Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Should resilience be removed from the game?
theratmonkey
Member Posts: 684
My guild friends and I got into a discussion about pvp in BC and how it is different from when we were 60.
Most of us agree that Resilience kinda ruined pvp. Especially since that almost everyone has it now. For those of you just hitting 70, it might be hard to play Bg's without getting completely raped by someone either in Welfare epics or in complete s3 gear.
(Especially Warriors. For those of you who are close to 70 on your warriors and want to pvp, I HIGHLY suggest you stop at 69 and pvp for your s1 set and weapon atleast before leveling to 70.)
It can be a very unfun experience for newer 70s that have to deal with fighting against people with 200+ resil, because they can barely do any damage to them.
At 60, you could pretty much pvp in raid gear, but now, you have to have resilience. Even if you're decked out in t6, someone is going to just destroy you because of your lack of resilience.
But I would like to hear other peoples opinion on it. Should resilience be removed?
Groovy.
Comments
definatly worrying, havent realy pvped have been considering it but have to wait and see when i get to 70
It's all Lies...
No, it was put in the game so rogues couldn't one shot a clothie from stealth. Now they can just stunlock from 100-0 (if you have crappy gear). Resilence was put in to make the fights longer and more skill based. There really isn't any skill one shoting a person from stealth.
This is the reason it was introduced in the game and the reason they will never remove it. Enhance it yes, remove it very unlikely.
No they need to keep it. The whole reason that resilience was introduced was to make a clear distinction between PvP gear and PvE gear. Prior to BC, your average raider could walk into a BG and do just fine. There was nothing wrong with that really, however that meant there was no incentive for the PvP player. There really was no reason to PvP other than the fact that you just liked that style of play. Resilience was introduced to give the PvP player something to shoot for. An incentive to PvP. Now that they've done that, the raider is complaining that he can't compete by just raiding. Well sorry about that, but you're free to do what the PvP player does and get a set of PvP gear like he had to. And it's not like the PvP player can take his gear and raid with it. You can, but you won't be able to compete with the guys with raid gear on.
So now there is incentive to do both, PvP and PvE. Resilience was the key to that. You're only looking at it from one side. Put yourself in the shoes of the PvP player and you'll see that resilience was a blessing.
If you want to PVP, get PVP gear. The fact that raid gear dominated PVP was an imbalance in old WOW that was fixed in TBC. If you loved PVP and hated raiding pre-TBC, you still got pwned by raiders.
The new system opens it up to let players choose their play style.
PVP is now a viable play style. If anything, they should buff resilience. PVE gear dominating in PVP is dead. Long live resilience!
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
No one destroys my warrior in his raid gear.
At lest they do, but it takes them a very long time. (If only I could destroy them as well as being indestructable!).
Resilience gives you immunity against crits and damage divides any "damage over time" effects like poison or bleeding.
As a warrior in raid gear, I have my immunity to crits maximised anyway through my defence rating. what i lose from damage over time immunities, I gain from not being hit. Defence adds avoidences. Dodge parry, block.
Through just raiding, or more specifically through just 5 man heroics, I have managed to buy mself many of the same items that are available for top PvP rewards, and also a set of uber dps stuff which is more than fine in PvP, although it has no resilience on it whatsoever, and no defence, it still cuts the mustard.
I would think that a high resilience is most annoying to those players who use low damage fast attacks and count on their crits to bring up their DPS. A dagger rogue with poison must be disadvantaged by it the most.
A good counter for it would be to structure your dps away from critical hit reliance.
With all due respect, you sound sad you can't destroy everyone anymore with your Naxx gear. And resilience needs to stay, it has added a new element to the game. And you know what they say, if you can't beat em, join em!
Frankly its all so simplisitic it doesn't matter.
Resilience is just a way to take player interaction out of the game and prolong the PvP fights. If there is some disparity sure they should balance it to some degree I guess.
Go onto Guild Wars and watch a quick GvG. What do you see? A player who has good Monk/Ritualist backing can take an incredible beating, but even a high armor Warrior can be killeder very fast if they are over extended and away from their guys. Not instantly and a good Warrior or assassin or dervish has ways to prolong things enough to make a strategic withdrawal.
It is important to keep in mind that good backing from a GW monk/ritualist can actually prevent a spike from killing someone.
Now look at resilience in WoW. A decent spike simply kills someone to fast and WoW healing has no way to deal with massive damage delivered quickly. As long as its massive enough it will get through and kill them instantly. This is not true on GW because of spell like Protective spirit which will reduce ANY damage to a max of 10% of a person health. Under that spell a GW player must be hit by 10 large hits in order for a spike to kill them instantly.
So what do you have in WoW you have resilience and other 50% solutions that really do not address the issue well. Becasue if they addressed it well you could keep people alive when competent people are trying to do so and you would have adequate solutions in your hands.
In other words the WoW combat system is not robust enough. With or without resilience you will merely shift the burden to kills that are too fast and can't be stopped or you will have the problem you are describing. It should be that you can have both depending on how the players react but WoW PvP is not designed well enough to have a system that robust.
So basically one way or the other you are kind of screwed and should hope whichever solution screws you less. Resilience serves a sort of purpose, the problem is it really should be conditional, but the class abilities are not designed well enough to account for PvP strategies. They were designed for PvE strategies.
So if you throw out Res you will nullify what it was meant to do, unfortunately it has other consequences as well because the implementation is not really in the right place.
With all due respect, you sound sad you can't destroy everyone anymore with your Naxx gear. And resilience needs to stay, it has added a new element to the game. And you know what they say, if you can't beat em, join em!
But it also took an element out of the game.Fast kills at will is a bad thing. It was a bad thing that was making PvP really stupid before they added resilience.
But fast kills are not bad in and of themselves. Taking out fast kills is limiting the tactical melieu. The spike dynamics in well designed games can be very interesting. Its important that fast kill have proper barriers, but that is not what WoW did. A well run spike team in Guild Wars GvG can be very interesting they instill a certain amount of fear, but when the opposing team holds together and can pin them down they tear through them. Its pretty cool to watch.
And in the larger meta-game sense it makes teams that like to win by slug-fest have to think again sometimes. Rushing a spike team is sometimes the worst thing to do. And sometimes the best things to do.
Resilience was just a way to shift things around. It did not add another dimension to the game. It added one thing and took another out. There was no net gain.
So while resilience was intended to help with a real problem in WoW PvP, that does not mean it doesn't cause its own problems. Perhaps this is a trade many are willing to make. But don't make the mistake of believe you haven't lost something important, because you have.
As someone stated , the main reason is to make a distinction in pvp vs pve gear. Pre TBC , raid gear could mop up in pvp. So what is the point of PVP.... if you have to PVE to get the best gear. As it stands now, the best pve gear is raid gear and the best pvp gear is arena/bg gear. Thats the way it should be.
If someone wants to compete in pvp, you have to take your lumps like everyone else and work your way up. It isnt like the old days where you could pansy out for a month or 2 building gear in raids and then jump into a bg.
But PVP in WOW sucks anyway
, so all this is moot. There needs to be more reason to pvp other than getting that next piece of gear. Hopefully this so called pvp zone in thenew xpac is worth while ...because overall WOW is fun. It just has an abrupt end after you are fully geared and have no reason to pvp. And pvp to me isnt doing the same bg over and over and over the same way everytime to win or lose.
One of the problems with resilience revolves around classes/specs that depend on crits as part of their talent build. One that comes to mind immediately is enhancement shamans. Many of their main, spec defining talents depend on crits.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I agree with resilience. I don't want someone to go raid and have good PvE gear and also good PvP gear. There is arena for a reason, and resilience is a great stat. I think it has changed how WoW is played and for the better I think. If your complaint is that it's hard to get gear when you first hit 70, thats not so.
Pretty easy, and sure you'll get owned with greens/blues from questing, but shouldnt that happen? I mean come on, these people who spent months on getting gear shouldnt have advantage then? This is a RPG get over it. Resilience has made PvP a lot better, as it extends fights and makes you need to stay on top of things. People who dislike resilience, I don't know what to say to you, I thought this argument was over a long time ago, but people really do amaze me.
Also, PvE gear does work in PvP, you might have less survivability but, on the other side, you do more damage. Now.. let's pretend it's hard to get 400 resilience.
To cure your lust for PvP, it is not very hard. You can try going to Halaa and see how healthy the Halaa PvP is there, or if that isn't World PvP enough for you, try ganking low levels with the intent of bringing their 70's to aid them. I always have fun with this, it brings about some of the more fun PvP in my opinion. However, you can always enter BGs and fight wherever, on the road, by the flag, wherever you want.
PvP is not limited to battlegrounds and arena, unless you let yourself be limited to it. I have PvPed for a very long time, and I did it when I was in UBRS blues with no honor system. Just go out there and have fun, that's what it is all about.
You want resilience removed?
Reason
#1 Raiders want to go back to the glory days when Tier 3 could stomp entire battlegrounds with impunity.
#2 You want to 2 shot players
#3 Because it destroys crit-based builds.
But yea, lets remove resilience so rogues ambush for 4K then back stab for 2K right after, nothing like going to 50% in the blink of an eye.
The thing is that resilience was not required to make alternative gear paths more acceptable for non-raiders. They could have just made pvp gear more on par with raid gear, and everyone would be happy. However, the introduction of resilience gear has the exact opposite effect where people are further pigeonholed into specific playstyles. If you want to pvp in any form (for fun or serious), you MUST go through the pvp treadmill. There is no other way. In essence, this solution simply reverses the situation and forces people who like pve to take the pvp path simply to compete.
I'm sorry, but your argument lacks logic. All this solution did was reverse the roles, and passed the burden from one class of players to the other. That's not a solution, it's just a way to make people play longer for the wrong reasons.
#1 - although this comment is probably true for a great many players, this system instead forces them to both pvp to even compete. Raiders should be able to compete with the gear they get from raiding. Raiders shouldn't be able to destroy non-raiders. Raiders should simply be able to compete in pvp without needing to go through the pvp treadmill.
#2 - Who doesn't. But resiliance is not required to solve this problem.
#3 - This fact alone is another reason I hate resilience. There's no reason a valid build type (give up stam/dmg to focus on crit) should be completely negated by a common pvp stat.
I understand that non-raiders should be able to compete with raiders in pvp. There is no question about that. However, resilience is a terrible method to achieve this goal. Just as you ask raiders to think like a pvp'er, then you need to think like a raider as well. You didn't like going through a second treadmill (pve raids) to be able to compete in pvp. So why do you think it's ok to force raiders to go through a second treadmill (the pvp progression) to compete in pvp? In essence, resilience makes raiders second class citizens in pvp. That's not a solution to the problem, it's a reversal of the original problem.
With all due respect, you sound sad you can't destroy everyone anymore with your Naxx gear. And resilience needs to stay, it has added a new element to the game. And you know what they say, if you can't beat em, join em!
But it also took an element out of the game.Fast kills at will is a bad thing. It was a bad thing that was making PvP really stupid before they added resilience.
But fast kills are not bad in and of themselves. Taking out fast kills is limiting the tactical melieu. The spike dynamics in well designed games can be very interesting. Its important that fast kill have proper barriers, but that is not what WoW did. A well run spike team in Guild Wars GvG can be very interesting they instill a certain amount of fear, but when the opposing team holds together and can pin them down they tear through them. Its pretty cool to watch.
And in the larger meta-game sense it makes teams that like to win by slug-fest have to think again sometimes. Rushing a spike team is sometimes the worst thing to do. And sometimes the best things to do.
Resilience was just a way to shift things around. It did not add another dimension to the game. It added one thing and took another out. There was no net gain.
So while resilience was intended to help with a real problem in WoW PvP, that does not mean it doesn't cause its own problems. Perhaps this is a trade many are willing to make. But don't make the mistake of believe you haven't lost something important, because you have.
So you would rather have hopeless players being killed instantly without a hope of fighting back instead of longer battles where the winning player is at least damaged?
Pros outweigh the cons when it comes to resilience.
With all due respect, you sound sad you can't destroy everyone anymore with your Naxx gear. And resilience needs to stay, it has added a new element to the game. And you know what they say, if you can't beat em, join em!
But it also took an element out of the game.Fast kills at will is a bad thing. It was a bad thing that was making PvP really stupid before they added resilience.
But fast kills are not bad in and of themselves. Taking out fast kills is limiting the tactical melieu. The spike dynamics in well designed games can be very interesting. Its important that fast kill have proper barriers, but that is not what WoW did. A well run spike team in Guild Wars GvG can be very interesting they instill a certain amount of fear, but when the opposing team holds together and can pin them down they tear through them. Its pretty cool to watch.
And in the larger meta-game sense it makes teams that like to win by slug-fest have to think again sometimes. Rushing a spike team is sometimes the worst thing to do. And sometimes the best things to do.
Resilience was just a way to shift things around. It did not add another dimension to the game. It added one thing and took another out. There was no net gain.
So while resilience was intended to help with a real problem in WoW PvP, that does not mean it doesn't cause its own problems. Perhaps this is a trade many are willing to make. But don't make the mistake of believe you haven't lost something important, because you have.
So you would rather have hopeless players being killed instantly without a hope of fighting back instead of longer battles where the winning player is at least damaged?
Pros outweigh the cons when it comes to resilience.
Um no I specifically said there need to be barriers to spiking an individual. WoW originally had nothing to protect from spiking of any sort whether it was based on crits or concentrated firepower.The two errors WoW made was that there is no counter and its completely out of the hands of the players to enact the protection.
Resilience as an armor stat is frankly a very boring mechanic. It would be better if its function was something that needed to be done by someone on the team via an ability. Why? Because it adds to the tactics.
Resilience as something that has no counter is again limiting the tactics.
In Guild Wars you can have both things happening. People can die very fast when they make a mistake. Or something you get very long Slug fests that do not end until the NPCs call for "Victory or Death!".
The resilience mechanics means you now have various formerly viable tactics beceom completely useless or extinct because they were not balanced correctly with a decent counter.
Move, counter-move, move, counter-move. This is the essence of good conflict. Whether its chess or boxing or MMA or RTS. It is the lack of this that is why reslience is a flawed mechanic.
As I said in my post some kind of solution was necessary. Resilience is better than nothing, because the old situation was a complete farce. I know I was there, as a rank 10 druid going against raiders. It was completely worthless. But it is still a flawed mechanic. It is a 50% solution. As Zaxxon mentions it just causes other problems and reverses a few things.
If the choice is only to keep or get rid of resilience I would lean towards keep, because the alternative is not worth anything at all. So something that is ok but substandard is better than something that was complete crap. But I would prefer real counters on both sides of the issue. Give people the ability to TRULY protect, give people the ability to kill possbily stunningly fast when not protected. Then let them use these tools.
Probably they can't do this without implementing PvP only abilities. So whatever. The point is you, the players, are screwed because there is no move,counter-move mechanic for a phenomenon that exists in all PvP. Namely spike damage. Blizzard did not account for this in their design and now you have them hacking in a solution. Hacked addon solution are rarely without problem.
Spike damage was never properly accounted for. Resilience is a shoehorned attempt to handle it in some way. Spike damage is a perfectly valid tactic. But WoW has no way to deal with it. Resilience is NOT a way to deal with, it is merely a blanket mitigation of a major aspect of PvP.
Resilience is something that makes your PvP less dynamic. It may be a necessary evil. But that does not make it a good thing.
Or in other words the OP and his friend are both right.
There are some good aspects to resilience - since well geared players no longer instantly kill eachother. But there are also problems with the current pvp gear system - such as:
- balance between abilities - resilience tends to make some abilities, such as healing, relatively powerful, whilst dimishes some specs, such as those based on inflicting critical damage.
- pvp gear is so readily available. I'm in a guild that has cleared kara. Some of the other players are fully epicced. However, a BM hunter even of fairly average abilities (~1500 rating with a few pieces of S2/S3) can walk into a Kara raid and compete quite readily for top DPS. Whereas our PvE gear will get us nowhere in PvP. So for us PvE gear and PvP gear are in no way balanced.
- Back at 60, although there were a small percentage of T2/T3 raiders, most players had fairly ordinary gear. It was perfectly possible to step into a battleground and have fun as soon as you hit 60. Nowadays, anyone who steps into WSG/AB/EoTs as soon as they hit 70 is instantly destroyed.
- The easy availability of PvP epics has seriously hurt instancing. Many people can't be bothered to do normal instances and go straight from PvP to heroics/Kara. Which makes it very hard for people who either enjoy doing these instances, or who need to do them to gear up (e.g. prot warrior tanks can only gear up in instances, PvP gear is no good to them).
- When you finally get the gear together for heroics, you look for other players and you have to deal with "fully-epicced" applicants, many of whom don't have the slightest clue as to how to play in PvE.
- Many classes have to choose between PvE and PvP fo specs, and can only really be effective in one - e.g. rogues go subtlety for PvP, combat for PvE, warriors prot / fury for PvE, arms for PvP, locks SL/SL for PvP, destro for PvE...In an attempt to get arena epics, it's not unusual to see players turning up to raids with pvp specs, which means inferior performance and far more wipes for those actually trying to do PvE.
- The arena is causing nerfs in specs/gear that seriously affects PvE game balance. It's almost impossible to make the game fully balanced for both PvE and PvP, and hence the increasing importance of Arenas in game balance is hurting PvE.
I'm not claiming to have an ideal solution. Just saying that IMO there are problems that need to be solved.
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
Another comment - if Blizzard wants to buff PvP, the shouldn't look at gear - they should just make it more fun.
For example they could make more new battlegrounds. WSG/AB/AV got old 2 years ago. And WSG is still horribly ridden with exploits.
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
It didn't reverse anything, it created 2 different rewards and 2 different unique paths to get there. And it also doesn't force anyone to do anything. I PvP all the time and I don't have any PvP gear. No, I'm not a dominant player, but I do compete. And the great thing about it is that the longer I compete, the better I will become. That's called incentive my friend. The idea is to get people who have a casual interest in PvP to PvP more. It's also incentive for the PvP player who has a casual interest in raiding to raid more. And yes it means that you can't be at the top of both by only doing one or the other. Yes, it's a way to make people play longer, but I don't know why you think it's for the wrong reasons. It's totally up to the individual whether or not they wish to go for the rewards.
+ crit was always a PVE stat designed for PVE battles. Getting lucky and taking a player out in one shot is not strategic or challenging.
Resilience did nothing bad for PVP at all. Every change resilience made was a fix.
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
There are good and bad things about resilience, yes it stops good pve'rs to own pvp over pvp dedicted players. Wow is a pve based game though and players with awsome gear who have raided at the highest level should be rewarded for it in all aspects of the game.
Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.
This is just one of the drawbacks of a item based game instead of a player skill based game. They are trying to make everyone happy but people are always going to cry about something.
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!