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

[Khadroth]

Answers in red.

 

^ All of this. I honestly think these "pros" and "competetive pvpers" are afraid of having to employ actual objective-based strategies and coordinating larger groups. For all their talk of skill they seem awefully scared of being forced to employ more complex tactics than timed target swapping. I think it's pretty clear that ranked warzones are actually going to bring thought and intellegence back into pvp.

 

There are people who enjoy deathmatches on small areas. Why not give them something they enjoy?

If there are no better rewards then in normal WZs, implementing arena would affect you in no way.

 

You can already do this yourself in outlaw's den on Tatooine. People are hosting tournaments all the time. If there's so many people in favor of this concept of pvp, I don't see what's stopping you from finding adequate challengers.

[cycao]

I should clarify, since my post was pretty slamming of arena.

 

I don't think arena is the top way to judge skill when it comes to a team based game, I don't think it is or SHOULD be where balance in a large scale mmo is focused. I prefer objective based pvp (like old school AV) first, then things like early wintergrasp, Isle of Conq siege, over most other objective based pvp- with death match at the bottom. That said, while I dislike death match because I find it takes less thinking- I don't think it has no place in an mmo.

 

I also have no problem with arena being in a game provided the game doesn't revolve around it- meaning, no balancing around it, and no giving the best gear to it.

 

And there lies the problem. The players who prefer arena will soon be demanding better gear for it, and, the forums will flood with nerf threads based on arena pvp- and since it's a small snap shot of how pvp actually works, it's both a less complete picture AND an easier to look at and judge, making it a tempting disastor for ruining the rest of the game to appease a niche crowd.

 

Thus, while I support arena getting in provided it doesn't wreck the rest of the game, I realize that it inevitably will ruin the rest of the game- and thus cannot support it being in game.

 

Very well put.

 

I will give arenas a throw if they implement them, but I know that everything you posted will probably happen if they do. There is enough whining on these forums I feel the arena will amplify this.

 

But never played WoW so im probably wrong

[Cwild]

^ All of this. I honestly think these "pros" and "competetive pvpers" are afraid of having to employ actual objective-based strategies and coordinating larger groups. For all their talk of skill they seem awefully scared of being forced to employ more complex tactics than timed target swapping. I think it's pretty clear that ranked warzones are actually going to bring thought and intellegence back into pvp.

 

 

 

You can already do this yourself in outlaw's den on Tatooine. People are hosting tournaments all the time. If there's so many people in favor of this concept of pvp, I don't see what's stopping you from finding adequate challengers.

 

No one who arenas is "scared" of objective based strategy warzones. Most still play them. You just get a better sense of your own skill when its a smaller matchup. It's easy to feel useful when 7 other players and you are working toward the same goal...but when its 3v3 and 1 of your members mess up and possibly cost you the game...its different.

[va_wanderer]

Read the OP. Do not agree.

 

Thanks to WoW-

 

Arenas are horrible things. They ripped PvP out of the actual game world and stuck it into a sandbox and then held it up as the epitome of combat.

 

Then they ended up being breeding grounds for endless screaming matches over game balance.

 

Waste of resources and detrimental to the overall community, as it's one of the best ways to segregate PvP and PvE play. We need to make PvP more of a part of the game world, not less of one. I'd take even another Warzone over the effort needed to make Arenas.

 

Want to fight whenever, whoever? /duel or Outlaw's Den it. Real PvP skill is World PvP skill, where the game doesn't turn into a class comp wang-waving fest.

[Cwild]

Read the OP. Do not agree.

 

Thanks to WoW-

 

Arenas are horrible things. They ripped PvP out of the actual game world and stuck it into a sandbox and then held it up as the epitome of combat.

 

Then they ended up being breeding grounds for endless screaming matches over game balance.

 

Waste of resources and detrimental to the overall community, as it's one of the best ways to segregate PvP and PvE play. We need to make PvP more of a part of the game world, not less of one. I'd take even another Warzone over the effort needed to make Arenas.

 

Want to fight whenever, whoever? /duel or Outlaw's Den it. Real PvP skill is World PvP skill, where the game doesn't turn into a class comp wang-waving fest.

 

Except most people who want to test out their skill can't in "world pvp" because of imbalance and population. Arenas were the only way to seperate "skilled pvpers vs average ones"

 

You can be average and still succeed in world pvp because of sheer numbers.

[fungihoujo]

In 20 pages of this thread i have nowhere seen any argument against implementing the arena as the OP stated it, except "i don't like it".

 

If you believe arena is about running around pillars and best comps (wich is evidently not true), then you do not have to play it.

There are people who enjoy deathmatches on small areas. Why not give them something they enjoy?

If there are no better rewards then in normal WZs, implementing arena would affect you in no way.

Yeah, there will be QQ in the forums, but seriously, there is enough QQ right now without having arena in this game, it can't get any worse imo.

 

 

You believe that, just because blizzard failed badly on their own arena (yet it was still enjoyable because no other game had something compareable, except maybe GW), Bioware will fail, too.

 

Except, OP is already moving towards talking about balancing the game 1v1- which is what everyone wants to avoid. Also, there's been plenty of good reasoning against bringing in arena- what you meant to say was 'I covered my ears and want LALALALALALA' whenever the anti-arena crowd spoke.

[Dayfax]

Wow, so class balancing would not affect other areas of gameplay? That is where wow failed trying to balance around all aspects of gameplay. That plus they kowtowed to certain communities (rogues and whatever class Kalgon was playing). The classes as of right now aren't to badly put of balance but getting nailed by 2 Ops in a 2v2 would have everyone screaming for nerfs.

 

Your points all show why there should not be any arena balancing because then every class would be alike just like WOW. Adjusting the classes would be to change there specific feel and I would be against that. This game was never intended to cater to one particular group. Coming in here and demanding changes that would dramatically changes the way the game looks and feels is just not right.

 

Heals should never be as powerful as DPS

Mercs do not suffer for not having one as there are way more threads about TS/GR spam than not having an interrupt. I have one and I don't find taht it matters as I have other abilities in my toolset that do damage and will interrupt as well.

Ops having a gap closer would make that class so OP this forum would be drowned in cries for nerfs.

The issues with animation delays are being addressed right now.

 

Sp, calling the suggestion stupid and giving me ammo to strengthen my point doesn't seem all that bright.

 

You misunderstood, bright eyes. I was agreeing with you & calling the OP's idea of 1v1 arena stupid.

 

The reason I said it would "have to be balanced" is because the second anyone lost a match because they couldn't interrupt an enemy cast, they'd be SCREAMING bloody murder on the forums & would never relent until changes were made.

 

In one sense, they'd be right, because gross imbalances do exist. But that's more an indication to me that 1v1 ladders are an impractical and silly idea.

 

The indication that, for one, the OP never seemed to consider that 2 healers would be dueling each other, points to an overall weakness in the proposal.

[Khadroth]

No one who arenas is "scared" of objective based strategy warzones. Most still play them. You just get a better sense of your own skill when its a smaller matchup. It's easy to feel useful when 7 other players and you are working toward the same goal...but when its 3v3 and 1 of your members mess up and possibly cost you the game...its different.

 

That can still happen and does happen all the time already in warzones. Despite being 8v8 the game can hinge on 1 person and their success or failure. And is being useful bad? Apparently so for arena's, which seem to routinely punish players who like support or utility roles that are not optimal for the current season. Ranked Warzones on the other hand reward niche/roll players and won't be nearly as influenced by FoTM comps.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Khadroth

[Jeffor]

i spent 3 hours writing this post and this is your response? bet you didnt even take 2 minutes to read my post

 

i'll report your response as 'garbage'

 

PVP Arenas wold be the final nail in the coffin for this game as far as I am concerned. Warzones provide enough spoon fed PVP for my liking.

[Jeffor]

Also, I don't understand the argument that arenas focus more on player skill. That would only be true if the arenas were limited to all of the same class fighting against each other.

[unicornfive]

Except most people who want to test out their skill can't in "world pvp" because of imbalance and population. Arenas were the only way to seperate "skilled pvpers vs average ones"

 

You can be average and still succeed in world pvp because of sheer numbers.

 

Ok, lets say they add arena...and lets say you seperated the skilled players from the noobs...

So...what u gained from all of this?

I would really like an answer plz.

 

If u dont answer, u proved my theory that those who want arena are ppl who fail irl and they need arena to feel they accomplished something with their high rating...

 

 

And dont tell me arena is fun...cause i shall remind you the resto druid games in tbc arena that lasted forever... It was the most retarted PVP i ever played as warrior on any game that includes warriors.... (running after a druid arround a pillar and wasting 4/5 of arena time in root and cyclone...

 

Still w8ing for your answer...

[slagartist]

As a female player, I stopped reading the moment you made mention that most PVPers are male because males are competitive... have you ever known a woman? Like, really known? We're insanely competitive, both in and out of game. Half the people I've pvp'd with (over WoW and now TOR) are female - and good at the game. They are insanely competitive, and generally as or even a lot more "ragey" than most of the men on their team. Ask my guildies if you don't believe me. You should hear me yell at people.

 

Anyway, I'd might have agreed with you if I could be bothered to agree with someone ignorant.

Edited March 16, 2012 by slagartist

[Khadroth]

As a female player, I stopped reading the moment you made mention that most PVPers are male because males are competitive... have you ever known a woman? Like, really known? We're insanely competitive, both in and out of game. Half the people I've pvp'd with (over WoW and now TOR) are female - and good at the game. They are insanely competitive, and generally as or even a lot more "ragey" than most of the men on their team. Ask my guildies if you don't believe me. You should hear me yell at people.

 

Anyway, I'd might have agreed with you if I could be bothered to agree with someone ignorant.

 

Lol so true. There was no need to even bring gender into this, yet the OP apparently felt the need to be sexist.

[Cwild]

Ok, lets say they add arena...and lets say you seperated the skilled players from the noobs...

So...what u gained from all of this?

I would really like an answer plz.

 

If u dont answer, u proved my theory that those who want arena are ppl who fail irl and they need arena to feel they accomplished something with their high rating...

 

 

And dont tell me arena is fun...cause i shall remind you the resto druid games in tbc arena that lasted forever... It was the most retarted PVP i ever played as warrior on any game that includes warriors.... (running after a druid arround a pillar and wasting 4/5 of arena time in root and cyclone...

 

Still w8ing for your answer...

 

They are fun. I played lock druid in s2 s3 s4 and I know all about 1 hr and 30 minute matches. I loved them, they were awesome. And of course you didnt like it, you played a warrior and sat in roots all day. I on the other hand had fel puppy and escape artist to eat them off of me.

 

If you don't think climbing a ladder in pvp which gives ya sweet mount at the end is cool, then I dunno thats fine, but I do. It makes you feel like you did well in a game you put alot of time into, cause lets be honest, these games are huge time sinks.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Cwild

[slagartist]

Lol so true. There was no need to even bring gender into this, yet the OP apparently felt the need to be sexist.

 

And also failed to realise that Arenas = cooperative teams for competitive fights. If girls are so good at the "cooperative" part of PVE, that makes them even more ideal for the arena aspect of PVP since you have to work together to beat the other team.

 

And really, hell hath no fury in pvp like a woman stunned.

[Cwild]

And also failed to realise that Arenas = cooperative teams for competitive fights. If girls are so good at the "cooperative" part of PVE, that makes them even more ideal for the arena aspect of PVP since you have to work together to beat the other team.

 

And really, hell hath no fury in pvp like a woman stunned.

 

Not to burst your bubble because I know girl gamers exsist. In my 5 years of arenas I only came across one girl gamer...she owned and was awesome. I'm sure there are more, but also any tourny i played in I also saw no girl gamers. I don't agree with the OP on bringing sex into it, but they are not the majority in the pvp scene, its just fact.

[unicornfive]

They are fun. I played lock druid in s2 s3 s4 and I know all about 1 hr and 30 minute matches. I loved them, they were awesome. And of course you didnt like it, you played a warrior and sat in roots all day. I on the other hand had fel puppy and escape artist to eat them off of me.

 

If you don't think climbing a ladder in pvp which gives ya sweet mount at the end is cool, then I dunno thats fine, but I do. It makes you feel like you did well in a game you put alot of time into, cause lets be honest, these games are huge time sinks.

 

I dont know how it was with your lock...but as warrior it was UNPLAYABLE...

To hell with win if i have to suffer 15min rooted and cycloned.. Thats NOT pvp...

[Cwild]

I dont know how it was with your lock...but as warrior it was UNPLAYABLE...

To hell with win if i have to suffer 15min rooted and cycloned.. Thats NOT pvp...

 

I know exactly how they were as a druid/warrior. It was one of my harder matches simply because I couldnt kill the druid and had to mana drain, but my druid would just sit the warrior in roots all day. Was never really threatened to lose, it was just time consuming with los and pillars etc.

 

I feel for ya, but warrior/druid was argueably the best 2v2 comp season 2-3...sooo unplayable, i disagree.

 

I'm sure others had fun with it.

[Mirialol]

As a female player, I stopped reading the moment you made mention that most PVPers are male because males are competitive... have you ever known a woman? Like, really known? We're insanely competitive, both in and out of game. Half the people I've pvp'd with (over WoW and now TOR) are female - and good at the game. They are insanely competitive, and generally as or even a lot more "ragey" than most of the men on their team. Ask my guildies if you don't believe me. You should hear me yell at people.

 

Anyway, I'd might have agreed with you if I could be bothered to agree with someone ignorant.

 

Not being ignorant / sexist, it is just an observation and trend i witnessed. Like even in animal kingdom males usually fight and compete for dominance, its all in hormones

 

Well yea, SOME women are competitive, but not as many as men. Usually its not abnormal to see mostly men in highest level of sports / games. For example world TOP 100 ELO rating in chess: 99 men, and 1 woman (Judit Polgar, she is a great chess player BTW).

 

(definitely not claiming women lacks intellectual capacity to perform as same as men in chess. most women like to play fun, and enjoy life, and unlike men just dont have competitive drive to 'sacrifice' their entire life into achieving that level of chess skill)

 

i just tried using it as example to show that PVP = more competitive than PVE. did not mean to offend any female pvpers of course.

[unicornfive]

I know exactly how they were as a druid/warrior. It was one of my harder matches simply because I couldnt kill the druid and had to mana drain, but my druid would just sit the warrior in roots all day. Was never really threatened to lose, it was just time consuming with los and pillars etc.

 

I feel for ya, but warrior/druid was argueably the best 2v2 comp season 2-3...sooo unplayable, i disagree.

 

I'm sure others had fun with it.

 

warrior + windfury = fun

warrior + druid = win (with no fun)

 

there is difference

[Iamurfriend]

The truth is the hardcore pvp community will not take this game seriously until they implement something similar to Arenas.

 

Also, it's not really the "team deathmatch" that we're wanting, it's smaller based teams. If they implemented some 4v4 rated warzones a lot of people would be happy.

[Mirialol]

The truth is the hardcore pvp community will not take this game seriously until they implement something similar to Arenas.

 

Also, it's not really the "team deathmatch" that we're wanting, it's smaller based teams. If they implemented some 4v4 rated warzones a lot of people would be happy.

 

they can do that except the current 3 maps are too big for 4v4 / smaller scale setup

 

 

they should shrink the maps in that case or add new, smaller maps

[Cwild]

warrior + windfury = fun

warrior + druid = win (with no fun)

 

there is difference

 

find a way to win

[pmiles]

If they add arenas, they will follow WoW and make it so that it is accessible to all. You can't stop it from happening... try as you might. Even the developers at Blizzard said arenas were a big mistake and they have been trying to figure out how to fix that fiasco ever since.

 

If gear didn't matter to PVPers, they'd never whine about the drop rates now would they? It's all about the gear, always has been. If merely killing a player is all that mattered, you already have that in game right now. But you get nothing for killing a player out in the open world... nothing. No one is out there PVPing either.

[Cwild]

If they add arenas, they will follow WoW and make it so that it is accessible to all. You can't stop it from happening... try as you might. Even the developers at Blizzard said arenas were a big mistake and they have been trying to figure out how to fix that fiasco ever since.

 

If gear didn't matter to PVPers, they'd never whine about the drop rates now would they? It's all about the gear, always has been. If merely killing a player is all that mattered, you already have that in game right now. But you get nothing for killing a player out in the open world... nothing. No one is out there PVPing either.

 

Not really true. If this game had any way of tracking how many players you killed or something, more people would do such things. But whats the point of killing someone when there isnt even a record of how many people you killed. Seems like a waste to me