Time to clean up the arenas.

This sums up the two camps that are forming in this thread.

LagunaCid's camp (apologies that I call it your camp, but just as point of reference I used you) arguments that people can't see that they will be a sure loss.

And that's true, up to a degree. Murphy's law dictates that things always can go bad. The other team may be hit with error 7, real life, etc.
But it IS possible to make a really good prediction of the outcome of a match even shortly into battle. An experienced pvp player has enough awareness to see how his fellow teammates are reacting to situations. Compare that to the reactions of the opposing team, and it won't take a rocketscientist to predict the outcome of a match.
I'll illustrate this with an example, because this concept is aparantly hard to believe for some.
I go into battle, the first present spawns. 2 people of the opposing team rush for the present, and on my side only I go for the present. I wind up in a 2v1 situation and get killed, while my teammates are happily snowballing the other players of the opposing team. This repeats itself 2 times, after which I can do nothing then conclude that my teammates are not interested in fighting for the present, but in fighting in general. All fine, I leave them too it, and leave the group. Now explain to me why this is wrong? They can have their fun of killing things without me just as well.

Another example: my teammates are knocking the relicrunner down, but at such a distance they have no chance in hell in recapturing the present. The opposing side knocks down our runner in such a way (by standing closely to him/her) that they recapture our relics. Who will win with everyone staying in the match? Who will win if one player leaves? The outcome is the same. You don't have to be 'psychic' lagunacid to see who will win a game.

Now, the soar point: the teammembers who were fighting see a teammember leave. And now it hits them: we can't win this. A conclusion the leaver already was able to make. His / her less skilled teammebers weren't able to make this conclusion before the leaver left. And I predict they will blame their loss on the leaver, as it is human nature to put the blame on someone else then our own.

Here you are correct. A competitive player doesn't mind losing, altough he strongly prefers winning. But a lot depends on the way how a match is lost. If the match never developped to a tactical / strategical level, the match will not be really satisfying for the competitive player. there never was a 'play of the game itself' in that case, at least not in the view of a competitive player.

That is an interesting point of view. If you see every point as an accomplishment, then you have something to fight for. But much like Chess, pieces are often offered to come quicker to a victory. If they let you take a present because they can run the other presents faster to their avatar, is it really an accomplishment to get a point in? It makes it pretty meaningless in the minds of most competitive players.

1) most people prefer a fair fight over an up-hill battle. The 'so what' approach is one that isn't shared by many. If the better team doesn't win because of the edge the other team has, then something is wrong imho.
2) yes, if you win with the lesser side it is nice.

You contracted a serious illness: e-peen priapism.
Please uninstall Guild Wars and go back to real life to heal yourself.

Absolutely. I fully expect to play with and against terrible teams. Not only that, but I stick it out with terrible teams against similarly bad teams. I've dragged some pretty awful teams a long way in RA this way. I'll quit out on them if they have no chance if winning - that's really only the case if I am Monking, however, and they are incapable of killing anything. If I am not Monking, there isn't much to think about because if my team is bad and overmatched they'll all be dead in short order anyway.

The difference in Snowball Arena is that it is easier to evaluate player skill (because the bars are given and only actions vary in SA, so beyond the really bad characters there's more to evaluate in RA), and the matches take a lot longer (have to wait close to 3 minutes at a minimum, assuming no dud presents spawn). Hence while a RA match will conclude by the time you figure out your team won't win more often than not, you can reach that same conclusion several minutes before the coup de grace is applied.


Again, I only leave lost games. Many players are simply worse at evaluating at which point a game is lost, and in all likelihood blame me leaving for their loss because they don't know any better, and want to blame someone.

I would play in organized teams if I could, and I do when available. However whether or not I have enough teammates who want to play TA or other organized PvP at any given time is not something under my control. Sometimes, I just want to log in and play Guild Wars, and I'll hop into the random formats. You could say I'm making the best of a suboptimal situation.


Insecure about losing? Where does that come from? No insecurity involved, I just see no reason to waste more time than neccessary on a lost match, when I can go right back in and start another.


This doesn't make any sense. It is purely an observation - when two good, competitive teams are matched up against each other, the team that pulled Dwayna wins a vast majority of the time. That does not mean that I don't play those games out, they're some of the most enjoyable ones you can have in fact. But it honestly feels like the coinflip has much more of an impact on the results of the match than the gameplay of the individual players. When the biggest lesson I can take away from a match is 'Dwayna sure is good', it really turns me off from a format.

Peace,
-CxE

IMO, people who thinks leaving is bad, unethical and or unhuman are not worth my time, unless they are already my friends.

Yes this is elitism and prejudice, but I don't have all the time in the world, so I have to make choices.

I leave randoms only under a few situations:

1. I'm monking, and leave to avoid a tedious stalemate. (I've played matches that went over an hour. They're no fun, and they'd happen quite a bit if I never left). Thankfully, this doesn't happen in snowball arenas.

2. I'm dead, and my team is hopeless/running around like headless chickens. In snowball arenas, this means I only leave when the other team is winning by a 3-4 point margin, and shows no sign of slowing down.

3. The rest of my team leaves, leeches, or does something so monumentally stupid that I feel I have to leave to preserve my already tenuous faith in the human race. Leavers and leechers happen plenty often in all formats, you ignore them and get a brand spanking new team in 10 seconds.
As for the morons, I see no reason to stay on a team with a bunch of tanking warriors, flare spamming rangers, or runners. Accordingly, why should I spend time playing in snowball arenas with a full team of people who stand on the ice and make snow forts while I run presents alone?

4. The girlfriend yells at me to tell me I've been playing for 6 hours and the dishes from dinner are starting to smell.

Couldn't resist responding to this thread...

As a PvP newb i can only say that the GW PvP experience is less than ideal most of the time. I don't have a GvG guild so i can only watch these matches in observer mode (which is fun in itself for learning strategies). I tried Heroes Ascent but nobody wants to group with an inexeperienced player. That leave me to with RA, TA, Fort Aspenwood and Alliance Battles. Team Arena has the same problem as HA, no one wants to group with a newbie. I occasionaly find a group but it's rare. RA can be fun when nobodies quit before the game or during and when we don't get owned in 45 seconds by the other team. Alliance battles are ok and Fort Aspenwood is the more fun because you can take your time and use the NPCs to your advantages.

I think these would help:

- Skill based matchmaking (i don't know what stats they should use but it would still be better than free-for-all like it is today)

- Deserter debuff (like WoW) if you leave an Arena so that you can't go back into another match for something like 15 minutes

- Automatic kick out if you stay inactive for x period of time

- Auto-join of players to fill the team that are missing players (due to leeching or disconnects). There could be a grace period for disconnected players before replacing them.


With this, IMO, everybody wins. The hardcore PvPers can fight among themselves, the noobs can finally have a balanced fight, no more leechers and no more quitters. The penality for quitting doesn't penalize people quitting for real life emergencies and things like that. It only penalize people trying to hand-pick their team in a random arena.

Magnus_Z,

You didn't read any posts did you?

"- Deserter debuff (like WoW) if you leave an Arena so that you can't go back into another match for something like 15 minutes"

This is just plain stupid, read above posts.

I think they should have changed it so that at the end of a game, you would gain one shard per present, even if you lost, then maybe throwing in a bonus one for winning, or having losers get half the shards per present, to establish the winner/loser gap to prevent afkers.

So not only are you psychic, but your presence or absence does not in any way affect a team's chances of winning?

What pathetically self-serving claptrap. You do not know a game is lost, you merely make a gross evaluation of probabilities and quit when they don't suit you. The team you left has every right and reason to blame you if they lose. They may or may not have won had you stayed, but your leaving almost certainly doomed them to losing. If they curse you, they do so with good reason.

It's these kind of "OMFG MY TEEM SUX I GO BAI BAI" people that are the kind of people that created the outright disgusting elitism circus that is HA.

Lets say you go play another game you want to get into, and YOU are the newb who wants to learn, but everyone else doesn't want you and you get the "GTFO" response.

Yeah, you can whine "OMFG MY TIME" all you want, but you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

I personally cannot wait till Anet punish rage quitting idiots.

I wish people who thought like that came with obvious labels, so the rest of us could avoid them. Some kind of title like "1337 Rage Quitter" earned after 20 matches exited after 30 seconds.

Deleet, that's really unfair of you to say merely because you disagree with his post. I think his post was on-topic, and I agree with what he said. He's telling us his experience with Guild Wars PvP from a newbie's perspective, and saying it needs improvement. If you don't listen to and follow advice like this the game won't grow (or at least be able to replenish what it's losing), and the game will have a much shorter life-span. I'd like to get the most out of what I payed for.

There's this thing called predictive modeling. It involves making observations about the past and present, and using those to make accurate predictions about the future. Every animal does it.

Or are you one of those people who is surprised every day when the sun comes up?


If course it affects it in some way. It reduces a very, very small number into an even smaller number. The other team might have several of their members go AFK mid-match, or they could have a mass error=7, or several of their members could suffer heart attacks right after I left.


Who, praytell, should I be serving?


You are in no position to evaluate my ability to predict a match. It is incredibly presumptuous on your part to assert that I am inept at predicting the outcomes of matches.


They have every right to blame me, sure. They also have every right to blame the tooth fairy.

Every reason? Nay. They have reason to be frustrated for losing, but blaming the loss on me leaving is virtually always inaccurate. The scenario that led to them losing played out before I left, and if they had half a clue they'd look to that and might understand why they just got smoked.

The main reason to blame me for leaving? Passing the blame.


They wouldn't have.


The good reason being that they're bad, and will remain bad, because they do not have an attitude conductive to getting better.

Peace,
-CxE

Our apologies that we don't want to be caught up in an unending cycle of altruism, of spending our time in game being the solution to not our, but *your* problem.


That isn't really neccessary. After all, the complaint raised in this thread is that 'people who thought like that' do a pretty damn good job avoiding 'people who think like you' in the first place. Which is ideal, because it sounds like neither of our groups has any desire to play on the same team in the first place.

The quitting out system works out pretty well for that, though. People who think like me go and join-spike in the international districts and get paired up with like-minded individuals more often than not, and don't cycle through too many teams because of it. The winning teams stay together, and stay in, after all.

Peace,
-CxE

The funny thing is I could say the same thing about your attitude, hence why I wouldn't want a player like you on my team if we weren't playing in a random arena. I really don't care about your accomplishments or those of iQ. I've played competitive sports my whole life, and been on championship teams in real life and in video games. When I was much younger and played little league baseball, I was on a team that was the worst in the league one year, and became the best the next year. I have never tolerated self-defeatists and quitters. Teams that get better consist of players that never quit, never surrender, and remain loyal to one another. iQ didn't always have gold trim on it's cape, and it's the result of determination, loyalty, and discipline that made you guys champions not quitting and back-stabbing.

I'm not gonna argue with you though Ensign. You'll surely overpower me with your better grammar and use of large fancy words. The issue isn't about you or any other quitters, but why hasn't Anet done anything about it?

After reading through this thread what would ever make you think that any of us would want to play 3 vs. 4 in 90% of the matches?

Maybe it's because Anet agrees with the point of view Ensign is presenting?

I leave if my team is stupid, has leechers, or just does stupid things. You can tell pretty fast if you have people who've never PvPed in their life before. Anyways, it doesn't mean they can't leave after you do either. But it sure is better than sitting through 4 minutes of horror to lose 5-0 because you want others to 'enjoy' losing. :P

Predictions are guesses, not certainties. What about that undeniable fact is so difficult for you to grasp?

If you believe your guesses about your random teammate's potential performace to have the same certitude as opining that the sun will rise tomorrow, then discussing this or much of anything else with you is pointless as you are well into the realm of paranoiac delusions of grandeur.

Let me sum it up:
You have a superego problem and dont give a shit about what other people think of you, or how your actions affect other people. In other words, you are freaking egocentric and selfish. Im done.

Dan, that might be true, but we'll never know until Anet publically addresses the situation. If Anet agrees with Ensign and others that the system is fine, then I hope Gaile makes a post about it soon, so I can start finding another PvP game to play. Gaile has expressed disapproval of leechers and leavers, but she said the blame is with the community not Anet, which makes me think nothing is being done to fix this problem.

I've always had a lot of faith in Anet, and loved 99% of the changes put in game, so I'm not gonna be quick to throw in the towel. It's getting very tiring though. It's been 8 months now (and 100$ later in costs for expansions) since these problems have been ruining casual PvP for me. Some confirmation from Anet on this issue would be nice.

Have you ever played on a team that wasn't interested in playing competitive sports when you were?

Have you played alongside players day after day who weren't interested in winning or getting better, or even putting forth a minimal amount of effort? Who not only don't try, but get mad if you call them on it?

How can you commit yourself to winning a team game without teammates willing to do the same?


In general, no, I don't think anyone really *wants* to play 3v4. Speaking for myself, I similarly don't really *want* to play with teammates that do put emphasis on winning a match. I would think, naively, that such an opinion is also universal, but experience tells me that it is far from the truth.

Hence, the question being debated to death: why am I obligated to help a team win if they are not interested in helping themselves win? Why do I need to stick through to the obvious conclusions when I can instead look for a team on the same page, for teammates who *are* interested in winning games?

To turn it around: why do people not only join a competitive match, like RA, without the intention of trying to win, but have the gall to get mad when we decide not to play with them? You expect me to stay through the match? I argue that you have a much higher obligation to actually *show up* to the match and do your best to win. If people can't be bothered to help themselves, I can't be bothered to stick around watch them fail, let alone help them.


It must be very difficult to live life when you can't base decisions upon what it likely to happen, only on what is certain to happen.


What is so difficult to believe about people being able to predict, in some cases, with an exceptional degree of accuracy, the outcome of a Snowball Arena match within the first 30 seconds? I'm not claiming to be unique in this way at all, there are likely hundreds if not thousands of players who can make the same estimations I can, because it is not terribly difficult.

If the core of your argument is that it is wrong for me to leave on a team because I cannot accurately predict the outcome of a match, in many cases, in only 30 seconds of gameplay, then I kindly suggest that your argument is factually wrong. Because such prediction is sufficiently simple that I am honestly surprised that it's subject to debate.


That's three separate assertions.

First, superego problem. In strictly Freudian terms, I will agree with you that my superego is 'abnormal'. However I will argue that an abnormal superego is not a problem, until it causes social disruption in excess of one's contributions to society. I am nowhere near that threshold. Hence, you are wrong.

Second, that I don't give a shit what other people think of me. Outside of a select group of people that I care about, I agree. I really do not care what the population at large thinks of me. However I believe this is healthy, and that having one's sense of self-worth being tied to what a faceless society thinks reeks of insecurity and is frankly pathetic.

Third, that I do not care how my actions affect other people. That is patently untrue. Of course I care about how I affect the people around me. However, there is a balance, as I care about myself as well. One has to constantly balance one's needs against the needs of those around them. You cannot thoroughly neglect yourself in favor of those around you, after all. In the case of quitting out of a lost match, it is my estimation that, given the goals (winning the match), that I am costing my team very little (playing down a man in a lost match, hence only costing them a tool to achieve a personal victory that I likely do not share), while gaining myself something valuable - more time spent in competitive matches, learning and getting better.

As for the slam you ended your post with, I think it'd be clear, based on the above, that you'd be better off directing your appraisal to the care police.

Peace,
-CxE

I was reading Montaigne, but I stopped, chucked it into the trash, and just made a pizza.

Well, yes, but with lousy timing. They are rage quitting after the opportunity to replace them with someone helpful has passed.

Usually, the best way to tell your team has some "winners" on it is if they start making comments like "Drop X. His profession sucks" and other such rudeness. Luckily, they tend to be very vocal that way and drop enough clues, if you know what to look for. It's the quiet ones you have to worry about ...

Haha, i mostly tell people what they are doing wrong before i leave the game.

Like, <Le French Guy> is using Mending!

(no offense against frence people, just an example.)

Let's not kid ourselves Ensign. You're telling me that a majority of players that "suck" don't even try? You claim to see these people playing day after day and they still "suck", because they don't try? You must be doing some serious stalking of newbies through your friends list, because 99% of people I come across in the arenas, I never see their names again.

Honestly, in all my time playing online video games I'd say that at least 99% of people playing are trying to win no matter how bad they "suck". Why else would they pay $50, install the game, and click Enter Mission? Just because someone can't dedicate hours a day to the game doesn't mean they aren't trying. The only time I'll conclude a person isn't trying is when they are actively trying to help the opposing team win. For example, I played a snowball match a few days ago, and a player on my team ran presents for the whole round to the opposing avatar. I've also played matches in FPS shooter games with Friendly Fire on, where some bonehead at the start will shoot or nade his own teammates.

Let's say someone is playing Guild Wars for the first time. How "good" do you really expect them to be just sitting down and reading PvP theory articles on these forums or the iQ website? Do you expect a player to familiarize themselves with all 900 skills in the game, and pick out a cookie-cutter build before they step foot in an arena? Or would it be better for them to just start playing the game, and familiarize themselves with the basics like movement? I would for argue for the latter as a better to learn a game.

I don't care what any elitist r12 player, who has been playing Guild Wars since release says about the difficulty of PvP in this game, but it is damn hard to get into PvP in this game. Compare the number of skills and combinations in Guild Wars to other RPG's like WoW, and it makes those other game look like they were made for pre-schoolers. I have A LOT of sympathy and respect for someone just starting this game, who has the balls to click Enter Mission in a PvP arena, knowing their probably going to get owned by players who have been playing this game since the beginning.

I'm done arguing with you Ensign. I've actually been finished arguing with players like you for years now. You'll never change my mind what it means to be a good sportsman, and I'll never change yours.

I didn't create this thread to argue with players like you. I didn't create this thread to offer suggestions to Anet. Many suggestions have already been made about this issue. I created this thread because Anet made a great game, and it deserves criticism (call them rants if you will), when something is terribly broken in the game. I created this thread to let Anet know the problem still persists, and it hasn't nor will it ever resolve itself.

3 vs. 4 or any odd-numbered match in an FPS game I can live with. Heck, I've even won matches in FPS games when it's just me, my machine gun, a few 'nades vs. 10 other people. But 3 vs. 4 in a team-based game like Guild Wars, where I can't rely on superior reflexes or individual prowess to win, breaks the game completely.

People who continue to do unefficient builds, even when told multiple times that they should rethink their build.

There is a difference between learning from mistakes and not learning.
Some people just don't learn or are unwillingly to learn.


This is why PvE is here. Learning the game, some people just never get past that. PvP isn't perfect, and it's very hard to get into if you just enter random arena a million times, but if you actually find some builds on wiki, read how they work and tips for playing them better. Then you're quickly on yout way of becomming a good player, you just need to realize that the information is out there also, you don't have to experience everything first handly.


IMO, the problem is that somem people are basically stupid and there is no solution to that.

You know, they can just quit also. Noone forces you to play a hopeless match. And of course it's possible to win some times in a 3v4 situation, but mostly not. Especially if you're missing a healing or just have brainless people without resurrect signets etc. etc.

Interesting how one side is arguing that they will leave if they have determined winning to be out of the picture and another side who insist on sticking it out out of sportsmanship and honor. I've got a solution that should appease both sides. Those that want to leave can leave and those that want to stay can stay. Look, if someone leaves because they are 100% certain that their team cannot win, what's wrong with that? Obviously they have different goals than you do in playing. Since some of you will stick with a team no matter how bad the team is, what's the difference if you are in a 4v4 losing team and a 4v3 losing team?

The only reason I play the snowball arena is because of that dang title. It would have been better off had they not added the title at all. But since its there, I have to get it of course. I'm certainly not doing this for the faction as I've already maxed my faction and have everything unlocked. Yes, I have left teams before the match ended but I am a bit more forgiving than some of the other leavers out there. I'll stay in a match if only three have loaded or if one has dropped out. If only two load or if two have quit then I will quit as well. The reason I stay with only three players is because there is still a possibility of winning. I had a team of three that won two rounds straight (both times, the 4th guy failed to load) then went on to win 28 rounds when we got a 4th teammate. It wasn't hard to see that my two teammates were capable players so I stuck it out for those two rounds.

My other condition for leaving is when I see that we are hopelessly outmatched. Say we are down 3 to 0 and my team has shown that they have no clue what they are doing. Why waste more of my time on a sinking ship when I can get back in with players that actually want to win? Besides, the quicker I get back in, the less likely I'll be with those same players who think that the snowball arena is deathmatch. Call me an elitist or whatever you want for leaving when my teammates are incompetent. Last time I checked the point of the snowball arena and any other type of PvP is to win and if my teammates can't at least do the courtesy of reading the instructions and looking for other players' advice on wiki then they aren't worth my time. The novelty of the snowball arena wore off last year. My only reason for playing more than a few rounds this year is to add another title to my collection.

While I most likely do not belong in a pvp conversation, I must put forth my few cents worth of thoughts.

First, I dislike PvP in almost all ways because of the must win attitudes out there. I did, however, decide to play the snowball arena to see if pvp can spark any interest again and for another title. While I am working toward that title, I refuse to fall into a leaver category and other dishonorable actions. I mainly play to have fun, but all of the too serious pvp people leaving and bad mouthing is sorely reducing that fun.


Although there are a lot of extremely good pvp players, from my view most pvp people just whine about "overpowered" skills instead of seeking counter builds, bad mouth those who are trying to learn how to pvp well, and just overall being "leet" jerks instead of being truly elite by teaching those who are learning.

Sadly this experience has extended into the just-for-fun snowball arenas. I think I shall just stop trying to get into pvp and just stick to what I enjoy most: helping others have fun at a game and playing that game better.

Granted, I have played pvp with a few helpful and fun players who gave me pointers, but sadly they are few and rare.

Apologies for the rant-it has been a bother for me for a long while now. Overall I do agree leavers should be punished at random arenas, but festival team arenas should also be available for the hardcore pvp players.

You would be surprised how many rounds I've done today where my team was utterly clueless about what to do, why the skills were diffrent, where to go. It was pretty annoying but I helped them as much as I could. Alot of people that were on today didn't know where to take presents, or how to win the match. As a rule I only leave if someone is afk, or leaves before me so yeah I've had to stick it out for a lot of sinking ship battles.


I haven't had a victory in a few hours -_-

If I'm in a game with someone who I've come to know as a frequent leaver and he doesn't leave that particular game, I usually leave a minute into the game, especially if we're doing well. Yes, I'm a very spiteful person, and getting back to one of these assholes gives me great joy. Screw the other two players, I'll gladly sacrifice their chances at winning AND their sense of fun to get back at someone who's been p-ing me off.

And yes, I do realize I practice a very horrible double standard.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr258
read, reread, digest, grasp.


I must have linked to 'Spike, Johnny & Timmy' dozens of time. But its such a great reading then again, and applies here again. People talk about 'honorable and dishonorable actions'. But remember its YOUR set of paramaters that define what is honorable or not. Not everyone thinks like you. There are different psychological gamerprofiles, which is explained in the article I linked to.
So stop trying to enforce your 'honorcode' on others. It doesn't work. It won't happen. Simply because there are different types of gamers. Not everyone is like you. Try to grasp things from the other gamerprofiles perspective for a change. It may be refreshing.

I'm getting pissed off - I reported a person for leeching few days ago. Probably he got banned for this time. Today I met him again, and he still leeches. I reported few other guys but i lost all the snowball fun. I made 2k pts and I'm so pissed off, that I prefer to play Counter Strike Source, than Guild Wars. ARENA NET - WAKE UP! Leechers are killing gameplay! Fort Aspenwood, Jade Quarry - what's goin to be next? You are making great game, but you MUST DO SOMETHING to keep it in good condition. Do some restart battle system(leechers will be kicked out, and new layer will be added) or votekicking system. i'm sure u can do that - anti-farm filter works, why not to apply it to PvP? If player enters PvP battle and doesn't use any skills/move for some period of time(depending on the PvP mode he is playing, or even a map), he get kicked, and whole battle restarts.

Sorry for my english, I know it's a mess...

All this would be _less_ of a problem if Anet implemented an Upgraded Ignore List or a separate "Exclude List" as per the following link:

http://guildwarsguru.com/forum/showt...3073065&page=3

You don't want to be in someone's team for whatever reason, add them to your private "Lamer" List, and be prevented from being _automatically_ put in the same team as them, and be warned whenever you are manually put in the same team, or they get added to your team (then you decide if you want to leave or not). The List should of course be based on the account and not the character- I think the Ignore list works that way right?

This sort of thing is fairly easy to implement. It's not complex business rules "logic"...

You don't like playing with noobs who don't know what they are doing- add the noobs to your list and quit.

You don't like playing with quitters, add the quitter to your list.

Then you two won't ever have to play with each other again.

Lastly, to the people who leave just because a warrior uses mending. I have played a warrior in Kurzick Aspenwood, using mending, and I have often won half the battle by leading 8 luxon warriors to a safe place on the map, then tanking them (and various luxon players that try to kill me) till both turtles die, and only then dying and leaving the 8 luxon warriors to stand there aimlessly (or till an idiot teammate aggros them). If the luxon warriors don't die = no new siege turtles. No new siege turtles = better chances for Kurzicks.

Sure the luxons are noobs for not being able to kill a whammo who uses mending- but I've tanked through a fair bit - edenial, enchantment removal, spike nuking, etc... After all 8 luxon warriors give you lots of energy and I had a lot more than 55hp and 60AL . No PvP build is unbeatable of course, nor should be. But mending has a place in PvP.

Oh please....the arguments have been made countless times to explain why Mending doesn't belong in pvp.
And everytime it is being 'counterargumented' with personal experiences instead of giving an explanation how 3 or 4 pips of hp can stop the bashing of 8 warriors ALONE, which makes absoluty no sense and is frankly, a bs argument.
Maybe you made a supertanking build. well, cgz, for finding 8 players stupid enough to endless swing their weapons of you, instead of finding a target they can kill easily and leave you basically useless for the team.

But this is derailing from the original topic, so let's leave it at that.

Absolutely. They don't prioritize winning over whatever other goals they've come to desire, and as a result don't try to win or get better.

I think that'd be obvious, because players who try stop sucking very, very quickly, leaving only a blip.


As if I pay attention to the name of Random J Scrub and follow him around. He's nameless, but appears on newly formed teams with frequency. Individual randoms are unlikely to stick around, they get smoked over and over again and because they do not have the mindset to understand why, they simply go back to PvE instead of continuing to fail.


Because they want to throw snowballs at people? Individuals have their own goals, which oftentimes supercede winning the match. I do not feel beholden to those people.


Are they trying to learn how to play PvP? Probably weak for the first couple matches, but that shouldn't last long. Learning comes very quickly in the fire if you pay attention to it. Certainly it'll take a while to pick up nuance, but it doesn't take very long at all to figure out how to deal damage to people and how to stay alive. Hell, when losing you're presented with examples of people accomplishing that goal, win or lose.

If you go into snowball arena, you're really playing a game of Capture the Flag. Maybe that should be spelled out more explicitly by the game, because I'm sure a vast, vast majority of players have played or at least heard of Capture the Flag in some capacity. If you have a clue, you understand as a complete newbie that you win at Capture the Flag by doing stuff with the flag. So when players, well, don't pay attention to the Flag at all or anything having to do with it, no matter if you mention it, what is one to conclude?


Agreed. In fact I believe it's the biggest failing of PvP in Guild Wars. The fact that the few newbie-friendly PvP types (anything with random teams) have been allowed to degenerate into cesspools (AFK leeching, poorly explained gameplay, imbalances and exploits, dominant team concentration) is pathetic and doesn't speak very highly of the Guild Wars support team. Unsurprisingly, Snowball Arena is quite possibly the worst of the random formats for new players, despite the one really strong mechanic it has - level and skill bar (rough) equalization, removing those barriers from play.

Unfortunately it suffers from other serious problems - the emergence of dominant 'random' teams as a consequence of winning teams sticking together; a serious AFK problem; a non-trivial set of rules that is not even attempted to be explained. As a result Snowball Arena has been in constant decline since it first was introduced, with the players most interested in winning join-spiking and cycling teams as fast as possible until they get one that'll go on a 50-game tear, and joe newbie trying to get into PvP running into a steady stream of AFK players, quasi-premade teams that have been playing together for hours, and, yes, players like me raging out over and over again looking for that team that can go on that streak. It's all a consequence of horrendous game design, one that, we would hope, people would learn from.


That's an accurate description of WoW actually, it has been designed so that you can succeed no matter how bad you are or what you try to do with it. That makes it incredibly addictive to a general population that has to struggle through things so often.


That's awesome. Usually when I get a solid team, I can win 3v4 easily, because players are so bad. If the scrub on my team wants to take off just to spite me, that's fine, I'll roll the dice on getting another player worth his salt in the next round. It could easily backfire with an AFK, but I hadn't had that experience yet.

Peace,
-CxE

Players are so bad now, i find myself leaving much more spontaneously, why do people still bring rangers and paragons in.

Uh... for the same reason you bring other classes in? Did I miss something?

A lot of people insist on playing snowball arena with their PvE characters. If they're a Ranger or Paragon, that's what they're playing as, no matter how weak that profession might be.

Peace,
-CxE

Oh, duh, I was thinking he was referring to RA.