Originally posted by Purgatus

Originally posted by C1d0s

All the downed state does is make being beaten much more forgiving and add length to fights. To say that any of this adds extra depth is rather shallow. Pretty much ANYTHING added could, in theory, add some sort of padded complexity no matter how major or minor. IMO, the downed state is tedious and hand-holding and I'd much prefer to just die and rez normally like in most MMOs.

It encourages thoughtful and strategic use of skills. Calling is shallow, defines shallow nicely.

Why not let the actual PVP dictate strategic use of skill, instead of having to plan around the inevitable downed state of your foe?

To the first argument presented: You could also say that PVP without the downed state is equally complex and/or stategic.

To use your logic, for example: You fight, you have to determine whether or not to use that long-channeled spell against this type of foe, or perhaps try and cast on an unsuspecting opponent, or ignore them completely to complete the mission objective.

See? Works both ways. The only thing different is one instance might be longer due to a forced mechanic in which the only added depth is how long it takes to literally kill someone.

Originally posted by C1d0s

*snip*

Why not let the actual PVP dictate strategic use of skill, instead of having to plan around the inevitable downed state of your foe?

To the first argument presented: You could also say that PVP without the downed state is equally complex and/or stategic.

To use your logic, for example: You fight, you have to determine whether or not to use that long-channeled spell against this type of foe, or perhaps try and cast on an unsuspecting opponent, or ignore them completely to complete the mission objective.

See? Works both ways. The only thing different is one instance might be longer due to a forced mechanic in which the only added depth is how long it takes to literally kill someone.

Its part of the "actual" PvP. And the reason that it is strategic is that killing is not the primary purpose of the fight. Controling territory is. Killing only furthers the primary purpose.

You strike me as the type of player that defines his play by KDR (I could be dead wrong). This is not that type of game.

too many people just confuse downed with death. there's nothing wrong with the mechanic in general, but tweaking of some of the skills in that state is perhaps needed. i am, however, still on the fence about the rally from downed state.

Originally posted by C1d0s

Originally posted by Purgatus

Originally posted by C1d0s

All the downed state does is make being beaten much more forgiving and add length to fights. To say that any of this adds extra depth is rather shallow. Pretty much ANYTHING added could, in theory, add some sort of padded complexity no matter how major or minor. IMO, the downed state is tedious and hand-holding and I'd much prefer to just die and rez normally like in most MMOs.

It encourages thoughtful and strategic use of skills. Calling is shallow, defines shallow nicely.

Why not let the actual PVP dictate strategic use of skill, instead of having to plan around the inevitable downed state of your foe?

To the first argument presented: You could also say that PVP without the downed state is equally complex and/or stategic.

To use your logic, for example: You fight, you have to determine whether or not to use that long-channeled spell against this type of foe, or perhaps try and cast on an unsuspecting opponent, or ignore them completely to complete the mission objective.

See? Works both ways. The only thing different is one instance might be longer due to a forced mechanic in which the only added depth is how long it takes to literally kill someone.

Originally posted by Baddogbill

Originally posted by C1d0s

Originally posted by Purgatus

Originally posted by C1d0s

All the downed state does is make being beaten much more forgiving and add length to fights. To say that any of this adds extra depth is rather shallow. Pretty much ANYTHING added could, in theory, add some sort of padded complexity no matter how major or minor. IMO, the downed state is tedious and hand-holding and I'd much prefer to just die and rez normally like in most MMOs.

It encourages thoughtful and strategic use of skills. Calling is shallow, defines shallow nicely.

Why not let the actual PVP dictate strategic use of skill, instead of having to plan around the inevitable downed state of your foe?

To the first argument presented: You could also say that PVP without the downed state is equally complex and/or stategic.

To use your logic, for example: You fight, you have to determine whether or not to use that long-channeled spell against this type of foe, or perhaps try and cast on an unsuspecting opponent, or ignore them completely to complete the mission objective.

See? Works both ways. The only thing different is one instance might be longer due to a forced mechanic in which the only added depth is how long it takes to literally kill someone.

I really don't know about the downed state mechanic , I've only played about 70-75 hrs so I'm not sold 100% one way  or another .I do know it's something new and I'm all for a change that adds something different to  the same old pvp I've rehashed over the last 12 years or so  .

 

But I do know you can't have your cake and eat it too ...if you post one way saying GW2 is the same old thing and then turn around and complain about everything that ArenaNet does different you sort of defeat the purpose of playing a new game. I’m happier trying a new game like GW2 and trying new things then the recycled crap we’ve been given for the last few years

 

The downed mechanic seems out of place in GW2. Did that part (killing/dying) of PvP really need changing? I've never heard anyone complain about how it worked in any oher MMO.

I mean if people think it's "fun" why not request they add it to every mob in PvE as well? Oh you wouldn't like stomping every mob after killing it? Thought so.

I also didn't like the downed mechanic, I feel it makes number imbalances even greater... if you get an ambush on a larger number of people they can all quickly help their friends up, and the more people helping you get up the faster you get up, meaning that the side with the most people will have a stronger advantage than normal.

Dislike :-(

Originally posted by Purgatus

Originally posted by C1d0s

*snip*

Why not let the actual PVP dictate strategic use of skill, instead of having to plan around the inevitable downed state of your foe?

To the first argument presented: You could also say that PVP without the downed state is equally complex and/or stategic.

To use your logic, for example: You fight, you have to determine whether or not to use that long-channeled spell against this type of foe, or perhaps try and cast on an unsuspecting opponent, or ignore them completely to complete the mission objective.

See? Works both ways. The only thing different is one instance might be longer due to a forced mechanic in which the only added depth is how long it takes to literally kill someone.

Its part of the "actual" PvP. And the reason that it is strategic is that killing is not the primary purpose of the fight. Controling territory is. Killing only furthers the primary purpose.

You strike me as the type of player that defines his play by KDR (I could be dead wrong). This is not that type of game.

I appreciate the fact that you responded to me like a person, not like most GW2 zealots who treat any disagreement like a witch hunt.

Mentioning that it's part of the "actual PVP" is part of my disagreement with the game's take on player-versus-player, I suppose. To be completely fair, you can't say that any of the PVP would be fundamentally different if you DID'T have the downed state. You'd still be working for the same goals in the exact same manner, save the fact that reaching 0 HP would  then be something to generally avoid - not that you wouldn't in the first place, but there's much less motive when you can depend on a downed state and the possibility of being rezzed. To me, I see the downed state as nothing more than a handicap for those less skilled players - which is fine seeing how the goal of Arenanet was to even the playing field between hardcore (skilled?) and casual players.. much like Warcraft does/is doing. Calling the downed state some innovative, super complex and strategic implimentation does seems a little ridiculous to me, though.

To be honest, I still like the game and plan to play. I just dislike the downed state.

P.S. I do care about KDR in games / game modes where that actually matters ( CoD DM / TDM; TF2 DM )

I am really on the fence about the downed state. At times it seems great and adds a sense of urgency to try and fight for your right to live (so to speak) but at other times it's just tedious and frustrating.  I'm hoping that I learn to use it to a better extent and maybe I can find a greater value in it.

The whole downed state thing reminds me of Return to Castle Wolfenstein because that game was the first FPS I played with a system where one player could revive another after he had been "killed."  It actually changed the multiplayer in a way that made squads and teamwork much more important.  Because, prior to being able to revive your teammates, death happened so quickly in an FPS that made it fairly difficult to roll with a squad...your squad may win a fight, but be completely broken up from folks dying and respawning far away.

MMORPGs never had this issue because of the power of targeted healing, and the relatively longer time it took to kill someone.  But think about this...healing does not have NEAR the amount of influence in GW2 than it did in other MMORPGs like Rift and WAR.  In those games, healers literally won scenarios because they could make it so you literally couldn't bring an enemy player down.

But in GW2, you can't just sit back and heal to keep someone alive...and I think that the downed state is almost a replacement for the traditional healing dynamic.  It gives teammates a way to support each other, and keep each other alive without having targeted healing.

It works in small arenas because the downed player can act as a tether point. But in the larger WvW maps, downed state translates into a ridiculous snare mechanic.

Originally posted by Foomerang

It works in small arenas because the downed player can act as a tether point. But in the larger WvW maps, downed state translates into a ridiculous snare mechanic.

Not following...

Originally posted by eyelolled

I am really on the fence about the downed state. At times it seems great and adds a sense of urgency to try and fight for your right to live (so to speak) but at other times it's just tedious and frustrating.  I'm hoping that I learn to use it to a better extent and maybe I can find a greater value in it.

It's hard to understand it's purpose when doing PvE in the starter areas but wait until you start running hard mode dungeons or competitive PvP and you'll start to appreciate how much the downed state adds to the game.

Some people who are looking for anything to hate on will act like having to decide between helping an ally, finishing an enemy or going for an objective isn't strategic in part because they haven't ever seen it used in a strategic way and can't even begin to  understand its purpose much less value. They will write it off as a gimick to extend combat because they can only think of it in terms of games like WoW where you have dedicated tanks and healers.

The video linked in the OP does a good job of explaining how the down state adds a new dimension to PvP and demonstrates how the downed state makes people think about how and when to use their normal abilities. GW2 PvP is much more than simply blowing all your CDs to focus someone down, rinse and repeat.

Focus firing the healer may have been a great strategy in WoW PvP but the entire GW2 combat system is designed to offer more situations and require more thought than this.

I could do without it in spvp.

I think it's really cool in PVE and WvWvW (Particularly WvWvW during big zerg vs zerg fights, diving in under heavy fire and trying to get that ress off, then you and your ally trying to run to safety is pretty awesome.

Originally posted by C1d0s

*snip*

I appreciate the fact that you responded to me like a person, not like most GW2 zealots who treat any disagreement like a witch hunt.

Mentioning that it's part of the "actual PVP" is part of my disagreement with the game's take on player-versus-player, I suppose. To be completely fair, you can't say that any of the PVP would be fundamentally different if you DID'T have the downed state. You'd still be working for the same goals in the exact same manner, save the fact that reaching 0 HP would  then be something to generally avoid - not that you wouldn't in the first place, but there's much less motive when you can depend on a downed state and the possibility of being rezzed. To me, I see the downed state as nothing more than a handicap for those less skilled players - which is fine seeing how the goal of Arenanet was to even the playing field between hardcore (skilled?) and casual players.. much like Warcraft does/is doing. Calling the downed state some innovative, super complex and strategic implimentation does seems a little ridiculous to me, though.

To be honest, I still like the game and plan to play. I just dislike the downed state.

P.S. I do care about KDR in games / game modes where that actually matters ( CoD DM / TDM; TF2 DM )

Likewise, I apreciate you are objective enough to answer my points honestly, without resorting to the vitriolic hatered I've come to expect from detractors.

I really think the downed state lessens personal achevment in a match in favor of team goals. I like this as I like team oriented game over lone wolf games ah la CoD.

If you are the type of player who revels in 1v1 abd 1v2ing enemies with your skill, you are not going to be as impressed with those kinds of changes. If you are the type of player that likes furthering team goals even at the expense of  your personal acheivments, then this will likely resonate with you.

This is what I feel they are going for, and I think it works. It adds more meaningful choice to skill use and encourages team play.

Focus firing the healer may have been a great strategy in WoW PvP but the entire GW2 combat system is designed to offer more situations and require more thought than this.

To be fair, I noticed focus-firing almost exclusively in all team-based realms of GW2 PVP.

You'll have players zerg one person, and five or more different people trying to execute the same person even as they're being bombarded by enemy attacks. It's MUCH worse in large-scale WvWvW battles. The only instance where any sort of strategy or thought was required seems to, from my experience, be found in those small solo battles during the WvW PVP.

It did add some tense moments in Darkfall for me but there i would have been looted empty if a group member would not have saved my half dead ass in GW2 it feels (at least to me) differently.

A lot of the GW2 followers claim that the game will need a lot of skill to be played.

You need to evade! (as if 2 evade moves in like what 30 secs make a diff and we just ignore blocking completely why don't we...)  Than we have the downed state but what is that actually?

Lets see you fight an opponent he is better you go down but its not over yet the better skill did not mean anything just yet now you are downed but still fighting and your inferior skill does not matter anymore its not much you can do  just lay still and hit a few buttons and try to kill the opponent.

I don't see the Strategy or Complexity at all its more the other way around.

In a big besiege you would loose some of the troops they would die respawn somewhat far away and try to rush back meanwhile the remaining troops have to react accordingly to the losses they would need to adjust the Strategy while waiting for reinforcements.

As a team leader you have to take into account what you lost and adjust accordingly to that but the downed state takes that away. 

So it would seem like a poor choice to put it in BUT it does encourage the players and they have more fun (most don't want to try hard to archive anything in games so lets make it easy for them/not saying its a bad thing to not want to try hard) and the main point in my opinion is that without the Trinity the game has no depths to begin with so there is not much strategy involved anymore so adding the downed state does add some illusion of strategy and depths and makes everyone happy.

In the end its like playing Chess only with Pawns, the game would be very boring so we add a ability to the pawns to fight even if they were beaten already and other pawns can get them back on the board too, by doing that we get the illusion of a deep game of chess while in reality its nothing more than pawns beating each other.

It may seem like i do not enjoy GW2 but thats not true the pvp is (at least the WvWvW) enjoyable and fun.

I just really don't think that everything about this game deserves the high praise it gets from its followers 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzxiGmF5fcY&feature=channel&list=UL&t=95

this video pretty much explains it perfectly

The Foefire map footage shows my team getting pooped on. Was a 4v5 so we didn't stand much of a chance, still KINDA embarrassing.

On topic though, I agree with Taugrim with how the downed state adds more "flavor" to combat, in both PvE and PvP. I really don't understand how anyone could argue otherwise, not with the way this game is built.

Originally posted by C1d0s

To me, I see the downed state as nothing more than a handicap for those less skilled players - which is fine seeing how the goal of Arenanet was to even the playing field between hardcore (skilled?) and casual players.. much like Warcraft does/is doing. Calling the downed state some innovative, super complex and strategic implimentation does seems a little ridiculous to me, though.

 

Did you, by any chance, actually watch the video about which that comment was made? And the context in which it was made had to do with sPvP, which again, you would know by watching the video in which it seemed, to me, to cleary add another layer of gameplay strategy. AND in my second paragraph I stated that this was referring to sPvP and not an "OMG everything in GW2 is awesome" kind of thing.

I have no problem with people criticizing facets of GW2 or not agreeing with me, but it would be helpful, at least from my point of view, if you took 10 minutes of your life to see the gameplay to which I was referring.

Or you could, you know, keep making assumptions.

And if you DID watch the video, and still stand by your comments, then so be it, we disagree.

---

Originally posted by Creslin321

---

Originally posted by Foomerang It works in small arenas because the downed player can act as a tether point. But in the larger WvW maps, downed state translates into a ridiculous snare mechanic.

---

Not following...

---