What can I say, this blows. It's such a simple feature and not implementing it really makes no sense to me since ANet is making all those promises about releasing a finished product. Like above poster said, if there will be dueling minigames, I won't have a problem with it. When I read the title of this thread I got really excited, hoping to hear some good news, because I find dueling to be a lot of fun. I love PvP and dueling's a great form of it, especially that it's more relaxing and lets you test new thing out without significant consequences. Just my 2 copper.
Anet never said what the promise of a finished game entails. In general, a finished product means something that is usable with minimal problems and gets the job done. I would imagine to Anet, a finished product would entail releasing the game with all the big features they've stated, with minimal bugs/glitches, and good graphics. They've never said dueling was part of the equation for GW2 to be considered a finished game. In fact, in the past they've stated quite the opposite. Duel would not be included in GW2. At least now they are saying that it's on their wishlist to implement in the future.
Dueling CAN be a fun casual thing to do, as long as everyone understand that 1v1 does not = group play, and therefore will not be balanced. Unfortunately, you'll get plenty of people who complain about being unable to beat x profession in 1v1.
The idea of testing new things is limited in scope. Those new things may not carry over into group pvp at all.
My proposition for a future dueling system AFTER they finish with the main content and have the game out the door:
Have a duel system that entails both group and single player play. You and another person may form two groups and challenge each other, possibly adding a feature to include a third group. There will be an auto-decline option. There should be an auto decline option to choose to ignore the other person for a minute or two after the request is sent (to prevent whisper spamming). There will be a duel option panel, for those 3 team matches. At the top in bold letters, there should be a statement saying "THE GAME IS NOT BALANCED FOR DUELING, AND THEREFORE SOME CLASSES MAY BY NATURE BE STRONGER THAN OTHERS IN A 1V1 SITUATION. BY DUELING YOU UNDERSTAND THIS STATEMENT." In fact the first time you open the duel panel, or use a duel request command a pop up should come up forcing you to read this statement and accept that you understand it. Dueling also may only be done in areas where an event isn't taking place.
I want big emphasis on the concept of balance not being done for 1v1.
Don't really care about dueling but I don't see the harm in it. I don't think they should worry about balancing it and just put it in. Dueling is just a simple and fun side activity. If they wanted to make it more e-sport I guess they could add "Official Duel" which is ranked and "Unofficial Duel" for the people that are just having some fun.
What can I say, this blows. It's such a simple feature and not implementing it really makes no sense to me since ANet is making all those promises about releasing a finished product. Like above poster said, if there will be dueling minigames, I won't have a problem with it. When I read the title of this thread I got really excited, hoping to hear some good news, because I find dueling to be a lot of fun. I love PvP and dueling's a great form of it, especially that it's more relaxing and lets you test new thing out without significant consequences. Just my 2 copper.
Be fair to the devs... they're saying it's not a mechanic they have time to work on ie they are already making something like 8 games in 1 for B2P - But they would like to add it in future updates after release, that is to say, allow some form of worked in game system designed around it, not just ad hoc let players get on with it (every spare second of combat is prly iterating around GvG, WvW & PvE) which they can still do at release just not designed. I'd say that's dissappointing for duelist but as long as it's in their roadmap...
While i don't consider this a huge disappointment.. it sort of takes away from the experience especially from rp. I really don't see why this would be hard to implement, especially seeing a large amount of players would definitely enjoy the feature. Also they say 1v1 won't work out, but claim you can go out into WvWvW by yourself and achieve stuff.. looking at this now sorta takes away from the might of that statement, I messed around in my guild hall in the original and 2 warriors could never take each other down, i'm really hoping pvp isn't like this, that would mean if you do play by yourself doing solo stuff in WvW and you meet up with a similar class it would make it completely pointless to even fight because you will be stuck in stalemates until someone else jumps in, honestly that doesn't sound like a great way for pvp to work.
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
This may be unsatisfactory but they're saying such is the team balancing for GvG duelling is way down the pecking order as a design-iteration... put that way it's understandable. Ppl will find a way to duel with what they are given no doubt eg House-Rules? Good to hear they have it in mind for the future.
Let's see how GvG turns out eh? If that is piss-poor then we can say hmm, duelling could have snuck in, if not then fair-do's
It's very silly for them to NOT want dueling in the game at all.
Having an "auto decline" for duels is perfect for those that are so against it so those that want it won't suffer.
But I guess having the pro dueling side suffer is fine eh.
But Swan! People would complain about their class being weak compared to another in SINGLE pvp! Yup. Since they plan on doing OPEN PvP in large areas, I expect this to happen with or without dueling. But I am a PvPer. And dueling someone can help me learn a few counters to a rock to my scissors.
It's very silly for them to NOT want dueling in the game at all.
Having an "auto decline" for duels is perfect for those that are so against it so those that want it won't suffer.
But I guess having the pro dueling side suffer is fine eh.
But Swan! People would complain about their class being weak compared to another in SINGLE pvp! Yup. Since they plan on doing OPEN PvP in large areas, I expect this to happen with or without dueling. But I am a PvPer. And dueling someone can help me learn a few counters to a rock to my scissors.
lolLore...gimme a break.
They are not saying they do not want it in, just that the addage:
"If a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well."
IE they are not creating a system that they have put labour into or specific design into. Why?
1. They do not have enough time/priority to fit it in so instead of doing a half-assed job they are saying "in the future".
2. If ArenaNet say a system will be in: It must configure to high QA. They are being honest, we cannot do this at this time.
3. It's something we would like to do in the future.
4. Players can do it anyway ad hoc. Create your own house-rules somewhere. But the take-home message: Player-driven not Developer-driven activity.
I think a lot of people have missed something in translation, here!?
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
How are you and others so sure that classes will be so severly unbalanced and that there wouldn't be another way "to balance group pvp" than to have these 1 on 1 balance issues?
Serious class imbalance seems like a hugely undesirable flaw which will end up in the community spot light with or without dueling anyway, as any kind of group pvp contains a lot of 1 vs. 1 moments as well.
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
How are you and others so sure that classes will be so severly unbalanced and that there wouldn't be another way "to balance group pvp" than to have these 1 on 1 balance issues?
Serious class imbalance seems like a hugely undesirable flaw which will end up in the community spot light with or without dueling anyway, as any kind of group pvp contains a lot of 1 vs. 1 moments as well.
We aren't sure how severely unbalanced they will be. In fact, I'm pretty sure that each class will be viable on it's own, somewhat. However, battling 1v1 is not how they want PvP done -- hence why you have the cross profession combos. Battling 1v1 does not prepare people for group pvp, where everyone has to look out for everyone. Someone who soley does 1v1 pvp may not understand the idea of rezing your teammates, using cross profession combos, and all the dynamics that would make a successful team. The biggest reason why Anet is reluctant to implement dueling, and this is their reasoning, is it does not fit with how they want pvp to be. They want PvP to be group oriented, not 1v1 oriented. They want to promote helping each other, using each other's strengths to cover your own weakness. 1v1 does not do this. 1v1 promotes solo play, not team play.
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
How are you and others so sure that classes will be so severly unbalanced and that there wouldn't be another way "to balance group pvp" than to have these 1 on 1 balance issues?
Serious class imbalance seems like a hugely undesirable flaw which will end up in the community spot light with or without dueling anyway, as any kind of group pvp contains a lot of 1 vs. 1 moments as well.
I've watched games go through near continuous buff/nerf cycles in an effort to achieve balance and still never get it right. Not to the extent that it quiets the insufferable whining from players whose turn it is to get beat on by the dreaded nerf bat. I don't see how GW2 will differ in that respect, especially when the core mechanics of the game don't use it. And I also expect that group-based balancing will differ greatly from one-on-one.
Using contemporary warfare as an example, you don't deploy your artillery units near the front line where they can be directly threatened. You deploy them in the rear, away from the danger. Why? Because if they do somehow get overrun, they are lost. They aren't meant for direct confrontation, but to enhance the fighting capabilities of a force of units. Put them one-on-one against a tank brigade or an infantry battalion and they're toast. They need support to keep the bad guys off them so they can do their job. And that's group play.
Anyway, what I said is I don't see how it can be done. But if anyone is capable of pulling a rabbit out of a hat in game terms, it would be ArenaNet, so I'm amenable to anything they might come up with. At least initially.
Eric: Dueling is not a core system for us, given that we balance all of our PvP combat around groups of players fighting and not one-on-one engagements. Because of this, dueling is on our wish list of things to add, but is unlikely to make it into the game on release.
1- thats a very bad excuse
2- thats a very bad excuse
3- thats a really really bad excuse
I will never consider a pvp game to be that good unless it have good dueling system, still Uo win them all, remember those duels in UO?... It was like 13 years ago guys, 13... In 98 the dueling balance in Uo was pretty solid.
Now i will tell you where that excuse come from. The first time i heard about this "we wont balance duel because our game is a group pvp game", it was L2...
Thats just a bad excuse guys, in group you don't need to balance anything, all the groups are pretty much the same, class or role wise, you have a healer, few melee and few ranged. They usually have quiet similiar structure in any mmo, its not like you are going to balance a full healer party against a full tank role party anyway, or that kind orf thing, so? . Why would you have to balance 2 groups that have pretty much the same class/role structure? You don't.
For me a pvp game that don't have duel balance have no balance whatsoever, it's pretty straight forward, the rest is just bs to feed kids with no experience. Damn thats pretty harsh...
Eric: Dueling is not a core system for us, given that we balance all of our PvP combat around groups of players fighting and not one-on-one engagements. Because of this, dueling is on our wish list of things to add, but is unlikely to make it into the game on release.
1- thats a very bad excuse
2- thats a very bad excuse
3- thats a really really bad excuse
I will never consider a pvp game to be that good unless it have good dueling system, still Uo win them all, remember those duels in UO?... It was like 13 years ago guys, 13... In 98 the dueling balance in Uo was pretty solid.
Now i will tell you where that excuse come from. The first time i heard about this "we wont balance duel because our game is a group pvp game", it was L2...
Thats just a bad excuse guys, in group you don't need to balance anything, all the groups are pretty much the same, class or role wise, you have a healer, few melee and few ranged. They usually have quiet similiar structure in any mmo, its not like you are going to balance a full healer party against a full tank role party anyway, or that kind orf thing, so? . Why would you have to balance 2 groups that have pretty much the same class/role structure? You don't.
For me a pvp game that don't have duel balance have no balance whatsoever, it's pretty straight forward, the rest is just bs to feed kids with no experience. Damn thats pretty harsh...
*put on flame suit and wait*
You can't have read up on Guild Wars 2 very much at all after having read that paragraph. There will be no dedicated healer class...every class will be capable of healing. That alone changes the dynamics of the game very much.
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
How are you and others so sure that classes will be so severly unbalanced and that there wouldn't be another way "to balance group pvp" than to have these 1 on 1 balance issues?
Serious class imbalance seems like a hugely undesirable flaw which will end up in the community spot light with or without dueling anyway, as any kind of group pvp contains a lot of 1 vs. 1 moments as well.
I've watched games go through near continuous buff/nerf cycles in an effort to achieve balance and still never get it right. Not to the extent that it quiets the insufferable whining from players whose turn it is to get beat on by the dreaded nerf bat. I don't see how GW2 will differ in that respect, especially when the core mechanics of the game don't use it. And I also expect that group-based balancing will differ greatly from one-on-one.
Using contemporary warfare as an example, you don't deploy your artillery units near the front line where they can be directly threatened. You deploy them in the rear, away from the danger. Why? Because if they do somehow get overrun, they are lost. They aren't meant for direct confrontation, but to enhance the fighting capabilities of a force of units. Put them one-on-one against a tank brigade or an infantry battalion and they're toast. They need support to keep the bad guys off them so they can do their job. And that's group play.
Anyway, what I said is I don't see how it can be done. But if anyone is capable of pulling a rabbit out of a hat in game terms, it would be ArenaNet, so I'm amenable to anything they might come up with. At least initially.
That kind of translates into: "we will have rock-paper-scissors class balance like many other mmorpgs do (which is perfectly fine), but we want to avoid too much casual 1 on 1 encounters because some people might cry that their rock class can't be a pair of scissors when fighting paper".
That would perfectly fit their "avoid player tension" philosophy, (and it could very well be the main reason for Anet being dueling-averse) but I'd rather have them NOT disregarding an easily implemented and endless gameplay alternative which will offer casual fun to many people just to avoid the whinage of a few spoilt little brats (who will merrily whine about something else instead).
And like I said: issues with class imbalance will end up being a hot topic anyway, even without dueling, as every kind of group pvp offers many 1 on 1 moments.
But if it is fair and square rock-paper-scissors balance, with a slight chance to win from your anti-class when you are skillful enough, the discussion will end with a majority supporting Anet's balancing act (even though there will always be complainers).
Don't give in to terrorists* and implement dueling at launch, Anet!
(*read: people whining about natural and properly implemented rock-paper-scissors balance)
Eric: Dueling is not a core system for us, given that we balance all of our PvP combat around groups of players fighting and not one-on-one engagements. Because of this, dueling is on our wish list of things to add, but is unlikely to make it into the game on release.
1- thats a very bad excuse
2- thats a very bad excuse
3- thats a really really bad excuse
I will never consider a pvp game to be that good unless it have good dueling system, still Uo win them all, remember those duels in UO?... It was like 13 years ago guys, 13... In 98 the dueling balance in Uo was pretty solid.
Now i will tell you where that excuse come from. The first time i heard about this "we wont balance duel because our game is a group pvp game", it was L2...
Thats just a bad excuse guys, in group you don't need to balance anything, all the groups are pretty much the same, class or role wise, you have a healer, few melee and few ranged. They usually have quiet similiar structure in any mmo, its not like you are going to balance a full healer party against a full tank role party anyway, or that kind orf thing, so? . Why would you have to balance 2 groups that have pretty much the same class/role structure? You don't.
For me a pvp game that don't have duel balance have no balance whatsoever, it's pretty straight forward, the rest is just bs to feed kids with no experience. Damn thats pretty harsh...
*put on flame suit and wait*
You can't have read up on Guild Wars 2 very much at all after having read that paragraph. There will be no dedicated healer class...every class will be capable of healing. That alone changes the dynamics of the game very much.
Thats why i used the role word, because in fact that excuse could be somehow valid in a class based game, the excuse become even weaker in a non trinity game. Still roles are role, even if they are for a short moment, they still exist.
Also Uo is pretty much the only pvp mmo without trinity everyone know for sure.
Because poeple like to duel, like i invite you to duel, and because duel make a large part of pvp encounter maybe, you know the pvp encounter in the wild...
I just just edit to say, i really don't understand why they don't want to balance duelling, i think it is just due to a very bad habit dev teams have now. Dueling in non trinity game is the easiest to balance since the fighyting strategy isn't about rock scissor paper (the usual class in trinity game) but about dps, backing up, heal/regen, back in damage. So ye they just need to balance the rythm of fight, its way easier to balance than rock scissor paper. I say this but i never played GW2, i'm not even sure how it work ingame, but it can't be very diferent than what we already know in principle anyway.
Because poeple like to duel, like i invite you to duel, and because duel make a large part of pvp encounter maybe, you know the pvp encounter in the wild...
I just just edit to say, i really don't understand why they don't want to balance duelling, i think it is just due to a very bad habit dev teams have now. Dueling in non trinity game is the easiest to balance since the fighyting strategy isn't about rock scissor paper (the usual class in trinity game) but about dps, backing up, heal/regen, back in damage. So ye they just need to balance the rythm of fight, its way easier to balance than rock scissor paper. I say this but i never played GW2, i'm not even sure how it work ingame, but it can't be very diferent than what we already know in principle anyway.
Sorry for the edit.
While that's true it leads to nerfing across the bored. Add dueling for fun and rp reasons and just forget about balancing for 1v1.
If you have time to waste, dicking around spamming duel invites to lowbies, then you aren't out fighting in the Mists trying to rack up points for server dominance.
Implementing a dueling system is a waste of time when those that crave PvP action should be out fighting the good fight for their server rather than hiding away trying to 1v1 that has now real purpose at all.
Thats why i used the role word, because in fact that excuse could be somehow valid in a class based game, the excuse become even weaker in a non trinity game. Still roles are role, even if they are for a short moment, they still exist.
Also Uo is pretty much the only pvp mmo without trinity everyone know for sure.
Nonsense. My point is that the trinity has nothing to do with the game being balanced towards group play or solo play.
You're forgetting about inter-class skill combos. You know...an Elementalist erects a fire wall which ignites a Ranger's arrows as they pass through it? It would be impossible to carry such gameplay over to duelling, so they're focussing on the task of balancing these complicated inter-class dynamics before focussing on duelling. Ultima Online, Lineage II and the presence or lack of the trinity has nothing to do with Guild Wars 2 because it's an entirely different kettle of fish.
While that's true it leads to nerfing across the bored. Add dueling for fun and rp reasons and just forget about balancing for 1v1.
Nobody involved with dueling is going to be satisfied with 'fun and rp', they are going to want to beat the class they are going up against. If a Warrior goes up against an Elementalist and ends up eating the dirt 9 times out of 10 in 1v1, you can guarantee that the Warrior is going to run bawling to the forums sreaming for a nerf to Elementailists. It won't matter if in WvWvW that Warriors can tear an Elementalist a new asshole every time because of GvG balancing, duel fans will be screaming about nerfs and 1v1 balance...not fun and rp.
Comments
Anet never said what the promise of a finished game entails. In general, a finished product means something that is usable with minimal problems and gets the job done. I would imagine to Anet, a finished product would entail releasing the game with all the big features they've stated, with minimal bugs/glitches, and good graphics. They've never said dueling was part of the equation for GW2 to be considered a finished game. In fact, in the past they've stated quite the opposite. Duel would not be included in GW2. At least now they are saying that it's on their wishlist to implement in the future.
Dueling CAN be a fun casual thing to do, as long as everyone understand that 1v1 does not = group play, and therefore will not be balanced. Unfortunately, you'll get plenty of people who complain about being unable to beat x profession in 1v1.
The idea of testing new things is limited in scope. Those new things may not carry over into group pvp at all.
My proposition for a future dueling system AFTER they finish with the main content and have the game out the door:
Have a duel system that entails both group and single player play. You and another person may form two groups and challenge each other, possibly adding a feature to include a third group. There will be an auto-decline option. There should be an auto decline option to choose to ignore the other person for a minute or two after the request is sent (to prevent whisper spamming). There will be a duel option panel, for those 3 team matches. At the top in bold letters, there should be a statement saying "THE GAME IS NOT BALANCED FOR DUELING, AND THEREFORE SOME CLASSES MAY BY NATURE BE STRONGER THAN OTHERS IN A 1V1 SITUATION. BY DUELING YOU UNDERSTAND THIS STATEMENT." In fact the first time you open the duel panel, or use a duel request command a pop up should come up forcing you to read this statement and accept that you understand it. Dueling also may only be done in areas where an event isn't taking place.
I want big emphasis on the concept of balance not being done for 1v1.
Don't really care about dueling but I don't see the harm in it. I don't think they should worry about balancing it and just put it in. Dueling is just a simple and fun side activity. If they wanted to make it more e-sport I guess they could add "Official Duel" which is ranked and "Unofficial Duel" for the people that are just having some fun.
My theme song.
Be fair to the devs... they're saying it's not a mechanic they have time to work on ie they are already making something like 8 games in 1 for B2P - But they would like to add it in future updates after release, that is to say, allow some form of worked in game system designed around it, not just ad hoc let players get on with it (every spare second of combat is prly iterating around GvG, WvW & PvE) which they can still do at release just not designed. I'd say that's dissappointing for duelist but as long as it's in their roadmap...
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
While i don't consider this a huge disappointment.. it sort of takes away from the experience especially from rp. I really don't see why this would be hard to implement, especially seeing a large amount of players would definitely enjoy the feature. Also they say 1v1 won't work out, but claim you can go out into WvWvW by yourself and achieve stuff.. looking at this now sorta takes away from the might of that statement, I messed around in my guild hall in the original and 2 warriors could never take each other down, i'm really hoping pvp isn't like this, that would mean if you do play by yourself doing solo stuff in WvW and you meet up with a similar class it would make it completely pointless to even fight because you will be stuck in stalemates until someone else jumps in, honestly that doesn't sound like a great way for pvp to work.
I am loving almost everything I hear about GW2, but it is unacceptable to not have duelling. That is a huge thing for a lot of people. From RPers to Min-maxers to epeen snobs, this is a thing almost everyone does at some point, and for many people is a focal point of the downtime in the game. There is no reason not to have duelling, and a plethora of reasons for it to be included.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
This may be unsatisfactory but they're saying such is the team balancing for GvG duelling is way down the pecking order as a design-iteration... put that way it's understandable. Ppl will find a way to duel with what they are given no doubt eg House-Rules? Good to hear they have it in mind for the future.
Let's see how GvG turns out eh? If that is piss-poor then we can say hmm, duelling could have snuck in, if not then fair-do's
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
It's very silly for them to NOT want dueling in the game at all.
Having an "auto decline" for duels is perfect for those that are so against it so those that want it won't suffer.
But I guess having the pro dueling side suffer is fine eh.
But Swan! People would complain about their class being weak compared to another in SINGLE pvp! Yup. Since they plan on doing OPEN PvP in large areas, I expect this to happen with or without dueling. But I am a PvPer. And dueling someone can help me learn a few counters to a rock to my scissors.
lolLore...gimme a break.
They are not saying they do not want it in, just that the addage:
"If a job is worth doing, it's worth doing well."
IE they are not creating a system that they have put labour into or specific design into. Why?
1. They do not have enough time/priority to fit it in so instead of doing a half-assed job they are saying "in the future".
2. If ArenaNet say a system will be in: It must configure to high QA. They are being honest, we cannot do this at this time.
3. It's something we would like to do in the future.
4. Players can do it anyway ad hoc. Create your own house-rules somewhere. But the take-home message: Player-driven not Developer-driven activity.
I think a lot of people have missed something in translation, here!?
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
You complain that pvp in gw goes against the lore but you do want them to implent a feature that you can battle against your own friends?
Yes and it's called a duel.
My brand new bloggity blog.
How about balance? If the game is to be balanced for group play, it will not be balanced for one-on-one. That means bitching about one or more professions being ill-suited to dueling while others are highly effective at it.
People complain. They complain about everything. You might have a consensus among people in this thread that even unbalanced dueling is better than having none, but that won't extend to the mass throngs of people who will be playing, who aren't here to comment, and who won't understand why their profession of choice is getting turned into a grease spot with agonizing regularity. They won't understand and they will cry rivers of tears.
The only way around it is to rebalance for one-on-one, making every profession viable, thus screwing with the group balance that the game uses as a foundation for every other aspect, or you run an alternate rule system specifically for duels. Neither option is very appealing.
So dueling. Nice concept and popular enough, but how to implement it in this game?
Duelling lovers...
When i close my eyes i envision 2 lovers duelling in their nightgowns....
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
How are you and others so sure that classes will be so severly unbalanced and that there wouldn't be another way "to balance group pvp" than to have these 1 on 1 balance issues?
Serious class imbalance seems like a hugely undesirable flaw which will end up in the community spot light with or without dueling anyway, as any kind of group pvp contains a lot of 1 vs. 1 moments as well.
My brand new bloggity blog.
We aren't sure how severely unbalanced they will be. In fact, I'm pretty sure that each class will be viable on it's own, somewhat. However, battling 1v1 is not how they want PvP done -- hence why you have the cross profession combos. Battling 1v1 does not prepare people for group pvp, where everyone has to look out for everyone. Someone who soley does 1v1 pvp may not understand the idea of rezing your teammates, using cross profession combos, and all the dynamics that would make a successful team. The biggest reason why Anet is reluctant to implement dueling, and this is their reasoning, is it does not fit with how they want pvp to be. They want PvP to be group oriented, not 1v1 oriented. They want to promote helping each other, using each other's strengths to cover your own weakness. 1v1 does not do this. 1v1 promotes solo play, not team play.
I've watched games go through near continuous buff/nerf cycles in an effort to achieve balance and still never get it right. Not to the extent that it quiets the insufferable whining from players whose turn it is to get beat on by the dreaded nerf bat. I don't see how GW2 will differ in that respect, especially when the core mechanics of the game don't use it. And I also expect that group-based balancing will differ greatly from one-on-one.
Using contemporary warfare as an example, you don't deploy your artillery units near the front line where they can be directly threatened. You deploy them in the rear, away from the danger. Why? Because if they do somehow get overrun, they are lost. They aren't meant for direct confrontation, but to enhance the fighting capabilities of a force of units. Put them one-on-one against a tank brigade or an infantry battalion and they're toast. They need support to keep the bad guys off them so they can do their job. And that's group play.
Anyway, what I said is I don't see how it can be done. But if anyone is capable of pulling a rabbit out of a hat in game terms, it would be ArenaNet, so I'm amenable to anything they might come up with. At least initially.
1- thats a very bad excuse
2- thats a very bad excuse
3- thats a really really bad excuse
I will never consider a pvp game to be that good unless it have good dueling system, still Uo win them all, remember those duels in UO?... It was like 13 years ago guys, 13... In 98 the dueling balance in Uo was pretty solid.
Now i will tell you where that excuse come from. The first time i heard about this "we wont balance duel because our game is a group pvp game", it was L2...
Thats just a bad excuse guys, in group you don't need to balance anything, all the groups are pretty much the same, class or role wise, you have a healer, few melee and few ranged. They usually have quiet similiar structure in any mmo, its not like you are going to balance a full healer party against a full tank role party anyway, or that kind orf thing, so?
. Why would you have to balance 2 groups that have pretty much the same class/role structure? You don't.
For me a pvp game that don't have duel balance have no balance whatsoever, it's pretty straight forward, the rest is just bs to feed kids with no experience. Damn thats pretty harsh...
*put on flame suit and wait*
You can't have read up on Guild Wars 2 very much at all after having read that paragraph. There will be no dedicated healer class...every class will be capable of healing. That alone changes the dynamics of the game very much.
That kind of translates into: "we will have rock-paper-scissors class balance like many other mmorpgs do (which is perfectly fine), but we want to avoid too much casual 1 on 1 encounters because some people might cry that their rock class can't be a pair of scissors when fighting paper".
That would perfectly fit their "avoid player tension" philosophy, (and it could very well be the main reason for Anet being dueling-averse) but I'd rather have them NOT disregarding an easily implemented and endless gameplay alternative which will offer casual fun to many people just to avoid the whinage of a few spoilt little brats (who will merrily whine about something else instead).
And like I said: issues with class imbalance will end up being a hot topic anyway, even without dueling, as every kind of group pvp offers many 1 on 1 moments.
But if it is fair and square rock-paper-scissors balance, with a slight chance to win from your anti-class when you are skillful enough, the discussion will end with a majority supporting Anet's balancing act (even though there will always be complainers).
Don't give in to terrorists* and implement dueling at launch, Anet!
(*read: people whining about natural and properly implemented rock-paper-scissors balance)
My brand new bloggity blog.
Thats why i used the role word, because in fact that excuse could be somehow valid in a class based game, the excuse become even weaker in a non trinity game. Still roles are role, even if they are for a short moment, they still exist.
Also Uo is pretty much the only pvp mmo without trinity everyone know for sure.
I don't see why you need to balance 1v1 dueling.
My theme song.
Because poeple like to duel, like i invite you to duel, and because duel make a large part of pvp encounter maybe, you know the pvp encounter in the wild...
I just just edit to say, i really don't understand why they don't want to balance duelling, i think it is just due to a very bad habit dev teams have now. Dueling in non trinity game is the easiest to balance since the fighyting strategy isn't about rock scissor paper (the usual class in trinity game) but about dps, backing up, heal/regen, back in damage. So ye they just need to balance the rythm of fight, its way easier to balance than rock scissor paper. I say this but i never played GW2, i'm not even sure how it work ingame, but it can't be very diferent than what we already know in principle anyway.
Sorry for the edit.
While that's true it leads to nerfing across the bored. Add dueling for fun and rp reasons and just forget about balancing for 1v1.
My theme song.
If you have time to waste, dicking around spamming duel invites to lowbies, then you aren't out fighting in the Mists trying to rack up points for server dominance.
Implementing a dueling system is a waste of time when those that crave PvP action should be out fighting the good fight for their server rather than hiding away trying to 1v1 that has now real purpose at all.
Nonsense. My point is that the trinity has nothing to do with the game being balanced towards group play or solo play.
You're forgetting about inter-class skill combos. You know...an Elementalist erects a fire wall which ignites a Ranger's arrows as they pass through it? It would be impossible to carry such gameplay over to duelling, so they're focussing on the task of balancing these complicated inter-class dynamics before focussing on duelling. Ultima Online, Lineage II and the presence or lack of the trinity has nothing to do with Guild Wars 2 because it's an entirely different kettle of fish.
Nobody involved with dueling is going to be satisfied with 'fun and rp', they are going to want to beat the class they are going up against. If a Warrior goes up against an Elementalist and ends up eating the dirt 9 times out of 10 in 1v1, you can guarantee that the Warrior is going to run bawling to the forums sreaming for a nerf to Elementailists. It won't matter if in WvWvW that Warriors can tear an Elementalist a new asshole every time because of GvG balancing, duel fans will be screaming about nerfs and 1v1 balance...not fun and rp.