Talk:Gladiator

From GuildWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Glads title[edit source]

Is this 25 10-consecutive-win runs since Factions was released, or ever? Because I'm pretty sure I have many of these, but I don't have the progress bar on any of my characters, PvP or PvE. Shandy 09:44, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

Since titles was in place, I most certainly have not opened 2 chests and ID'd 1 rare item :) Skuld Monk 09:51, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
Many titles began tracking progress only when the titles were introdiced, because the game didn't have any reason to track them before. Use your brains in these cases. Why would the game have tracked your chests or consecutive wins earlier? No reason. But it did track your missions and map exploration ofcourse. --Gem Gem-icon-sm.png 11:21, 2 May 2006 (CDT)
Well, it is still useful to know for sure what it tracked previously. But yes, it definitely did not start tracking that stuff until Titles were added. I'm sure I had Gladiator before (or at least enough for it to show progress!), but nothing was there to start with. --JoDiamonds 16:15, 2 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm pretty sure Shing Jea arena wins count towards Gladiator title too, not only Random and Team Arena victories. If someone can check Ascalon and Shiverpeaks Arenas that would be great.

Shing Jea arena does count: It was the only arena I played in since Factions was released and I got a point in gladiator. --Xeeron 09:28, 15 May 2006 (CDT)

Can someone verify the validity of the Deadly Glad title? I sincerely doubt that the number of wins is such a haphazard number as 168, when all other titles have nice "round" numbers.--4.248.91.110 05:18, 19 May 2006 (CDT)

I'm also skeptical, and curious about the mention of Gladiator's Arena, which others have said Gaile said was removed from the game. --JoDiamonds 14:15, 2 June 2006 (CDT)
Confirmed, in a couple of different threads relating to guild wars, there are people w/ screenshots of them at Mighty gladiator, hovering over the title track, and seeing 168 as the next number to reach. Wierd though, isn't it? --Tarutaru 05:36, 5 June 2006 (CDT)

Here is one of the threads sourced for the odd 168 number [1]. Anyway by the looks of things Glads is following naming convention of the Hero path. It will take awhile til we find out all the odd numbers required up to Emperor's Gladiator (and beyond?) --ArTy 11:52, 13 June 2006 (CDT)

Yea it does, here is my theoritical tree for the next couple of ranks based on a few factors (the 168 isnt 'random' though)
Title Winning Streaks needed Consecutive Wins Needed
Gladiator 25 10
Fierce Gladiator 50 10
Mighty Gladiator 100 10
Deadly Gladiator 168 10
Terrifying Gladiator 280 10
Conquering Gladiator 467(?) 10
Subjugating Gladiator 775(?) 10
Vanquishing Gladiator 1300(?) 10
Renowned Gladiator 2160(?) 10
Illustrious Gladiator 3600(?) 10

This is gleened off of the fame track divided by ten. (Which is where, in theory the odd 168 number comes from). --Draygo Korvan (Chat) 09:49, 26 June 2006 (CDT)

Well, that's accurate up to Subjugating so far. --Theonemephisto 10:12, 18 August 2006 (CDT)

Anyone have confirmation that 280 is the 4th level for this title?--ArTy 02:02, 11 July 2006 (CDT)

new glad title[edit source]

Note: The content of this talk section has been moved here from Talk:Title --Tetris L 05:19, 16 November 2006 (CST)

friend unko just got conquering next level is subjugating at 775 points --Theonemephisto 09:08, 16 August 2006 (CDT)

Picture

Conquering Glad.JPG


I think it's pretty obvious by this point that gladiator streaks needed are following perfectly along with the hero fame needed track, off by a factor of ten and offset slightly in the beginning. All in favor of adding Vanquishing through Eminent gladiator cells in the table sign below. (for the record: Vanquishing - 1,296; Renowned - 2,160; Illustrious - 3,600; Eminent - 6,000)--Tarutaru 02:31, 19 August 2006 (CDT)

20 consecs = 1 point in RA/TA[edit source]

Note: The content of this talk section has been moved here from Talk:Title --Tetris L 05:26, 16 November 2006 (CST)

Yep. I got 27 consecs. Only 1 point. Guildie said the same. Someone confirm?--Silk Weaker 04:59, 8 October 2006 (CDT)

I get one every 10 consecs. Grz 13:04, 14 October 2006 (CDT)
I very clearly remember not getting a point after winning 10 matches once. Might be a bug or some unknown condition that was not meet, but my guess is that you normally get a point every 10 matches, but you didnt due to the same reason I did not. --Xeeron 06:30, 15 October 2006 (CDT)
Me too, I won 12 after eachother, and didnt get one glad (stuck at 43 points)

max level?[edit source]

Is there any proof that Subjugating Gladiator is the max level of this title? Rhrez 07:27, 19 November 2006 (CST)

Thats what i has been wondering, i searched a proof about it but nothing, and seeing how the pvp titles works i would be surprised if this one can be maxed at that number. Lord Juan 05:23, 20 November 2006 (CST)

I read on the Hero title page, that rank 15 is the max. Perhaps it's the same for all PvP titles. 132.203.83.38 18:57, 22 February 2007 (CST)

During ATS testing they had legendary champion (12) shown, which leads me to believe that rank 12 is the highest for all the other PvP titles besides Hero Holymasamune 05:17, 1 May 2007 (CDT)

King's Gladiator?[edit source]

Who put King's Gladiator up?--Lokre 17:37, 11 June 2007 (CDT)

According to the history, User:Rah did. --NYC Elite 18:14, 23 June 2007 (CDT)
Ahh, thanks, i would ask for evidence of the title, but i already have seen it on a guru thread. it might, however, need to be posted on here before we could keep it up--Lokre 14:07, 26 June 2007 (CDT)

Easy points lately[edit source]

Don't you guys think its fairly easy lately to get points in Random Arenas? I mean..I did it for 2 hours yesterday and all I noticed was: No monk in party is atleast one leaver. As opposing party you just stay in your party and kill the remaining one of the other party or you get a flawless because everyone leaves! I got 4 Gladiator points in one day, and that's pretty nice for a new PvP player. Eshiworu

It's true, BUT .. you normally need fight at least one hard match, so doesn't really matter if 9 are easy when you can lose in 1. Normally the hard one is the last, maybe is the way RA/TA works.--NeHoMaR 00:54, 9 July 2007 (CDT)
Yeah that 9th battle is a curse for sure. Really annoying losing your 9th one. Happened to me lots of times :S
It's no curse, if u played RA occassionally, you'd realize it's no way "Random." Also, go make a Monk and join RA, I guarantee 3/4 of the times another Monk will be on ur team in ur first battle (lessens offense). Therefore on ur 9th battle, they MAY put u up against a team that completely counters urs or is simply better, causing loss.

progression[edit source]

25,25,50,68,112,186,289,541,964

Emperor's Gladiator[edit source]

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=45971&d=1185991019 Menzies 13:24, 1 August 2007 (CDT)

New Update[edit source]

I am note getting 1 point every win... 76.170.184.165 21:19, 2 August 2007 (CDT)

The update only changed the title's description, not the actual point gain, we're still getting one point each 10 wins =/ --Animate Flesh Golem.jpg Torins (talk) 21:22, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
As usual, just give it time. DavimusK 21:24, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
Why would I want to give it time? This change not only completely obliterates any prestige associated with the title, it invalidates the hours title-holders have put into getting it. I'll give it time to revert to normal instead. I've go my fingers crossed. Why would they need to completely change the title anyway? Why not create a new title for individual wins? The first rank could be "Arena Challenger." Demonic Peaches 21:48, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
I foresee the rank requirements changing drastically if this update is put into practice. 250 (or 500 to compensate for the new much easier way to earn points) wins per rank, perhaps? I am bobo 22:08, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
Yeah, prestige that comes with RA victories... - Candle.jpg Krowman (talkcontribs) 22:12, 2 August 2007 (CDT)
First off, Krowman has the most valid point on this page. Second, he would want to give it time because he obviously wants the easy points that this is offering. Likely the titles will be changed to reflect the point changes, much like the faction titles were at one time to reflect a major game change. DavimusK 22:19, 2 August 2007 (CDT)

OMG... I have been playing in Ra for Soooo long to get the freaking points... If it's not an error they are going to screw all the efforts and the tons of hours I spent in there... Let's hope it was just an accidental text change. Big Bow 02:34, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

I agreee, although I only have a mere 58 points they imo the must take our old points and mutliply it with 20 for things to be fair.--Vik.PNG (iktor) 04:35, 3 August 2007 (CDT)
I hope they're ganna change our current points (current points*10 or 20=new amount of points), and do the update afterwards, so we will be awarded for all the effort we put into it... 10 wins in a row would get us 1 glad points while it would give us 20 glad points in the new system. Pul 05:18, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

Oh cry me a dam river. What prestige can there be had from either sync-entering RA with all your friends to kill noobs, or whoring WITH the noobs for hours upon hours. Quit your freaking whining. If you want prestige, go play hero battles or HA. - Yellow Monkey 06:02, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

Some of us play it the way it's meant to be, and you forgot TA wins. By the way, fame means you can play the FoTM well and hero battles mean you can roll, not much prestige there. Demonic Peaches 18:17, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

Well, blame RA leavers, the glad farmers - blame yourselves, if this change happens. I welcome such a change. RA as it is now is horrible. -80.130.238.170 07:06, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

@yellow monkey: Are you KIDDING me?? HB title is for ppl who nonstop /roll 100 when it was still posible. sure, you cán join and leave for a good party in ra, but sóme ppl play RA/TA the way it should... please don't blame them for 'crying a dam river' becouse all there effort might go to waist... Pul 10:09, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

The best part about playing in the RA is the fact that you never know what your party is going to be like, so you have to be prepared for everything from conditions to hex removal to self heals to FOTM builds. I really enjoy that sort of challenge. I am bobo 11:19, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

play nc is just trying to screw up the game for all the people who worked hard for titles...faction title, glad..what's next and i have a friend who worked very hard for his faction title only to realize he could of had double the points...i think the people working at play nc need to stop doing drugs cause look what is happening to the game The preceding unsigned comment was added by Demonic Peaches (talk • contribs) 23:17, 3 August 2007 (CDT).

What people are failing to point out is that altering the requirement to "one point per win" would likely cause the bot problem in RA to explode exponentially. Clearly, Anet is trying to link the coming battle mini-games in Eye of the North (Polymock, Dwarven Boxing, and Norn Fighting) to the Gladiator title with this expected change, but unless they find a way to systematically weed out the bots AND remove the idiotically inexplicable option for people to map out once they've entered a battle, this change will only serve to make things much worse, methinks.

This is random, but there should be a title for most losses! Can't you just imagine farming the loss bots? :/ Sarcasm still doesn't work over the interwebs, does it?--Gigathrash 23:56, 3 August 2007 (CDT)

In response to the low-IQ fellow above Gigathrash. LOL, yes, NC is trying their hardest to alienate players and ruin the time they already wasted going for titles in a virtual world. C'mon, you know what they're doing is what they believe to be in the best interest of the whole game. If it's better for the majority, but hurts the minority (doesn't it suck to be hurt in a video game), it should absolutely be done. They've obviously built something that you've enjoyed enough to be willing to grind your life into, so even if they were to wreck it all they deserve the appreciation that they gave you good times. Why do people only bitch about what they don't like instead of praising what they do? Jesus, use those little brains whiners. DavimusK 15:33, 4 August 2007 (CDT)

Another New Update[edit source]

500 points for R1... 80.60.71.199 17:18, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Do you earn a glad for trapping over a stone yet or is it still 10 a win. They are probs gonna x10 everybodys glad so now is a good tome if they changed the earning XD.--Diddy Bow 17:19, 23 August 2007 (CDT)
How do you propose we change the table? Or do we just put a note in this? The Imperialist
They will change it back I think. 80.60.71.199 17:27, 23 August 2007 (CDT)
Leave the article alone for now... check to see if the conditions for gaining a point changed. If not, don't change anything in the article (with the exception of adding a small note about what's going on). — Poki#3 My Talk Page :o, 17:28, 23 August 2007 (CDT)
I already added a note. I doubt they'll change this back considering how they've been planning to change it for a while now The Imperialist
This is a bug. Gaile confirmed it and it will be fixed. Swift Thief 18:03, 23 August 2007 (CDT)

Titles[edit source]

It took me 3 ranks in Gladiator to realize how pointless titles are in this game. Emoting means nothing when you can farm in HA (how sad is that), calling out in TA districts "Starting Glad. group must have rank #"(Gladiator title is way too easy to farm/sync), and AB titles..... I don't have to explain how pointless that one is. When I started to PvP I wanted the Glad. title, bad. I spent hours at a time in RA/TA trying to get just one more point. How many idiots are running around with PvP titles now? Way too many. What I'm getting at is this, even if they change how the title system works, it won't matter. This game is all about skill, as it should be. I hope they change the Gladiator point system, let everyone get a damn Gladiator, Hero, Commander, whatever they want it to be title, it is still all about skill. --Mahsa 18:40, 14 September 2007 (CDT)

Has anyone else than me noticed that it will in fact take years even with daily farming to get the last title?

It probably would. (Edit: Not anymore. It is pathetic how easy this title can be farmed now.)--Mahsa 11:56, 20 September 2007 (CDT)

This is a slap in the face to everyone that got the title the old way. GG Anet. --Mahsa 01:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. 10 wins now worths 3 points, so Anet should have multiply old points by 12 for balance. GG Anet, i stopped playing in arenas. --Hanako 16:47, 1 October 2007 (CET)

Uh, what? Why multiply by 12? - Buzzer 05:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

New Gladiator Title Achievements Updated 28 September 2007[edit source]

I think its [stupid]. ( And omg i was saying it sucked and got a 72 hour ban for an innapropriate name ( which i did ) Lol :(

this update is BY FAR the worst update plaync has ever done GG for sucking it up guys what did you let 5 year old start designing the game for you?

I am not even involved in the PvP community at all and I'm also mad. Usually I don't complain when ANet changes things that makes older achievements obsolete, but this-is-crap for a "solution" to the /Rank issue! Just like when ANet tried to balance Ritspike and slapped Exhaustion on everything. They are just so...heavy-handed whenever they really want to "fix" things, and usually end up making them worse for everyone. Sigh. Entropy Sig.jpg (T/C) 01:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

What does the /Rank emote have to do with the Gladiator title track? I agree completely with the Ritspike analysis, I was ecstatic when they reverted it, the changes in place now kill that team without nerfing the skills themselves to hell. But again, how is that related to an easier system for earning glad points? -Gildan Bladeborn 20:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

keep old files?[edit source]

i think we should, just like with the skill hunter title --Dunkoro 15:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

The Old Title could be kept as reference, so people can see how much they would have in the old title. The Chart says: Winning Streaks needed, which is not accurate as you don't get 1 point per streak anymore, needs to be changed.

Their idea was to change the title so no more 9 win streak = nothing. Depends on how you look at these changes... Yes, the Title will be a little less valued if compared to the Hero title. Now you get rewarded for winning 5 in a row (or 6, 7, 8, 9...) with 0.25 points from the Old Gladiator Title, and 0.75 points if you get 10. For those who play RA (or can't keep TA Streaks higher than 14) the progress you have on the title should stay roughly the same, but when you are lucky enough to lose not twice but thrice at after getting 9 wins, of course you won't be happy, at least you will have earned something (what you would earn if you got 1 extra win in one of these streaks, which is still frustrating).

For Hardcore TA players, the gap from casual players should be increased as they'll be getting twice what they used to get after getting the 20th win in a row, if the title has less value now, just aim at getting one rank higher, the 50% bonus on the progress should have done the trick. It's not like people already had Gladiator Title maxed.

The running or overly defensive builds should have been fixed with the time limit, while they won't disappear chances are that they will be reduced. Leaving until you get a "team who is capable of getting 10 win streak in RA", is not that effective for GRINDING the Gladiator Title, the new Title encourages that you stay in the group for "at least 4 more fights", if you find it completely hopeless just leave after the fight ends (dishonor system).

If you find it pointless to play with a Whammo on your team or an Assassin that overextends and dies trying to attack a target blindly and be "obliged" to play even though you know you'll lose, then don't play RA, you would be fighting against players of that same skill level on the way, so if that's not what you want you are in the wrong place.

If you still didn't like the change, at least it isn't "the worst update plaync has ever done". Many of these things needed to be fixed. The title might have become "easier" but not faster for most people, then unless you use a higher level of play to get it, it'll be slower instead. So now Organized TA > RA Sync/Choosing Teams, and it's more fairly rewarded.

To the anon above, I agree with you for the most part. The thing I have to disagree with is that no title should be easy to get. The point of having a max title is the challenge that it took to receive that title. Before Nightfall it wasn't easy to earn any rank in the max title track, but now anyone should be able do so that has at least the 3 campaigns. I have no clue why Anet is pushing for easy max titles. To have people happy cause they finally were able to get a title (regardless of it being PvE or PvP), let alone max it? I don't mind new Gladiators running around, let them be happy with their title, but why should it be SUPER easy to acquire points now? Fuck GW2, why does this game have to suffer so that people can have max titles in preperation for it? Wow, when GW2 comes out you're gonna get a mid lvl item, or another stupid dance emote, whatever. How lame is that? Yes, this is a game and everyone should enjoy their time within it, but when someone has put so much time into something, doing it the old way and exceling at it, its wrong to create a new system just because everyone who couldn't get a single glad. point can now. I love this game. It has by far the best PvP combat system I have ever been able to experience, but what Anet does is just wrong and insulting to those of us who did it the old way. --Mahsa 13:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think making a title easier is that good either, specially because the Gladiator Title had been like that for over 1 year, some people spent much of their playing time on it the way it was, but for the other reasons this had to be done. Some of them change naturally because the game itself changed, like Kind of a Big Deal it pretty rare before Factions came out, before EotN you used to see many People Know Me and I'm Very Import at Outposts. I haven't heard of any God Walking Amongst Mere Mortals yet, but when EotN Hard Mode comes out we'll have 5 more titles to be maxed. As of now, 19 Campaign Titles, 2 Nightfall Titles, Defender of Ascalon/Survivor, Drunkard, Sweet Tooth, Wisdom, Treasure Hunter from Character Titles, you would need maxed Lucky Unlucky and Savior of both Factions, which I haven't heard of either. Even if Gladiator becomes easier to max, the highest achieved rank I've seen was King's Gladiator, even if someone got upgraded to Emperor's Gladiator on this update... well we might see some Legendary Gladiator next year. Now that I think that should be happening unless the ones who had higher tiers give up on the title. Maybe an extra tier could have solved that matter, but if as no one had it yet they'll most likely leave it this way. Not everyone will be happy with it, but the update fixed Random Arenas and gave an edge for those who play organized Team Arena, not everyone will be complaining about that either.
What you ppl don't seem to realize is that those who had a lot of glad points and those who get long winning streaks are the big winners of this change. Title caps were increased by x4, points increased by x6. So that was already a huge gift to those having earned lots of glad points the old way. On top of that to gain points is now a lot easier for a good team than it is for a bad one. Before the update there was no difference in points if you got 2 10 win streaks or one 20 streak. Now to get max points you have to do 20 wins and continue from there. The fact that there was a high entry cap before doesn't make the title more valuable, it is still not time normalized (spending twice as long in ra/ta still gives me twice the glad points) and it just makes the title more random/exploitable. Yes, we now might see some crappy players with low glad ranks just because they spent lots of time in ra/ta but with a little luck they would have gotten there with the old system too. And possibly a lot faster. The high ranks though actually became much more valuable because now you get rewarded for long and ongoing winning streaks (4 points rather than 1) rather than just getting the same points as someone with several shorter ones. 134.130.183.235 11:11, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
How easy is it to get 5 wins? That's nothing, especially in RA. Time doesn't matter when it comes to acquiring titles, its how hard it is to actually get it. I know this guy that sucks at PvP. He's always blaming it on his teammates. He loved this change, why? Cause now he can actually get points. Take away the time aspect from this, because veterans were going to get points as quickly as possible anyway. Their flow of glad. points wouldn't stop, but now noobies will start to get more. And that's why people hate this change, because it dulled the "respect" of the title. I can't wait till they do a double glad. point weekend, we'll gonna see so many noob r1-r2 gladiators running around spamming that they got a title so they "must" know what they're talking about. --Mahsa 00:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I won't take away the time aspect of it because that is exactly the point you are missing. Someone who plays twice as long in RA/TA gets twice the points, regardless if you have to do 10 victories or 5. Requiring 10 wins just makes getting points more random for the average player. Since matches don't get harder the more wins you have it is just a matter of luck when the one group turns up that is actually better than you. Imagine two players, both having done 20 matches and won half of it. One won every second and one won the first 10 and lost the second 10. Do you really want to tell me that the later is more skilled just because he picked a better order in his wins/losses in terms of how points are calculated? Setting the cap to 5 wins takes away a lot of this randomness while the bonus of getting 4 times the points for long winning streaks still keeps those groups on top that hardly ever loose a single match and so were not that much affected by chance.
About those bad pvp players, yes they now have it easier to get points, but they also need 4 times as much of them now. And even as a very bad player, getting into a good group could easily get you a 10 in streak, which was 4 times as much worth. And if you look around a little bit, you will see that there are already to every pvp title much higher ranks than just r1-r2 who don't know what they are talking about. That is, as i said before and will say again since you keep denying that simple fact, because titles in gw are not time normalized. They represent much more a level of devotion than a level of skill. The longer you play, the more points you get. You can compensate some of the time with skill, ha does that with granting more points for followup matches, ra/ta does it now with granting more points for longer winning streaks, but at the end if one player just doubles his time spent playing pvp he doubles his points as well. So if you have two players with equal skill (and in case of ra/ta equal luck :o), one playing 2h pvp a day, the other one playing 1h pvp a day, the later will have only half as much points. Really hard to not get that... 134.130.183.235 11:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You must've just started to RA/TA, or you never have and are just trying to make a point you have no clue on. Before the patch, it took 10 wins to earn one gladiator point. The biggest complaint that most people made was that they often would lose after 9 wins. So while yes if you play twice as much as someone else, then you would have the potential to earn twice the amount that they would. You're right, but again, as I said before, time is not something to consider using the old method. You're forgetting the most important aspect of Guild Wars... and its not devotion, but skill. The reason why Anet skewed the progression as they did was because they realized that earning 1 point for 5 wins is super easy. You see, that is what YOU are failing to realize. With the old method, regardless of doubling your playing time, you didn't always get a point. People could play in RA 2 hours a day, 7 days a week and receive 1 point every week (that's pushing it for a lot of the people in RA too). A skilled player, regardless of devotion (simply playing for fun or because they are waiting for GvG to start), could play an hour a day, for 7 days a week, and average 1 glad. point every 1-3days. Yes, there are farmers in RA/TA, but we're not talking about the size of the title yet, but simply acquiring any level in it. You see, the old method was more about skill, not time. But now its every 5 wins. Winning 20 matches in a row (to use your example) is not twice as hard as only winning 10. The same goes for winning 5 versus 10. This isn't about randomness in points being distributed, but the fact that you are even earning points towards a title in the first place. It is so easy to earn a point now, and that is the key reason why people were upset about this change. This new change makes it about time. In time a noob can become a rank 6 gladiator and yet with the old method maybe have gotten to rank 1-2 in the same amount of time. Rank 6 all because he put a lot of "devotion" into earning another rank in a title. But I will stick to my "time doesn't matter" remark, because I don't rely on doubling my time to earn a title. I would prefer to earn it without having to farm and fall back on "devotion". Skill > time anyday. How can you not understand that yet still act like what you are saying is true? Is it really that hard? --Mahsa 12:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry but if you can't even follow the simple maths i tried to explain to you in my post before and keep ignoring even the simplest facts (such as that 2 times as much is pretty exactly double the amount) this discussion will lead to nothing. Anyway, i made my point. I like the changes because it takes away a lot of randomness in point distribution for average players while keeping the headstart for the top players. You seem to forget (or ignore since you obviously do that a lot) that good players will earn points 8 times as fast now as before (which is still twice as fast considering the new rank caps). And those titles always are relative. The big loosers are the sync farmers, they only get points worth 75% of what they did before. And even if the very worst of all pvp players now might have it a little bit easier (although it is debatable that a player not able to ever gain a 10 win streak will have it so much easier to get 4 5 win streaks), they still won't get into the high ranks (the r6 noob you are talking about would have to do 1864 5 win streaks, quite a lot for a player who sucks). And for the average and top players it is just much less random when they get their points, because the win/loss order is not so importaint anymore. And unless you explain to me in reason (instead of just making statements on a gut level) why a guy getting 9 wins, a loss and a win again should get no points while someone who wins 10 times and looses once after that should, i will "act" like what i say is true. Unlike you who obviously is always true and so does not even need a single fact based argument to participate in a discussion. 134.130.183.235 15:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
You got a point I forgot to say, it's not like people who weren't able to win 10 in a row, will start winning 4x more 5 win streaks from the title changes. If anything changes that it will becaused of the Dishonorable Combatant System. Overall the title is better now, average players can now have a more constant point gain, but if they are actually slowed down for playing Random Arenas, it might be time for trying Team Arenas with organized play, experienced gladiators can now have a faster pace getting this instead of having to to play more to get any increase on points, so that's still skill > time. If someone that sucks so much can't improve by playing so much so they get the title by playing 25-100% more... that's not ANet's fault...

Math[edit source]

gladiatormathyn8.png

Consecutive wins max bonus[edit source]

The official wiki's article's numbers match ours for 25 consecutive wins. This is backed up by evidence on their talk page. Before changing the numbers here, please provide appropriate evidence showing different rewards.   — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 05:50, December 13, 2009 (UTC)



BRING TA BACK or FIX SPAWN or FIX POINTS[edit source]

Any one who agree's sign here, if not dont write anything, otherwise your agreeing to either1 i know the spawn is "random" but come on 4 wars or 3 wars and a sin vs Monk+War+Ele+1 other caster?, getting morons who dont know a PvP build atleast in T.A you could be picky about who/what you brang, and its damn upsetting that you have to win 5 in a row?, come on HA is meant to be ELITE why not have 5 wins in a row for that to get fame instead?, atleast with HA u can select what u want your team to have...So i suggest 1 wins=Gladiator Point, OR Spawn is set so teams will have same proffessions(or 1 of that similiar I.E Derv is to War, what Ranger is o Paragon, What Mesmer is to Necro, what Assassin is to Ele, Rit is To Monk) because i understand theres probably not enough of all classess going around to do that, or Just Bring T.A back to fill that blank space, T.A=balanced, R.A=imbalanced, A-Net loves to claim that the game should be balanced...how? they have an imbalanced ARENA enough said...GG The preceding unsigned comment was added by 110.32.29.62 (contribs) 13:51, 23 October 2010.

R.A = Random it is in its name quit QQing The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.3.47.38 (contribs) 03:14, 31 March 2011 (UTC).

Wrong wiki dude. Arnout aka The Emperors Angel 07:21, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
No, it's the right wiki. I'll see what I can do. Felix Omni Signature.png 07:38, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
"R.A=imbalanced" - Random is not imbalanced, everyone has the same chance to end up with a good team or with a bad team, although TA was always better. — Viruzzz 07:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

June 2011 update[edit source]

The dev notes say that now you get 1+ ((consecutive wins) mod 5) points per win (except for the 1st win), plus an unspecified number of bonus points after every 5th consecutive win. The edit just made by Gkoogz would be incorrect according to that, since he shows it as (consecutive wins) - 1 points per win. Since I don't PvP at all, I was hoping someone else could verify this for us. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 01:44, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Haven't had much luck in RA since the update, but the in-game description hasn't changed iirc... --TalkpageEl_Nazgir 09:02, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It seems to be like this (for wins 1 - 6 I am sure, up to 11 was observed by a friend and the rest is guessing)
wins 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 25
points 0 1 1 1 2 + 3 2 2 2 2 3 + 3 ... 6 + 3
sum 0 1 2 3 8 10 12 14 16 22 ... 96?
So every 5 wins the number of raw points is increased by 1, starting with the 5th win. And you gain 3 bonus points every 5 wins + a Gladiator's Zaishen Strongbox. (Or maybe it's 4 bonus points and the increasement of raw points happens one victory later - however this wouldn't affect the number of points gained.)

However, I can't guarantee that this is right.Kaede (talk) 11:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

That sounds like the dev notes - "The number of points per win starts at one and increases by one for each fifth consecutive win. Players are also given bonus points for each five consecutive wins." Your prediction for 25 also falls in line with this: "A 25-game winning streak in Random Arena used to reward 19 points and, under the new system, will reward 100." Maybe you get an extra 4 bonus points for reaching 25 to round it out to 100.
I'm going to go ahead and change the notes to reflect this. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 13:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Added the table, needs some formatting love. —Dr Ishmael Diablo the chicken.gif 13:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Maybe the extra points for the 25th victory are granted as compensation for kicking you out of RA...Kaede (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)