1v1 PvP format

A discussion was ongoing in another thread about why 1v1 didn't work, as well as what changes may have allowed it to work.

Anyway, I know the popular opinion about this, however, I am curious what you folks think. What could they have done to experiment with a truly competitive 1v1 format?

GW2 isn't too far off, and I've heard 1v1 may very well be a viable format. Why is it possible to give us 1v1 in GW2, but not in GW1?

1v1 would be extremely unbalanced and as a result would be flawed and broken as a format. If you want to 1v1 scrimmages are the way to go.

Edit: As for GW2 I believe the skillset is going to be much smaller than GW1 and each profession has their own utility to allow for somewhat balanced 1v1.

1v1 while conceptually sounds like alot of fun, outside of in your own guildhall, it is so buildwarsy, that really it would be almost roll dice on your build determining who wins. With gw2, I agree with the forced utility on your bar this would be a more plausible concept

I believe removing resurrect from all PvP formats would have been the prudent thing to do.

In regard to 1v1, removing direct heal spells would be one answer to the imbalance problem.

People keep speaking of imbalance. What creates this lack of balance? As well, once we identify what created imbalance, could we not address this and take a step toward balance?

I don't see it as having to retool the game entirely, just imposing limitations and general guidelines would do it.

GW2 has no secondary class that's how it will also be much more like other mmos out there.

For GW1 to have had 1v1 it would have to be that you can only face your own class, so only WvW and NvN then it could have maybe been who is the better player at one class, but would be odd/weird/bad to start with because being a monk isn't about killing the other guy.


You know how this could have worked and it would not be a true pvp but a competition instead.Is that if each class had a set objective and you had to do taht objective faster/better then the other guy to win.

So let's say:
Warriors the objective would be to tank a increase number of foes until you die.( it would leave out the better part of the warrior but still)
Elementalist would have to nuke down as many targets in a given time limit, so you have static enemies and you choose your skill of choice and nuke away, which one will win, MS or Rodgorts?
Monks would have one target that they would have to keep alive as an increasing number of enemies beat on the target.

Etc, but I don't know if that would satisfy people wanting to beat their one friend and gloat about it.



Edit:The imbalances that would be in a 1v! format as GW is right now is very simple, The player that choose the monks would just heal everything non stop while the player that choose the warrior would beat on the monk.In the end every game will end up in a draw since nobody will die.

Edit2: Don't believe GW2 1v1 format to be a truly 1v1 format it could simply be something like HB.

1v1 is open to way more griefing than regular PvP. All someone would have to do is load their bar with running skills and just run away from the other person. Eventually the other person would give up and quit and the griefer would get the win. There's plenty of other ways but you probably get the jist.

If you ever have to forcibly remove skills/mechanics from a format that only further shows how problematic it is to balance such a format.

1v1 is probably the most egotistical format in existence; with that being said the only mindset of the player is to find whatever means possible to win, either with some hyper-defense bar with enough dps to get the job done or full burst bar with no survivability.

The only chance you have at having a balance 1v1 is by rolling 2 cripshot rangers or any situation where you and your opponent have consented to run the same bar. As previously stated it would turn out to be nothing but a dice rolled between who has the stronger bar (usually in the form of some gimmick).

Edit: This is a team-based game so we should expect skills to be balance around team concepts. Since each profession has a different role on a team, in 1v1 situations certain professions would always have the upper hand against their counterpart.

i.e. Necros have superiority over melee characters thanks to their Curses spell attribute, while Mesmers have dominance over most spell casting opponents.

Oh and cripshot rangers are probably the most viable 1v1 in this game, since an individuals ability to dodge would play a key role. Spellcasting 1v1 would just be a competition between who got the most 40/40 offs over time, since spells deal direct damage. Other melee characters would operate in this sense as well (factoring in defense capabilities and healing).

I use to in a guild that headed 1v1 Tourny every month. The GL would put up a small prize for the winner.
I won twice using that old Derv Bar where U cast all the enchantments then use sand shard to blow crap up ( not sure the build had a name). Until I got beat by a ranger with a spear and a pet. using heal as one ( remember how popular that build was?). Anyways ... I can say from experience, though short lived..... 1v1 was probably the most fun I ever had in GW.
For an actual 1v1 PVP a special map with no NPC's at all. And small enough( Im thinking slightly larger than Nearby range on radar). That if U decide to come in only to be a douche and run the whole time, The other person takes 2 steps any any direction to catch up 2 you.
Other than that 1v1 sounds like a terrific idea
+1

The one person who tried to out heal everything as a monk died, cause I used disrupting dagger on his elite every time he used it.

1v1 would lead to terrible unfun fights ( everyone would run same builds , for example air ele which requires no skill and all about mashing 123456) plus abusing the format for rewards would be very easy...
Only good point would be the easy entry and be able to play it anytime

on a side note : Hero Battles were 1v1 in a certain way....

the game is balanced for team play, it is balanced (somewhat...) for 8v8

so why 1v1 would suck in gw
-it would lead to 10 sec fights
-it would be 100% dependant on the build
-u have no backline so u dont get to do anything besides facerolling and hoping the other guy dies before u (leading to 10 sec fights...)
-the game is balanced around 8v8
-the game is made for team play (1 person isnt a team)

why it would work in gw2
-gw2 will be a faceroller
-u dont get to pick ur skills (so it doesnt leave for some1 just running 75% blocks with rupts n kds n daze or w/e)
-every1 has a self heal (even tho they are ridiculous and u gotta sit there for 5 seconds to cast em... u could compare it to troll unguent...idk if they put interupts in gw2 but from wat ive seen it will be like WoW -gameplay wise- so there prolly wont be many interupts and they will not be fast casts like 1/4 in gw1)

Ugh, 1v1 in GW context sounds awful, terrible. So much griefing and cookie-cutting.

-I disagree a had 1v1 fights last hour before.

-In my opinion Guild Wars should be about the builds, isn't that the whole point? That's what separates GW from other games like WoW. (In most games u can bring 30 skills at a time into battle, but usually only 3 are useful to use). For me personally it was the one thing that kept me coming back.

-This games relies and skill and your skills in your bar... In other games U can buy allot of potions to keep you going. It requires almost no skill at all play.. only money.

-IF U can't last 10 seconds in a 1v1, your build is terrible.... period!

-The game is balanced around builds. Which build works better for the given situation. PvP is unbalanced and always will be. There-go GW is not balanced for 8v8

-This game is solo game that U MAY play with other people ( if U wish)
( I say this cause, PVE players make up 90% of the community)

-As a final point... in 1v1 U always have to have an interrupt.(just saying)

guild wars is about player skill... in 8v8 format, u have 8 players with 8 skills each, which allows for a lot of possibilities, but among those 64 skills, most of the times it will allow ur team to counter any other build if played properly, whereas in 1v1 it is completely a build wars and with only 8 skills there are definitely builds u will always lose to and builds u will always win to, no matter the player skill.

gw IS balanced for 8v8

Everything u said is true...
That being said, 1v1 is still fun and rewarding. Beating each other in hand to hand combat perhaps would be a good alternative. Like Kilroy's with punch skills and no weapons. That's seems like like a reasonable alternative. What ya think?

GW1 is just NOT designed for 1vs1.

In GW1, every single build has at least another one that beats it.
So winning or losing in 1vs1 will be mostly about luck, no matter how good you are, there's no way you can fight with certain builds against others.
1vs1 in GW1 rewards just knowing most gimmicks and loopholes to make a build that will exploit them, and being lucky enough not to face a build that will always beat yours.


In GW2, builds are set with more strict rules, so no matter what you choose, you'll have always a more or less balanced bar, with self heals and such.
And you'll also have alternate skill sets, so if the one you have is not as good as you'd like against the one enemy, you may still switch to the other.
1vs1 in GW2 will reward using better the skills you are given.


Now, there's one way that I could see 1vs1 working in GW1, and that's Tag matches.
If you compare old fighting games like Stree Fighter with games using Tag matches like The King of Fighter, you'll see Tag matches are far superior in every sense.
If balance between characters is not perfect (and it enver is) and a character has any kind of weakness against another, you won' stick with that character for the next match and keep the disvantage, you'll change to another that may have it easier, with makes gameplay itself more balanced and enjoyable.

2 teams of 3 characters each, each with different professions and build, and no secondary skills, or limited to no more than 3 secondaries and no elite (somewhat like in Codex), and make them each other one after another and you'll make 1vs1 more plausible.
Still unlikely, but more plausible nevertheless.

thats why u can do it with scrimms, i dont think there should be a format for 1v1

1v1 mirror bars can be fun, but other than that 1v1 is pointless, proves nothing, doesnt rely on player skill and is usually pretty boring

Though it's not like other PvP formats today rely on player skill and are pretty fun....
But yes, even on mirror builds i think it would come to the one with lowest ping, otherwise turn into 10mn games...

Don't forget the strongbox.

I think they could do 1vs1 if it was like Dwarven Boxing. Something where everyone has the same exact skillset.

I can't see any other way to make it balanced.

Balanced does not necessarily imply either skillful or exciting, though.

1v1 would be terrible. The only thing you have to do is pick 8 skills that are really strong and can keep you alive then mash 12345678. The hard part of guild wars is working with your team and using your skills at the right time, not mashing the buttons. The right time to use a skill in a 1v1 is whenever it is off cooldown, no thinking or skill at all. Just complete buildwars. Not even interrupts are skillful in 1v1, it just comes down to who has the lowest ping or gets the most half cast time procs.

In reference to GW2... As far as Anet are concerned, they are not allowing scrimmages/duels with players. However, this could change if the demand for it gets huge.

I've never tried to 1v1 in GW unless it was to help test certain builds/mechanics. The whole idea is a joke, really. As everyone has said, Guild Wars and the skills involved are not focussed for 1v1 situations.

An 8v8 means that every build will spec into the maximum potential of a build. This is why you no longer seen wammos with heals, Necros with Fire Storm. Splitting attributes is not positive play and is detrimental towards unique roles for teams. And so this is why Guild Wars skills are so direct, and do not have any special proc effects, class buffs and bla bla.

And because of this 1v1 would be extremely unbalanced (in its current state), unless you both decide to run the same build, then it's down to who can utilise the build quick enough to kill the other quicker.

Suggesting the brawling/punch out thing would fall upon these lines as well, it's whoever builds adrenaline quicker. It's then no longer a contest of skill nor experience.

I can see one way to balance 1v1 (as much as any PvP format can be balanced).

A match would be a set of fights when the winner of a fight has to keep the winning build and the loser has the possibility to choose another build (and possibly another profession) within a set time. The winner of the match is the player that is able to win two fights in a row.

This way the format focuses on knowing the many skills and being able to quickly find a counter to a build (which takes skill). And being able to win a fight against the odds (which takes even more skill). Of course there is the problem of rules enforcing, but nothing that could not be included in a hypothetical format.

There are three adjustment variables to keep the format usable:
* the set time during which the loser can think of a counter-skillbar (and actually fill the bar);
* the amount of consecutive wins necessary to win the match (2 is a minimum, the more the more difficult to actually have a winner);
* additional constraints on builds, for exemple forcing the players to play the same primary profession.

The Norn Arena is OK. IT's not terribly fun though. 1v1 just isn't what Gw is designed for. Heck, there isn't even parity between all the classes in RA. Paragons are hands down designed for 8v8 in PvP.

I think it would be cool. GW isn't designed for this, blah blah. I'd be happy to at least try 1v1. If i didn't like it, I'd screw it and go RA/GvG/HA, whatever. I don't like HA, so I don't go there. Simple enough. Too much content isn't a flaw, we usually go "there's so much content! crafting, grinding, quests, pvp, mounts, houses, gear, so much place!", not "omg, too much stuff to do, this game sucks".

Too much content is a flaw considering much of the present content is still full of bugs and/or requires a significant rethink.

Weird. If i don't like some content, i don't do it, but I'm still happy being able to do it. Who knows, one evening I might just feel like doing it. For instance, monking. It's too much of responsibility and stress for me usually, but I sometimes just create a PvP monk and do some RA. Because I can.

Why you trolling?

Congratulations on having primal human instincts of exploring and handling it very capitalistic. But seriously, 1v1 has never been a viable format.

Sure, as you said, you can do it. But there is no fun, nor competitiveness behind it. Scrimmages in your GH are to practice and train on mechanics, reaction times and knowledge of the GvG format. People use this Scrimmage option to 1v1. Not the other way around.

If a 1v1 format wants to be implemented, skills and mechanics need to change.

Personally, I find it astounding that players have played Guild Wars for so long but still have the wrong mind set. This is a team game, and skills and mechanics/battles/PvP/goals and tactics have been implemented to support team play. Which is why i explained in my previous post that players create fully offensive builds, and allow a fully defensive backline to handle damage.

How can you win a team game if everyone has split their builds for self heal? there are no longer dedicated roles. Which is why builds like that don't exist in Guild Wars.

P.S. Of course solo farm builds exist, but farm builds more importantly exploit game mechanics that Anet never accounted for.

What does wanting to play 1v1 have to do with mindset. When you "live" in a game long enough, you will want to do other things in that game.

I honnestly don't get why the fact that is was not meant to do it makes 1v1 impossible. Yes it would require to "break" the engine (say, with fixed (a la GW2)skills bars, or by knowing your oponent's classes beforehand), but over all, a team based game does not forbid 1v1. Yes some classes will be weaker and having a title or a motivation for competitive gameplay is a bad idea, but 1v1 is not completely impossible.

Of course, in GW, with the hard-counter/specialist bars kind of balance we have, it is a bad idea outside of player mediated events. Not every game can have it.

The mindset I speak of is the ability to throw out previous concepts of previous MMOs, where traditional tank+spank gameplay is had, and have the capacity to fully understand Guild Wars as a team game.

Personally, I've found a trend that PvP players are more capable to understand team set ups simply because they are playing competitively, whilst PvE players can roll around with 4 Barrage rangers, no dedicated healers and 3 Spirit spammers, with an imbagon in the background. Again, just an example.

1v1 stems from other MMOs where duelling with people were encouraged on a basis.

As I said, players use the Scrimmage option to create a 1v1 environment, not the other way around (1v1 was implemented through the creation of Scrimmage). Scrimmage was an opportunity for players to test.

Moreover, I don't understand your point. You "don't understand the fact that people were not told to do it, doesn't make it impossible", and yet you agree that the current mechanics, systems and skills need to change to make it viable. Surely you just answered yourself? I'm not sure, your wording wasn't perfect.

I never said 1v1 is entirely impossible. Of course you can have a 1v1 match. But in its purist sense, it is not balanced gameplay at all, it does not support the correct skills/attributes for ONE character to be self-sufficient (e.g. adequate healing, CC and damage) and provide fun, objective-based gameplay.

Seriously, this thread has turned into two arguments: one very valid argument underlining absolute flaws in the current 1v1 area of Guild Wars that makes it unbearable and worth none of your time.

The other argument is: So what? I have the freedom to create 1v1s. Ok, it needs work, but its still possible to 1v1! Herp Derp derrrrppp.
We shouldn't need to discuss such basic principles of PvP/Guild Wars if the OP is asking about how we can improve the format for PvP.

Suggesting Kilroy's Punch Out-style skills has pretty much been the next level of conversation on this thread.