ARENAS/Death match....NOW

[Agooz]

Again, only people I see calling for nerfs are war zone related.. And not the results of some small tournament no one has even heard of.

 

What do you think these QQing for Nerf is based on? The goal line in Huttball being too light that you cant see it? The Turret in Alderaan takes too long to capture??

OR

The QQing is more along the line of X class is sooooo OP I cant kill him?

 

That's the whole point of what I am trying to say. At least in WZ damage/dps and people getting 600k+ damage dont matter. Because as everyone who played enough game Damage does not win WZs.

In arenas on the other hand, there is no bigger picture. There is 2 Pyros/Vanguards pulling the sorc to their team and before the other team can even sneeze, the sorc will be flat on his back. You cant win an arena game if you're putting less dps. Afterall there is a finite pool of Health that a team has to eat through to win. Balance classes based on these types of PvP games will be the END of swtor.

[Pantallika]

I've seen a lot of gibberish posted here. Idiots calling idiots idiots accomplishes nothing, I know people don't wanna give wow credit but they ARE they biggest mmo on the market and the first mmo to get their style of pvp in the pro gaming circuit.

 

Also guild wars adapted the same style fo pvp for thier extremely successful mmo based mostly around pvp. I played mmos since uo in 1999. I played around 12 different mmos, seen good and bad ideas for pvp, warhammer had a ton, this game has a few good, and a lot of bad ideas for pvp.

 

Huttball is fun, but face it u nubs, huttball's based around map abuse, not pvp, charge, force pull, score goal, rinse and repeat. Knock into fire / poison for kills, charge / force-grip / positioning is not pvp, it is map abusing. Don't get me wrong I love huttball, it is fun, but it is also not really pvp oriented its more like a sport, where you can kill opposing players, but will win faster if you just focus entirely on healing and scoring the ball asap.

 

This game has directly stolen the other two warzones it uses from wow. Let me type that again. THIS GAME DIRECTLY STOLE TWO OF 3 WARZONES FROM WOW. So obviously the devs realize what all u swtor fanboys dont. Just because wow has something, doesnt mean it will ruin swtor pvp if they use it.

 

I for one am all for giving players equal gear to pvp with, class balance, and any and all types of pvp, the more warzones the better, the more world pvp the better (dont get me started on this games world pvp, its a laughing stock). World pvp was best done in warhammer, where players were funneled into one another while questing, and there was objectives, but warhammer dropped the ball on giving players too much incentive to just win trade.

 

Point of this post : this guy wants more ways to have fun pvping besides doing the same 3 lame warzones, I say give it to him, if your bashing him cause you think hes a wow fanboy cause he likes death match, your just stupid, and have no right posting on pvp forums. Death match is originally from first person shooters, not wow.

[ugig]

You think that people would not cry nerf even w/out an Arena? Of course they would; they do right now.

 

No, you obviously acknowledge this happens whether they exist or not, so how does having an Arena setup make this any different whatsoever?

 

If you read back a post or 3 I said I am all for them adding arena's, ppl are gonna cry no matter what is or isnt in the game, its in their nature, the average gamer will cry rather than adjust to the situation and figure out different ways around their percieved problems.

[Varicite]

I've seen a lot of gibberish posted here. Idiots calling idiots idiots accomplishes nothing, I know people don't wanna give wow credit but they ARE they biggest mmo on the market and the first mmo to get their style of pvp in the pro gaming circuit.

 

Also guild wars adapted the same style fo pvp for thier extremely successful mmo based mostly around pvp. I played mmos since uo in 1999. I played around 12 different mmos, seen good and bad ideas for pvp, warhammer had a ton, this game has a few good, and a lot of bad ideas for pvp.

 

Huttball is fun, but face it u nubs, huttball's based around map abuse, not pvp, charge, force pull, score goal, rinse and repeat. Knock into fire / poison for kills, charge / force-grip / positioning is not pvp, it is map abusing. Don't get me wrong I love huttball, it is fun, but it is also not really pvp oriented its more like a sport, where you can kill opposing players, but will win faster if you just focus entirely on healing and scoring the ball asap.

 

This game has directly stolen the other two warzones it uses from wow. Let me type that again. THIS GAME DIRECTLY STOLE TWO OF 3 WARZONES FROM WOW. So obviously the devs realize what all u swtor fanboys dont. Just because wow has something, doesnt mean it will ruin swtor pvp if they use it.

 

I for one am all for giving players equal gear to pvp with, class balance, and any and all types of pvp, the more warzones the better, the more world pvp the better (dont get me started on this games world pvp, its a laughing stock). World pvp was best done in warhammer, where players were funneled into one another while questing, and there was objectives, but warhammer dropped the ball on giving players too much incentive to just win trade.

 

Point of this post : this guy wants more ways to have fun pvping besides doing the same 3 lame warzones, I say give it to him, if your bashing him cause you think hes a wow fanboy cause he likes death match, your just stupid, and have no right posting on pvp forums. Death match is originally from first person shooters, not wow.

 

I agree w/ pretty much everything you said, but I just wanted to say:

 

I think deathmatch is the oldest form of PvP in the world. : D

[Dayfax]

I've seen a lot of gibberish posted here. Idiots calling idiots idiots accomplishes nothing, I know people don't wanna give wow credit but they ARE they biggest mmo on the market and the first mmo to get their style of pvp in the pro gaming circuit.

 

Also guild wars adapted the same style fo pvp for thier extremely successful mmo based mostly around pvp. I played mmos since uo in 1999. I played around 12 different mmos, seen good and bad ideas for pvp, warhammer had a ton, this game has a few good, and a lot of bad ideas for pvp.

 

Huttball is fun, but face it u nubs, huttball's based around map abuse, not pvp, charge, force pull, score goal, rinse and repeat. Knock into fire / poison for kills, charge / force-grip / positioning is not pvp, it is map abusing. Don't get me wrong I love huttball, it is fun, but it is also not really pvp oriented its more like a sport, where you can kill opposing players, but will win faster if you just focus entirely on healing and scoring the ball asap.

 

This game has directly stolen the other two warzones it uses from wow. Let me type that again. THIS GAME DIRECTLY STOLE TWO OF 3 WARZONES FROM WOW. So obviously the devs realize what all u swtor fanboys dont. Just because wow has something, doesnt mean it will ruin swtor pvp if they use it.

 

I for one am all for giving players equal gear to pvp with, class balance, and any and all types of pvp, the more warzones the better, the more world pvp the better (dont get me started on this games world pvp, its a laughing stock). World pvp was best done in warhammer, where players were funneled into one another while questing, and there was objectives, but warhammer dropped the ball on giving players too much incentive to just win trade.

 

Point of this post : this guy wants more ways to have fun pvping besides doing the same 3 lame warzones, I say give it to him, if your bashing him cause you think hes a wow fanboy cause he likes death match, your just stupid, and have no right posting on pvp forums. Death match is originally from first person shooters, not wow.

 

The key sentence is your final one.

 

FPS games don't have to deal with balancing issues. Arena can be amazing, and I have a great deal of respect for players that hone their timing and situational awareness well enough to play at high levels.

 

But for the unwashed masses, Arena ruined WoW. It took the focus of the game off where it should have been (big, cooperative group play) and put it on 6 guys killing each other in a small room.

 

People don't want to see a repeat of Blizzard's mistakes in SWTOR, and Bioware's readiness to copy whole swathes of Warcraft already makes people nervous. If you're duping the content this closely, you're also copying all of the mistakes.

[grfu]

Excuse me, but, as a small aside, could you tell me when WoW implemented objective based pvp? I remember objective based pvp in Halo . . . and Tribes . . . and Unreal Tournament . . . and some other very old games that I haven't played in so long I can't even remember what they are anymore. Point is, there ain't much innovation anymore, so it's misleading to say "They stole it from *blank*."

 

On topic, really? A 150m by 250m room? What will that accomplish? Where is the tactical finesse? Where is the elegance of execution? Real combat does not take place in a 150m by 250m room. Real war is not won solely on who racks up the most kills. So you get your deathmatch. What are you achieving? What are you proving? That you can press buttons faster than the other guy? Try to think outside of the box. An arena deathmatch is the rawest form of pvp, but it is also the simplest and most boring.

 

Just my $.02.

[BacklashEH]

I'd also like there to be an actual pvp map in this game at some point. Objective pvp is fine and all, but sometimes an actual deathmatch can be pretty outstanding.

[ChaosDogg]

Excuse me, but, as a small aside, could you tell me when WoW implemented objective based pvp? I remember objective based pvp in Halo . . . and Tribes . . . and Unreal Tournament . . . and some other very old games that I haven't played in so long I can't even remember what they are anymore. Point is, there ain't much innovation anymore, so it's misleading to say "They stole it from *blank*."

 

On topic, really? A 150m by 250m room? What will that accomplish? Where is the tactical finesse? Where is the elegance of execution? Real combat does not take place in a 150m by 250m room. Real war is not won solely on who racks up the most kills. So you get your deathmatch. What are you achieving? What are you proving? That you can press buttons faster than the other guy? Try to think outside of the box. An arena deathmatch is the rawest form of pvp, but it is also the simplest and most boring.

 

Just my $.02.

 

WoW introduced objective based pvp in vanilla which was years ago.

 

And in arenas, when you die you don't come back and in most situations your team loses so the idea is to kill without being killed. You need to have a very good understanding of the game, what your team and the other team can do, what offensive and defensive cds are left and mind your positioning. Obviously, that is a very simple breakdown of what it is but it isn't entirely about who presses buttons faster than the other guy. What about Alderaan Civil War, what are you achieving? What are you proving? That you can right click a node and aoe on top of it to defend it? I can also make blanket statements that trivialize other forms of pvp when there is a lot more behind it.

Edited March 31, 2012 by ChaosDogg

[Proppa]

Warzones and Arena's in general aren't as skillful in my opinion. Both are against equal numbers and you have a fair chance of predicting what's going to happen.

 

Atleast with Open World PvP, you may be 8 and come up against 12, you may need to play to avoid any zergs, you may get added on by a pack of stealthers. Nothing is predictable and numbers/classes aren't always equal, but your ability to time and use abilities are far more critical in those situations imo.

[ChaosDogg]

Except that in world PvP, it is unfair to one side because of gear/number/positioning/class disadvantage and the superior side doesn't need as much skill to win so the point that it's more skillful is moot.

 

If you pit 2 teams against each other with similar teams and the exact same gear aka a competitive setting, the more skilled team will win simple as that.

[longgrassgrows]

can this thread get any more annoying............................no......****

[Proppa]

Yes numbers can control, but its playing to avoid those zergs whilst still maintaining good kills etc. Things are predictable in Arena's, you can just have the most op'd combination or w/e.

[broganthomas]

Yes numbers can control, but its playing to avoid those zergs whilst still maintaining good kills etc. Things are predictable in Arena's, you can just have the most op'd combination or w/e.

 

Well it's a good thing that you wouldn't be required to play in the Arena.

[Pantheros]

Yes numbers can control, but its playing to avoid those zergs whilst still maintaining good kills etc. Things are predictable in Arena's, you can just have the most op'd combination or w/e.

 

Arena's really aren't that simple. Go watch people stream high rated arena's one day. You have to have PERFECT execution, broad game knowledge, spot-on reaction time, and flawless teamwork/communication. There's a reason arena's are part of pro gaming. Not to discredit open world pvp but I think saying it takes "more skill" isn't really a comparison that can be made.

[Proppa]

What I mean is, that Arena's are setup fights. You know that your never going to be outnumbered. But from what I heard arena's were normally just made up of FOTM combos and few players wanted to actually break the mold.

 

Yes it takes a degree of skill, but the excitement for me, was that fights could be varying in numbers. I remember in DAOC, me on my Paladin with a friend on his Friar, and we literally killed about 14 people, who rather than come as a unit, decided to come in 3's and 4's and we wiped about 14+ people over 5 minutes by working well together etc.

 

That to me was a challenge, having to use abilities and be perfect meant we came out laughing. He frapsed it too I think.

 

But for me, there is no fun in Arena's. It's almost like scripted PvP, also there aren't enough classes to get any kind of diversity in them.

 

They are adding cross server queues, so maybe it wont be as bad pop wise, but atm I dont think the game could deal with splitting players even more.

[HileyQuiggley]

If they put something so insanely God awfull as is Huttball in a game then they sure as hell can put in a Team Deathmatch WZ. You kill other players in every other type but dont really have too for a victory. Need something where killing has to be done and that would be a TD WZ.

 

Its not just WoW since I never played it. DAoC had BG's that where basically an un-timed kill fest. It was a blasty blast.

[broganthomas]

What I mean is, that Arena's are setup fights. You know that your never going to be outnumbered. But from what I heard arena's were normally just made up of FOTM combos and few players wanted to actually break the mold.

 

Yes it takes a degree of skill, but the excitement for me, was that fights could be varying in numbers. I remember in DAOC, me on my Paladin with a friend on his Friar, and we literally killed about 14 people, who rather than come as a unit, decided to come in 3's and 4's and we wiped about 14+ people over 5 minutes by working well together etc.

 

That to me was a challenge, having to use abilities and be perfect meant we came out laughing. He frapsed it too I think.

 

But for me, there is no fun in Arena's. It's almost like scripted PvP, also there aren't enough classes to get any kind of diversity in them.

 

They are adding cross server queues, so maybe it wont be as bad pop wise, but atm I dont think the game could deal with splitting players even more.

 

See I like the bigger battles as well and I enjoy WZ's but I also had a lot of fun in smaller scale pvp. As far as skill in it, I was pretty bad, but like I said it was enjoyable and that's why I did it.

[Proppa]

The trouble with a TDM warzone, is it would ahve to be a post 50 bracket. Atleast with the warzones currently, you have objections which add a distraction. I've had warzones on Civil War, where we were 30/40 kills, against the enemy teams 3/5 kills. But we had a distinct level advantage etc. But I've also been on the recieving end of that.

 

So a TDM would be INCREDIBLY unbalanced in terms of win/loss ratios. Atleast with objectives the focus isnt always on destroying enemies.

[TheNotorius]

I don't understand why so many people are against an Arena-like system.

 

Are you afraid it will be the only way to gear up? I don't think so, it will probably an additional way to get commendations, for example, as warzones currently.

 

The difference is that, for the people that like them, they have a choice to switch between Warzones and "Arena" warzones. Having options in PVP is always a good thing (if you don't like them, you won't do them, and it won't change anything for you really)

 

--> P.S.: With the 1.2 patch there will a teleport to Outlaw Dens, the closest thing to an Arena currently. Maybe they are planning something..

Edited March 31, 2012 by TheNotorius

[Proppa]

But on the other hand, too many options can be a bad thing depending on the population.

 

As it stands my server is nigh on dead, its the same group of people queueing each time. If Arena's were in too, the queues would take forever.

 

But yes, cross server queues will aleviate most of the problems.

 

But personally, I just never enjoyed setup fights, to me the ranking from arena's would mean little, as it's almost the same as kill trading. Not quite as bad, but its XvX all the time, you don't have to worry that you will get more people add etc. To me that was all the excitement.

 

I shouldn't be opposed to the idea, but there are far more important issues I'd rather see addressed first.

[Anbokr]

Death match please. Elitist attitudes surrounding lol "objective" based warzones has infected these forums. One of the things that kept WoW going so long was arena PvP--it's fun, addicting, and easy to get in to.

[Proppa]

It's not an elitist attitude, but unless things are far more balanced PVP wise, a death match warzone would be a joke. Imagine full bm's vs fresh 50's for example

 

Give everyone equal gear, so it is ALL skill based, then its a different kettle of fish, but the way the game is at the moment, it seems pointless.

[broganthomas]

But on the other hand, too many options can be a bad thing depending on the population.

 

As it stands my server is nigh on dead, its the same group of people queueing each time. If Arena's were in too, the queues would take forever.

 

But yes, cross server queues will aleviate most of the problems.

 

But personally, I just never enjoyed setup fights, to me the ranking from arena's would mean little, as it's almost the same as kill trading. Not quite as bad, but its XvX all the time, you don't have to worry that you will get more people add etc. To me that was all the excitement.

 

I shouldn't be opposed to the idea, but there are far more important issues I'd rather see addressed first.

 

After the pre-season rated warzones(Patch 1.2), they are releasing cross servers for season 1 rated warzones. By that time it will not matter about population on the different servers.

 

http://www.swtor.com/blog/pvp-game-update-1.2

[broganthomas]

It's not an elitist attitude, but unless things are far more balanced PVP wise, a death match warzone would be a joke. Imagine full bm's vs fresh 50's for example

 

Give everyone equal gear, so it is ALL skill based, then its a different kettle of fish, but the way the game is at the moment, it seems pointless.

 

But so was Arena really(Sorry superproplayers here), unless you got paid doing it but that isn't the scope of this thread. Again, I'd like to see something like it because it was fun.

[Didy_Kush]

Huttball hello?