The event has been ruined by leavers

The major problem with TA is that its in the middle of other better forms of PvP and it has no incentive to play. Most experienced players who have 4 people handy can easily grab 2-4 more and play an 8 man PvP format. What is the point in TA if you can organize a team? It has no benefit whatsoever.

Now the entire point of RA is to have some fun fast PvP with no organization involved, but people have fun in different ways. While some people will go in to mess around, test builds, play a quick game or two, or what have you... some others will have fun simply trying to win even in a casual setting, and the team is a part of that. Its just a situation where people play for different reasons.

Now those two conflict of course, but its not extreme as people claim here. I was just raging at the "go to TA" argument because I think its so horrible. People are in essense saying "we don't like how you play so go somewhere else".

Yea I just raged at the TA argument which I still think is bad. I enjoy RA as well and THAT is the reason I don't want these ridiculous changes. I enjoy 4v4 as much as the next guy...I don't like 4v3 or 3v4 or any number disadvantage on either side. I like good fights while trying to win...one sided smashings teach me nothing. That is why I prefer to have a capable team when I face another capable team.

Then guess what ? Your a n00b. Any half decent player knows that your better off if you stay for one match irregardless if you have a monk or whatever, so that way you can see what the team your in actually has. A monkless team with complimentary builds is just as likely to win glads....if not more.

About half my glad points are in RA, the others in TA. Their have been tons of times were I got a team, we got no monk, some random scrub on our team left and we won 3v4...going on to get a glad point with no monk.

And to top it off, leaving is rude and selfish. So not only is leaving until you get what you think is a "balanced team" ( bullshit in ra ) illogical and n00bish, but it also makes you a jerk.

Fail @ life.

/uninstall nao.

Everyone who is on here defending leaving in Random Arenais wrong. Period. Look up the word. It is silly to try to get the perfect team by leaving and restarting again and again and again. Think about the ppl who are on that team. They may not have a good chance of winning or they may. Maybe they are newbies and are trying to get a feel for PvP and all they see is half their team leave before the fight even starts. If you are so "Uberleet" why don't you take it to TA where you are sure to get the team you want. Because you probably suck and wouldn't last 1 match there. So take your spanking on the team you were dealt and get on with it. You can always leave in between fights if you have to. Stop ruining other ppl's fun because it isn't the team you wanted. Maybe they came for the element of Randomness.Something about the name of the area..............what was it again?...........Oh yeah.............

Easy way to fix RA is to remove Galdiator title track. Hence, no need for people to farm, and look for a team possible to make a winning streak of 10 matches = No more leavers.

That title track is a joke anyway.

No, PvP is ruined by game imbalance. If you consider RA isn't a serious PvP place, then leavers, who take it as a serious PvP place, ruin it.
You can't use your argument here: If you consider RA as not serious, then there is no incentive to leave, you want to play and not to win. Actually, that's leavers who takes it seriosu, not anti-leavers.

That's here you're wrong. If people were unaffected by leavers they wouldn't complain. Sorry. You conveniently hide or minimize the fact that early leaving wastes 3 other's people time. You get your fun AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHER's TIME.
Leaving after 1-30 is not whjat anti-leaver condemn. You have the right to leave if your team doesn't suit you, as long as other people had their fight.

But yet they do. They don't want to, but they do.

Taking a RL example, would be considered as noobish for many here, but I follow you with RL examples. Take the Minamata bay example. Or Exxon Valdez example. The companies didn't want to pollute and kill people and entire ecosystems.They didn't even wanted these havoc happen. But it happened. Leavers don't want to take into account the damage they do. They only take into account their own fun, even if they ruins other's one. I don't care if a guy pursue a glad title. As long as he's not destroying other's fun. For in-game example, that's not a crime to want to become rich in GW. But when you start to scam others to reach your goal, that's an issue.


You'll have to bring statistics. Because I pawned teams with a monk fairly easily. Additionally, in RA, not only monk can heal. Rits, and some gimmick dervish can, too. Everything relies on players skill. A healing monk in my team? useless.


Let's see, 3 people in a team satisfied against 1 leaver dissatisfied forced to go in TA to have its dream team and learn to play. I take. That's democracy.
There was a poll on putting a temp ban on leavers. Try to find it and guess who was the more numerous ? Anti or pro-leaving? You get it. Anti-leavers.

Leavers don't take this issues seriously at all. The only ones I see complaining here are anti-leavers.

They can simply leave all the same. They lose about the same amount of time as the leaver...which is about 5 seconds. So what?

I could care less what the other players do. They play the game as they want to play it. This is almost like me saying "the other 3 players are crap and they probably get pleasure out of being bad".

I've decided all real life examples don't show at all what is happening in RA and are just meant to make a point seem more serious than it actually is.

I don't need statistics. Its common sense if you play in RA with any consistency that not having a dedicated healer makes it VERY difficult to get consistent wins. Its possible but not probable. I would easily bet anything on that.

Please...the next person that says "go to TA" is major flamebait who didn't read any of the previous posts.

Link? And even if you find the link I'm willing to bet it was a completely biased poll that can't be taken seriously. In order to get a serious poll on this you'd have to do a lot of research...because quite frankly...HA got changed to 6v6 on one of those polls and look how that turned out. (Bad for those who don't already know).

EDIT: DreamWind ninja'ed me. Anything redundant is a result of that.

It would appear that my post has fostered some discussion on the values of both sides of this argument. I'm happy to see that, because threads with just one side complaining about the other side tend to be a waste.

Like I said earlier, I can understand how both sides feel in this situation. I've been on both sides, and I've always had the ability to see merits in all sides of an argument. Thus, I think it best that I refrain from debating too much more in this thread, or else confusion from my opinions is certain to erupt.

That said, please continue debating on this. I don't want to see this thread locked due to flames, as it can offer some ideas into how to try and mediate between the two sides of leavers and non-leavers.

I want to see discussion about how to do this, I really do. Removing glad points from RA is an idea, but of course that idea must be backed up with evidence that it actually will work, and doesn't just shun one side entirely. This is the sort of discussion I want to see: objective viewpoints and proper examination of ideas with minimal flaming and ad hominem attacks.

As an example, I'll respond to an above post, which was in response to my earlier post.

This is an example of a logical fallacy called a "straw man." In a straw man, you misrepresent the opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. You, glountz, misrepresented my argument by trying to make it appear as if I was saying RA wasn't "serious" PvP. I said nothing of the sort, only that RA isn't PvP in its -entirety-. The argument that PvP is being ruined by RA leavers is laughable because RA is only a small portion of PvP. Thus, my argument that PvP is not being ruined by RA leavers stands.

Here, you try to refute my argument that leaving often does not change what the outcome of the battle would be. However, you offer no evidence in your favor. You are essentially saying, "Well you're wrong. Leaving makes the team lose when they would have won but I have no evidence to support that." Leavers do what they do because they feel that the team they are on has a very low chance of victory. If you get a mending warrior with 5 defensive stances on your team, he's going to be pretty much useless. That's more or less 3v4, and as you yourself say, 3v4 almost always results in a loss. Somehow, I don't think a leaver would affect the outcome of this match.

Here you say that as long as the team gets their fight, it's fine to leave. Well then, if all you care about is the fight, what's the problem fighting 3v4? Someone leaving doesn't affect your ability to fight; you're the only one in control of your character. People can "have their fight" regardless of whether or not they have a leaver. It's their choice whether they want to fight, and theirs alone.

They don't want to take pleasure in making you lose, but they do? Does that even make sense? Of course, if you're referring to just the loss, then what you mean is "They cause a loss, even if they don't want to." I'll assume that's what you meant. You said that as long as the players get their fight, the leaver has his right to leave. You curiously omitted anything about winning, just fighting. So why is it you would care about the leaver making you lose? You are inconsistent.

There is a difference between these situations which results in them being incomparable to one another. In the Minamata Bay or Exxon Valdez incidents, the companies had -nothing to gain-, and what occurred were -accidents-. In the leaver's mind, he knows that even though the team he left had a low chance of victory anyway, his actions made it even more likely. In this case, it's an unfortunate side effect, not an accident. Your argument is therefore invalid.

You say that leavers only take into account their own fun, even if they ruin that of others. But you say you only want a fight. Once again, leaving does -nothing- that prevents you from fighting, so by your own words, you should have fun regardless of what happens with a leaver. You still get to fight.

You committed the -exact- same fallacy that I pointed out in the part of my post you quoted. This is called a "biased sample," where you only take into account certain situations in order to make your argument seem better or more favorable. You say, "I pawned teams with a monk fairly easily." Didn't I -just- say in the part you quoted, to "look at all the times you've -lost- to a team with a Monk"? You're only taking into account the times you've beaten a team with a Monk, and ignoring the times you've lost.

Next, of course not only a Monk can heal. But Monks are by -far- the most effective for the task. Now of course you could compare a Monk with just Orison of Healing to a Rit with Wielder's Boon, Vital Weapon, Spirit Light, etc., but then you're trying to say that a bad Monk build is worse than a good rit build, rits are just as effective at healing as Monks. Tell me how that makes sense.

Now, "everything relies on players skill." This is ideal, of course, but if you have someone on your team designed specifically to keep you alive, you can't tell me that won't give you an advantage over a team that doesn't have a way to keep themselves alive.

You do realize that the majority is not always right, don't you? The majority of PvErs want an auction house, but guess what? They're not going to get one for GW1. The majority of players didn't want Soul Reaping nerfed, but guess what? The devs realized that it was overpowered in both PvP and PvE and decided that for the good of the game, it should be nerfed. You seem to claim that the majority of a group of people is always right, but that isn't the case.

And now you can consider this. If a lock-out mechanism is instituted, "leavers" will become "leechers." If they don't like the team, they'll just sit out the battle so that they don't have to go through the frustration of trying so hard and losing. It doesn't change the fact that you still end up 3v4. So don't claim that such a mechanism would force the leavers to play. Once again, they're in control of their character.

Or perhaps even this will happen. The leaver, when he doesn't get on a team he likes, will instantly go suicide into the enemy without even trying to do anything. This way, the battle ends sooner and he can more quickly find the team he likes. Either way, the leaver -still- doesn't help you if the lockout mechanism is put in place.

The general argument against leavers seems to be, "They may not like the team, but because they left, we lost! We could've won if the leaver had stayed!" This is an example of the logical fallacy "Post hoc ergo propter hoc."

In "Post hoc ergo propter hoc," you conclude that because two events happened in sequence, the latter must have been caused by the former. "Because the leaver left, we lost." You fail to note that it was likely you would have lost even if the leaver had stayed.

The argument for and against going to TA has been answered a couple of times already, and I doubt I could do much better. Please refer to those.

Now that that's out of the way, you can see the sort of discussion I would love to see happen in this thread. The way glountz responded to my post was not vitriolic or ad hominem in any way, and instead focused on the argument in a level-headed manner. In response, I created a civil, level-headed rejoinder that once again focused on the argument that does not insult any person. If you all can continue to discuss this in such a way, this thread will not have to be locked, and perhaps a useful improvement to RA can be found.

My original purpose in this thread was to facilitate discussion between supporters of both groups, and it appears I have achieved that. This post is to try and ensure proper debate and discussion. I'll leave you all to keep debating about this, since as I said earlier, it's difficult for me to argue one side too long. If I continue, confusion will certainly arise because it will appear that I either don't know my own opinion, or that I keep changing sides. It's best for the debate if I stay out of any further discussion, for now.

But who knows? I might post again if I see something I need to respond to.

The leavers are not spoiling it for me. I can't even play RA. Lag, Screen freezes of 10+ sec, Error 7 all over the place done it for me.


GG

RA is fun, i have only RA'd twice but had leavers both games.
leavers are a problem everywhere on guildwars, not just RA.
another problem are people who leave because of a single leaver/leecher.
if only 1 player has left, STAY and finish the match!

i can say the same about leechers and leavers in competitive arenas like fort aspenwood. if you have leechers, dont just leave, stay and fight. afterward maybe take a break from the arena so it doesnt get overly troublesome.

one last thing. this is important. players talk very badly about new players and those of us who dont have time to read everything on the sites or play enough to be considered "pro" or whatever. if people go around calling each other names in missions and arena, insulting and belittling players because they do not have the skill these "pro" players Think they have. then nothing will ever change. things will only get worse.

remember we are all "Newbies" on one game or another. so give people a chance to learn the game, help them out with advice and no name calling. that is one way to do things and make friends instead of guild wrecking enemies.

guildwars is not some simple 1 button click game. you have to learn the meta game and the tactics behind every area and monster. this takes time. but if you are calling people "noobs" or "trash" or any of the thousands of flavorful insults players throw at others daily, then dont be suprised when people just up and leave. (its nice to be important but it is more important to be nice.) I never leave a game until the abusive insults start, i didnt buy the game to listen to angry people vent their rage. so i escape!

(Sorry for the long Post)

How about subtracting faction from leavers, or make it so if they leave, then for the next hour they get no faction at all form PvP.

it's their right, Anet allows it, they can use it.
it's selfish, but they have the right to do it.

the one majorly overlooked fact here that the leavers have tried to avoid is that RA is also the starting point for new PvPers. you have to win 5 in a row to get to TA. many people who are supposedly good players of course don't take into account that this is the case. if half your team leaves you'll never get there. leavers are the reason the only PvP I now do is AB, at least the leachers don't have anything stupid to say while they stand there leaching. I got to TA on a random team that didn't have a monk, just decent players on it.(we continued on and got a glad point too). point is though that if anybody had left because of no monk........no TA, no g.p..leavers make it very difficult to just try something new or different. but my arguement actually strengthens their cause doesn't it, they are in RA because it is the only way their suxxor playing style will get them a title. newbs are the only people they can beat

Translation=I have no skills.

I rest my case.

I suggest we all start massively spamming General Chat until they find a solution for it.

No. Everything. Lets start a spam revolution everywhere. In forums, in-game, etc.

Biased staff, biased developers, biased players...

Guild Wars = FAIL

:'(

Months ago I would want to kill the guy who said that, now I'm saying it myself.

Thank you for opening my eyes, everyone.

The event is more favourable for regular TA'ers, than RA'ers.

I can't imagine leavers ever being an issue that will be fixed. A timeout system has some horrible loopholes which could make it unreasonable at times. And let's face it ... RA isn't exactly going to be one of their priorities. Even without leavers it's a bit of a crapshoot still.

Maybe they should reduce the consecutive wins from 10 to 5, maing it more achievable, and therefore less likely that people will leave?

then again that is propbably a pipe dream

people will still leave

Why? It was just on objective report of the situation. RA is not as hard as TA. That's fact. You disagree? What does that have to do with my skills?

Anyone who leaves in RA to get gladiatorpoints faster is acting smart. The problem is the design of RA, not the players.

like what i said on the previous thread on leavers,

Remove the Gladiator title track from RA already.

Agree completely. Remove the title track from RA and the problem is solved.
Only reason why people quit and leave is that they want to restart as soon as possible and enter a team with a monks, or enter with their friends by synchronising... in other words, they are here only to farm Gladiator points.

Remove that, and make RA as it was before, i.e, rewards should be rewarded with bal. factions only. Make the title Gladiator exclusive for the team arena. This not only promotes team arena but it also solves the problem of leavers.

And that goes without saying that this will provides a very interesting pvp system that has been way too neglected already. TA offers much more interesting, and faster matches than HvH. And also, Gladiator titles will at least have a meaning at least.

Thus, new players go through Zaishen ---> RA(earn some factions for skill unlocks for TA) ----> TA ----> HA/GvG

Agree completely. Let the first experience that most players have with pvp (not running around killing npcs) be one not spoiled by farmers.