TUXs Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 only the extremely simple somehow believe that "PvP" = Killing. Player vs Player means any activity in which enemy players are matched against you and your actions directly oppose theirs. So, now I'm "simple" because I enjoy the challenge and hunt when fighting other players?! I don't think it's quite as "simple" as you make it out to be... - It's about the HUNT! - sending them chasing you - making them think you're somewhere you aren't - dividing them - out smarting them - hiding when they're looking for you - baiting them into doing something foolish - catching them off guard When the objective is one of 2 points or a ball, there's little 'surprise' and less strategy. I would argue that only the "simple" feel that PvP needs to include an objective to fight over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delavager Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 It's dead alright. Why would Blizzard invest money in arena in it's current state. In fact, the next expansion is going to focus on pet battles. What other indication do you need that Blizzard has arena on life support cause a very small portion of their player base still play, but it will never be a selling point any more. Those statistic are only ones that exist and those are only true indication of the state of arena over time. Blizzard has better statistics, but they will never release those stats until after wow has been shutdown or arena removed from the game. You also seem to forget that the number of gladiators per season is a direct percentage based on the total number of people who participate. It's top .05% of total number of rank teams, thus a direct indication of total number of people who participate in arena. That's just a fact. The other variables are impossible to quantify, which is why Blizzard doesn't include them in their internal reports either other than what people post when they unsubscribe. My analysis is purely statistical and not based on what I think or unquantifiable variables. You are missing the point. Your analysis isn't fact, it's just conjecture. First, you are attributing lesser gladiator numbers to a lesser desire in Arena. This does is not a direct relationship. Also the whole "Blizzard is promoting Pet Battles" has absolutely nothing to do with Arenas. One does not mean the other. Second, WoW Arena != Arena. I don't know why you assume that. Statistics from WoW Arena, albiet flawed, do not define statistics for Arena in general. WoW as a game itself is "dying"...does that mean MMOs in general are "dying"? Third, you completely ignore all other possible variables that contribute to loss of Gladiators. As I said before, simply "Getting Bored after 10 Seasons" could contribute to the loss, but you don't account for that. You don't account for anything. You basically say "Season 10 is less than Season 3, therefore less people like Arenas" You pretty much left out everything in your argument, especially the most important part: The reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keapoe Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When are we going to get a warzone that focuses on killing the other team, with no respawns when zero players are left on the other team, your team wins. Any one else feel this way? I want to see the skill in killing other players, i don't find any joy in standing next to a "node", door, or running a ball. Yea you can kill other players in warzones but that's not the goal of any of these matches. Modern Warfare 3 is that way ---> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNightfall Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 As one option on the list of war zones this would be fun imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uwmpanther Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 LOL @ people who think that playing gimmick-based….ERRRR “objective”- based PvP puts them on some sort of strategic high ground. Oh my, your sooooo strategically advanced because you and your boys capped that node or passed that huttball. No really, we’re quite impressed. Wow, your epeen…it’s just so huge and throbbing…quite marvelous, I must admit. I mean, lord knows there’s no room for strategy in a team deathmatch, it’s all about gear and healers, completely unlike gimmick….ERRRRR objective based PvP where such things are transcended by the brilliant genius of an unstoppable Center-Left strategy in civil war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delavager Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 So, now I'm "simple" because I enjoy the challenge and hunt when fighting other players?! I don't think it's quite as "simple" as you make it out to be... - It's about the HUNT! - sending them chasing you - making them think you're somewhere you aren't - dividing them - out smarting them - hiding when they're looking for you - baiting them into doing something foolish - catching them off guard When the objective is one of 2 points or a ball, there's little 'surprise' and less strategy. I would argue that only the "simple" feel that PvP needs to include an objective to fight over. No, you are simple because you can't read lol. Please go read his post again. He said PvP or Player vs Player doesn't strictly mean literally KILLING the other players, it just means competing in some fashion where the opponent is a player (as opposed to a MoB). Deathmatch is just a form of PvP, not the definition of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knockerz Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) You are missing the point. Your analysis isn't fact, it's just conjecture. First, you are attributing lesser gladiator numbers to a lesser desire in Arena. This does is not a direct relationship. Also the whole "Blizzard is promoting Pet Battles" has absolutely nothing to do with Arenas. One does not mean the other. Second, WoW Arena != Arena. I don't know why you assume that. Statistics from WoW Arena, albiet flawed, do not define statistics for Arena in general. WoW as a game itself is "dying"...does that mean MMOs in general are "dying"? Third, you completely ignore all other possible variables that contribute to loss of Gladiators. As I said before, simply "Getting Bored after 10 Seasons" could contribute to the loss, but you don't account for that. You don't account for anything. You basically say "Season 10 is less than Season 3, therefore less people like Arenas" You pretty much left out everything in your argument, especially the most important part: The reason. Perhaps provide another explanation using those statistics. In research at a University or even for a normal research paper my explanation and statistic would be academically acceptable. You on the other hand provide no facts. That is why if you were put in front of a board you would not last. You know they ask you question pertain to any thing you put on your paper and presentations. I never stated that my explanation of the statistics I used are the final say and is only an explanation of of those statistics. You are welcome to provide your counter argument using those statistics or any other facts. However, I won't conti8neu reply to some one whose argument wouldn't hold in academic research or in the corporate world. You can't say my argument has no merit since I provide facts to support my argument. However, you provided none. Edited March 8, 2012 by Knockerz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talizzar Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 BH Powertech. No kidding. I would never have guessed. Tanks in this game get melted in seconds. The team that can melt face the fastest will win. Boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 No, you are simple because you can't read lol. Please go read his post again. He said PvP or Player vs Player doesn't strictly mean literally KILLING the other players, it just means competing in some fashion where the opponent is a player (as opposed to a MoB). Deathmatch is just a form of PvP, not the definition of it. Ah, but I can read, and I read his reply just fine. At no point have I suggested that killing other players was the ONLY possible goal for PvP or that objective based PvP isn't enjoyable or have a place - in fact, I LOVE Voidstar and Alderaan. However, that's ALL this game has at the moment (Ilum is worthless)...objective based, 'go get it', follow the flashing light PvP. An area based deathmatch game would be a great addition imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 BH Powertech. No kidding. I would never have guessed. Tanks in this game get melted in seconds. The team that can melt face the fastest will win. Boring. I'll argue that a team full of stealthers would own a team full of BH's ANY day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delavager Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Perhaps provide another explanation using those statistics. In research at a University or even for a normal research paper my explanation and statistic would be academically acceptable. You on the other hand provide no facts. That is why if you were put in front of a board you would not last. You know they ask you question pertain to any thing you put on your paper and presentations. I never stated that my explanation of the statistics I used are the final say and is only an explanation of of those statistics. You are welcome to provide your counter argument using those statistics or any other facts. However, I won't conti8neu reply to some one whose argument wouldn't hold in academic research or in the corporate world. You can't say my argument has no merit since I provide facts to support my argument. However, you provided none. HAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Really? Please go read your statistics again. You would be LAUGHED AT in the corporate world and ESPECIALLY Academic Panel. You provide ZERO FACTS, you only provide conjecture. You tried to reach a conclusion based on your conjecture, and I was simply stating that your statistics are BS, don't attribute to the discussion, and are irrelevant. I don't need to prove otherwise as you state, I just need to show that your "evidence" is a reach at best and is irrelevant to the topic and the case is thrown out. Until you actually show any facts backing your claim, there's no need for me to do anything. All I've done so far is show how your statistics are off and how your conclusion is irrelevant to the discussion. I have yet to even attempt to show that your conclusion is wrong, and why would I need to, it's IRRELEVANT TO THE DISCUSSION. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasymodeX Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Raw Arena / TDM is a ****** game mode, because it's just as narrow as Huttball on the opposite end of the scale. There's as much strategy in TDM as there is fighting in Huttball. Let's have some real Warzones. Think BioWare would benefit greatly from just copying every SC from Warhammer except Thunder Valley. Hell, just port Nordenwatch and BFP and PvP in this game would be good to go for another 6 months. Edit: And for Nordenwatch, you can just upgrade Alderaan: 1. Change the resource pool to 800. 2. Every death causes a loss of 5 resource. 3. Nodes are captured by standing on them while no enemies are standing on them. Rather than CLICKY CLICKY. Edited March 8, 2012 by EasymodeX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delavager Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Ah, but I can read, and I read his reply just fine. At no point have I suggested that killing other players was the ONLY possible goal for PvP or that objective based PvP isn't enjoyable or have a place - in fact, I LOVE Voidstar and Alderaan. However, that's ALL this game has at the moment (Ilum is worthless)...objective based, 'go get it', follow the flashing light PvP. An area based deathmatch game would be a great addition imo. Uhh, this is a DIRECT quote from what you posted: I have this silly idea that PvP is about players killing players, be it in an MMO or a FPS. [/Quote] Thus prompting the response that started all this. Additionally, if you DID READ, then you wouldn't of come up with a response that had NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HE POSTED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broom Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 read the last line of the post... Then let me rephrase it for you: you have a very limited idea of PVP if the killing is everything for you. Some of the most glorious PVP victories my guild has had, involved tweaking the noses of PVP guilds many times larger (and better geared, and better at killing) than us, by (literally) taking away their stuff or by running circles around them in every possible way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Uhh, this is a DIRECT quote from what you posted: Thus prompting the response that started all this. Additionally, if you DID READ, then you wouldn't of come up with a response that had NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT HE POSTED. My mistake. I should have said "I prefer PvP when killing the other players is the objective". That doesn't mean it should be the ONLY possible goal, but I feel giving players less direction to where other players are, provides a lot more opportunity to get creative and have fun that simply doesn't exist when you zerg and head straight to a turret, door or ball carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Perhaps provide another explanation using those statistics. In research at a University or even for a normal research paper my explanation and statistic would be academically acceptable. You on the other hand provide no facts. That is why if you were put in front of a board you would not last. You know they ask you question pertain to any thing you put on your paper and presentations. I never stated that my explanation of the statistics I used are the final say and is only an explanation of of those statistics. You are welcome to provide your counter argument using those statistics or any other facts. However, I won't conti8neu reply to some one whose argument wouldn't hold in academic research or in the corporate world. You can't say my argument has no merit since I provide facts to support my argument. However, you provided none. LOL your post would never pass anything. Also don't try and shift the burden of proof, we are saying we don't believe what you are saying based on the evidence you are providing. You aren't accounting for tons of variables and is in no way even close to anything academic. Edited March 8, 2012 by Eroex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 Then let me rephrase it for you: you have a very limited idea of PVP if the killing is everything for you. Some of the most glorious PVP victories my guild has had, involved tweaking the noses of PVP guilds many times larger (and better geared, and better at killing) than us, by (literally) taking away their stuff or by running circles around them in every possible way. I just want another game mode. As for the rest of your post I have no idea what you are going on about honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talizzar Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Raw Arena / TDM is a ****** game mode, because it's just as narrow as Huttball on the opposite end of the scale. There's as much strategy in TDM as there is fighting in Huttball. Let's have some real Warzones. Think BioWare would benefit greatly from just copying every SC from Warhammer except Thunder Valley. Hell, just port Nordenwatch and BFP and PvP in this game would be good to go for another 6 months. Edit: And for Nordenwatch, you can just upgrade Alderaan: 1. Change the resource pool to 800. 2. Every death causes a loss of 5 resource. 3. Nodes are captured by standing on them while no enemies are standing on them. Rather than CLICKY CLICKY. One of the main reasons that worked in War was because it was low level pvp and nobody had all the crazy cc skills yet. War got worse and worse as you leveled up because of the insane CC in the game. They tried to address it a number of time and most of us gave up after that. Fighting in the small town was pretty fun too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasymodeX Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 They tried to address it a number of time and most of us gave up after that. The CC in WAR was fine after they consolidated the immunities. Took them awhile though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) BH Powertech. No kidding. I would never have guessed. Tanks in this game get melted in seconds. The team that can melt face the fastest will win. Boring. I still have no idea what you are talking about, you do realize there would be 7 other people on the team right? Tanks dont get melted in seconds, I know tons of PVP and PVE geared tanks that are near impossible to kill. 22-25k health and tons of armor, stats and cooldowns to keep them alive. Try killing an assassin tank that is best in slot geared as a powertech then come talk to me. Edited March 8, 2012 by Eroex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts