choovanski.5462

iirc the spectator function for tournaments works like the spectator function in custom arenas, in that there is actually a limit to how many people can join and spectate. so If this function was open to the public, often streamers would be unable to cast games due to the lobby's being full. so this plus cheating are the main reasons.

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said: > > @"Archer.4362" said: > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > Based on the average of 8 teams or so that show up in AT's which is one entire continent, with you telling me that can't be interested in doing AT's. The TeamQ will be dead in a week even if Anet hyped it up. > > > > It would be very easy to implement, a checkbox like the fortress mode, you want to pair up with groups of people V or X, you don't want queues alone, you want to, you can enter those groups, and solved. > > It would be very easy to implement because its already been done before > > Probably right that it would probably be dead on arrival too, but that really doesn't matter. Worst-case scenario people keep playing ATs and SoloQ. The big thing is more fair matchmaking in Ranked. > > Unless the 'pros' are right. According to them; the first time the queues were split it was apparently SoloQ that died out, and Teams became the more popular mode. > PepeLaugh > > Also disagree with the whole DuoQ existing, but restricted thing. It would be fun for a few seasons, but I reckon the 'pros' would force another 51-49 poll to no fanfare/announcement, and then we'd be back in the same spot a few seasons later. honestly, we need a full solo queue and a mixed queue that does groups of 2, 3 and 5. it won't take long for the community to realise that people playing in a party both afk far less and play more seriously and team orientated. I would bet the mixed queue would be highly popular. people had no issue getting duo and trio together for the 2v2 and 3v3 seasons, I bet they can do the same for a mixed queue. i wouldn't even be surprised if it ended up with better queue than solo. so many people, like myself and even steamers like mightyteapot love PvP but hate the solo queue fiesta that is ranked. all of us would be more than happy to mixed queue. honestly, mixed would get myself and everyone I know playing significantly more gw2 than we do right now. it's the move. full solo for the bots, afks and solo hero's pushing far. give us mixed for the people with at least one friend who enjoy teamwork.

> @"Shao.7236" said: > For every 3 hours and you're not able to find the time? Sounds like a bad excuse, for mAT I'd understand but for every AT, I believe you might not even be trying. every 3 hours is really not as convenient as you think, especially when you have to deal with people with lives in multiple time zones. the stars have to basically align for you to have everyone on for the exact time the tournament is. often you can end up with hours to kill before it. also, you are committed to an entire multi round tournament and sometimes your necro only has time for two games. it's really not ideal. look, I'm glad we have ATs and I can do the occasional one, but dude it's not as convenient as you think. what if we just have time for two or three games, and don't have the time to wait two hours+ for an AT? our only option then is farming peepos in unranked, which is pretty sad so we usually just play WvW.

> @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > @"apharma.3741" said: > > I think there's a problem a lot of people don't appreciate. > > > > Human's play this game. > > > > To spell it out, you could have won/lost that match for any of the following reasons: > > 1-10 players had to spend 2 minutes away from their keyboard for a multitude of reasons. > > 1-10 players were just playing bad that day. > > 1-10 players were tired due to poor sleep the night before. > > 1-10 players had lower blood sugar as they forgot to eat on time. > > 1-10 players got tilted due to the straw that broke the camels back. > > 1-10 players decided they just don't like someone else on either team and so played differently. > > 1-10 players disagrees with another person and so causes team conflict. > > I just want to mention most, if not all of these can be addressed with premades, and that these reasons for loss are all worse than "enemy team was more organized". bro they will never listen 

> @"Archer.4362" said: > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > @"Archer.4362" said: > > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > > > @"Archer.4362" said: > > > > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > > > > No until population can prove me that they have real full teams to play with for more than just 2 Golds. You kitten well know players will complain about being stacked against certain other players as usual, nobody will play the mode because the only teams you'll see will be all the pubstars together which is not even close to 1% the current PvP playerbase, you're allowing problem to only get worst. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to improve the quality of matchmaking, remove DuoQ from people that are top 250, consistent winners should prove their ability to win by playing SoloQ exclusively. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If anet does not give the queue option in group classified, your first sentence of your publication is impossible to be fulfilled, if you do not allow to play in team classified and only in AT, you are answering yourself. > > > > > > > > I don't get what you're trying to say. > > > > > > > > If the population really care about having a full team Q, they'd already be playing AT, that's one factual part of the statement and we can easily prove that false. However AT's are underfilled at best and mAT suffers the same meme culture regular AT's have, just in for the gold. > > > > > > > > Full team queue would be cancer and separate the population even more until we are left with people only caring for an improper DuoQ again. > > > > > > > > All of that results in wasted dev time for Anet, preventing DuoQ from being as toxic as it is by properly adjusting restrictions for players with a greater influence is a better way to improve the current state of the game high level. > > > > > > The ATs do not work to create groups of continuous teams to generate more population, they are specific times and not always people can. > > > > > > If it would be in a group of 5 in ranked, people would return to the game, which is why there are fewer people, you want to play with friends at any time, but you can, because people leave it and that's what happened. > > > > > > > Under what claim do you think that 5 man Q's will bring more people when you're enabling even more toxicity to the try hards that already try to stack team in duoQ? > > > > Nobody will want to play against 5 man try hard just like they already refuse to play AT's anyway. > > > > DuoQ should be removed from people on the leaderboard, that would solve a great part of the competition because those who match manipulate are always on it. > > > > It's not a competition if you can always be with someone when there is only one place up there. That arguement alone should make it obvious how having 5 man only makes it worst also. > > Under what statement? When were more people playing? with groups of 5 friends or now. > > I've been in gw2 since it started, and as soon as the groups of 5 were removed, the pvp was declining, it is a reality and a verifiable fact can confirm. i had a whole 50+ man PvP/WvW guild quit around the time it happened. a few us are back playing, with a few new players too- but we basically only play WvW and the occasional unranked. tournaments are rarely at a convenient time for us, so it's not something we can do. I'm the only person in the group with enough mental steel, or high enough you decide kekw- to put up with the trash bad attitude flamers and afkers in ranked. I can't say I blame them, the solo queue players are toxic and can't rotate at all. ranked is a terrible experience and is only worth for rewards tbh. it's not because of the game or balance, it's the players. full of bad attitude and no desire to learn or improve. honestly, people who really don't deserve my carry at all. anyone with a long memory will remember we used to have a solo queue and a mixed queue for PvP. the solo queue was removed because people preferred to queue for mixed even when solo because the games were higher quality. often due to less afks and toxic chat, because guess what- most toxic people have no friends to queue with and have huge egos so queue solo. it's a teamgame. banning teams is going to discourage people who value and enjoy teamplay from playing. you'll be left with just a ton of solo queue heros who flame, afk and blame all their losses on matchmaking and never improve. just like what we have now. it's amusing to see solo players crying about matchmaking, since they are too lazy to actually form a team that works. they just want things to blame for not winning kekw

> @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said: > It's like they looked at some of the most unfun periods in PvP's history and said: "Hey, let's do that again." > > These polls are popping up daily, and the majority of people seem to dislike it. Even if you don't subscribe to the whole "majority rules" mentality, maybe you'll agree that it was probably a bad idea to force something so polarizing on a gamemode that was already bleeding players. the gw2 PvP forum has been full of crying since release. it has never liked current meta, and has always looked on the past with rose tinted glasses even though the forum was always full of tears regardless of meta. why? because this is where people come to vent their frustrations. no one is coming here after a great game to post. it's basically entirely salt posting. if you think that kind of a communities opinion is indicative of anything, well hey buddy I have some shiny rocks to sell you. hmu in the DMs, they start at around £300. on topic tho, my boomer ass still misses rifle being viable on engineer kekw

> @"mindcircus.1506" said: > Isn't a commander in the game who has ever done it for the rewards. > > Most commanders stop tagging due to the frustration from the sheer incompetence of your average zergling. what can I say, the dude is right. if people actually pushed and played real builds instead of deadeye and soulbeast I would still be tagging. sadly, tagging without a guild group is pointless for the most part because of how low quality PUGs are.

yo the build has no stunbreak, and can't live without the rune. don't think it takes a lot of thinking to figure out it's the rune that's the issue, because without it you have a full DMG no stun break DH just rocking up to get cc'd and farmed.

everyone who thinks TDM is actually good in GW2 obviously never played courtyard all AoE spam, no 1v1, no rotations. actual trash tier gameplay honestly tho, wouldn't hurt to revamp courtyard. a bit of a shame to see the effort go to waste

> @"Animism.7530" said: > > @"choovanski.5462" said: > > > @"Animism.7530" said: > > > > @"choovanski.5462" said: > > > > we had TDM but everyone hated it and would complain that it just turned into a one sided snowball and was very unfun to play. thus it ended up being removed. > > > > > > > > so you might think you want it, but to be honest courtyard (the TDM) was just a ball snowball fest. it wasn't very good, and I can see why people didn't like it. I didn't mind it myself, but I also usually queued in a party and was the one farming the other team. so a bit of bias there > > > > > > > > TDM has basically no depth too. there are no rotations, no 1v1s, nothing like that. it's just ball up, and spam AoEs. it gets old pretty fast. > > > > > > > > TLDR: you might think TDM is good, but when we had it it was bad and most people hated it > > > > > > Some of the top fights in Conquest 5v5 can go on for a long time. It is the same in TDM and isn't really distinguishably different. > > > The thing it does promote however is a team build for a 5v5 fight, and understanding/testing those builds. > > > > > > We have Stronghold, why not TDM on that basis? > > > > I mean, I already told you why TDM was removed... it wasn't well liked. > > > > if your argument is we have stronghold, which no one likes and is hardly played- so why not also have TDM that people didn't like so much they got it removed. then yeah, sure add back TDM. we can have two extra gamemodes that no one likes. > > > > I don't object to having TDM in the game, but it does seem a bit silly to re-add something that was removed because the community didn't like it. it mean maybe they would suddenly like it, but I'm not convinced. > > > > TDM was very snowbally, and very unfun for team in the receiving side. it has basically no come back potential. you can't rotate to sides if the enemy team are beating you in teamfight like you can in conquest. in conquest a strong teamfight team can be beaten, the three point system makes the 5 person mid teamfight tactic pretty bad to be honest. > > > > personally I would much rather 3v3 or 2v2 replaces stronghold as a permanent queue option if the devs have no desire to rework stronghold to be actually good. I don't think re-adding a gamemode that has already failed (TDM) is the move. > > I would also like 3v3/2v2/TDM. Realistically, anything that isn't solely Conquest being played. > > I don't agree that conquest is much better by having the 3-point system. A side-noder plus a strong 4-man team build annihilates every match. There is no competition when more than half the enemy team are constantly on respawn and movement between only two nodes is so easy (and all that's required). > > If a team was likely to get 'snowballed' in TDM, it would likely occur in Conquest also. yeah, but in conquest you can play sides and win if your teamfight is weak. if you wipe in TDM people just afk at spawn. your only option is to go back out and teamfight and get farmed again. if you think conquest can get one sided TDM, is much much worse. it's also incredibly hard to carry as 1v1 is no longer important there. it really is luck of the draw with queue. like, getting a thief is basically 4v5 because it's a trash class for 5v5. 3v3 and 2v2 as the exist in the game are much more fun, and the community actually likes and plays them. unlike stronghold, which is abandoned, and unlike courtyard (TDM) which the community hated so much they got it removed. I know TDM can seem really fun and good if you actually never played it, but if you were around in the day when we actually had TDM you'd know the reality was very different. it's not like 2v2 and 3v3 that the community enjoy and want to have all year round, not just off season. people hated TDM. basically, unless you were actually there when we had TDM you can't know what it was actually like. it was bad and people didn't like it. I'm happy to stand outside of spawn in a queued team and cc lock and farm the players from the enemy team until I hit max points and win. however, I don't think a lot of people want to be on the other side of that, something history supports. TLDR: you think TDM would be good because you never played it, but it was pretty bad look, I just searched on YouTube for courtyard and this is one of the few things that came up watching that, I can't say I miss it at all

> @"Animism.7530" said: > > @"choovanski.5462" said: > > we had TDM but everyone hated it and would complain that it just turned into a one sided snowball and was very unfun to play. thus it ended up being removed. > > > > so you might think you want it, but to be honest courtyard (the TDM) was just a ball snowball fest. it wasn't very good, and I can see why people didn't like it. I didn't mind it myself, but I also usually queued in a party and was the one farming the other team. so a bit of bias there > > > > TDM has basically no depth too. there are no rotations, no 1v1s, nothing like that. it's just ball up, and spam AoEs. it gets old pretty fast. > > > > TLDR: you might think TDM is good, but when we had it it was bad and most people hated it > > Some of the top fights in Conquest 5v5 can go on for a long time. It is the same in TDM and isn't really distinguishably different. > The thing it does promote however is a team build for a 5v5 fight, and understanding/testing those builds. > > We have Stronghold, why not TDM on that basis? I mean, I already told you why TDM was removed... it wasn't well liked. if your argument is we have stronghold, which no one likes and is hardly played- so why not also have TDM that people didn't like so much they got it removed. then yeah, sure add back TDM. we can have two extra gamemodes that no one likes. I don't object to having TDM in the game, but it does seem a bit silly to re-add something that was removed because the community didn't like it. it mean maybe they would suddenly like it, but I'm not convinced. TDM was very snowbally, and very unfun for team in the receiving side. it has basically no come back potential. you can't rotate to sides if the enemy team are beating you in teamfight like you can in conquest. in conquest a strong teamfight team can be beaten, the three point system makes the 5 person mid teamfight tactic pretty bad to be honest. personally I would much rather 3v3 or 2v2 replaces stronghold as a permanent queue option if the devs have no desire to rework stronghold to be actually good. I don't think re-adding a gamemode that has already failed (TDM) is the move.

we had TDM but everyone hated it and would complain that it just turned into a one sided snowball and was very unfun to play. thus it ended up being removed. so you might think you want it, but to be honest courtyard (the TDM) was just a ball snowball fest. it wasn't very good, and I can see why people didn't like it. I didn't mind it myself, but I also usually queued in a party and was the one farming the other team. so a bit of bias there TDM has basically no depth too. there are no rotations, no 1v1s, nothing like that. it's just ball up, and spam AoEs. it gets old pretty fast. TLDR: you might think TDM is good, but when we had it it was bad and most people hated it

> @"Opopanax.1803" said: > > @"choovanski.5462" said: > > I think y'all underestimate how good heal warrior is right now. it's the meta healer in spvp right now with tempest, and it was just nerfed last patch. it's a better support than any guardian, druid or rev centaur build right now, even after big nerfs. > > > > warrior is also meta on minstrel shout heals for boon strip and support in WvW too. > > > > adding more support to this class is just going to make it overkill, and either the spec or tactics will have to be gutted for the sake of balance, as support warrior right now is already so strong it's basically the only way to play the class in PvP modes. as for PvE, everyone already knows about banners no need to go over them. > > > > a mobility utility spec with pistols would be far better. you know something that might let warrior play damage on side node in PvP again. a support spec that would be so broken it would have to be nerfed on launch or break the game is really NOT what we need. > > You folks keep calling warrior with banner in pve "Support". This is not accurate. It is a dps spec that slots group buff utilities. > > In no way is a banner slave a support in any sense of a minstrel or harrier firebrand, renegade, druid, or tempest in pve. > > You don't play them or gear them like support, you gear and play them like dps...because they are. feel like you completely missed the point of my WvW and sPvP focused post my dude. still, I would classify a full bar of group buff utilities as being a support. not a healer sure, but an offensive support none the less. regardless, in two of three gamemodes warrior is stuck playing heal support. power creep to this role is hardly what we need there.

I think y'all underestimate how good heal warrior is right now. it's the meta healer in spvp right now with tempest, and it was just nerfed last patch. it's a better support than any guardian, druid or rev centaur build right now, even after big nerfs. warrior is also meta on minstrel shout heals for boon strip and support in WvW too. adding more support to this class is just going to make it overkill, and either the spec or tactics will have to be gutted for the sake of balance, as support warrior right now is already so strong it's basically the only way to play the class in PvP modes. as for PvE, everyone already knows about banners no need to go over them. a mobility utility spec with pistols would be far better. you know something that might let warrior play damage on side node in PvP again. a support spec that would be so broken it would have to be nerfed on launch or break the game is really NOT what we need.

I zerg all the time on healbreaker, and honestly it took some getting used to- but the bubble still works and can provide high value. it's more reactive and defensive now, but it's good. I've ruined a ton of enemy pushes with it already. that cast time needs to be toned down though, it's just too long. reduce the cast time to 1sec, 1.5sec is too much. the animation is big and a second is long enough to boon corrupt the warrior and interrupt, the extra half second is overkill and means the enemy group has too much time to move before the bubble goes down. still, I have to say, I see way less spellbreakers than I used to. a lot of people moved off the class with this change.