Hello everyone, today I will be addressing a serious issue that is literally causing the game to die, critical. There is already another article describing the issues with critical, so I am not going to steal his article. But, I do have a personal story of an experiment I performed last week in pvp. I really hope you guys like this, because it took 5 months to complete.
So to be specific, the preparation for the experiment was almost 5 months, but the actual experiment lasted 3 days. I got my fire from level 1 to 60, got him the proper gear, got a pet, and finally some hardcore critical in those 5 months.
Allow me to describe some important stats - His damage was 101%, total critical percent was 56%, and universal resist was 31%. and yes he was only level 60.
These stats are outrageous, and mostly because of the critical. The experiment was to see how fast I could get the 35 wins needed to become a warlord. (I purposely lost 10 times / boosted a friend 10 times to make it 35 not 25 wins).
My initial guess for amount of time needed to obtain 35 wins was 3 weeks, winning 3-5 matches every time I got on for the day. I figured I would win most, lose some, making it somewhat long to get to warlord. My guess was obliterated, because I won 35 times straight, over the course of 3 days.
It was truly awful how I didn't even know how to play fire, yet with that critical, was able to do things like turn one brimstone rev. for 2.6k damage, then elf for the win. My opponents were really annoyed after losing to me, because the fight lasted 8 minutes and they didn't get a chance to do much of anything.
So in short, I hope this has made some people realize how awful critical is in pvp, especially at legend. The scarier part is I can get my critical to 63% and drop my damage down to 95% which is still good. This is an experiment and personal story detailing why KingsIsle really needs to listen to their fans, and make serious changes within the game.
Side note, just abolish shadow spells and critical from pvp thank you very much.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
I ABSOLUTELY agree! I'm a Level 50 Warlord (~2k rank) and this happens a lot when I play, I absolutely hate it, especially when I face schools like Storm and Fire (strongest schools). I get high level storms, and I don't mind that, but what frustrates me is when they crit and I don't block (ever). Sometimes I'll even get lucky and crit a lot, but they won't block. It's unfair for them in that case.
I totally would love it if KI removed all Critical from PvP only. I don't care if they don't remove it from other places, but PvP should be about fairness, and about strategy and skill, not about luck. It confuses people and they question their own skill, when in reality they're pretty good, but they still lose just because of some noob who crit on them.
If KI listened to their players more, they would be more successful. I know this game has potential. I've been with Wizard since 2009 with different accounts, but PvP is losing its excitement.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
ElectroCat on May 25, 2016 wrote:
Hello everyone, today I will be addressing a serious issue that is literally causing the game to die, critical. There is already another article describing the issues with critical, so I am not going to steal his article. But, I do have a personal story of an experiment I performed last week in pvp. I really hope you guys like this, because it took 5 months to complete.
So to be specific, the preparation for the experiment was almost 5 months, but the actual experiment lasted 3 days. I got my fire from level 1 to 60, got him the proper gear, got a pet, and finally some hardcore critical in those 5 months.
Allow me to describe some important stats - His damage was 101%, total critical percent was 56%, and universal resist was 31%. and yes he was only level 60.
These stats are outrageous, and mostly because of the critical. The experiment was to see how fast I could get the 35 wins needed to become a warlord. (I purposely lost 10 times / boosted a friend 10 times to make it 35 not 25 wins).
My initial guess for amount of time needed to obtain 35 wins was 3 weeks, winning 3-5 matches every time I got on for the day. I figured I would win most, lose some, making it somewhat long to get to warlord. My guess was obliterated, because I won 35 times straight, over the course of 3 days.
It was truly awful how I didn't even know how to play fire, yet with that critical, was able to do things like turn one brimstone rev. for 2.6k damage, then elf for the win. My opponents were really annoyed after losing to me, because the fight lasted 8 minutes and they didn't get a chance to do much of anything.
So in short, I hope this has made some people realize how awful critical is in pvp, especially at legend. The scarier part is I can get my critical to 63% and drop my damage down to 95% which is still good. This is an experiment and personal story detailing why KingsIsle really needs to listen to their fans, and make serious changes within the game.
Side note, just abolish shadow spells and critical from pvp thank you very much.
Agreed Indeed! Please post to the other topic on this that was started recently; He is trying to make it a Hot Topic so that many post and mabye K I will listen. Thanks Electrocat, your words ring true as well. If we all keep building that Post maybe something will get done? Critical and Shadow should go. Let's get back to Strat Play.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
SilverbackMonkey on May 26, 2016 wrote:
Agreed Indeed! Please post to the other topic on this that was started recently; He is trying to make it a Hot Topic so that many post and mabye K I will listen. Thanks Electrocat, your words ring true as well. If we all keep building that Post maybe something will get done? Critical and Shadow should go. Let's get back to Strat Play.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
AngelBlade69 on Jun 2, 2016 wrote:
Yup, I agree with this experiment for sure, and hope it gets implemented to the game sometime. I made a post kinda similar to this.
Yea I was going to make a post about critical removal but checked first to make sure I wasn't ripping anyone off. After I saw your post, I figured I would just make a post over my experiment, and not general info on why critical should be removed. It's truly a wonder KI hasn't made a feedback Friday asking if people like critical in PVP or not.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
I for one think that critical allows for a different type of gameplay in the arena and keeps it from being a stale who has the better "try hard" (for lack of a better word) stats. Like it or not removing something from the game that's been there for so long is just plain awkward and would probably turn off even more players from pvping. I think the system needs to be fixed rather than removed
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
king140506 on Jun 4, 2016 wrote:
I for one think that critical allows for a different type of gameplay in the arena and keeps it from being a stale who has the better "try hard" (for lack of a better word) stats. Like it or not removing something from the game that's been there for so long is just plain awkward and would probably turn off even more players from pvping. I think the system needs to be fixed rather than removed
I totally disagree. The system before the critical update was not good, but it wasn't horrible either. A lot of players disliked it in the game, but people weren't leaving by the boatloads because of it. You can argue that Shadow magic is what really made pvp enter this trend of decline; critical was the final blow to the community. If you really think about it, when shadow magic arrived in pvp, the response was not great. But it was when all of a sudden these shadow spells and all spells were getting critical'ed and not blocked every other turn, that people had a serious problem and left the game or pvp.
As far as "try hard" stats go, good stats is probably a better substitution because you don't have to try much at all to have good stats at levels like max and legendary. You say that it brings a "different type of gameplay". This gameplay is something I would think you would dislike, considering you don't like "try hard" stats. With my amazing stats, I'm doing a lot of damage. With critical and this new type of gameplay, I can easily destroy you in a few turns because my damage is doubled. The only new gameplay option it brings is called spam.
Maybe you don't like long, thought out games where the best wizard wins. Maybe you only enjoy 1 minute games where the spamiest critical lord takes the win. Sadly, 90% of the community disagrees with you and for good reason. Most people like games where you need real strategy and skill to win.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
ElectroCat on Jun 4, 2016 wrote:
I totally disagree. The system before the critical update was not good, but it wasn't horrible either. A lot of players disliked it in the game, but people weren't leaving by the boatloads because of it. You can argue that Shadow magic is what really made pvp enter this trend of decline; critical was the final blow to the community. If you really think about it, when shadow magic arrived in pvp, the response was not great. But it was when all of a sudden these shadow spells and all spells were getting critical'ed and not blocked every other turn, that people had a serious problem and left the game or pvp.
As far as "try hard" stats go, good stats is probably a better substitution because you don't have to try much at all to have good stats at levels like max and legendary. You say that it brings a "different type of gameplay". This gameplay is something I would think you would dislike, considering you don't like "try hard" stats. With my amazing stats, I'm doing a lot of damage. With critical and this new type of gameplay, I can easily destroy you in a few turns because my damage is doubled. The only new gameplay option it brings is called spam.
Maybe you don't like long, thought out games where the best wizard wins. Maybe you only enjoy 1 minute games where the spamiest critical lord takes the win. Sadly, 90% of the community disagrees with you and for good reason. Most people like games where you need real strategy and skill to win.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
LifeyLeafy on May 25, 2016 wrote:
I ABSOLUTELY agree! I'm a Level 50 Warlord (~2k rank) and this happens a lot when I play, I absolutely hate it, especially when I face schools like Storm and Fire (strongest schools). I get high level storms, and I don't mind that, but what frustrates me is when they crit and I don't block (ever). Sometimes I'll even get lucky and crit a lot, but they won't block. It's unfair for them in that case.
I totally would love it if KI removed all Critical from PvP only. I don't care if they don't remove it from other places, but PvP should be about fairness, and about strategy and skill, not about luck. It confuses people and they question their own skill, when in reality they're pretty good, but they still lose just because of some noob who crit on them.
If KI listened to their players more, they would be more successful. I know this game has potential. I've been with Wizard since 2009 with different accounts, but PvP is losing its excitement.
Do something KI.
I know what you're feeling. But removing critical would remove the purpose of people being obligated to get the best gear. What about all those times where people trained their pet and or trained multiple pets just to get a critical rating? And you are kinda ( no offense ) being self centered and you only want your own needs. If you dont like it get a critical block rating thats good, and plus its a part of the game. I've been a private for months and warlords go first and get a lucky crit so I know what you're feeling but its absolutely fair.
Life is unfair for everyone - noob but if life isn't fair for everyone, then that means life is fair because it isn't fair for everyone, thus making life fair. wow just plain clever.
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
DevinSkullStone on Jun 18, 2016 wrote:
I know what you're feeling. But removing critical would remove the purpose of people being obligated to get the best gear. What about all those times where people trained their pet and or trained multiple pets just to get a critical rating? And you are kinda ( no offense ) being self centered and you only want your own needs. If you dont like it get a critical block rating thats good, and plus its a part of the game. I've been a private for months and warlords go first and get a lucky crit so I know what you're feeling but its absolutely fair.
Life is unfair for everyone - noob but if life isn't fair for everyone, then that means life is fair because it isn't fair for everyone, thus making life fair. wow just plain clever.
I completely understand, believe me.
I understand that removing crit would cause a lot of conflict, especially for those who worked hard to get pets/gear who especially is about crit. However, what I'm trying to say is that for level 50's who are very high up in the rank ladder, KI should at least increase the crit block and make block more possible. Nowadays, I rarely ever see a grandmaster block to a higher level spammer who crits every time he hits. It's frustrating.
I'm not being self-centered by telling you a problem that most of the leaderboard PvP players face. Most of them are level 50-60's, and all of them face this problem since they are a high rank and they face high level spammers or people who crit a lot, but they never block. Or at least in very rare occasions.
Life is unfair? That is your argument? Then let's make PvP a lot worse now, because life is definitely unfair. Life being unfair is not an excuse to make PvP complete and utter trash, with all due respect...
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
LifeyLeafy on Jun 19, 2016 wrote:
I completely understand, believe me.
I understand that removing crit would cause a lot of conflict, especially for those who worked hard to get pets/gear who especially is about crit. However, what I'm trying to say is that for level 50's who are very high up in the rank ladder, KI should at least increase the crit block and make block more possible. Nowadays, I rarely ever see a grandmaster block to a higher level spammer who crits every time he hits. It's frustrating.
I'm not being self-centered by telling you a problem that most of the leaderboard PvP players face. Most of them are level 50-60's, and all of them face this problem since they are a high rank and they face high level spammers or people who crit a lot, but they never block. Or at least in very rare occasions.
Life is unfair? That is your argument? Then let's make PvP a lot worse now, because life is definitely unfair. Life being unfair is not an excuse to make PvP complete and utter trash, with all due respect...
going to get more worst when more new spell come to the Arcanum!
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
LifeyLeafy on Jun 19, 2016 wrote:
I completely understand, believe me.
I understand that removing crit would cause a lot of conflict, especially for those who worked hard to get pets/gear who especially is about crit. However, what I'm trying to say is that for level 50's who are very high up in the rank ladder, KI should at least increase the crit block and make block more possible. Nowadays, I rarely ever see a grandmaster block to a higher level spammer who crits every time he hits. It's frustrating.
I'm not being self-centered by telling you a problem that most of the leaderboard PvP players face. Most of them are level 50-60's, and all of them face this problem since they are a high rank and they face high level spammers or people who crit a lot, but they never block. Or at least in very rare occasions.
Life is unfair? That is your argument? Then let's make PvP a lot worse now, because life is definitely unfair. Life being unfair is not an excuse to make PvP complete and utter trash, with all due respect...
just a quote? don't make a fight with opinions? it wasn't my argument just a funny quote? and the leaderboard PvP players? People who take advantage of noobies not lvl 50-60 people but lvl 110's? lvl 50-60s arent having a hard time getting on the leaderboard with all the ranking they just can't go on like this is so easy i guess i won't get a challenge. The reason why lvl 110's are on the board and lvl 50-60's aren't, are because lvl 50-60's go onto harder opponents, lvl 110 is the level limit, meaning they can't go up against higher lvl opponents
Re: Why critical should be taken out, an experiment.
LifeyLeafy on Jun 19, 2016 wrote:
I completely understand, believe me.
I understand that removing crit would cause a lot of conflict, especially for those who worked hard to get pets/gear who especially is about crit. However, what I'm trying to say is that for level 50's who are very high up in the rank ladder, KI should at least increase the crit block and make block more possible. Nowadays, I rarely ever see a grandmaster block to a higher level spammer who crits every time he hits. It's frustrating.
I'm not being self-centered by telling you a problem that most of the leaderboard PvP players face. Most of them are level 50-60's, and all of them face this problem since they are a high rank and they face high level spammers or people who crit a lot, but they never block. Or at least in very rare occasions.
Life is unfair? That is your argument? Then let's make PvP a lot worse now, because life is definitely unfair. Life being unfair is not an excuse to make PvP complete and utter trash, with all due respect...
Warlord (~2k rank) and this happens a lot when I play, I absolutely hate it, especially when I face schools like Storm and Fire (strongest schools). I get high level storms, and I don't mind 
