PvP Updates: Why the HvH support

I agree. Not so much that they're overpowered, because anywhere else the build is sort of useless, but in the HvH format they're too easy to run with little or no effort for a lot of effectiveness. Which is why you see so many of them. Besides, cookie cutter builds are bad. See too many of them and ANET is going to change it just to vary the metagame.

Good points, cheers. Some thoughts (I realize you weren't citing your points as justifications but just possible explanations )

1) Sadly this is bad reason to support HB from a players perspective. It might be financially lucrative to push more copies of the game but not necessarily good for players.

2) I don't think additional TA support would be that difficult. Mini tournaments are one thing, registering a 4 person team for a ladder season, Track individual success in some way etc. The benefit is that it is a PvP format. Regardless of how much one directs the heros, they are still mainly doing their own thing, there is only so much micro management one can do. I think the HB arenas could be a lot of fun with some changes and making it a 4v4 setup. Heros, meh. It is a kind of 1v1, but really GW had the choice of supporting 4v4, making some changes to HA (removing heroway was simply a patch to return it towards a state of normality not a true update) and 1v1 (HB). HB since release had been a largely a bit of a wasteland that never really caught on, so it seems rather out of the blue to try and push this format.

Anyway, none of this has anything to do with bitching about HB because of elitism. I greatly appreciate the work ANET has done and I'm excited to see the tournament system. I just find it weird that HB would be suddenly given such a push to the exclusion of formats. It could very well be that HB was pushed because its more accessible to a broad audience. But in time if it does become more played because of the changes, the play quality will increase, the average gamer won't really have a place there (or have a fighting chance anyway) and in the end you'll just have a different hardcore pvp format (though with heros...). But then why not just work on improving something you already have (TA, HA) which is a full pvp format that has a crowd of dedicated gamers already?

Did you miss the threads from Gaile about getting feedback to improve HA? So why do you think that they arent already trying to improve HA? And yes I'd like to see TA get some improvements as well.

But I still don't see any reasons brought up why trying to introduce a format to a broader audience (i.e. Hero Battles) in any way is a bad thing or hurts other PVP formats. Saying that it stretches resources is a flimsy reason. We all know that working on multiple things at once doesnt mean quality suffers, especially when it's not just about the work but about the ideas.

I realize ANET is listening to concerns, in particular bravo for reducing the role of heros in HA which as I said is not really a real change or development but just a patch for something that got broke. I'm sure they are working to improve and implement changes in a variety of areas. The oddity is that HB, which was honestly the bottom of the PvP barrell, not only got some attention but equal support in terms of tournaments and prizes to what has always been the top of the pvp pile, GvG. I have nothing against improving HB. Add a title, have consecutive match win streaks or something, but suddenly making it part of the PvP flagship when its at this point the weakest of all the PvP formats (partially not even PvP) instead of propping up HA or TA seems to be a mistake to me. Perhaps in time they will do more for these formats, and that would be great.

Well, think of it this way. PVP already has a tournament. And now the casual more PVE oriented crowd get a tournament now too. A lot of hardcore PVPers don't consider HB to be PVP at all, so now it's a case of the other side (hardcore PVP) not liking what the other side of the fence (More PVE oriented PVP players) getting things.

And really, I doubt that HB tournaments and prizes will be anything on par to GVG tournaments. There really is no reason to feel threatened that the rewards will be the same for both.

Would be some exciting HvH tournaments...

X team rolls 67 on a 100 sided die.
Y team rolls 74 on a 100 sided die.
X has left the game.

Observer: "Woah! Did you see that? HOW AWESOME! The style of play, the leetness, the BUILD!"
"Dammit, i think X should've won. X usually rolls more than 90"

Rolls a 100 on a 100 sided die.

YAY i won the championship.

I seriously think hb needs changes, I faced someone today with 2 monk and rit hero, and the person himself was r/rt FERTILE/symb/rit spirits spam.........biggest waste of time ever.

Its owned in seconds if you brought a counter to rits? Spiritual pain hasn't been nerfed yet that I'm aware of.

after reading more in the \roll 100 thread i take back any positive insinuation I made about HB. ANET might as well give tournament support afkers in fort aspenwood next.

I'm sorry, but TA is about a billion times better than HvH. This is just plain simple fact to anyone who PvPs seriously.

Don't let your prejudice against random pvp cloud your thinking. This \roll problem has more to do with the rule oversight than the actual HB play itself. Similar cheating has occurred in RA/TA for very long time, with members of same guild hit enter simultaneously to be grouped/matched together in the same game. So rigging the outcome isn't HB's problem alone. Needless to say, it needs to be fixed asap, and same for afk leechers issues in FA.

Majority of GW's players care more about "fun" of pvp than "quality" of pvp. Anything that squashes creativity and freedom is not fun, which explains why organized pvp isn't very appealing to many pvers. But so far, aside from AB/FA, Anet has yet found a bridge that can bring its huge PVE playerbase over to pvp. GW's future does not sit well if the current schism between PVE and PVP playerbase widens, because its model probably cannot provide enough endgame content to satisfy its bread-and-butter PVE playerbase without some help from its PVP portion.

So HvH is getting the support perhaps in a move to appeal to majority of NF pvers out there who have had more experiences working with heroes npc's than organized pvp. But it's a questionable move imo, as tournament and championship aren't what most are craving for. Casual players like me want freedom and fun, not the pyramid-like cutthroat competition. I feel more work on expanding ideas of AB/FA would have brought more pvers over to pvp than HB. A successful formula requires giving bad/average players, who constitute most of GW's playerbase, a chance to learn while give them some chance at beating good players to keep them interested in the game; being slightly massive wouldn't hurt either. NF's HvH just doesn't have the same appeal that AB had at beginning of Faction's release. So I too question Anet's move, but from a different angle and perspective.

Finally, GW is all about skills/builds; pvp and pve are just different ways of applying those skills. So both pvers and pvpers should really work together to seek a solution helping the game expanding its appeal to the mass; it's for the benefit of all.

That's why I said trying.

It's all about marketing.
The company is focusing on new features that require buying the latest installment. Which is how it works in business.
I think Anet has done a good job of making Nightfall more worthwhile to buy with all the extra things they are giving people to do in it.
I like the Treasures!

if you'll wipe the froth off your mouth and finish your pointless rant, you'll realise that it's a joke because players have been asking for a ladder for team arena since... beta? that ANet would choose to give this to HvH and not TA is ridiculous

I was largely kidding with what I said. I just find it funny that the problem of the roll 100 things pops up about the time they decide to support HB as a legit format. As for fun and playability, I agree that if the motivation for supporting HvH is to appeal to a casual audience that its the wrong way to do it. Making it prizeworthy makes it competative and not casual. Eventually people will get better and they'll iron out the problems and HvH will become as inaccessible to the casual gamer as GvG is now. Perhaps in the process they'll rope a lot of people into the pvp arena who knows.

Whether or not they need to worry about getting people from pve to crossover just depends on whether they think it will sustain the game in the long run. If not, then why not just concentrate on giving pvers what they really want, good pve content and giving PvPers what they really want, good pvp content. Cut the crap middle ground stuff.

Anyway, it really doesn't make any sense unless you look at it like a marketing move of some kind. If it was a decision that reflected the value of the format in any way, then I would be forced to conclude that Anet is off their collective rockers.

If they can disable roll in outposts and towns, they can easily do it in HvH. And I'm sure these HvH tournaments will be monitored by Anet and people "fixing" the ladder could get the same penalties that GvG teams get for rules violations. If there are bugs in the system, whats to say they won't fix them.

HvH ladder isn't a sleight against anyone.

GvG = Guild Accomplishment

HvH = Individual Accomplishment

The problem is that it seems like part of the point of GW is that individual accomplishment is a part of guild/team accomplishment. Its not a game meant or useful as a 1v1 stage. Even the proposed 1v1 stage is really not 1v1, it a 4v4 stage. Each person has to be supplimented with AI. The only individual accomplishment here is your ability to select a team skillbar and direct npcs around a map. Substantial individual accomplishment occurs in the context of team/guild accomplishment by being able to skillfully play your role within the context of a teams larger goals.

Why do you think A.Net implemented HvH?



you can also customize the heroes bar not to use skills automatically. not only you can control your 8 skill bar but also you have a full control of the remaining 24 skills used by your heroes. and you need extreme multitasking ability to use skills accordingly or in correct sequence (e.g. sever then gash)
and direct the hero where do you want them to be, attack, stay put or avoid battle (microing)

HvH players are playing in a team that usually/traditionally needs 4 players. So all the job of those 4 players are being done by a single player. if a single player can make its heroes emulate three independent and competent persons, isn't that skill? isn't that worthy of a tournament?

Sadly, there's going to be prejudice by people who look down on this PVP format. Which is silly really. It's all for fun, whether you play PVE, HA, GvG, TA, or HvH. You don't have to like them all but to come in here to say "Go play some real PVP, this is a joke" smacks of insecurity and snobbishness.

And neither of them are playing a video game.

I'd find your logic rather unsetteling if you compare the HvH as toddlers and GvG as olympic athletes

In HvH it's more person based and what he manages to do with all his/her skills on heros, while GvG is more focussed on hunting down the guild lord and outsmarting human players.

Don't make these analogies when theyre that kind of rubbish.....

sounds like that you have played against my ritualist holding build I've been using it the last 3 weeks.

You should be ashamed BlueSS.

Why? Because he is winning?

Why? I win a lot with my ritualist build, I'll only change it when I start losing. I'm also the only one in Hero vs Hero battles who doesnt use searing flames and RaO thumpers. never played any of those. every team I play against is either SF or RaO, and I mean every single one of them. and do play sometimes other builds too like R-spike and B-spike. After the 3x searing flame + 1 monk team loses sais that my B-spike build is lame. very funny.

IWAY used to win a lot as well, just because a lame build is winning doesn't mean its skillful to play. Since when has standing on an altar spamming your skills whenever they recharged been skillful?

Honestly my point from the start has been that I don't think there is anything intrinsicly bad about HvH. There is a negative stigma that surronding it because for a long time, and still to some degree, winning was a joke. I could go afk half my games and my 3 AI monkies would kill the other team. And now with the roll 100 mess the format is in the crapper. Yes the latter thing can be fixed and it isn't about the actual format, but it does reflect peoples attutiudes towards the format. I also don't find the single player element to be that reflective of anything valuble in terms of playskill. I realize the degree of control of koss and friends, but you're not going to cast ever spell, direct everymove, unload every adrenal skill, and I don't see why its a matter of great individual skill to be able juggle your heros better than someone else can juggle their heros. I realize that some people might think differently, but I really don't think this is a reflection of individual skill as much as your play in GvG is. Thus the idea that 8v8 = team skill 1v1 = individual skill isn't quite accurate imo. BUT The real worry I have is that given the lack on interest in general and the state of this format which is brand new, it seems odd that ANET that pass over substanital support for established formats that have a following (TA, HA etc) and suddenly decide HvH was tournament support worthy.

maybe that's why a.net is implementing hvh championships so people will actually raise the bar for HvH?

when the game was new, people were bringing mending in gvg/tombs. over time, people knew how to do things efficiently, know the good skills from bad skills, etc, etc. maybe give HvH some time to refine?




please read what you've quoted.


i think differently and i really think HvH is a reflection of individual skill. and HvH skill and GvG skill is an "apples and oranges" comparison. but there's an exception. full man pure spikes are actually similar to HvH team coz the command is centralized.

I have no doubt that adding prize support will improve the skill level. But, the question I had was why the sudden concern to promote this format to the degree they did while ignoring formats that are established, have a following, and could use some work. I did read, not sure what you're talking about. Your point seemed to be that in fact there is a lot of individual skill involved in managing your heros. I think there is skill involved, but you're never going to get them to act like 3 decent people and the format would be better off with 4 real people playing their roles than having one person running around the map while telling the heros stand here, stand there, use x once and a while. It is to a degree apples and oranges I guess. Directing Hero's around is a bit closer to an RTS in some ways. It still seems like a bad RTS in that case.

What's the problem with HvH getting attention from devs? I'd like to ask the OP why not the HvH support?

sigh...

I don't want to repeat everything again, but to sum up...

I don't have a problem with HvH getting attention. Give it a ladder, a title etc. but I feel giving it equal tournament support to GvG is odd given better more established formats exist which could use the attention and some work. HvH went from being a format most players didn't care about to suddenly getting as much attention as the format most pvpers careed about most. I found this a little odd and so do a lot of other people when formats like TA which players have been pushing for more support for for a long time got leapforgged by this rather undeveloped HvH format which to be honest was a bit a of joke. I have no doubt that now that their is money behind it that people will start caring more and looking to improve, but they are only caring more because suddenly there is something to be gained not because of the value of the format, or current player interest in the format. This strikes me as very artifical.

you're right that they should give HvH some time to refine, however, a hvh championship in "early 2007" doesn't allow for much time does it?
if they had just implemented a ladder first to see how things played out, i doubt this thread would even be here.



ultimately, winstar, you need to realize that the determining factor in holding a HvH championship is that it allows ANet to showcase their unique Heroes system to a wider audience.

All I can say is that introducing Heros to the pvp scene is a big mistake...

RIP HA... so dead and buried and even the new updated can't res it

Farewell, GW =)

Unfortunately, the fundamental problem is that the opponent is forced to run into a dozen of spirits and try to take it out. It is possible to beat but this build and the variation with a shadow of haste runner is currently being used a lot and provide for the most boring and often frustrating experience. HB could be a lot more interesting with a few changes in the way shrines work.

Uhm, no you're not. I know several experienced HB players who're using totally different builds (for example a lot of the players from the top guilds are usually running very customized high-damage builds). Currently the ganker + spirit spam build is being played even more than SF or thumpers. Your build is also being copied, I ran into several of those already.

I guess that's true but maybe this is exactly what's needed to make people play HB. Now a lot of people are calling it a joke without even giving it a chance. I do understand you find it odd that TA doesn't get this support but basically the question should be "why no TA ladder" instead of "why the HvH support".

maybe because 2 TA teams can make a gvg team and HvH is a unique format that showcases individual skill and needs to be promoted to make it high end pvp?

/ROLL IS A BUNCH OF CRAP
day back in was in hoh and the other team asked to roll
we said ok and rolled and beat them by alot. But, like almost every one of you jackoff crybaby players, they refused to leave, so we just rolled them.

I still don't see how this format showcases indiviudal skill when your time is spent beating up ai who are supported mainly by other ai. I can concede that it tests (challenges, highlights) a very different set of skills than those used in other pvp formats. Basically, your ability to micro mangage, making the format like an RTS of sorts. But in this sense its not a good measure of your individual skill in GW in the older sense, how well you play in an HA or GvG team. Basically it measures something very different from what we would mean by individual skill in traditional formats. I don't see why the fact that 2 TA teams = GvG team that TA shouldn't get support. Halls needs 2 more for GvG, so don't support halls?

Yeah, this is pretty ridiculous.

I remember when GvG and HA were the two highest peaks of acheivement in this game. HA's status was continually falling though, and now instead of giving it support and attempting to restore competition in HA to the level of GvG again, anet makes tournaments for HvH...

Hey, why don't we hold RA tournaments? Or maybe Fort Aspenwood tournaments? Or daily time attack in Boreas Seabed?

Seriously, if they are set on running HA into the ground, they could've given Team Arenas some serious support instead... I'd probably start playing that :/