Yfelsung Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Seems to me, all the people who complain that arena's are a bad choice are just the baddies that got curbstomped over and over again in wow arena's. There's a reason why Arena's were so popular they they got featured in MLG. If you don't want to play arena's fine don't do it..but don't come crying on the forums talking about how it doesn't involve any strategy or how it ruined pvp. All that does is show everyone how bad you are at the game. I never got curbstomped in Arena because, well, I never played it. Why? Well, I outlined that already. Death Match is the game mode invented for people who can't strategize. Think about it. In an FPS, where are all the REALLY good players? Playing objective based game modes. While Death Match is mostly people spray and praying or using whatever weapon happens to be broken at the moment. In an objective based game mode, every spec shines. In a DM type game mode, certain specs become next to worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenos Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Arena is the most skill base event in the game. Don't believe it. Fine. All you people who say wz take more skill are wrong. It's fine though. Either way you guys are going to get steamrolled and then run back here crying saying rated wz are unfair. Good luck getting 8 competent players on at the same time routinely. Atleast arena was easier to keep a team small and have chemistry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yfelsung Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Arena is the most skill base event in the game. Don't believe it. Fine. All you people who say wz take more skill are wrong. It's fine though. Either way you guys are going to get steamrolled and then run back here crying saying rated wz are unfair. Good luck getting 8 competent players on at the same time routinely. Atleast arena was easier to keep a team small and have chemistry I'm not against 4 man warzones. I'm against death match. If you want to have an Arena with an actual objective, I'm all for it. But death match is for people who can't think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxcolt Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I never got curbstomped in Arena because, well, I never played it. Why? Well, I outlined that already. Death Match is the game mode invented for people who can't strategize. Think about it. In an FPS, where are all the REALLY good players? Playing objective based game modes. While Death Match is mostly people spray and praying or using whatever weapon happens to be broken at the moment. In an objective based game mode, every spec shines. In a DM type game mode, certain specs become next to worthless. Good points... Arena's in wow was what really made me a good player..it forced me to either level other classes or do tons of research in order to figure out how to counter their specific abilities etc. And it took strategy and coordination from my teammates in order to carry out plans and change tactics on the fly vs other comps. Comparing to FPS's though isn't very valid imo...I used to play competitive counter strike and despite the fact that the objective was to plant the bomb (or defuse it) it was team deathmatch. (with the bomb really only providing a dynamic choke point for teams to meet). And I don't think anyone can argue that CS didn't take a lot of strategy to win. Plus didn't bioware already state that they weren't planning on putting arena's into the game? Which would render this thread kinda pointless anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yfelsung Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Good points... Arena's in wow was what really made me a good player..it forced me to either level other classes or do tons of research in order to figure out how to counter their specific abilities etc. And it took strategy and coordination from my teammates in order to carry out plans and change tactics on the fly vs other comps. Comparing to FPS's though isn't very valid imo...I used to play competitive counter strike and despite the fact that the objective was to plant the bomb (or defuse it) it was team deathmatch. (with the bomb really only providing a dynamic choke point for teams to meet). And I don't think anyone can argue that CS didn't take a lot of strategy to win. Plus didn't bioware already state that they weren't planning on putting arena's into the game? Which would render this thread kinda pointless anyways. Sure, it took minor strategy variations from comp to comp. But now add an objective. Now you have the new strategies for a new comp, PLUS new strategies from the objective. Your brain should dictate victory more than your reaction speed. Game modes should be complex with lots of nuances. The smarter player should always win, not the faster one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceperson Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Atleast arena was easier to keep a team small and have chemistry i think you mean it was easier to have the right comps. 3 comps make up over half the top arena teams in wow. if you can't see why people wouldn't want anything close to that in swtor then you're wearing blinders... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenos Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 *** every season on wow there was every class in the top 15. Yes certain comps were strong. But rarely did unskilled players reach glad... you think rated wz will be balanced more then arena? Wake up. Half the classes. Have vanish in this game.. its impossible to recap side turrets in civil against any good players.. the top rbg players on wow and top arena players are the same.. coincidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceperson Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 *** every season on wow there was every class in the top 15. Yes certain comps were strong. But rarely did unskilled players reach glad... you think rated wz will be balanced more then arena? Wake up. Half the classes. Have vanish in this game.. its impossible to recap side turrets in civil against any good players.. the top rbg players on wow and top arena players are the same.. coincidence? 120 possible group combinations in 3 man arena for wow (4495 if you're doing it by spec) and only 3 of those comps make up OVER HALF of the top teams (i'm betting the specs for those players don't deviate more than a few points too) and you think this is "competitive" pvp? no thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenos Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Have you even played arena? Its not sounding like your familiar with any of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kunari Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Herding 8 cats is much harder than herding 2 cats. Also, when all you have on your team is 2 people, 1 good player can carry the other quite easily, even if he dies in seconds. But in an 8-team, 1 good player and 7 morons will get curbstomped 9 times out of 10. Ranked warzones are quite a bit more about skill and communication. A 5v5 arena comes close, I admit. But in a 5v5 it is always about taking out as many enemies as possible as quick as you can when the whistle blows. Which is why 99% of top rated 5v5 teams had a shammy in them - for Bloodlust. And which is why when ranked WZs start, the group will have a Marauder in it - for Bloodthirst. All in all, I don't think anyone cares. There's so many other things that need fixing, starting with class balance, before we can worry about ranked warzones or arenas. If they were introduced right now, all they would conclusively prove is that a handful of classes in this game are grossly overpowered, as their representation in top teams would be incredibly high. Of course BW can always take a Blizzard route and claim representation has nothing to do with strength, and 99% of top teams having exactly 1 shammy in a group has nothing to do with Bloodlust, it's just because they LOOOOVE shammies... ^^- That! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmahra Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) The fact that it's a "deathmatch" is meaningless. In arena, you're supposed to react correctly to all of your group's and the opponent groups actions. The fact that the game ends when one team dies as opposed to when your stupid turrets shoot down the other ship doesn't make it less strategic. People are awful at games. This is why people hate arena. You think there is more skill in standing somewhere or running around spamming skills with little consequence for mistakes than playing a match where the smallest mistake can lead to a loss for your team? No, you've made yourself think that stupid little mini-games with "PvP" thrown in on the side are fun because it's easy to SUCK and win. You'll always be awful, you'll always PvP, and you'll always think you're at least decent. This is, of course, unless arena is introduced and people have to come to terms with the fact that some players are good and the other 99% are bad. Until then, people like the ones who post in these arena threads about how arena takes no skill will continue to make this game a depressing experience for those who want skilled and competitive PvP instead of farm PvP with people who don't NEED to improve because 8v8 WZs are a joke. Edited February 13, 2012 by Elmahra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincedaddy Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 WTS premade warzone carries pst with class and expertise rating 200k credits per match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwinology Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 "Death Matches are for people who can't think" lol, how much harder do you have to think to click on something highlighted while still killing people in the process of the warzone. If thats the only real reason you have against an arena being implimented then you are a bitter person. Nothing is more annoying than losing a match because you have complete morons on your team and you have no control over it, no matter how well you play. In an arena setting atleast you can have set players that you are confident in their ability to play with you, and losing is losing, you lost because you did something wrong a long the way to cost you the win and your reflect on it. I can't reflect on being randomly paired with idiots that keyboard turn and click im sorry. I'm all for rated WZs though and have nothing against them, depends on how large the teams are going to be though and if they change up some of the settings for rateds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goulet Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 in game where 2 factions are in a war for control of the galaxy...they're gonna settle it in the octagon? if its same faction against same faction again you're at war. pragmatically speaking a non gear dependent forum is probably an ideal situation for some pvpers, but bragging rights probably aren't sufficient enough to get enough people to engage in it when you can go in warzones and get gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dadydimsum Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 How bout because I enjoy to play arenas with a cpl friends? I find it FUN! I don't care if you don't like it don't play it if you don't like it. Rated warzones are fun too!! Please implement both next week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy_Marsh Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 It's simple, this game has a lot of players that are scared of being exposed as "bad". They opposed to any kind of measure of game skill, damage meters, arenas ect. When rated pvp comes out the majority of whiners on these boards are going to realise they suck at it and start crying about game balance. Bioware needs to stop worrying about a vocal minority of baddies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FriarChuggs Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I'd love to see the ranked WZ/Arena or whatever force uniform gear loadouts. Please please please please don't make the ranked matches a gear grind, reward skill and communication! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceperson Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Have you even played arena? Its not sounding like your familiar with any of it http://www.arenastats.com/ What point are you rebutting? 51% of teams rated 2k or better are the same 3 comps. Skill in arena? lawlz. being the best at whatever fotm comp doesn't mean much, it's funny that you think so... what's really funny is when you see teams selling spots. haha, we'll carry you to 2200-2300+ for X gold. yeah, that takes oooooh so much skill. rofl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmahra Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 It's simple, this game has a lot of players that are scared of being exposed as "bad". They opposed to any kind of measure of game skill, damage meters, arenas ect. When rated pvp comes out the majority of whiners on these boards are going to realise they suck at it and start crying about game balance. Bioware needs to stop worrying about a vocal minority of baddies. this And to those talking badly about arena PvP, wait until the small number of remaining subcribers who PvP learn their classes and the WZs well and realize that it's just a child's game with absolutely no competition because everyone has reached or is very close to reaching the ridiculously low skill-cap. That will be when many of the current baddies realize that everyone else is even worse than they are and will want to have real PvP. Currently, they all know they're BAD so they're afraid of arena PvP. BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmahra Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 http://www.arenastats.com/ What point are you rebutting? 51% of teams rated 2k or better are the same 3 comps. Skill in arena? lawlz. being the best at whatever fotm comp doesn't mean much, it's funny that you think so... what's really funny is when you see teams selling spots. haha, we'll carry you to 2200-2300+ for X gold. yeah, that takes oooooh so much skill. rofl Skill in arena has nothing to do with what comps are the best to play. It's still a skilled variety of PvP, whether you're playing with an optimal comp or a weaker one. Yes, some will play the best one to be ranked highly rating-wise. WZs will never ever take nearly enough skill as arena. Why the hell is this so difficult for you guys to understand??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceperson Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Skill in arena has nothing to do with what comps are the best to play. It's still a skilled variety of PvP, whether you're playing with an optimal comp or a weaker one. Yes, some will play the best one to be ranked highly rating-wise. WZs will never ever take nearly enough skill as arena. Why the hell is this so difficult for you guys to understand??? i don't care how good you think you are, if you have a bad comp you wont get far at all, if you have the right comp you can faceroll to 2k rating. that isn't skill. anyone who knows anything about arena laughs at you people implying that only bads hate arena. most glads prob don't even play more than 10 matches a week just to earn the gear/title. arena isn't coming to swtor. stop asking for it. there's another game with duel in a box. go enjoy it and all it has to offer. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsbacka Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Because Arena is a duel in a box based on no strategy other than "kill". Rated Warzones are based on strategies that, generally, emulate a real battle. Battles are fought over things, even if those things are arbitrarily represented by a flag, or a ball, the point is that when battles are fought over stuff, new strategies evolve. When you're just killing each other in a tiny box, it's death match, and death match is the game mode for people who suck at thinking. There is only 1 or 2 viable tactics, same FOTM philosphy as with arena and same people that dmianted arena showed that the are far better in any kinda PvP. Every top team in RBGs were made out of high rated arena players. Will be exactly same with rated WZs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenReafer Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) Herding 8 cats is much harder than herding 2 cats. Also, when all you have on your team is 2 people, 1 good player can carry the other quite easily, even if he dies in seconds. But in an 8-team, 1 good player and 7 morons will get curbstomped 9 times out of 10. Ranked warzones are quite a bit more about skill and communication. A 5v5 arena comes close, I admit 5v5 the most unskille dbracket where you do 1 cc chain on a healer if even needed and burst someone. WZs 5 good players 3 bad and you can win. Arena 3 good players 1 bad you will lose against a decent team. Large scale just means less coordination and a more forgiving environment for the misuse of CDs and overlapping cc so players who lack any coordination succeed in it. Hell even clickers succeed in Large Scale PvP where in a small scale environment they would get stomped. Edited February 14, 2012 by GreenReafer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngryBuddhist Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Arena means small groups... like 3v3. that means a ton of micro managing balance. That means character skill 'whiplash' after every patch. The tail starts wagging the dog and the devlopers start coding to satisfy a minute pool of people and aggravate 95% of the player base with constant ability tweaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forsbacka Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) http://www.arenastats.com/ What point are you rebutting? 51% of teams rated 2k or better are the same 3 comps. Skill in arena? lawlz. being the best at whatever fotm comp doesn't mean much, it's funny that you think so... what's really funny is when you see teams selling spots. haha, we'll carry you to 2200-2300+ for X gold. yeah, that takes oooooh so much skill. rofl Its much more easier to sell ratings in rated BGs and getting 2.4k in RBG took few weeks of RBGS for me but never achieved it in arena for 11 seasons. RBGs was fun though, to do as guild but very easy compared to arena. What comes to team compositions, at top there was only few setups and about 5 classes that was a must in every team in a same role and all other tanks but warrior was a nono and resto druids wasnt needed healers. Edited February 14, 2012 by Forsbacka Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts