ugrakarma.9416 Posted January 15, 2020 Share Posted January 15, 2020 Yes reward one-shooting + stunlock spam, u will gonna see Pvp population increase as ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted January 15, 2020 Author Share Posted January 15, 2020 > @"ugrakarma.9416" said: > Yes reward one-shooting + stunlock spam, u will gonna see Pvp population increase as ever! Did you miss the part where I said to remove berserker + assassin amulets and nerf the damage modifiers to not only be additive instead of multiplicative but to also flat out lower their values as well? If you're having an issue with CC, bring a build with more stab, stunbreaks, and vigor uptime/endurance regen/evades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortrialus.3062 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. Let me put it into a more understandable version. In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. Downstate takes a disadvantageous but theoretically winnable fight and turns it into an _impossible_ fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. > > Let me put it into a more understandable version. > > In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. > > Downstate takes a disadvantageous but theoretically winnable fight and turns it into an _impossible_ fight. > > Yeah this all = carry mechanic. Downstate and rally is done in pve but has zero place in a pvp mode, especially rally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. > > Let me put it into a more understandable version. > > In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. In a world of good matchmaking 2 teams should never be matched together where 2 people have such a skill gap over the 4 people that they can do that commonly. If so then well gg because that game is a wash out. I do understand what you mean but realistically walking into a 2v4 one should not expect to easily win that even if the 2 people going into the 4 are highly skilled. Keep in mind that it is a team based game mode and if the team work of the 4 people is proper even if a few of them enter down status and can recover due to team work and a good team comp. then thats ok. To be real with you if the match reaches a point where 2 people are running into groups of 4 people then i would hope the 2 people already have the lead and the point advantage. The 2 players, if they are as skilled as we are estimating, should know the point when they cannot win a 2v4 and have over extended and should retreat. Choosing not to retreat and and then dying which rally's the other players is really still on the fault of the 2 players. If 2 of the 4 people are committed to supporting then it sounds like the duo players picked the wrong targets to burst which lead to their failure. A squishy player with no support in their kit will rarely commit to rezzing another player because in most cases its suicide. You wont out heal the incoming damage and you will become a target dummy in the process. If by some reason there are not 2 people commited to supporting and one or both of those two players goes down in the 2v4 before they can kill one of the 4 players it means they were not as skilled as they thought they were, over estimated themselves, or made some serious mistakes. If this game mode was not focused on capture points first i might agree with what you are trying to say. How ever as player kills are not the main focus of conquest mode i cant agree with what you are saying. Its a team based game mode and should be treated as such. IF you choose to go in without your team and lose as a result then you will eventually learn not to make those mistakes. If 2 people run into 4 people and fail when those 2 people had 3 others on their team who where not there for what ever reason i cant really look at it as the idea of well the 4 people got carried by downstate. I see it as 2 people making a mistake and not caring to admit they made a mistake skilled or not. You dont run into obvious disadvantaged situations then blame it on some other factor when you knew what the deal was before ever committing. I get that people want to satisfy themselves in matches and show case their individual skill or build or whatever but thats not really the point of how conquest was designed to work. You dont carry the team on your back. Team work makes the dream work. > Downstate takes a disadvantageous but theoretically winnable fight and turns it into an _impossible_ fight. Again 2v4 1 person on enemy team is dead or missing 3 people on your team are doing what? Basically pick anything except for "Helping you in the 2v4 fight" The issue is not downstate. The issue is players thinking they should run into 2v4s or 1v4s and come out on top all the time. When it happens "Congratulations" by no means its it technically impossible to do. It should feel like a big accomplishment! But dont expect this kinda thing to happen every match. It most certainly should be a rarity if you are properly matched with players at a similar skill level to your own. If the mode was something like death match i could totally understand the concept of not including downstate or rally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AliamRationem.5172 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 I'm fine with having downed state and revives/rallies, but I feel like they should rework downed state skills for PvP and either remove or tone down the number/strength of skills that auto-revive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rukia.9860 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 shouldn't exist in pvp but neither should dying in .5 sec Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortrialus.3062 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > > > > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > > > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. > > > > Let me put it into a more understandable version. > > > > In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. > > > In a world of good matchmaking 2 teams should never be matched together where 2 people have such a skill gap over the 4 people that they can do that commonly. If so then well gg because that game is a wash out. I, too, wish GW2's PvP had a stable 50,000 active players or more. This is reality. And in real games there are usually strong links in a team and there are weak links in a team. You've largely completely missed the point of what I was trying to say so I'm going to try again. 1 . Downstate turns close fights into massive all or nothing blowouts. Take for example A standard opening game. I'm a side noder. I'm capping home. Home is uncontested. Four of my team faces four of the enemy team in mid. Both teams score two downstates at more or less the same time. One team manages to cleave out one of my teammates and rallies their two guys. They then cleave out the remaining guy. Now the encounter is 4v2. Even if I rotate into the fight now it'd just be 4v3 and I'm unlikely to make a difference. The 3 of us will be eaten alive, especially as the person on home will rotate in making it a 5v3, which again because of downstate it is nearly impossible for any of us to secure any kill before a rez happens no matter how well we play and how low they are on health and cooldowns. Now I have few options. I can either try to regroup with my team at home when they come off respawn, and I'll inevitably have to deal with 3-4 of the enemy team snowballing onto home all at once. Or I can go for a far push, hopefully sneakily decap their node uncontested and hope the way way the enemy team has rotated leaves them off kilter and allows my team to come back. I'm also resigning my team to die. Without downstate, when the two allies and the two enemies ran out of health they didn't just go into downstate, they died. Mid is now 2v2 instead of 4v2. The close fight remains a close fight and it has done so in a way that is overall fair. Now rather than being left with an unsalvagable blowout in mid, me and the enemy side noder rotating into mid is a lot more significant as both of us can swing the entire mid fight depending on who is more skilled between us. Heck even if the mid fight plays out in a similar way and my team scores 2 kills but all four of the fighters going mid die, that has significant ramifications on me due to the fact that the fight that just happened wasn't an all or nothing blow out. Now whatever snowball I have to deal with at home is much more manageable, if they even feel bold enough to try with only 3 teammates alive and four coming off respawn. The end result could be a crazy slug fest where one by one each teammates die in this team fight leaving a close exciting 1v1 as all the remaining teammates fell in battle. And this makes sense because without downstate this fight was very close the entire time. And it would be an amazing feeling to be that last player standing, the guy who survived it all and secured the node for your team. And it would still be fair. Instead we have a system where as soon as one team won one rally race, it was just a matter of mopping up the remaining 3 players with little difficulty. 2. Downstate compresses skill gap. Again imagine a realistic scenario in the same game. My entire team wiped mid. I have resolved to stay home, defend it if need to, and regroup with my respawning teammates. While defending home I get rushed 2v1. I massively outskill at least one of the two players who have chosen to rush me at home. We end up in a protracted fight where I repeatedly down the weak link of this 2v1. However he is able to be easily rezed by his teammate and without cleave I cannot secure the kill even with safe stomp and the enemy that is doing the rezing is good enough to pop stability each time so I cannot just interrupt him, cleave him, and scare him away from attempting the rez. The end result; even though I outskill the opponent, aside from stalling and creating a numbers advantage elsewhere on the map, I'm still in an overall unwinnable situation. The bad player who has no business trying to engage me in a fight due to the difference in skill is cushioned from failure and death because he has a numbers advantage. Without downstate; When I engage in the 1v2 rather than the enemy being repeatedly rezed they die outright the first time. Now I'm in a potentially interesting 1v1 and if I win that I've created a very important swing due to my skill and my capacity to handle these two opponents. And you can extrapolate this up and up. If there's an extremely skilled player, downstate reduced their capacity to swing the game in his favor. 3. Downstate can feel extremely unfair. Let me bring you back to 1997 at my local arcade. This is a very, very small town so we still had a Street Fighter 2 cabinet as one of the most popular machines despite the game being close to 6 years old at the time. Now in Street Fighter 2 there is a hidden "Stun Meter." When this stun meter fills up due to enough damage to this stun meter, they are stunned. All attacks cause some damage to the stun meter, and some of them do a lot more damage by design. You probably know exactly what this looks like either due to playing Street Fighter 2 or through pop culture osmosis. At my arcade and I know _many others_ there was always a house rule; You don't hit the stunned opponent. Now people were fine with hit stun and combos. But there was something that felt fundamentally wrong about the actual stun / dizzy mechanic. A losing player, who is already been on the receiving end of damage, being made literally helpless felt unfair. It felt dirty. And so a lot of local places straight up decided "Sorry but we don't play that way around here." Downstate when forced into an outnumbered fight feels unfair. This enemy team already has an advantage, whether it is a roamer +1ing a fight or a weak link on your team being focused down a split second before you can focus down their weaklink. Because of the way it gives a side with the momentary advantage a BIGGER advantage than they already get just by having the bigger side, it feels fundamentally unfair to go up against. Because again like point 1 states, Downstate turns very close fights into massive All or Nothing blowouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeolus.3615 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"Aaron Forestman.4758" said: > > I'd be for a season without the downed state. Reviving is seriously disproportionate to damage, so even a burst build can have a lot of trouble securing a kill when the enemy team has a support or two that just keeps reviving people. > > Wouldnt the better solution be to implement more skills that finish off foes in downstate though? Imo the finish effect and downstate should work with a hybrid Rez from gw1. Remove the Rez rubbing allie mechanic. Give skills to Rez players we have banners, signets, those feet perfectly for it, they can rez pkayers while downed, a finished player would take 8-10!sec to Rez and would increase skill CD by 60sec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > > > > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > > > > > > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > > > > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. > > > > > > Let me put it into a more understandable version. > > > > > > In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. > > > > > > In a world of good matchmaking 2 teams should never be matched together where 2 people have such a skill gap over the 4 people that they can do that commonly. If so then well gg because that game is a wash out. > > I, too, wish GW2's PvP had a stable 50,000 active players or more. This is reality. And in real games there are usually strong links in a team and there are weak links in a team. > > You've largely completely missed the point of what I was trying to say so I'm going to try again. > > 1 . Downstate turns close fights into massive all or nothing blowouts. > > Take for example A standard opening game. I'm a side noder. I'm capping home. Home is uncontested. Four of my team faces four of the enemy team in mid. Both teams score two downstates at more or less the same time. One team manages to cleave out one of my teammates and rallies their two guys. They then cleave out the remaining guy. Now the encounter is 4v2. Even if I rotate into the fight now it'd just be 4v3 and I'm unlikely to make a difference. The 3 of us will be eaten alive, especially as the person on home will rotate in making it a 5v3, which again because of downstate it is nearly impossible for any of us to secure any kill before a rez happens no matter how well we play and how low they are on health and cooldowns. > > Now I have few options. I can either try to regroup with my team at home when they come off respawn, and I'll inevitably have to deal with 3-4 of the enemy team snowballing onto home all at once. Or I can go for a far push, hopefully sneakily decap their node uncontested and hope the way way the enemy team has rotated leaves them off kilter and allows my team to come back. I'm also resigning my team to die. > > Without downstate, when the two allies and the two enemies ran out of health they didn't just go into downstate, they died. Mid is now 2v2 instead of 4v2. The close fight remains a close fight and it has done so in a way that is overall fair. Now rather than being left with an unsalvagable blowout in mid, me and the enemy side noder rotating into mid is a lot more significant as both of us can swing the entire mid fight depending on who is more skilled between us. > > Heck even if the mid fight plays out in a similar way and my team scores 2 kills but all four of the fighters going mid die, that has significant ramifications on me due to the fact that the fight that just happened wasn't an all or nothing blow out. Now whatever snowball I have to deal with at home is much more manageable, if they even feel bold enough to try with only 3 teammates alive and four coming off respawn. My only question is what about when the tables are turned and your team is the one that holds the advantage? IF your team lost the mid fight and you cant make a difference then they lost there is nothing wrong with the situation you just played out. It certainly wouldnt be an issue for you if your team was the one who won the mid fight. > > The end result could be a crazy slug fest where one by one each teammates die in this team fight leaving a close exciting 1v1 as all the remaining teammates fell in battle. And this makes sense because without downstate this fight was very close the entire time. And it would be an amazing feeling to be that last player standing, the guy who survived it all and secured the node for your team. And it would still be fair. This would be ideal for a different game mode but not standard conquest. This is not a 1v1 mode and 1v1's shouldnt always be the end result in this mode. The mode is about capturing the points and some times a side secondary objective. Kills are a part of it but should not be the main focus. I have to say i still dont agree with the idea of trying to push something that showcases individual skill as the main aspect in a team focused mode. I would ideally ask for a new mode that allows that as the main objective 3v3 tag style matches where the combatants fight 1v1 till all members are eventually eliminated with no down state or something. There are better ways i think to ideally allow that individual satisfaction that people are striving for without just ripping down states so people can run into 2v4's and 1v3s expecting to just win them. > > 2. Downstate compresses gap. > > Again imagine a realistic scenario in the same game. My entire team wiped mid. I have resolved to stay home, defend it if need to, and regroup with my respawning teammates. While defending home I get rushed 2v1. I massively outskill at least one of the two players who have chosen to rush me at home. We end up in a protracted fight where I repeatedly down the weak link of this 2v1. However he is able to be easily rezed by his teammate and without cleave I cannot secure the kill even with safe stomp and the enemy that is doing the rezing is good enough to pop stability each time so I cannot just interrupt him, cleave him, and scare him away from attempting the rez. > > The end result; even though I outskill the opponent, aside from stalling and creating a numbers advantage elsewhere on the map, I'm still in an overall unwinnable situation. The bad player who has no business trying to engage me in a fight due to the difference in skill is cushioned from failure and death because he has a numbers advantage. > > Without downstate; When I engage in the 1v2 rather than the enemy being repeatedly rezed they die outright the first time. Now I'm in a potentially interesting 1v1 and if I win that I've created a very important swing due to my skill and my capacity to handle these two opponents. > > And you can extrapolate this up and up. If there's an extremely skilled player, downstate reduced their capacity to swing the game in his favor. > Thing is... if the 2 people that rushed you are both offensive players or and neither of them is a support and one starts to try and rez the other and some how you still are unable to get both well... i dont know what to say. Cause i think as high as damage is right now you most certainly be able to do it. Its not always about just getting the interrupt depending on who is doing the rezzing. Some tims just do damage. IF you dont have enough damage to 2v1 in the current meta it means you are bunker or something and its probably a good thing you cant kill 2 players balance wise. IF a support player is part of the 2v1 then perhaps the ideal thing would be to go for them first as the other likely wont have the power to rez them if you have the dps. > 3. Downstate can feel extremely unfair. > > Let me bring you back to 1997 at my local arcade. This is a very, very small town so we still had a Street Fighter 2 cabinet as one of the most popular machines despite the game being close to 6 years old at the time. Now in Street Fighter 2 there is a hidden "Stun Meter." When this stun meter fills up due to enough damage to this stun meter, they are stunned. All attacks cause some damage to the stun meter, and some of them do a lot more damage by design. You probably know exactly what this looks like either due to playing Street Fighter 2 or through pop culture osmosis. > > At my arcade and I know _many others_ there was always a house rule; You don't hit the stunned opponent. Now people were fine with hit stun and combos. But there was something that felt fundamentally wrong about the actual stun / dizzy mechanic. A losing player, who is already been on the receiving end of damage, being made literally helpless felt unfair. It felt dirty. And so a lot of local places straight up decided "Sorry but we don't play that way around here." > > Downstate when forced into an outnumbered fight feels unfair. This enemy team already has an advantage, whether it is a roamer +1ing a fight or a weak link on your team being focused down a split second before you can focus down their weaklink. Because of the way it gives a side with the momentary advantage a BIGGER advantage than they already get just by having the bigger side, it feels fundamentally unfair to go up against. Because again like point 1 states, Downstate turns very close fights into massive All or Nothing blowouts. An out numbered fight is suppose to feel unfair thats why its called being out numbered. All aspects of an out numbered fight are going to feel unfair regardless of down state its going to be unfair. Down state is not an excuse or the reason why its unfair... its unfair because you are outnumbered. IF they had supports and you didnt get the supports then well start over and try again. In regards to the stun meter reference im not sure how this is relevant to games or the thought process in 2020. As of right now in street fighter every player can see their stun meter and if they think they are going to be stunned they do one of two things. They go over aggressive using offense as the best defense or they take a defensive position opting to not allow the enemy to take advantage of that high stun meter so that they can avoid being stunned. Gw2 gives you the same options you have a choice in most cases on how to take on a situation based on evaluating that situation In gw2 if 2 people come at you you have the choice in most cases (depending on your profession) to engage that if you think you can or you can opt not to do so and take up something else. Now i will say this maybe MAYYYYBE if anet balances the games professions, boons, conditions, etc etc very well and there is no cheese in the game without turning the game into bunker meta then maybe they can consider reducing the power downstate provides in conquest. But as of right now no way. Damage is too high some builds are out of control (some of them even lack a wide range counterplay) The game would need some massive changes before you could ever implement something like no down state or no rally in spvp (conquest). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 > @"Aeolus.3615" said: > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > @"Aaron Forestman.4758" said: > > > I'd be for a season without the downed state. Reviving is seriously disproportionate to damage, so even a burst build can have a lot of trouble securing a kill when the enemy team has a support or two that just keeps reviving people. > > > > Wouldnt the better solution be to implement more skills that finish off foes in downstate though? > > Imo the finish effect and downstate should work with a hybrid Rez from gw1. > > Remove the Rez rubbing allie mechanic. > Give skills to Rez players we have banners, signets, those feet perfectly for it, they can rez pkayers while downed, a finished player would take 8-10!sec to Rez and would increase skill CD by 60sec. Maybe but those skills would need to be made to fire off alot faster because of how gw2 has evolved and plays so fast. OR IF we are also going that route then wouldn't this also be the idea that cleaving a downed person should be made super ineffective almost enforcing players to use the stomp action which would allow those revive skills to have time to cast on downed player. Ideally i think meeting in the middle ground is fair and to take away the rub rez means that cleaving needs to be made super ineffective as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stand The Wall.6987 Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 I would remove rally and nerf res speed by a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted January 17, 2020 Author Share Posted January 17, 2020 @"ZDragon.3046" Mortrialus is 100% correct. Close fights can swing massively in favor of one side or the other just because of rallying, downstate, and the ability to rez in combat. You asked, "But what if your team was the one winning?" and my response to that is that it feels just as unfair. For example, if we were in a 4v4, both sides down 2 players, and we cleave out one of them first to rally our teammates. All of a sudden, a close 2v2 fight becomes completely unwinnable for the other side and once they wipe, we don't even need to spend time rezzing our downed teammates. Instead, we can literally full push another point with 4/5 members of our team. It's completely lame and contributes heavily to the effectiveness of ranked carry builds like rev or tools holo simply because they have the damage and mobility to abuse the rally mechanic consistently. Without downstate, fights would end more cleanly, but you/the enemy would also be able to come back into play quicker. I played in the no-downstate WvW events. I understand how heavily it emphasized oneshot/glass cannon builds, hence why I also asked Anet to remove Berserker/Assassin Amulets in PvP as well as lower the damage modifiers that make those gimmick builds possible. With that being said, when I fought against non-meme builds in WvW, the fights felt much more clean. Even on the receiving end of it, I liked the fact that I didn't have to wait around. It was nice to be able to instantly respawn and head right back into the fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Fear.1624 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > @"ZDragon.3046" > > Mortrialus is 100% correct. > > Close fights can swing massively in favor of one side or the other just because of rallying, downstate, and the ability to rez in combat. > > You asked, "But what if your team was the one winning?" and my response to that is that it feels just as unfair. For example, if we were in a 4v4, both sides down 2 players, and we cleave out one of them first to rally our teammates. All of a sudden, a close 2v2 fight becomes completely unwinnable for the other side and once they wipe, we don't even need to spend time rezzing our downed teammates. Instead, we can literally full push another point with 4/5 members of our team. It's completely lame and contributes heavily to the effectiveness of ranked carry builds like rev or tools holo simply because they have the damage and mobility to abuse the rally mechanic consistently. > > Without downstate, fights would end more cleanly, but you/the enemy would also be able to come back into play quicker. > > I played in the no-downstate WvW events. I understand how heavily it emphasized oneshot/glass cannon builds, hence why I also asked Anet to remove Berserker/Assassin Amulets in PvP as well as lower the damage modifiers that make those gimmick builds possible. With that being said, when I fought against non-meme builds in WvW, the fights felt much more clean. Even on the receiving end of it, I liked the fact that I didn't have to wait around. It was nice to be able to instantly respawn and head right back into the fight. They should keep all amulets. If they are indeed a problem, then this would surely highlight the issue and give the devs the data they need to adjust things that need it. I feel that it would make pvp funner and faster paced. Unfortunately, they have only buffed res skills, so we should probably just pick our nose with these crossed fingers. At the very least, rallies should be a 1 for 1 only, not the whole team getting picked from one down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoidKami.2867 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Problem with the game is that there are too many high damage builds. They need to remove the high damage builds before they remove downstate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeolus.3615 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"Aeolus.3615" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"Aaron Forestman.4758" said: > > > > I'd be for a season without the downed state. Reviving is seriously disproportionate to damage, so even a burst build can have a lot of trouble securing a kill when the enemy team has a support or two that just keeps reviving people. > > > > > > Wouldnt the better solution be to implement more skills that finish off foes in downstate though? > > > > Imo the finish effect and downstate should work with a hybrid Rez from gw1. > > > > Remove the Rez rubbing allie mechanic. > > Give skills to Rez players we have banners, signets, those feet perfectly for it, they can rez pkayers while downed, a finished player would take 8-10!sec to Rez and would increase skill CD by 60sec. > > Maybe but those skills would need to be made to fire off alot faster because of how gw2 has evolved and plays so fast. > OR > IF we are also going that route then wouldn't this also be the idea that cleaving a downed person should be made super ineffective almost enforcing players to use the stomp action which would allow those revive skills to have time to cast on downed player. > > Ideally i think meeting in the middle ground is fair and to take away the rub rez means that cleaving needs to be made super ineffective as well. Gw2 fast nature exist due overperformance builds to guide players.. overperforming above their own personal skill reason gw2 is know to be a bad pvp game. I believe it is going to settle down a bit more max damage and max surviability extremes gona get more balanced values. Any changes/improvements to make Rez towards more tactically/decisions Rez are in fact needed but they can only happen after Call hammer hits Tyria. Gw2 as changed over time to a very lamer gameplay that needs to stop. Let’s seeingTyrians will start to praise to the supposed avatar of balance ehehehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tharan.9085 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Downstate can be a disadvantage for the side with more players. If someone goes down in a 1v2 and the other one tries to rez him (since many players have 0 sense for decision making) you can easily damage both of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidrex.5649 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"Tharan.9085" said: > Downstate can be a disadvantage for the side with more players. If someone goes down in a 1v2 and the other one tries to rez him (since many players have 0 sense for decision making) you can easily damage both of them. gun is a disadvantage in self defence, you can be dumb and shot yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tharan.9085 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > @"Tharan.9085" said: > > Downstate can be a disadvantage for the side with more players. If someone goes down in a 1v2 and the other one tries to rez him (since many players have 0 sense for decision making) you can easily damage both of them. > > gun is a disadvantage in self defence, you can be dumb and shot yourself Same goes for 2v3s btw, if one of the 3 goes down and they try to rez it's a 2v2 vs two target golems Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortrialus.3062 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > @"mortrialus.3062" said: > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > @"ZDragon.3046" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > > What do you guys think about this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The res mechanic already heavily favors the side with more numbers. From my perspective, downstate and rallying are exactly the same. There have been plenty of winnable fights (both outnumbered and even) if the downed enemies my team or I get weren't constantly getting rallied. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I dont agree with this statement because its not entirely true. The side with fewer numbers can res multiple times should the side with higher numbers have people who go down or die more easily / often so i feel like this statement is a bit subjective. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It also heavily enforces the notion in ranked that the side with the worst PUGs lose. If your teammates feed in every fight, there's simply nothing/very little you can do to take back control of the map if they die too quickly to regain any footing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Learning is a part of the process once again though im not so sure about this statement if your team is going down cause your comp is not as good as the enemy teams it does not mean your teammates are purpose feeding some times you are just mechanically out matched and need to try a different strategy but not everyone catches onto the idea that there might be another option unless someone tells them to try something different. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, if it's possible for Anet to test a sPvP season with no downstate (as long as they remove berserker/assassin amulet and tune down stacking damage modifiers that make oneshot builds possible PRIOR to starting the season), this is something I'd be willing and interested to play in. Then, scenarios such as 2v2s where I down an enemy and they down my teammate become winnable even _after_ another enemy rotates in to rez/stomp. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. condition builds become super meta... imagine having condis throwing on you and instead of getting a second chance with down state you just die instantly feeels bad man. > > > > > > > > > 4. imo Zerker and assassin ammy shouldn't be options in spvp in general. This also changes nothing with your previous statements techncially speaking the side with the better team or higher numbers in a fight will still heavily favor that side. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I think it might be worth preventing teammates from rezzing until combat ends as well. These changes would make fights more about who is more skilled as opposed to who has the numbers advantage. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It wont though it will still be the same. Dont be fooled into the idea that this changes much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyways, that's just something I was thinking about from the no downstate WvW. A lot of people loved it, I have a feeling the same would apply for sPvP. Also, I feel like the combat would be a lot cleaner and easier to watch since people aren't constantly going up and down. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. I wouldnt mind no down state events or some maps having no down state like if team death or other game modes were supported but in the standard capture and hold i dont really see the point. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Um... if you have to add a condition to make a statement true, it's probably because it isn't true to begin with. Rezzing _heavily_ favors the side with more numbers, period. Just because the side with less numbers _can_ potentially rez more often is irrelevant because I could counter with: the side with more numbers _can_ potentially rez more often than the side with less. If you just look at how the rez mechanic works, the side with more players will ALWAYS have an advantage. There are no exceptions to this, currently. > > > > > > > 1. But you added a condition to make your statement true. Thats why i said it was subjective to start with. > > > > > > > Infact one could say that the side with the numbers advantage period (regardless if downstate is included or not) has the advantage so whats the point of even bothering to make this claim when the side with the numbers advantage has the advantage before down state would even be applied. like what.... sorry but no... you were already at the disadvantage to start with removing downstate wont change that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. The problem is... there's no way to win a match if your PUGs are mechanically out-matched. You, as a single player, _cannot_ carry a game alone if your PUGs are completely incompetent. There are no "different strategies" you could try when Conquest revolves around winning fights/snowballing/pushing your advantage with good rotations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. That depends if you can win smaller fights2v2 or 3v3 etc but not and 4v4 or 5v5 match ups then obviously then the obvious solution would be to try and force the enemy team to split up and take the advantage that way. Not every team comp thats good in bigger fights is just as good when you split them up into smaller fights. > > > > > > > There are different strategies depending on the map, your team and its comp, and their team and its comp. If you only see things as one line and one line own where "well they have x and y gg cant win" then you shouldnt be in pvp to start with. Conquest and anet do not often support different strats but its up to you to take the risk on trying them. IF plan A is not working and is failing over and over again why do you keep trying plan A. Thats common sense that you try something else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. No, condition builds wouldn't become any more meta than power builds would. In fact, you'd have more time to react and save yourself vs. burst conditions builds than you would against burst power builds. Imagine being at 7k HP and having to choose between getting hit by a Mirage's condi bomb or a Warrior's Eviscerate. Which one would you pick? In this scenario, you'd die faster from the Eviscerate. > > > > > > > 3. I dont think it matters you are not in the advatnage here if i have to chose between one of them but cant opt to avoid both then it does not matter you are still dead. Leading back to my first comment .... it dont matter cause the advantage here was already lost before we would even get to a down state. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. It will change a lot. Currently, it doesn't matter how many people you down, a single support Firebrand rotating in to rez means you've lost that fight. It's almost impossible to outcleave that build as a single player. Preventing them from rezzing and instead forcing them to support their allies that are still _alive_ would result in a completely different dynamic and would help reduce the impact builds like Firebrand/pre-nerf Blood Scourge have on the match. It's no wonder builds that have had the ability to _consistently_ guarantee (or almost guarantee) rezzes have been _consistently_ meta. > > > > > > > 4. Then that means firebrand is over-performing obviously which we all know to be true. Thats not a down state problem thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > > > In the case of scourge (why is the scourge alive even when you know it should be the first target) if your team opted to kill other targets first thats a your team problem. > > > > > > > IF a firebrand is with the scourge then we have already confirmed thats a firebrand problem. > > > > > > > Do not think that its fair to say no down stat should be a thing just because a firebrand always comes alone and ruins your attempts to finish off a player. Thats directly calling out that the problem is a firebrand issue. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5. If anything take the creative approach and ask for more skills that can directly finish off players The game imo needs more skills like this considering most people dont commit to using the "stomp" action anymore (unless mirage) and would rather just cleave a downed player to death because its faster and you can ideally ignore the interrupt from the downed player. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. These changes would help slow down the pace of the game. It would give individual players a much easier time winning matches _if_ they play well. It would also reduce the snowball effect derived from the highly mobile + high damage meta builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6. If anything it would speed up the game players die faster, teams get more points per kill. Speeds up snowball effect via the previous 2 statements pluse the fact that people cant delay an enemy from de capping or capping a point by being in down state on that point as they die. > > > > > > > Lastly this is a team game mode not a individual player game mode. While i would love to see other supported game modes you have to accept this as a fact. You cant always carry your team deal with it. there are 9 reasons why you cant individually decide the outcome of a match and each of them is a player in the match with you. > > > > > > > If you want individual wins to satisfy yourself ask anet for a 1v1 mode or play 2v2 etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. It is literally not subjective at all. 3 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 2 people. 5 people will rez faster than 4 people. That's pretty objective. The only time this would ever be up for debate (thus becoming subjective), are when you start adding in conditions that effect rez speed. Even then, with 10% rez speed modifiers, you'd need 10 players to compensate for the speed you'd gain from simply having an additional person. > > > > > > > > > > The advantage was never yours to start with down sate has nothing to do with this lol > > > > > if you are 2v5 your advantage is already gone regardless of down state why are you putting the illusion that down state is more of an advantage to the side with the bigger number when they already had the advantage from the start this is what i dont understand. > > > > > > > > Let me put it into a more understandable version. > > > > > > > > In a 2v4, the side with only 2 is straight up at a disadvantage. That's just numbers. But in a world without downstate, it's a lot more likely that if the side with 2 are very skilled and have excellent use of focus, burst, as well as kiting and positioning they can win the 2v4 if they out skill their opponents to a high degree. However, downstate makes it so that in a 2v4 regardless of kiting and positioning, skilled use of terrain, and burst, the side with 4 are unlikely to lose, because if any one of their players die they have three players to rez them up. And if two of them are rezing, unless you have 100% poison up time on the downed body and a ton of cleave you can't even safe stomp fast enough to stop their rez. > > > > > > > > > In a world of good matchmaking 2 teams should never be matched together where 2 people have such a skill gap over the 4 people that they can do that commonly. If so then well gg because that game is a wash out. > > > > I, too, wish GW2's PvP had a stable 50,000 active players or more. This is reality. And in real games there are usually strong links in a team and there are weak links in a team. > > > > You've largely completely missed the point of what I was trying to say so I'm going to try again. > > > > 1 . Downstate turns close fights into massive all or nothing blowouts. > > > > Take for example A standard opening game. I'm a side noder. I'm capping home. Home is uncontested. Four of my team faces four of the enemy team in mid. Both teams score two downstates at more or less the same time. One team manages to cleave out one of my teammates and rallies their two guys. They then cleave out the remaining guy. Now the encounter is 4v2. Even if I rotate into the fight now it'd just be 4v3 and I'm unlikely to make a difference. The 3 of us will be eaten alive, especially as the person on home will rotate in making it a 5v3, which again because of downstate it is nearly impossible for any of us to secure any kill before a rez happens no matter how well we play and how low they are on health and cooldowns. > > > > Now I have few options. I can either try to regroup with my team at home when they come off respawn, and I'll inevitably have to deal with 3-4 of the enemy team snowballing onto home all at once. Or I can go for a far push, hopefully sneakily decap their node uncontested and hope the way way the enemy team has rotated leaves them off kilter and allows my team to come back. I'm also resigning my team to die. > > > > Without downstate, when the two allies and the two enemies ran out of health they didn't just go into downstate, they died. Mid is now 2v2 instead of 4v2. The close fight remains a close fight and it has done so in a way that is overall fair. Now rather than being left with an unsalvagable blowout in mid, me and the enemy side noder rotating into mid is a lot more significant as both of us can swing the entire mid fight depending on who is more skilled between us. > > > > Heck even if the mid fight plays out in a similar way and my team scores 2 kills but all four of the fighters going mid die, that has significant ramifications on me due to the fact that the fight that just happened wasn't an all or nothing blow out. Now whatever snowball I have to deal with at home is much more manageable, if they even feel bold enough to try with only 3 teammates alive and four coming off respawn. > > My only question is what about when the tables are turned and your team is the one that holds the advantage? > IF your team lost the mid fight and you cant make a difference then they lost there is nothing wrong with the situation you just played out. It certainly wouldnt be an issue for you if your team was the one who won the mid fight. > > > > > The end result could be a crazy slug fest where one by one each teammates die in this team fight leaving a close exciting 1v1 as all the remaining teammates fell in battle. And this makes sense because without downstate this fight was very close the entire time. And it would be an amazing feeling to be that last player standing, the guy who survived it all and secured the node for your team. And it would still be fair. > > This would be ideal for a different game mode but not standard conquest. This is not a 1v1 mode and 1v1's shouldnt always be the end result in this mode. The mode is about capturing the points and some times a side secondary objective. Kills are a part of it but should not be the main focus. This isn't a 1v1. This is a teamfight that has gone down to the absolute wire. Which currently is nearly impossible because of downstate. > I have to say i still dont agree with the idea of trying to push something that showcases individual skill as the main aspect in a team focused mode. > > I would ideally ask for a new mode that allows that as the main objective 3v3 tag style matches where the combatants fight 1v1 till all members are eventually eliminated with no down state or something. > There are better ways i think to ideally allow that individual satisfaction that people are striving for without just ripping down states so people can run into 2v4's and 1v3s expecting to just win them. Let's compare a similar game mechanic. In Marvel vs Capcom each player chooses three fighters. When fighters are reduced to 0 hit points they are dead. They are eliminated. They can't be swapped to. They can't be used for assists. When you lose all your fighters you lose the match. What Marvel vs. Capcom DOESN'T do is that when one player scores a kill on one of the enemy fighters soon enough after all theirs die, it doesn't revive all their previous fighters to full health. Because all that does is snowball the match in an unnatural way. One player scores a kill? Now they have three fighters vs the enemy's 2. Now you've made things like comebacks immensely more difficult. The idea that a player can die, adjust their strategy and then kill the enemy with their one guy against the enemy's three is basically impossible. > > > > > 2. Downstate compresses gap. > > > > Again imagine a realistic scenario in the same game. My entire team wiped mid. I have resolved to stay home, defend it if need to, and regroup with my respawning teammates. While defending home I get rushed 2v1. I massively outskill at least one of the two players who have chosen to rush me at home. We end up in a protracted fight where I repeatedly down the weak link of this 2v1. However he is able to be easily rezed by his teammate and without cleave I cannot secure the kill even with safe stomp and the enemy that is doing the rezing is good enough to pop stability each time so I cannot just interrupt him, cleave him, and scare him away from attempting the rez. > > > > The end result; even though I outskill the opponent, aside from stalling and creating a numbers advantage elsewhere on the map, I'm still in an overall unwinnable situation. The bad player who has no business trying to engage me in a fight due to the difference in skill is cushioned from failure and death because he has a numbers advantage. > > > > Without downstate; When I engage in the 1v2 rather than the enemy being repeatedly rezed they die outright the first time. Now I'm in a potentially interesting 1v1 and if I win that I've created a very important swing due to my skill and my capacity to handle these two opponents. > > > > And you can extrapolate this up and up. If there's an extremely skilled player, downstate reduced their capacity to swing the game in his favor. > > > > Thing is... if the 2 people that rushed you are both offensive players or and neither of them is a support and one starts to try and rez the other and some how you still are unable to get both well... i dont know what to say. Cause i think as high as damage is right now you most certainly be able to do it. > Its not always about just getting the interrupt depending on who is doing the rezzing. Some tims just do damage. IF you dont have enough damage to 2v1 in the current meta it means you are bunker or something and its probably a good thing you cant kill 2 players balance wise. > > IF a support player is part of the 2v1 then perhaps the ideal thing would be to go for them first as the other likely wont have the power to rez them if you have the dps. A number of DPS builds can support reviving a downstate significantly better than others can. For example; Holosmith. Elixir S is a VERY powerful tool for reviving downed teammates. And Toss Elixir S is also a massively powerful tool for reviving teammates. So for example you are playing basically any variant of Mesmer or a Fresh Air Ele, once they stealth, because all your damage and phantasms require a target to cast and because all your auto attacks are deliberately under tuned you just can't stop the rez. Heck you're LUCKY if you score damage at all. You simply can't stop the rez. > > 3. Downstate can feel extremely unfair. > > > > Let me bring you back to 1997 at my local arcade. This is a very, very small town so we still had a Street Fighter 2 cabinet as one of the most popular machines despite the game being close to 6 years old at the time. Now in Street Fighter 2 there is a hidden "Stun Meter." When this stun meter fills up due to enough damage to this stun meter, they are stunned. All attacks cause some damage to the stun meter, and some of them do a lot more damage by design. You probably know exactly what this looks like either due to playing Street Fighter 2 or through pop culture osmosis. > > > > At my arcade and I know _many others_ there was always a house rule; You don't hit the stunned opponent. Now people were fine with hit stun and combos. But there was something that felt fundamentally wrong about the actual stun / dizzy mechanic. A losing player, who is already been on the receiving end of damage, being made literally helpless felt unfair. It felt dirty. And so a lot of local places straight up decided "Sorry but we don't play that way around here." > > > > Downstate when forced into an outnumbered fight feels unfair. This enemy team already has an advantage, whether it is a roamer +1ing a fight or a weak link on your team being focused down a split second before you can focus down their weaklink. Because of the way it gives a side with the momentary advantage a BIGGER advantage than they already get just by having the bigger side, it feels fundamentally unfair to go up against. Because again like point 1 states, Downstate turns very close fights into massive All or Nothing blowouts. > > An out numbered fight is suppose to feel unfair thats why its called being out numbered. All aspects of an out numbered fight are going to feel unfair regardless of down state its going to be unfair. Down state is not an excuse or the reason why its unfair... its unfair because you are outnumbered. IF they had supports and you didnt get the supports then well start over and try again. My point is that an Outnumbered Fight is already unfair, and downstate takes an unfair advantage and makes it an almost impossible advantage barring a severely extreme level of skill disparity. A normal game in a 2v1 a player might kill one player and then die if they are more skilled than their opponents. The idea of that is already very impressive enough on its own. The end result isn't the 2 that rushed the 2v1 get a massive advantage because both of them are alive now, but only a modest advantage as they have a teammate alive but both teams have suffered casualties. You know, the way a normal team based game works. If a fight is close the end results and rewards should be close. The result is a less snowbally game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZDragon.3046 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > @"ZDragon.3046" > > Mortrialus is 100% correct. > Dont agree > Close fights can swing massively in favor of one side or the other just because of rallying, downstate, and the ability to rez in combat. > You asked, "But what if your team was the one winning?" and my response to that is that it feels just as unfair. For example, if we were in a 4v4, both sides down 2 players, and we cleave out one of them first to rally our teammates. All of a sudden, a close 2v2 fight becomes completely unwinnable for the other side and once they wipe, we don't even need to spend time rezzing our downed teammates. Instead, we can literally full push another point with 4/5 members of our team. It's completely lame and contributes heavily to the effectiveness of ranked carry builds like rev or tools holo simply because they have the damage and mobility to abuse the rally mechanic consistently. > > Without downstate, fights would end more cleanly, but you/the enemy would also be able to come back into play quicker. > > I played in the no-downstate WvW events. I understand how heavily it emphasized oneshot/glass cannon builds, hence why I also asked Anet to remove Berserker/Assassin Amulets in PvP as well as lower the damage modifiers that make those gimmick builds possible. With that being said, when I fought against non-meme builds in WvW, the fights felt much more clean. Even on the receiving end of it, I liked the fact that I didn't have to wait around. It was nice to be able to instantly respawn and head right back into the fight. Truth be told in most cases you are not sitting around once you go down especially if on the point you are dead within seconds due to high dps or person who stomps with immunity. In wvw you have the option to way point right away upon death, in pvp you wont have that even if downstate is removed that does not mean there will not be a death timer. Death timers almost always exists in competitive pvp modes for a reason so you would still have to wait around for a bit before you can rejoin the fight. Every once in a while someone in pvp will leave you to bleed out to keep you out of the game a bit longer and while its kind of a rude thing to do its a strat to keep their team in an advantage for a short time. In truth anet could solve this by considerably reducing death timer in the event of death by bleed out. Before any downstates are removed or rally is removed however, we should start with removing the insane 1 shot builds first which will likely not tilt team fights so fast. Im still mostly against removing downstate and rally in the current version of conquest. Every coin has two sides and regardless of how much you think it shouldnt be there there will be people who thinks it should remain and i think we can just agree to disagree. The only way i would consider the idea is with a lot a major changes not only for the insane damage flying around but also for support specs. They would need functionality splits in pvp to improve their supportive power on allies who are still standing if aiding downed allies is no longer a thing. I still think the idea of this would bet better left for a new type of game mode like standard death match, elimination, team tag etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HnRkLnXqZ.1870 Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 When you make a game which has combat, you have to create a couple of facts before you can start with the real work. For example: - Separation between physical skills and magic - Use of mana/ability-points or just simple cooldowns - turn based, global cooldowns, mulit-casts, - dodge, block, miss - endurance-bar, defense-bar - crowd-control ... etc. Whenever we discuss about the removal of the Downed State in Guildwars 2, people assume that it is just a simple thing that has no connection to other elements of the combat-system or even the entire game. In my opinion, the downed-state belongs to one of those above mentioned facts you have to create before you start developing the combat-system. Now if you code a combat-system and you know, that you have a Downed State the players will enter whenever their HP drops to 0, you make a lot of decisions different than usual. It is easier to tolerate excessive damage, as there is technically no true lethal-strike possible. You can go on squishier base-stats. The downed-state also includes a set of unique skills per class, which recover HP, CC, deception, damage ... etc. Knowing that those skills exist, you make different decisions about skill-design (effects, range, cooldown, damage). Thief and Mesmer have a teleportation-skill in their downed-set. So they would have more mobility in their active state, if there has never been a Downed State at all. This is just a tiny example of the relations between the Downed State and class-configuration. There are tons of these relations in every class, for active-skills, passives/traits and even regarding base-stats like HP pool. So if we would just turn the entire thing offline, like they sometimes do in WvW for a week, we create a massive imbalance in the system. And I have not yet talked about any of the classes which have active & passive skills that rely on the existence of the Downed State. Competitive is different from PvE and in my opinion, the Downed State makes things more difficult than it should be. Some people above me described very well how easily things get messed up. But with reference to the stuff I just wrote, turning it off will not work. Two things need to be done: 1.) Give all classes, which have active & passive skills that work with the downed-state, an alternative skill-set for the competitive modes. 2.) Replace the Downed state with something similar, but less annoying. This is the actual discussion that has to be launched. How do we **replace** the downed-state in the competitive modes? I have three funny ideas you are welcome to criticize and comment: a.) Special-Action-Key in competitive modes grants access to a Mini-Reaper-kit. HP pool is X % of your maximum HP. Recovers over time or with kills. The kit grants access to 5 unique skills per class, similar to what we have in downed state. = We outsource the downed-state into active combat. b.) Upgrading the base-stats, especially toughness & vitality. c.) Pulsing permanent barrier gain, not higher than 20-30 % of the barrier-pool. A Guardian with 12,000 HP can get a barrier pool of 6,000. That pulsing barrier would be 1,200 - 1,800. Given how barrier works, stacking up pulses on a 5 second cooldown to cap at that value, it should prevent you from dying too fast. Classes like Scrapper, which have a similar mechanic in their passives would have to get their multiplier adjusted (Impact Savant) to remain mortal. Stomping? You could just play the animation on the corpse. That would require a Waypoint/respawn cooldown, which lasts a little longer than the longest finisher-animation. I have to admit, looking on the Downed State like I do, makes this problem a lot more complex. Some of you may rather shut it down anyway and just live with the consequences. Ultimately, responsibility lies with ANet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now