Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help

Holinka appreciation thread


  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#41 Kriff

Kriff
  • Premium Junkies
  • Curse Premium
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Lightninghoof
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 23
  • Talents: Shadow 1/2/0/1/2/2
  • RBG: 2105

Posted 27 March 2013 - 04:36 PM

View PostDonald, on 27 March 2013 - 04:00 PM, said:

arena players are starving dogs near blizzards round table feast of PvE, haircuts, and pet battles

holinka threw us some crumbs

these are just crumbs, he is not a hero yet

we are not satisfied

Posted Image

Love it. Only problem though is that it would ruin R1. Maybe make the top 10 spots get the title? And hopefully the ladder would not be dominated by BG9. Theoretically there would be the same number of glad spots, but consolidating the ladder makes all the spots available to everyone so I am not sure how that would turn out.

But honestly, the best way to breathe life into this game would be to blur (or even remove, if possible) the lines between servers/battlegroups. Making it so you can do pretty much anything if you add someone on real ID is a good first step.

#42 Durial

Durial
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • EU-Talnivarr
  • Reckoning / Abrechnung
  • Posts: 885
  • Talents:
  • RBG: 576
  • LocationEngland, London

Posted 27 March 2013 - 05:44 PM

View PostDonald, on 27 March 2013 - 04:19 PM, said:

Posted Image



11 classes 33 specs... the game isn't super balanceable
the stuff i posted and probly a few others are game mechanics that can be fixed

ISNT THERE 34?! (Not many see the 34th, it's like a mewtwo)

(Druids have 4)

#43 Donald

Donald
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Tichondrius
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 941
  • Talents: Shadow 1/2/0/2/2/1
  • RBG: 2511

Posted 27 March 2013 - 05:47 PM

View PostKriff, on 27 March 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

Love it. Only problem though is that it would ruin R1. Maybe make the top 10 spots get the title? And hopefully the ladder would not be dominated by BG9. Theoretically there would be the same number of glad spots, but consolidating the ladder makes all the spots available to everyone so I am not sure how that would turn out.

But honestly, the best way to breathe life into this game would be to blur (or even remove, if possible) the lines between servers/battlegroups. Making it so you can do pretty much anything if you add someone on real ID is a good first step.
"Only problem though is that it would ruin R1."
one "R1" title? that's not a problem, that's the top form of competition. what we have now for "R1" is and has been forever a joke. they do the TR every year and the top teams are always the people that play on BG9, so the consolidated ladder would be "dominated" by "BG9" players, but that line would get blurred, the best players from everywhere would play each other all the time. overall skill would increase since you only get better by playing better people, which is why people go to BG9 in the first place (greater competition = greater training).

they should probably make glad top 1-5%, because when they made it top 0.5% it was TBC and arena participation was huge, very much due to the fact that EVERYONE arena'd because epics were actually hard to come by, so even little retard s3 challenger donjewberg could be 1700 for 3 months for his arena points and epics to get enough gear to do karazhan and own people in blues in BGs. i'll tell you how consolidating the ladder would turn out for the top 1-5% - exactly how it should.

they understandably didn't have the tech to blur the lines between servers and BGs before, but now they do and should be, especially with real ID raiding and PvP.

Posted Image


#44 AcerMVP

AcerMVP
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Darkspear
  • Cyclone
  • Posts: 644
  • Talents: Subtlety 1/1/0/0/0/2
  • RBG: 764

Posted 27 March 2013 - 05:55 PM

View PostDonald, on 27 March 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

"Only problem though is that it would ruin R1."
one "R1" title? that's not a problem, that's the top form of competition. what we have now for "R1" is and has been forever a joke. they do the TR every year and the top teams are always the people that play on BG9, so the consolidated ladder would be "dominated" by "BG9" players, but that line would get blurred, the best players from everywhere would play each other all the time. overall skill would increase since you only get better by playing better people, which is why people go to BG9 in the first place (greater competition = greater training).

they should probably make glad top 1-5%, because when they made it top 0.5% it was TBC and arena participation was huge, very much due to the fact that EVERYONE arena'd because epics were actually hard to come by, so even little retard s3 challenger donjewberg could be 1700 for 3 months for his arena points and epics to get enough gear to do karazhan and own people in blues in BGs. i'll tell you how consolidating the ladder would turn out for the top 1-5% - exactly how it should.

they understandably didn't have the tech to blur the lines between servers and BGs before, but now they do and should be, especially with real ID raiding and PvP.

Top 5% is a joke just because 1900 is already top 5%...

#45 Synkz

Synkz
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Blood Furnace
  • Retaliation
  • Posts: 2614
  • Talents: Destruction 0/2/0/0/2/.

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:01 PM

View PostOhhiimMvp, on 27 March 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

Top 5% is a joke just because 1900 is already top 5%...

Top 1-5% with all of the BGs being combined wouldn't be that bad, though.

#46 bouncyballs

bouncyballs
  • Junkies
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Magtheridon
  • Ruin
  • Posts: 42
  • Talents: Fury 2/1/2/0/1/0

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:03 PM

View PostSynkz, on 27 March 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

Top 1-5% with all of the BGs being combined wouldn't be that bad, though.

Why would you need to increase the percentage of people that get glad.... if you are widening the amount of people that are in the battle group then the .5% grows with it, but if you increase the percentage as well, then you would be growing the eligibility exponentially.

Edited by bouncyballs, 27 March 2013 - 06:05 PM.


#47 Feliclandelo

Feliclandelo
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • EU-Shattered Hand
  • Cyclone / Wirbelsturm
  • Posts: 709
  • Talents: Holy 0/0/1/2/2/1

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:04 PM

View PostNickyEU, on 27 March 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

Hooooolinka

I wanna take you out and give you the time of your life!

Ps hyuru sucks

I agree with both of these statements.

On another note, I don't think they should completly remove racials. Perhaps even them out a bit more, but it really still is an MMORPG we are playing here, I like the fact that I can choose among a few different races, and have a small trick accordingly. +1%, Arcane Torrent, Gift of the Naaru. Nothing gamechanging. On that note, the human racial probably won't be that good anyway after the 5.3 fixes, but wotf is a bit too strong.

#48 GrieverZ

GrieverZ
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Emerald Dream
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 1299
  • Talents: Marksmanship 2/0/1/2/1/1
  • RBG: 1910

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:06 PM

View PostOhhiimMvp, on 27 March 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

Top 5% is a joke just because 1900 is already top 5%...

70-100+ teams getting drakes in BC didn't seem to be a problem back then, why is it now? On my Bgroup 1900 is rank 90 atm.

Also why do people see rating as a static value of skill? It got stupidly deflated, 1900 atm is much harder than 1900 in WoLTK or S9/early S10. I don't remember exactly but weren't glad cutoffs around 2k in BC? I remember people that got glad without being even able to buy their shoulders in S4 and those were at 2200.

I'm not saying they should be given away for free, but if the goal is to incite people to pvp and create an healthy competitive setting rewarding only 12 teams out of 2000+ feels a bit absurd.

We've seen what insanely exclusive rewards creates anyway, an underground market preventing legit players from acessing them anyway because a vast percentage of spots are taken by a handful of people monetizing those rewards for real life money.

Edited by GrieverZ, 27 March 2013 - 06:45 PM.


#49 Feliclandelo

Feliclandelo
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • EU-Shattered Hand
  • Cyclone / Wirbelsturm
  • Posts: 709
  • Talents: Holy 0/0/1/2/2/1

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:38 PM

Gladiator in TBC was around 2200 in 3v3, and 2400 in 2v2. On most BG's that was. I can't remember S1, that might be an anormalia. 5v5 only had a few spots like now, around 2250+.

#50 CreepStatus

CreepStatus
  • Junkies
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Kel'Thuzad
  • Nightfall
  • Posts: 390
  • Talents: Restoration 1/2/2/1/2/0
  • LocationGAINZville, the Gym

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:46 PM

View PostFeliclandelo, on 27 March 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

Gladiator in TBC was around 2200 in 3v3, and 2400 in 2v2. On most BG's that was. I can't remember S1, that might be an anormalia. 5v5 only had a few spots like now, around 2250+.

5s was not like now, lol.

now there's no glad slots only rank 1 slots, there used to be quite a bit of activity in 5s, one of the most competitive brackets if you don't remember it was what used to be played in MLG over 3s.

and 2s was much lower like 2250/2300, not 2400

Edited by CreepStatus, 27 March 2013 - 06:52 PM.

Please use an appropriate signature; thanks! www.arenajunkies.com/forum-9/announcement-3-forum-rules-2272014/
the best playlist ever-https://www.youtube....FVT_S-TjfEu-GC2
NEW: best playlist ever 2- http://www.youtube.c...feature=mh_lolz
twitch.tv/bornlol
youtube.com/bornlolwins

#51 GrieverZ

GrieverZ
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Emerald Dream
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 1299
  • Talents: Marksmanship 2/0/1/2/1/1
  • RBG: 1910

Posted 27 March 2013 - 06:56 PM

View PostFeliclandelo, on 27 March 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

Gladiator in TBC was around 2200 in 3v3, and 2400 in 2v2. On most BG's that was. I can't remember S1, that might be an anormalia. 5v5 only had a few spots like now, around 2250+.

Um, i really don't remember teams going up to 2400 as a very common thing, outside at the top of very competitive BGs maybe.

Actually managed to dig from the depths of the internet a thread from S2 and things aparently looked like this, at least on one BG.

Quote

2v2 :
Gladiator - 2150
Duelist - 1920
Rival - 1700
Challenger - 1500

3v3:
Gladiator - 2175
Duelist - 1900
Rival - 1700
Challenger - 1500

2v2:
Gladiator - 2180
Duelist - 1925
Rival - 1725
Challenger - 1500

(Source : http://elitistjerks....tor_cutoffs/p3/ )

Considering S3 was aparently the most active season ever, 2k glads don't seem completly far-fetched, at least on some BGs ans S4 was very short with a rating wipe every season (since MMR didn't exists) its also in the realm of possibilities.

Either way, my point is that glad was much more accessible back then.

Edited by GrieverZ, 27 March 2013 - 06:58 PM.


#52 dionim

dionim
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Arthas
  • Ruin
  • Posts: 506
  • Talents: Shadow 1/1/0/1/2/1
  • 2v2: 883

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:29 PM

View PostGrieverZ, on 27 March 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

Um, i really don't remember teams going up to 2400 as a very common thing, outside at the top of very competitive BGs maybe.

Actually managed to dig from the depths of the internet a thread from S2 and things aparently looked like this, at least on one BG.



(Source : http://elitistjerks....tor_cutoffs/p3/ )

Considering S3 was aparently the most active season ever, 2k glads don't seem completly far-fetched, at least on some BGs ans S4 was very short with a rating wipe every season (since MMR didn't exists) its also in the realm of possibilities.

Either way, my point is that glad was much more accessible back then.

ratings have nothing to do with glad, ranks do

you dont get glad cuz you got 2xxx rating, but cuz you're rank 1x

#53 AcerMVP

AcerMVP
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • US-Darkspear
  • Cyclone
  • Posts: 644
  • Talents: Subtlety 1/1/0/0/0/2
  • RBG: 764

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:30 PM

What the shit? Really? 2200+ was barely glad back in TBC at least on my bg.

#54 GrieverZ

GrieverZ
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Emerald Dream
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 1299
  • Talents: Marksmanship 2/0/1/2/1/1
  • RBG: 1910

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:40 PM

View Postdionim, on 27 March 2013 - 07:29 PM, said:

ratings have nothing to do with glad, ranks do

you dont get glad cuz you got 2xxx rating, but cuz you're rank 1x

I'm aware. Those numbers are simply rough rating cutoffs to reach the minimum ranking to be eligible for gladiator in S2 on a particular bg to illustrate my point from a previous post.

Edited by GrieverZ, 27 March 2013 - 07:47 PM.


#55 Feliclandelo

Feliclandelo
  • Junkies
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • EU-Shattered Hand
  • Cyclone / Wirbelsturm
  • Posts: 709
  • Talents: Holy 0/0/1/2/2/1

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:58 PM

You cant compare US to EU. My experiences are only from EU. The numbers are listed are from european bgs that were decently competitive. Nobody would get gladiator in 2v2 without breaking 2300+ minimum.

Edited by Feliclandelo, 27 March 2013 - 07:58 PM.


#56 dionim

dionim
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Arthas
  • Ruin
  • Posts: 506
  • Talents: Shadow 1/1/0/1/2/1
  • 2v2: 883

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:05 PM

I dont get your point grievez/donald

you want a reward for top 5% ? it already exist, is named Duelist

if people dont care/like it now why would they like another tittle that everyone can have?

#57 Dawnlolz

Dawnlolz
  • Junkies
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • EU-Ravencrest
  • Cyclone / Wirbelsturm
  • Posts: 437
  • Talents: Assassination 1/1/2/2/1/1
  • 2v2: 1708
  • 3v3: 2002
  • RBG: 192

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:12 PM

Holinka for president ! :heart:


Remove titles fro 5s and maybe give them back to 2s when work has been done to balance in the future? :duckers:

#58 Redboww

Redboww
  • Junkies
  • Night Elfclass_name
  • US-Sargeras
  • Shadowburn
  • Posts: 427
  • Talents: Marksmanship 2/0/2/0/0/.

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:25 PM

I miss competitive 2's so badly... I know it was never really balanced, but the idea of being able to just pick up and play with one person made it so easy to coordinate. I'm getting kind of sick of 3's being the only meaningful pvp bracket.

Fixes:
1. Unite all the battlegroups to really help out queue times.
2. Make 2s, 3s, 5s each give more points like it used to.. Or at least make 5s do the rbg cap.. that would improve participation SOOO MUCH.
3. RealID arena teams.. Come on, its time.
4. Probably should allow multiple teams... e.g. starcraft system. I really see no reason why this couldn't be implemented, and make the game better.

After these types of things are fixed, then worry about class balance? Fixing class balance isn't going to help a dying game. The reason the pvp game is dying is because people are getting bored most likely. (At least I am getting bored of just doing 3s with one team at a time over and over...)

#59 Donald

Donald
  • Junkies
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Tichondrius
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 941
  • Talents: Shadow 1/2/0/2/2/1
  • RBG: 2511

Posted 27 March 2013 - 08:32 PM

View PostOhhiimMvp, on 27 March 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

Top 5% is a joke just because 1900 is already top 5%...
it doesn't have to be 5%. i don't see you responding to my point about what arena participation was in TBC and why it was (super high because it was a good source of epics for all, meaning that a bottom gladiator today is better than mostly arena players whereas a bottom gladiator in TBC when the 0.5% was chosen he was better than a bunch of scrubs).

View PostSynkz, on 27 March 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

Top 1-5% with all of the BGs being combined wouldn't be that bad, though.
combining them just gets rid of the randomness that different battlegroup ladders adds to the reward.

View Postbouncyballs, on 27 March 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

Why would you need to increase the percentage of people that get glad.... if you are widening the amount of people that are in the battle group then the .5% grows with it, but if you increase the percentage as well, then you would be growing the eligibility exponentially.
because participation is different today than what it was back in the day like i said
the % does not "grow with it" ... 0.5% of one big BG = 0.5% of each ladder individually combined

View PostGrieverZ, on 27 March 2013 - 06:06 PM, said:

I'm not saying they should be given away for free, but if the goal is to incite people to pvp and create a healthy competitive setting rewarding only 12 teams out of 2000+ feels a bit absurd.
the only reason it is absurd is because people felt like they had to do arena to get good gear when the 0.5% was decided. they don't do that anymore, so participation went from, say, 10,000 to 5,000. the 10,000 was made of raiders and arena players, and the 5,000 today is just arena players.

first scenario: 0.5% of 10,000 is 50 teams
second scenario: 0.5% of 5,000 is 25 teams

the only reason that the 50th team in the first scenario got glad was because there were 5,000 extra scrub PvE teams in the 1600s. today's glad is better than just PvPers. the 50th team of the second scenario is better than or equal to the 50th team of the first scenario, so they should get glad. the way to do that is to increase the from 0.5% to 1-5% (meaning 1, 2... or 5%, idk how to decide the exact number).

View PostGrieverZ, on 27 March 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

Either way, my point is that glad was much more accessible back then.
back to my points... = why the % should be increased.

View PostRedboww, on 27 March 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

4. Probably should allow multiple teams... e.g. starcraft system. I really see no reason why this couldn't be implemented, and make the game better.
i soooo forgot about this

yes, the arena system should work like the RBG ladder should.
you have a RBG rating and your individual rating is put on a ladder against everyone else.
you should have an RBG rating, a 2v2 rating, 3v3 rating, and 5v5 rating, and a global ladder for each.
you would be able to play with different team mates just like you are in RBGs.

Posted Image


#60 bouncyballs

bouncyballs
  • Junkies
  • Humanclass_name
  • US-Magtheridon
  • Ruin
  • Posts: 42
  • Talents: Fury 2/1/2/0/1/0

Posted 27 March 2013 - 09:06 PM

I see so what you are proposing is they still keep the battlegroup system; however, allow players to queue against all other players fromg every battlegroup? Thiss seems like a decent way to look at it without completely redesigning the entire system.

However, I feel like it would obviously need some boundaries, as far as like I am from texas and the internet here is mediocre, but playiing on central server I get fine ms at about 50 to 70 ms, however when playing on west coast servers, my ms fluxuates from 100 to 200 and being a melee class is nearly impossible to play t that ms... well its possible but it definitely negatively effects my gameplay.

Now I realize some people may say that its a personal problem with bad internet, but isn't the whole point to cater towards the greater public? And I am sure that having abilities not cast nearly a half a second after you use the ability is noticeable even to newer players. So, I don't know if anyone has a solution to this other than splitting bgs up regionally.

Now, for the sc2 system thing, I honestly think this would be negaive. I personally would never play with anyone that I have the chance of losing with, where as I like to play with random people all the time or alts or even friends that might not be the best at the game. I don't have an alternative; it seems like a fine idea but I think in my case and probably others it would make me play the game even less than I already do.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

<