★★★[ARENA] - benefits of adding ARENA to SWTOR★★★

[Cwild]

Glorified deathmatches does not belong to MMO.

 

Even modern shooters stray away from them.

You are minority here.

 

Glorified deathmatches my ***.

 

Do you know how much is required to actually be successful vs another skilled team in arena. You have to counter every single thing they do. You have to think 15 seconds into the future the whole entire match. It is the only way to test skill vs skill at a competitive level. For people saying "go back to wow" if you want to arena. We played it for a long time, and now WoW is simply too easy and homogonized because of crybabies and care bears. Arena was the only reason we played wow at all. It held me and my friends for a long time, but an MMO can only hold someone for so long, everyone should know this.

[navotjr]

Kudos to the OP. I will not offer opinion overall, but in short, if gear is not attained in arena play that is best in game, so you have to arena to get best pvp gear, then I think anything that is available as an option for people to enjoy the game is a good move.

 

Just given the player the option with certain arena rank levels to lets say custom color your gear would be motivation enough for people to want to play it. At some point the casual player has to stop whining about this game having something for the hardcore player. Give the hardcore players whatever they want in game, as long as it does not give them gear advantage. Hell, people pvp for sole purpose of be world number 1 team, and have world competitions for it. If that ads subscriptions to this game, and does not affect the casual player, why do they care?

[ilhias]

Pleaso NOOOOO arenas. SWTOR's pvp should NOT be balanced about arenas. Objective based pvp is ok, deathmatch is just too dumb.

 

I like deathcmatch-style based play in shooters, but not here please!

[Scotland]

no thanks.

[Cwild]

Pleaso NOOOOO arenas. SWTOR's pvp should NOT be balanced about arenas. Objective based pvp is ok, deathmatch is just too dumb.

 

I like deathcmatch-style based play in shooters, but not here please!

 

What people don't realize is it is actually harder to land a kill on a coordinated team, then to coordinate a throw in a huttball into the endzone.

 

It may be a "deathmatch game" but it's more involved then that.

[dcapotos]

I'll file this under "More WoW garbage"

 

This.

[Sykper]

Sadly, in my humble opinion rather than balance PvP, Arena sparks continuous balancing, nerfing, buffing that frankly Ranked Warzone does not have to deal with.

 

I should be more clear.

 

Arena as someone mentioned before puts every single class balance under a lens, in the cases of 3v3s or 5v5s in WoW, this game may (if it happened) have 4v4s. When you put any class down under detail, you do see discrepancies, but attempting to alter those discrepancies alters other classes as well. YOU GET A NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF BALANCE IN ARENA!

 

Rated Warzones won't have that difficulty, you get different sized fights going on, and multiple warzones favor different classes, thus fulfilling the need to want one of each class (save the underpowered ones, which Bioware CAN FIX EASILY IN A WARZONE BASED BALANCE).

 

When you look at PvP from a whole, you realize that it is fairly balanced on the warzone level, when you bring Arena along to balance things out...you go into the specific, and that could be hell.

[chrisronline]

I read the entire original post and feel inclined to agree - the answer to the WoW arena problem is not require participation to acquire the best gear, at least non-balance concerns aside. Assuming most of the PvP population grinds the best gear through WZs, each arena match starts like a SC match - all things equal aside from skill and experience.

[Armaso]

Glorified deathmatches my ***.

 

Do you know how much is required to actually be successful vs another skilled team in arena. You have to counter every single thing they do. You have to think 15 seconds into the future the whole entire match. It is the only way to test skill vs skill at a competitive level. For people saying "go back to wow" if you want to arena. We played it for a long time, and now WoW is simply too easy and homogonized because of crybabies and care bears. Arena was the only reason we played wow at all. It held me and my friends for a long time, but an MMO can only hold someone for so long, everyone should know this.

 

 

Running around a pillar waiting on a CD is not skill. The cry babies are birthed from arena.

 

NO TY

[Mirialol]

Sadly, in my humble opinion rather than balance PvP, Arena sparks continuous balancing, nerfing, buffing that frankly Ranked Warzone does not have to deal with.

 

I should be more clear.

 

Arena as someone mentioned before puts every single class balance under a lens, in the cases of 3v3s or 5v5s in WoW, this game may (if it happened) have 4v4s. When you put any class down under detail, you do see discrepancies, but attempting to alter those discrepancies alters other classes as well. YOU GET A NEVER ENDING CYCLE OF BALANCE IN ARENA!

 

Rated Warzones won't have that difficulty, you get different sized fights going on, and multiple warzones favor different classes, thus fulfilling the need to want one of each class (save the underpowered ones, which Bioware CAN FIX EASILY IN A WARZONE BASED BALANCE).

 

When you look at PvP from a whole, you realize that it is fairly balanced on the warzone level, when you bring Arena along to balance things out...you go into the specific, and that could be hell.

 

 

u wont have to have neverending balance patches if theyre done correctly

 

once all matchups are reasonable balanced to at least 60:40 ratios they dont have to bother adding balance patches anymore. after that, just let the things stabilize and let the metagame grow, like SC1 did.

 

 

original starcraft was most perfectly balanced game of all time from 1999 ~ today and they had zero balance patch after year 2000. Sure certain years saw terran dominance, zerg dominance, protoss dominance etc etc etc. They were just due to trends and evolution of new gameplay styles, but since game was balanced enough other races could develop new strategies for counter.

 

sadly even SC2 fails to see that, and they constantly throw completely arbitrary "balance patches" as soon as game designers (none whom are even grandmaster level) think necessary. Its either new blizzard devs are too blind / stupid to see this, or gaming community got a lot whinier and demanding. As soon as a ___ race wins GSL, nerfbat inc to that race. just no no

 

screw activi$ion blizzard

Edited March 16, 2012 by Mirialol

[islander]

Arenas just mean more work for the devs because then they'd have to think about balancing smaller scale group pvp.

 

Personally, I'm not a fan of them. More trouble then it's worth.

[Foenixz]

i read every replies that get posted here. i see that some ignorant tools crawl in this thread, assume it is just another arena thread, and throw in random insults without even reading a line of my original post

 

funny thing is you're making yourself look like huge idiots when, you bring up exact same arguments against wow's arena that i mentioned in the OP, making it obvious you didnt even read my post.

 

if you are here to troll, dont even bother trying. i will flag your post and put you on ignore instantly

 

go troll another arena thread

 

 

I was actually thinking you made a good post until reading ALL your replies; you are rude and abusive; your ideas just died an ignominious death because of your attitude.

 

How about dialing back your attitude and keeping YOUR thread on topic.

 

Just because someone disagrees with you they are not trolling.

[Korrigan]

u wont have to have neverending balance patches if theyre done correctly

Of course you will. You can't balance a game with 8 different classes for small scale PvP like 2vs2 or 3vs3 or even 4vs4. This will automatically create FOTM setups, with FOTM classes, which will spawn nerf cries, which will affect everything else in the game. Even Blizzard admitted that adding arenas was a mistake they would not repeat, as they were a balancing nightmare, but it was too late to remove them then.

There is a good reason why the smallest group PvP in SW:TOR is 8vs8.

[Vaipyr]

-I dont see why some players believe that rated warzones will be the solution for the PvP of the game? Objective oriented PvP such as warzones will be nowhere NEAR skill-dependent and competitive compared to any arena, PERIOD. "Competitive" and "objective" sound like oil and water to me.

 

Warzones = objective oriented (casual) PvP. Arenas = survival/killing oriented (competitive) PvP.

 

What sounds more PvP-like?

 

 

-Objective oriented PvP doesn't give players any incentives to "play well". In warzones, you simply respawn if you are killed due to being outplayed or making mistakes. Arena is whole different story, where the focus is surviving, outplaying, and killing opponents.

 

 

There is so much wrong here it's almost sickening. Objective based team games are far more skill-intensive than deathmatch. Fact. Period.

 

Also arena was the worst thing to ever happen to WoW, it ****ed up the balance of all the classes a multitude of times, caused huge rifts in the community, and caused more hate filled insulting and general terrible attitudes to flood the game than any other single part of the game.

 

And yes, I did arena's constantly till they took away 2's and we got tired of rolfstomping with RMP in 3's. Even the WoW devs admitted that arenas were the worst thing they ever did.

[Mirialol]

Of course you will. You can't balance a game with 8 different classes for small scale PvP like 2vs2 or 3vs3 or even 4vs4. This will automatically create FOTM setups, with FOTM classes, which will spawn nerf cries, which will affect everything else in the game. Even Blizzard admitted that adding arenas was a mistake they would not repeat, as they were a balancing nightmare, but it was too late to remove them then.

There is a good reason why the smallest group PvP in SW:TOR is 8vs8.

 

i think blizzard is quite stupid and have no idea how to deal with class balances. all their "balance" patches were completely opinion based and had zero regards for actual state of pvp. (i heard ghostcrawler kept buffing ferals back when his main was a feral druid). plus blizzard doesnt even have numbers and statistics to look at. (and even if they did, im sure they dont look at them)

 

if i run blizzard as a company, its arena would have never turned out as bad as it is today

Edited March 16, 2012 by Notannos
use of the word retarded

[Humanbeam]

What a biased thread. Terrible from all aspects.

You didn't elaborate ONE logic argument. All you did was mascarate big words with your personal distaste for objective-based PvP.

 

-1

[Vaipyr]

I was actually thinking you made a good post until reading ALL your replies; you are rude and abusive; your ideas just died an ignominious death because of your attitude.

 

How about dialing back your attitude and keeping YOUR thread on topic.

 

Just because someone disagrees with you they are not trolling.

 

^

This as well. Further proves the community divide and disrespectful nature that comes with arena, and here it's just being talked about.

[Delcon]

PVP should all be about orvr ,

 

Engaging objectives of small to large importance using various size buildings , strongholds , bunkers , that have a galatic effect on the side that meats the controlling /wining criteria

 

balance should be based on group play , ( I think imo stor is pretty well balanced there obv some tweaks hear and there but still good, )

 

Wz's sc's should be something on the side to compliment orvr ,

arena's should be someware where you can just go and have a laugh and playabout alla EQ1 arenas ,

[Mirialol]

^

This as well. Further proves the community divide and disrespectful nature that comes with arena, and here it's just being talked about.

 

insulting me without even reading = disrespect. and i tend to be just as disrespectful to them if they're disresctful to me

 

if they plan to disagree / post rude comments i expect them to at least take 1/10th of time to read my original post as it took me to write it.

 

don't expect friendly response from anyone if youre going to blatantly disrespect them

Edited March 16, 2012 by Mirialol

[Tsubibi]

if they add those just for fun why not ... I just like the 1v1 idea . Edited March 16, 2012 by Tsubibi

[Dealdrick]

i think blizzard is quite stupid and have no idea how to deal with class balances. all their "balance" patches were completely opinion based and had zero regards for actual state of pvp. (i heard ghostcrawler kept buffing ferals back when his main was a feral druid). plus blizzard doesnt even have numbers and statistics to look at. (and even if they did, im sure they dont look at them)

 

if i run blizzard as a company, its arena would have never turned out as bad as it is today

 

So, the creators and developers of the single most successful MMO of all time are a bunch of bumbling idiots that based their "balancing" decisions on no statistical data and they didn't look at this data because you're "sure the don't look at them?"

Edited March 16, 2012 by Notannos
rude

[Lerdoc]

Yes, lets stick to the current model of ignoring objectives in warzones to kill each other as far away from the objective as possible ... I know I am not the only one who notices this in MMOs ...

 

The fact that this exists means there is a need for "Glorified deathmatches."

 

Only most dumb players do that. It gives NOTHING over fast win now, and you can easily do 4 medals by the time you win.

 

And yes, unfortunately about 90% MMO population are dumb, either by choice or its theirs natural gift.

 

Want glorified deathmatches? Give incentives to go to Smugglers Den.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Lerdoc

[Dayfax]

"In general, I expect ALL comps to be fully viable and competitive, as long as classes are balanced around 1v1! (important!)"

 

It's not that people are objecting because they didn't read your post.

 

They're objecting because stuff like this makes you seem delusional.

[Foenixz]

if they add those just for fun why not ... I just like the 1v1 idea .

 

As long as ZERO balancing is done for arenas ... maybe.

[Mirialol]

So, the creators and developers of the single most successful MMO of all time are a bunch of bumbling idiots that based their "balancing" decisions on no statistical data and they didn't look at this data because you're "sure the don't look at them?" This is such a childish post and perspective. Stop drinking the Kool-Aid

 

you dont need to be skilled / knowledgeable in game and release good balance patches to be a successful gaming company, they are completely irrelevant

 

blizzard just have smart marketing strategies, and benefit of being one of first MMOs to be successful (hence larger fanbase)

 

 

in terms of their marketing strategy, i give blizzard A - brand new scroll of resurrection and offering FREE cataclysm upgrade right before pandaria? pure genius.

 

in terms of knowledge of their own game and knowing how to balance their game properly, i give them F

 

in other words, theyre just care about money and doesnt care much about pvp balance (as long as it doesnt affect their income)

Edited March 16, 2012 by Mirialol