GvG Update June 10th 2011 - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Zenzai

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jun 2009

N/E

15 Jun 2011 at 06:17 - 81

That's fine and dandy that you're banning cheaters, but why did you change it to punish legitimate users? Changing the time for the boxes to be granted by 3 minutes won't stop the cheaters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stéphane Lo Presti

Hi everyone,

We'd like to update you about the recent PvP activity following the June 10th PvP update. In analyzing recent GvG matches, we noted a number of players were engaging in match manipulation. As a result of this, the players’ accounts were terminated.

We want to remind everyone that match manipulation is a breach of the Guild Wars User Agreement and the Rules of Conduct, and those involved risk immediate account termination. We will continue to monitor the situation and take any appropriate actions that are necessary in the future.

Missing HB

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Mar 2010

Anna

A/

15 Jun 2011 at 06:51 - 82

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Dervishes.

I'm not even being facetious.

Watch basically any 8v8 match between top European guilds (LaG, wtf, DirT, rR, Est, Jh come to mind). If it has dervishes, odds are that it won't go past four minutes.

That's not completly true... We won many fights by using 3 melee , whether it was sins dervishs or warriors or daggers r/a....
The main problem is that usually the opponent team resigns after they got rolled twice , thus doesn't leave you time to kill glord after 5mn....

Spikes or ganking rely build will probably give more chances, but otherwise , anything relying on big damage won't get past 5mn ( and even the fights we won vs " better " players , it didn't go past 6.00...)

deluxe

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Feb 2006

Monkeyball Z

S.K.A.T. [Ban]

Mo/

15 Jun 2011 at 21:45 - 83

So... much... grief... resigning before 5 minutes...

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

16 Jun 2011 at 13:19 - 84

So does anyone know if Anet has any plans to change this atrocity of an update?

cataphract

Forge Runner

Join Date: Aug 2005

Ashford Abbey

Hey Mallyx [icU]

Mo/Me

16 Jun 2011 at 13:27 - 85

Banning cheaters was a step in the right direction and that's left to do now is removing the boxes. gg

animal fighter

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2009

buying shields w/ armor vs animals

Animal Fightas Inc [?????????]

16 Jun 2011 at 15:15 - 86

the animal fighters kills them so fast that i dont get boxes
boxes
boxes

Mireles

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jun 2009

W/Me

16 Jun 2011 at 16:51 - 87

I think adding PvE loot directly to PvP was probably one of the biggest mistakes arena net has ever made... This hasn't fixed anything, only caused more problems... adding loot did not give people a desire to play and be competitive in pvp it only added the desire for new loot... pvp formats just happen to be the means to an end, so we will continue to see more match manipulation as long as there is a high yield reward to do so... you need to fix the problems... you still have sync teams in RA tearing up new interested players, randomize them in a similar fashion as costume brawl... In HA you have highly experienced teams winning halls over all other new and inexperienced teams... you need a match making system based on rank similar to GvG, people are not going to accept getting rolled over and over just to learn... there is more fun and productive things that people are almost always going to choose over it. Codex took a step in the right direction... hopefully its popularity will increase a little... GvG was probably the best PvP format out there but this new syncing and 5 min rule problem is causing issues... if your going to leave the strongbox loot in... you need to disable the resign function in all pvp or at least have dishonor caused by resign.. especially in codex... it is way to easy to sync rewards with alt accounts as dead as it is... Fix format problems not add bells and whistles...

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

16 Jun 2011 at 18:40 - 88

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

Banning cheaters was a step in the right direction and that's left to do now is removing the boxes. gg

( I think we already discussed how this is a bad idea) if you remove boxes from only gvg, gvg will become completely dead in the casual scene, because why on earth would a casual guild gvg when you can get boxes from ca/ra/tombs? And if you remove boxes from all pvp, this update was useless and pvp goes back to dead. No thanks pal.

and banning literally does nothing anymore, since ppl have +5 accounts in 2k11.

Missing HB

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Mar 2010

Anna

A/

17 Jun 2011 at 06:47 - 89

So , they did put a 5mn requirement in order to make people stop farming chests.. However , now we're told that they banned many people who were caught syncing on low rating , i.e farming chests... What's the logic there??? Is there so any reason left to not revert back the timer to 2mn considering that abusers " should " get banned ?

cataphract

Forge Runner

Join Date: Aug 2005

Ashford Abbey

Hey Mallyx [icU]

Mo/Me

17 Jun 2011 at 06:54 - 90

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnicornStampede

( I think we already discussed how this is a bad idea) if you remove boxes from only gvg, gvg will become completely dead in the casual scene, because why on earth would a casual guild gvg when you can get boxes from ca/ra/tombs? And if you remove boxes from all pvp, this update was useless and pvp goes back to dead. No thanks pal.

and banning literally does nothing anymore, since ppl have +5 accounts in 2k11.

Bad idea was implementing the boxes in the first place. What were they thinking - that people wouldn't abuse it and go all RR on them? LOL

And what's wrong with PvP going back to dead? IMHO, it's better if it stayed dead and not hand out PvE rewards than vice versa. If people need PvE rewards as an additional incentive to play PvP they shouldn't PvP in the first place. Balthazar faction, zkeys and PvP titles should be enough incentive to play. But noooooo, we want more and more rewards because we PvP.

Please.

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

17 Jun 2011 at 07:03 - 91

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

Bad idea was implementing the boxes in the first place. What were they thinking - that people wouldn't abuse it and go all RR on them? LOL

And what's wrong with PvP going back to dead? IMHO, it's better if it stayed dead and not hand out PvE rewards than vice versa. If people need PvE rewards as an additional incentive to play PvP they shouldn't PvP in the first place. Balthazar faction, zkeys and PvP titles should be enough incentive to play. But noooooo, we want more and more rewards because we PvP.

Please.

Balthazar faction,zkeys, and PvP titles obviously aren't enough incentive to play because nobody played PvP before. Which is why once an actual incentive was brought to the table, more guilds started playing.

So you argument is its better for this game to be completely dead in the PvP scene than people getting money. No thanks

.

People are grabbed to shiny things, it's how the world works. I don't think you should get a higher reward for killing a monster in the underworld than winning a gvg.

cataphract

Forge Runner

Join Date: Aug 2005

Ashford Abbey

Hey Mallyx [icU]

Mo/Me

17 Jun 2011 at 07:09 - 92

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnicornStampede

Balthazar faction,zkeys, and PvP titles obviously aren't enough incentive to play because nobody played PvP before. Which is why once an actual incentive was brought to the table, more guilds started playing.

So you argument is its better for this game to be completely dead in the PvP scene than people getting money. No thanks

.

People are grabbed to shiny things, it's how the world works. I don't think you should get a higher reward for killing a monster in the underworld than winning a gvg.

The point of killing that monster in the Underworld is getting that valuable drop. The point of GvG is to beat the other team and move up the ranks. But hey, since PvP has to be kept alive and seeing how people seem to think PvE rewards are a great idea for PvP let's ask ArenaNet to make killed players drop one Ecto and one Zaishen Key for each member of the opposing team.

Ofcourse, those would have to appear in their inventories as not to interfere with the match. You can't bloody well go around picking up drops in the middle of a flag stand battle, can you?

On second thought, make that five Ecto and five Zkeys. We wouldn't want to underestimate people's greed again, would we now?

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

17 Jun 2011 at 09:27 - 93

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

The point of killing that monster in the Underworld is getting that valuable drop.

Oh no, the point of pve is to protect ascalon from the charr/whatever reason. The point of pve is to save the town from invaders/participate in the lore and plot of the story. You don't need to get any items from pve, however it is what attracts and puts interest in it.

the point of doing the underworld is to kill dhuum and bring grenth into power, the chest and ecto drops aren't needed, however it attracts players to it.

Exact same concept with PvP. Saying that a champ title is good enough to attract players to gvg is like saying killing dhuum and knowing you saved the fate of mankind is good enough to do the underworld.

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

17 Jun 2011 at 09:51 - 94

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

On second thought, make that five Ecto and five Zkeys. We wouldn't want to underestimate people's greed again, would we now?

If you understand how supply and demand works, those zkeys and ectos would drops severely in prices, practically 1g/ea. So since you are only gain .001g a kill, the incentive becomes nothing.

Just look at Hero Battles, the incentive (reward points) for Hero battle ATs was complete trash, so very little pvers competed in it.

Aljasha

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2009

17 Jun 2011 at 10:08 - 95

The strongboxes are there to give some incentive for new players to check gvg out. There's nothing wrong with giving incentives to rejuvenate a format or area in the game and so far matchups do happen more quickly. Basically the problem is that strongboxes can actively be denied by other players via resigning, which promotes a solution based on other data than time.

Why someone plays a format is irrelevent as long as that person keeps playing. Until a solution is found, we need to focus our efforts on making suggestions, which make strongboxes ungriefable, but also unfarmable.

makosi

Grotto Attendant

Join Date: Mar 2006

"Pre-nerf" is incorrect. It's pre-buff.

Requirement Begins With R [notQ]

Me/

17 Jun 2011 at 10:22 - 96

The increasing compendium of PvE rewards for PvP play is a big indication of the state of PvP.

The live team are trying to stimulate activity in the PvP formats by doing almost everything except improving the gameplay itself. Skill balances are very rare; bug fixes are minor, sporadic and inconsequential and GM presence seems to be nil. They're doing it wrong.

One wholesome content update that doesn't include minis and tonics would be great.

Aljasha

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: May 2009

17 Jun 2011 at 12:30 - 97

It seems they (the LT) have accepted the fact they can't save gvg to the degree most regular gvgers want them too. Maybe you should do that too and be glad matchups don't take half an hour anymore in some ladder ranges.

ThreatToSociety

Academy Page

Join Date: Aug 2010

A/N

18 Jun 2011 at 07:46 - 98

More leechers in FA and JQ now. RA is still garbage with same OP classes dominating it. I still don't see more GvG. HA is still way too rewarding for the little effort it takes to hold halls. Thnx update.

doomfodder

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

farm

R/

19 Jun 2011 at 05:10 - 99

So let me get this straight.. if UR an unranked guild.. & win in more than 5 min... U DONT get an sbox...

I've been in 2 straight matches over 5 min & we're unranked.. no sboxes.. might as well go back to RA for sboxes....

ah the fun of transitioning from PvE to PvP

Urcscumug

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jan 2011

UNO

W/

19 Jun 2011 at 08:51 - 100

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomfodder

ah the fun of transitioning from PvE to PvP

Heh. You realise you're acting like the stereotypical "PvE farmer doing PvP just for the rewards", right?

Swingline

Forge Runner

Join Date: Sep 2010

Somewhere far away from you

The Mirror of Reason[SNOW]

W/

19 Jun 2011 at 16:35 - 101

I think the cold hard fact is this was a lazy update to stimulate a dying format. It's like giving a person with an advanced stage of cancer some pills to give them an extra 2 months when surgery could save their life.

Missing HB

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Mar 2010

Anna

A/

19 Jun 2011 at 16:44 - 102

Well still , i think the reward might attract a few players , but it doesn't remove the fact that most fights are boring..... It's always the same 2 builds ( on the exact skill) , which is 3-4 derv + mes or 5 def + sin/ele/mes splitting....

On first days we had fun because there was originality ( at all ranks , vs all kind of opponents ) but now it's too repetitive...

Add to it those 5 rounds AT's where you face the same team for 2 hour , and it's /yawn

doomfodder

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

farm

R/

19 Jun 2011 at 18:53 - 103

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urcscumug

Heh. You realise you're acting like the stereotypical "PvE farmer doing PvP just for the rewards", right?

I'm in PvE alliance for last 6 years (don't wanna leave).
No guild in alliance is ranked over 1000 or rated under 900.
Some of us in alliance like to GvG occasionally (5-8 times per month).
I want to play GvG for a CHANCE to COMPETE for Sboxes on GvG weekend.
So, I put ads in GTOB "LF Guest Inv from RATED guild for weekend event".
Effect of ad = trolling for insults (& ias if U didn't predict this, NO invites either)

THX ANET for STRUCTURING a game reward system that CREATES this type of behavior.

lemming

The Hotshot

Join Date: May 2006

Honolulu

International District [id???]

19 Jun 2011 at 19:33 - 104

What are you really expecting out of advertising for guests in a public district? There's plenty of experienced players who'd be interested in either helping out or just guesting.

doomfodder

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

farm

R/

19 Jun 2011 at 19:58 - 105

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

What are you really expecting out of advertising for guests in a public district? There's plenty of experienced players who'd be interested in either helping out or just guesting.

don't know any

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

19 Jun 2011 at 20:09 - 106

Quote:

Originally Posted by deluxe

So... much... grief... resigning before 5 minutes...

this 12 char

doomfodder

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

farm

R/

20 Jun 2011 at 06:16 - 107

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

What are you really expecting out of advertising for guests in a public district? There's plenty of experienced players who'd be interested in either helping out or just guesting.

TY for opening my eyes Lemming....

I've been trying to figure out why your response made me so confused. The unwritten part of your text is: If a causal PvE'r doesn't want to change his guild & still wants an opportunity to COMPETE for a champ sbox, he has to KNOW somebody (someone that meets the requirements to compete for champ sboxes) !!!! OR already BE somebody that meets the requirements to compete for sboxes!!!!

So why would ANET structure a reward system that way? And then it hit me... It wasn't "sloppy programming" or a "poorly thought out quick fix". ANET is intentionally trying to segregate their customers. They only want the champ sbox reward to be accessible to a select group of their customer base.

Casual gamers (mostly PvE) can still get sboxes through RA. But only the "ELITE" Champ boxes are accessible by THAT select community of top 400 guilds (or at least those with the unwritten required rank/rating). The champ sboxes is simply ANET's reward to THAT customer base and THAT customer base ONLY. It is NOT intended to be a reward for the casual PvE'r gamer!!!!

I used to think that ANET's primary customer was the casual gamer... Why else would rewards HoM be structured the way they are (30+ of 50 by gaming approx 1hr per week)? Now I REALLY recognize that ANET has implemented as series of reward structures for EACH of the categories of their customers. I only wish there was a way I can be "reclassified" without leaving my guild/alliance. c'est domage

Essence Snow

Unbridled Enthusiasm!

Join Date: Nov 2009

EST

DPR

20 Jun 2011 at 06:27 - 108

So....lol...they introduce rewards to entice pver's over to pvp then make sure these new players cannot get said reward in gvg untill they have a win>loss ratio? Genius!!...lol... I don't usually say this, but that is fail in it's finest form.

Del

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Sep 2009

In a van, down by the river.

RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO if I know, ask Lynette.

R/

20 Jun 2011 at 06:47 - 109

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essence Snow

So....lol...they introduce rewards to entice pver's over to pvp then make sure these new players cannot get said reward in gvg untill they have a win>loss ratio? Genius!!...lol... I don't usually say this, but that is fail in it's finest form.

Giving people things for losing is a brilliant plan. At least requiring people to win entices people to play properly.

lemming

The Hotshot

Join Date: May 2006

Honolulu

International District [id???]

20 Jun 2011 at 07:00 - 110

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomfodder

stuff

I'm not following your logic at all.

The criteria for winning a strongbox is to win a GvG match between 5:00 and 28:00. Of course it means that it's geared towards, you know, people who GvG. I'm merely suggesting that as a (self-described) casual PvE guild, getting a guest or two from a top guild when you're short people might be better for your odds of winning matches than trying to pug people out of GtoB, a renowned cesspool of the GW community.

UnicornStampede

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Mar 2011

20 Jun 2011 at 07:38 - 111

So can this thread not get derailed to pvers not being able to get into a PvP guild in 2k11? Or a pver trying to gvg but stay in a pve guild. Or whatever that guy was talking about. Make another thread about it if you feel it is an issue.

However Real Talk, I would really want Anet to change the 5:00-28:00 box criteria, because guilds just resign out before 5 mins because most games are determined roughly in 3-4 mins due to the roll or get rolled meta.

fowlero

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2007

England, UK

We Are The One And Only [rR]

20 Jun 2011 at 10:00 - 112

I'd rather they spent their time fixing skills so nearly all matches don't end in <5 mins rather than fixing the 5 min limit on strongboxes (as dumb a change as it was).

Wouldn't be such a problem then, potentially.

Essence Snow

Unbridled Enthusiasm!

Join Date: Nov 2009

EST

DPR

20 Jun 2011 at 13:58 - 113

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

Giving people things for losing is a brilliant plan. At least requiring people to win entices people to play properly.

I never said they should get them for losses. There was a bit about a ratio in there. ex) 20 wins and 23 losses....if the loss column has always been higher than the win one it would still mean 0 boxes for the guild that has tried gvg 43 times...That doesn't entice anything but leaving the format. Remember not every guild can have a winning ration..there has to be ones with losing ratios. There is a guild towards the bottom of the ladder that was 71 wins and 77 losses...I guess they shouldn't get any boxes either?

Reverend Dr

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2005

Super Fans Of Gaile [ban]

W/

20 Jun 2011 at 15:00 - 114

So that there are more than 1K guilds on the ladder, is there any way to identify tank and syncs guilds now?

Seriously, if boxes were given for beating guilds with rating 900 or higher it would fix almost every problem.

doomfodder

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

farm

R/

20 Jun 2011 at 15:40 - 115

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

I'm not following your logic at all.

The criteria for winning a strongbox is to win a GvG match between 5:00 and 28:00. Of course it means that it's geared towards, you know, people who GvG. I'm merely suggesting that as a (self-described) casual PvE guild, getting a guest or two from a top guild when you're short people might be better for your odds of winning matches than trying to pug people out of GtoB, a renowned cesspool of the GW community.

sorry for introducing confusion....

But the "current" criteria for winning an sbox is NOT ONLY win GvG match between 5:00 & 28:00. I was in at least a half dozen matches during the recent GvG weekend event. When we won (between 5 & 28) we did NOT get sboxes (our guild is rank under 1000, rated over 900). When we lost (got rolled) to teams that were "ranked" (don't remember but they were typically under top 500) we saw the sboxes drop.

So LF a PUG guest invite to GvG ranked guilds is NOT the behavior that ANET wants to encourage from the casual PvP'er... ANET WANTS the GvG sboxes to remain an ELITE reward ONLY for THAT select group of "ranked" GvG'ers. I just didn't think about it that way until you opened my eyes about how casual PvP'ers that want a chance to compete for a rewad ACTUALLY have to form teams.

Apparently, GvG is the GW "elite" format & ANET wants to keep it that way by creating a structure with little incentive to play casually.

Missing HB

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Mar 2010

Anna

A/

20 Jun 2011 at 16:39 - 116

Quote:

Originally Posted by UnicornStampede

S
However Real Talk, I would really want Anet to change the 5:00-28:00 box criteria, because guilds just resign out before 5 mins because most games are determined roughly in 3-4 mins due to the roll or get rolled meta.

You know , now we reached a correct rank , the only thing we're facing are splits or 4 dervs and it's not like we ever win in less than 5min( except on burning isle sometimes)....
The real problem is about beating low rating guilds( i.e less than 1015-1020), who aren't running those meta crap builds and thus winning usually before 4.00, leading to resign in 85% of times....

But once again , the good question in my opinion is about those meta builds rather than chests... Overall , it's about GvG in itself , not about the reward ( remembering that almost noone can get champ points now).... Removing ways to faceroll players in 2mn would be nice.

floor

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Mar 2008

England

Activity Can Be An Issue [afk] / Queen And Country [QC]

Mo/W

20 Jun 2011 at 17:56 - 117

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

You know , now we reached a correct rank , the only thing we're facing are splits or 4 dervs and it's not like we ever win in less than 5min( except on burning isle sometimes)....
The real problem is about beating low rating guilds( i.e less than 1015-1020), who aren't running those meta crap builds and thus winning usually before 4.00, leading to resign in 85% of times....

But once again , the good question in my opinion is about those meta builds rather than chests... Overall , it's about GvG in itself , not about the reward ( remembering that almost noone can get champ points now).... Removing ways to faceroll players in 2mn would be nice.

Almost every match involving triple dervish with fevered, vs triple dervish with fevered is under 4 minutes. This accounts for probably 90% of all teams playing in the european timezone, which in turn accounts for 90% of the entire playerbase....

There is no problem with strongbox drops imo. The problem solely lies with this retarded meta which has so much monk hate that everyone dies in 45 seconds. Fevered Dreams isnt even a broken skill, but it just combines far too well with dervish condition spam and signet of humility. Which of course leads to another problem, why are mantra's and other shit that prevents you from being interupted STILL permitted in PvP. Shutdown was always considered skillful, and its certainly one of the best designed aspects of guild wars, yet they introduce skills that entirely go against this concept.

Once they get their head around the fact that dervishes HAVE GOT TO GO, nerfs dont cut it, they need smiters booning off this planet, 95% of games will go over the 5 minute mark, and people will stop complaining about box griefing as a result of it.

deluxe

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Feb 2006

Monkeyball Z

S.K.A.T. [Ban]

Mo/

20 Jun 2011 at 22:18 - 118

Byob beats this meta, just run that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GDy--ZaSLc&hd=1

Killed u man

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

20 Jun 2011 at 23:09 - 119

Quote:

Originally Posted by deluxe

Byob beats current players, just run that

Nothing to do with current meta, as midline and frontline characters have never been so strong as nowadays. (Dervs, blood necro, etc.)

floor

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Mar 2008

England

Activity Can Be An Issue [afk] / Queen And Country [QC]

Mo/W

21 Jun 2011 at 00:17 - 120

Quote:

Originally Posted by deluxe

Byob beats this meta, just run that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GDy--ZaSLc&hd=1

you're right, since ppl stopped using the blood necro, they have become very susceptible to split.

Its also worth pointing out that since the majority of monks are now using either dark escape or return, ur 3 KD sin combos became ultra effective as there is no balanced stance, and in a lot of cases, no aura of stability either. Just unfortunate for that guild (and my own, as we lost to u too :P) that ur guys choice of build that night happened to be so KD oriented. On another day if u all chose fire eles, different story perhaps