how 1vs1 can be used to find issues in pvp (take2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowgod
so you agree that you're unable to properly explain how 1vs1 can be used to find issues in pvp. good to hear.
Given that nearly every post I made was an example of 1vs1 being used to find issues in PVP, I really expected more from you. But anyway, the key posts that seem to have gotten lost in the lockage:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
6-person team works because the others aren't in a team. When both 6-person vs 6-person are on an equal footing, then two things happen very fast - I have led this sort of thing long before you called yourself a PVP MP:
1) All supports get called first
2) They die
3) Combat profs and whichever supports still alive then turn on each other and enjoy PVP while we rezz at reclaim
When I'm a caller in small PVP, I always target support profs first because it's so much easier to kill them and consequently it's better to get rid of them first before worrying about AMS'd soldier or coon/limbered adv or SL ess'd enf where you need numbers to wear them down. If you are 6 vs 6, and you know the soldier or enf or adv can tank all 6 people's alpha, calling him first is is suicide because it allows them to pick off your support profs. So your theory only works in an imbalanced situation of teamed and coordinated vs bunch of noobs unteamed, it has never worked in balanced ones with experienced PVPers before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
And nowhere do I ask for balance. I identify a clear and obvious problem, recommend a solution, and suggest it will move us towards a better balance. Not saying "waah some profs have it better than me waah" because I can live with that. But if you clicked the link I posted, you'll see the priorities are really around GTH, CB, RI, NSD-proc. Since this is the MP forum, I also raise melee alpha as one of our problems but I'm sorely disappointed to hear a professional saying we should kite to survive (give us kiting tools like runspeed and snares plz?)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
MP static def for non-shield builds in full 300 symbs/gear/etc: 2.8k. 2.9-3k with awesome towers. If you know what that implies, you wouldn't talk about "not doing too badly" or not being SS reliant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corily
We are the ONLY profession that is open for an alpha without any possibility to survive it.
Note that Ebag's response to this can be summed up as "well some profs if they screw up will die too" and doesn't address the fundamental fact that we have insufficient options to begin with. Note also that the entire exchange that ensued was a good example of how examining one-on-one situations could inform ways to improve group balance. Again, shadowgod seems to have forgotten to read that part of the thread while trying to post his retort.
You think if people gangbang an agent, CH and UBT are going to save him? Of course not, but it's very good one-on-one. That's why so many agents kite all the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
The GTH resist is nice, but really, one-on-one MP vs trader is already a fair fight given one stupid OP nano vs one stupid OP proc. xD
Anyone who's ever PVP'd traders before knows that this is one of the most hilariously luck-based results ever (though the odds are that the MP will win). A nice example of one-on-one being used to point out an issue in pvp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
It might be to do that (1) PVM is in a fine state, hell PVM is too easy as is (2) FC aren't adding significant content sub-tl7 and (3) PVP is where balance problems exist. In short, if the rest arent working or FC priorities, it's PVP that we talk about. And we all know the game now is 220-heavy and that's where the majority of attention is going, with new content there every patch which always has implications for PVP balance while consistently just making PVM easier.
The simple fact is that 1-on-1 has always been the basis from which to start making changes for PVP. How else do you examine a profession's toolset to make changes? Look at stuff like Bullseye, which was fine and balanced in a 1-on-1 situation but exponentially OP in mass PVP.
In summary:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrys
I mean seriously, you guys aren't coming up with any ideas, and when I suggest we should focus on where our strengths are, fix our weaknesses, etc., you make all kinds of childish mischaracterisations and try to twist whatever I'm saying into "HAI LETS B AGENTZ WIF PETS". LE made it clear that Bow was going to be one direction to go in. But now our professionals are saying they hate the Tigress and want us to go back to the drawing board and start all over again?
What exactly do you contribute to the professionals programme in terms of tl7 issues, SG?
I still don't get what you meant about me being an engy being a MP or whatever (hm was that a personal attack?).
I'm still yet to see Ebag show what nanos makes a MP so dangerous without actually killing anything.
I'm still yet to see either of you explain how our lack of alpha-protection in 1-on-1 is not exponentially worse in group pvp, the thing you guys claim is the only thing FC are interested in fixing (short of kiting, not being called, or other lamer ways of exploiting broken pvp mechanics). If you refuse to answer any other point, answer this one.
I'm still yet to see either of you show what area you'd like to see MPs go in the future. At tl7.
Which reminds me, you never did answer the question, SG: What tl7 experience do you have of live server issues such as towers, tara and other forms of group tl7 pvp? What about tl7 solo pvp experience?
I'd now like to ask you to demonstrate how post-LE changes in current PVP balance were not in fact, made based on feedback from situations relating to one-on-one. Hell we just found out that test server can barely get BS going, gawd knows how they ever test stuff there.
Only clear sign I'm getting from our professionals is that they want to cling to every red herring in an attempt to duck the real issues that they have no answer to, nor qualification/experience to speak about, hence why they frustrate the people who actually play their 220 MPs regularly and are failing in their task as professionals.
Edit: Oh yes, I forgot the most obvious example is that you won't realise how proc/kite reliant our "good" defenses are until you do 1-on-1. Which I pointed out way at the beginning... as well as in a thread months ago about our def. So if you want to know why I'm frustrated with professionals who either willfully ignore or just unable to understand what others are saying while twisting people's words, there you have it...
Is this better Ebag? All whatever can be construed as vaguely mocking removed.