as it is. But unfortunately, your proposal is merely expansion beyond concepts of DoA, even if without artificial difficulty increase. DoA currently requires only a small subset of skills that your fully implemented idea would require. And even then it caused an uproar over difficulty.

This is a contradiction in itself. Cookie-cutter = normal playstyle. You cannot do one without the other. Playing your homemade build however means that area must never present any kind of true challenge to which you need specific counter. If your homemade build doesn't include hex removal, there must never be any hexes. Same for conditions, stances, AoE, spikes, ...
Cookie-cutter as a term is way too abused.

In DoA, the mob composition and skills are constant. And look what happened when I mentioned Backfire. Even when knowing, down to the dot, the skills used by opponents, I got shot down for suggesting a proven and reliable counter without even consideration. Even with knowing every single patrol spawn, agro management is still a mistery to just about everyone in DoA.

Ironically, your proposal is what would enforce everyone to run cookie cutter balanced, one build fits all. And this build is known. The Tank/Nuker/Healer. Why bring an anti-caster mesmer, when the groups might not have any casters. Why bring a dedicated MM, when there might not be corpses. Why bring a SS necro, if there might be heavy hex removal. Pure DPS. You end up with lowest common denominator.

I'll leave it at that, agree, disagree, understand or not, but: "Be careful what you wish for. It just may come through." Maybe, it already has...

Good posts and good points.

I agree that most groups rely on firepower rather than tactics/thinking. (The quest Brawns or Brains comes to mind heh?)

I agree to both the OP and the following critics, you are both right.

Concerning the AI, i agree that it is too much based on being stronger than you, other than actually being better than you.
However, creating such a smart AI may be more work than we're currently estamining it to be.

I've suggested it before and you have also been thinking in that direction, randomness. Cookie-cutter builds or gimmick builds without brain simply cannot withstand to face unknown dangers. That requires almost instant responding and changing of tactics.


Here's a simple random encounter that could easily be implented in areas.

- 8 man group

3 random attack based builds, with speed bosting skills. (steady stance, axe shock, hammer, assissins, ranger based degen etc.)

2 casters being mostly offensive (edenial, migrainers, ss, hex overload sb/ri, etc.)

1 caster being half-half (warder, blindbot, necro hexer, spirit spammer with chenneling skills, hex removals etc.)

2 healer based builds, should always include one primary healing(woh, lod, bl, rit healer etc.) and one mostly protective (spirit spammer, rc prot, zb, etc.)

-

Standard aggro AI is removed and a new priority based AI is created.

Attackers, 2 automatically go for targets with a healing based attribute @ 9 or above, 1 goes for the target with the least armor)

Casters automatically target melee/casters depending on the build that they are using. (dom mesmer goes for casters, necro hexes for attack based characters etc.)

and so on, you get the basic principle.


Conclusion to randomized 8 foe teams.

Does this remind us of something?, yes pvp!
What are we actually looking for in pve, where is the difference between them. If we had randomized spawns, it would be very pvp-alike pve. Is that really what we want?
Remember that the casual player just wants to have fun and win.
Giving this scenario to a casual player might not actually be giving him what he wants.

Though, this will attract the good players to do such areas, but again, such groups and above require tactics and teamwork to beat. Don't get me wrong, I know this game is based on teamwork and tactics, but generel Joe, is utterly crap. He doesn't understand skills and just wants his toon to look good. He, as you already pointed out, thinks that if he spend enough time on it, he will win in the end. Problem is, he won't if we have randomized areas, and then average joe will be forced to either: quit or adapt. (also phrased as "adapt or die!")


Speculations based on my own conclusions

If we had such teams as this, better means of communication is essential to completing said area. Thus forcing average PUGs to use voice communication.
The problems with this is that average PUGs just refuse to. (Based on my own expierences)

Then there are two possible scenarios as a result of this.
People will either,

Not use communication, making it very hard and in need of cookie-cutter builds actually capable of clearing said area.

Adapt and start using it. This will require many many players to become a lot for focused on the game, stepping futher away from the casual gamer's mind.
I fear that many players simply don't have time or will to do this.


End conclusion
Changing the area to randomized spawns is just like playing organized pvp. Either you run cookie-cutter builds and are likely to fail or you find a decent guild. Option number two requires some dedication, which most players don't have or want to have. So this is no different then our current areas.

This is highly speculative and I don't support my own ideas 100%


Just my thoughts on the topic.

PS. Please find spelling mistakes. (no this wasn't sarcasm, i actually want to improve my english.)

Faction's rush rush atmosphere was enough of that already, thanks. Even when not trying for masters, it was pushed too much. You never know when the phone might ring and you have to be on it for a bit, or any other uncountable things. Remember this.

"One of the great features of Sorrow's Furnace was that even the dumbest player could enter and explore it and do easy quests. Decent or average players could do all quests (including Final Assault) with a minimum of thinking, and excellent players could farm everything in smaller groups."
Wow! I must qualify as decent or avareage, as I took my ele through Final Assault with a group as primary healer(couldnt get a real monk). We only wiped twice(like the movie ), and one of those, I was last one left, but got degened before I got break aggro to rez(this was a couple months ago). I wouldnt call Oro quest(only one Ive bothered trying) easy, by any means. Its not very difficult, but its not easy, either. I dont know how people consider these thing easy sometimes. Im pretty good, but I almost never solo(never can get it to work), and take minimal henchies, 2 tank/healers. For me, at least, it depends alot on how well the group works together, like a couple days ago, when my lvl 14 mes got invited to a lvl 20 party to fight to Droks. Did pretty good, got throught Lornars without getting more than 50%DP. And no, I didnt just sit, I fought too. As someone said, it takes thinking for some high-level areas, which I enjoy, but I have no real problem with certain skills being better suited for some areas.

/signed thats very true, and very hard to do

I am agreeable that having more creative and fun ways of completing PvE objectives is much better than the "brute force" option (environment effects, Higher mob levels, unbalanced mobs skills). I always felt that missions/quest should feel like an adventure into the unknown (at least for the first couple of times) but how the element of "random' can be introduced into the instancing technology remains a technical question i suppose for Anet to figure out and implement.

While cookie cutter builds are not neccessary healthy, it is now a part of our culture with its own pros and cons. A necessary evil of sorts in the times placed before us. As much as i like for us to be able to play whatever build in a balanced fashion, i would also very much like to be able to complete objectives in a reasonable time frame rather than failing reapeatedly in vain. Hence the cookie cutter build.

Random is a very difficult issue in Guild Wars. Let's look at a few things:

Randomized skillsets:
- This is basically worthless. With the large number of skills in GW, the chance of 8 random skills, even limited to certain attribute lines or skill types, making even a decent build is close to nil. Any conditional skill becomes nearly worthless because the other skills to provide the condition are likely not going to be picked randomly(crushing blow, glowing gaze, etc).
- Chances of getting absolutely worthless skillbars due to having all support-type skills(blessed aura+divine spirit+divine boon+peace and harmony, etc)

Randomized group composition:
- Again not so great. What happens when you randomly get a group with 4 monks? 4 illusion mesmers with the same hexes? If you limit it to a basically balanced build, you basically have the current status quo(though currently, the designers change things up intelligently like elementalist spiker groups(rain of terror's).

Randomized group placement:
- Probably the best way that randomization could fit into GW, but again leads to problems. What happens when 2 difficult groups spawn too close to each other? Is there movement(and how is that determined), leading to potential horrid patrol overlaps, or is everything stationary and stupid?


While randomization seems good at first glance, when you look into how it would actually work, it really falls apart in Guild Wars. Other games have incorporated it successfully, mostly due to the games design. Diablo 2 had random monster spawns, but every monster did very little, they came in hordes, and a single character could wipe out the hordes of monsters. Since all the monsters were the same, there was no group composition or skill issues, and since all the monsters stood in one place and attacked anything that they saw, movement and placement weren't huge issues. However, I wouldn't want to see GW dumbed down to the level of Diablo 2.

About the domain of anguish, there are good points and bad points in this thread.
- I dislike that the environmental effects really punish you for playing. It seems that with the monster difficulty level, the area could have felt much better without them. Overall, it doesn't seem like they have a huge effect, though, compared to the monsters- I'd prefer to take 50 damage for blocking or whatever it was than to take 200+ damage from attacks. The energy loss in City is a bit annoying, but the monsters are already doing the bulk of the energy denial(Energy Surge, Feedback, Wither, Malaise, etc).

- It does seem to be designed to be difficult to brute-force. The main thing that I've noticed in playing in DoA that nobody even bothers thinking about is the way that the Enraged skill punishes AoE damage(including my guildmates). Enraged gives bonus damage to every monster who is injured but not dead. That means that in that period of time when you're AoE'ing a group of monsters and they're at about 20% health, each and every one of those monsters is doing double damage. That's what causes party wipes by multiple 400+ damage Invoke Lightnings, and 500 damage Stygian Horror attacks. Killing a single monster at a time seems to me much better for survivability. However, everybody is so set on the tank, echo nuker, monk or AoE gimmick build(traps, spiteful, etc) that work elsewhere in the game, that nobody is even willing to try not using massive AoE.

Overall, it seems that the DoA was intended to try to push players into "thinking outside the box" and adapting their builds, rather than brute-forcing their way through it. However, players appear to be unwilling to change, and instead just give up and whine on forums, or else bash their heads into the wall using the same gimmicks, just more refined and tweaked to have a chance to power through the areas.


I agree with Frog in that the challenge missions seem to have a nice level of challenge that players can play at any level, and that can provide a challenge for any level of player. I particularly like Zos Shivrous Channel and Dajkah Inlet, personally. However, the lack of rewards in these areas definately takes them off the list of places that most people actually play. This gives the same feel as many people list as being their biggest postive about Sorrow's Furnace- the ability to go in at any skill level and do something and earn rewards.

Personally, I think that the game should have some areas of both types. It should have moderate end-game areas with somewhat scaling difficulty where anybody can go in, and the average player can have a good challenge that they can overcome. I do like the fact that there's some very difficult end-game areas like Domain of Anguish, however, where those who don't find challenge elsewhere can sate their desire for near-impossible areas where they have to think and coordinate with their friends in order to have a chance to complete.

I agree with you Froggie, there are better ways to add challenge to the game without progressively boosting the levels of the enemy.

With regards to DoA, it doesn't actually force folk to change anything that they have been doing previously. The most prevalent DoA build atm consists of a tank, nukers, monks and perhaps a solitary ranger (if they want spirits for GC+Winter+MoF). The same tactics work, you send the tank in to soak up all the damage then the nukers carefully close in and nuke the entire group of enemies surrounding the tank. The only challenge here is when 'aggro' breaks from the tank.

You know, I've said this before, there are other ways of doing things in PvE but overall the tank, nuke and heal (3 roles provided mainly by 3 core classes) approach will always get the job done. There are other ways of mitigating damage other than sending a tank in or having bonds or relying on spirits (I'm thinking of shutdown, disruption and debilitation) and there are other ways of killing enemies other than nuking the crap out of them, however, while the age old brute force method works, no-one is going to want to play the other methods, especially as the other methods are generally slower and more difficult to play well. This is why certain classes, such as mesmers, necros, rits, assasins don't find it as easy to find groups - especially when it comes to the high level areas. I accept that this is a generalisation but overall I believe it to be true.

Come on, have some sense and don't read it so literally. It doesn't have to be "give the monsters 8 random skills". If they gave the monsters a random selection of just a small handful of different preset builds, that would still likely be sufficient, especially combined with other randomized factors. Of course, it'd also help to not make such awful monster builds - even the monsters in the Domain of Anguish have a lot of subpar skill bars.