Guild Wars 2

In the new map – The Silverwastes – there is only one waypoint and the map is designed in such way that not having more waypoints isn’t even noticable, at least for me after a few hours of gameplay.

I must admit it feels much better than the generic GW2 maps, feels much better than Dry Top, and pretty much anything that we have had so far.

I will go as far as saying that I would enjoy every map to be designed in this way – smaller than the traditional GW2 map, without an abundance of Waypoints and an absolutely amazing event structure.

I can also imagine it’s much more difficult to produce a map like that, but the quality is unrivaled so far.

Great job, ArenaNet. Whoever designed the map and came up with the idea of not putting waypoints everywhere around deserves a bonus and a hug from Colin or… something! I really hope it’s not just a single instance of this design.

What do you guys think?

I’ll second this. More focus placed on keeping your teammates alive and more of a sense of worry when you’re on the far-flung corners of the map and get jumped by a pack of plant monsters. I don’t know that I want it for every map but it seems very appropriate for this one.

Frankly, i’d rather have waypoints. And less irritating mobs. I’m having flashbacks to original Orr… and i didn’t like it then either.

I completely hate it and was the reason i logged in to forum to see if i was the only one. I played a game before for 3 years that only had one teleport in each region and it was terrible. Only thing that made up for it was that we had mounts and could move were we wanted.

I play the game a lot like more then 6 hours a day and i don’t want my game time to be about walking the map. I want easy access to the part of the map were i need to go to events/quests or what ever it is that i need or want to do.
Having to run back if you die and it takes you 5 min to get back to a event that most likely have failed when your back is just not effective game play. In this area it is also easy to get stuck with mob groups that slows you even more, so more waypoints is something i hope they will add to the region or i think i will stay out of it and only visit if i have too.

I mostly agree with this. I like only having one waypoint. It’s a pretty small zone, which might be why I’m okay with it. It would suck only having a single waypoint in large zones.

I would also add my voice to those who are annoyed and frustrated with the lack of waypoints. No waypoints and above average difficulty foes really makes for a frustrating experience.

Jure Simich.6154:

I would also add my voice to those who are annoyed and frustrated with the lack of waypoints. No waypoints and above average difficulty foes really makes for a frustrating experience.

I noticed that people really went out of their way to resurrect people, kinda like they do in WvW. Especially with the amount of people around, it shouldn’t be an issue right now.
It could change when it slows down.

I haven’t been able to play yet. I hear the zone is small, but is it obvious that it get bigger like how dry top did?

The lack of waypoints is good. I wish, however, that there were more merchants on the map. Managing inventory is kind of a pain.

It reminds me of the endless number of mount threads where the anti-mount people talked about no need for mounts because of way-points and (more relevant for this) how the pro-mount people would then see way-points go while way-points where great according to them, much better the no way-points like other games.

Wonder how those people feel about that (waypoints are great and should not be removed / should also be added in new maps) now.

Anyway, I like it while it would then also be nice to have an alternative for a little faster travel.

Mystic.5934:

I haven’t been able to play yet. I hear the zone is small, but is it obvious that it get bigger like how dry top did?

There are a few areas that are blocked off by vines, so maybe?

well 1 more waypoint in the west would be cool

and a bank+tp on the main camp in the east

but it really doesnt need more

Breckmoney.6387:

Mystic.5934:

I haven’t been able to play yet. I hear the zone is small, but is it obvious that it get bigger like how dry top did?

There are a few areas that are blocked off by vines, so maybe?

It’s already about the same size as dry-top and when compared with other maps it’s 1/3th of a map (so not sure what it has a separate name). So it’s likely at some point the last 3th of the map will be added at some point.

I do wonder if the complete map will then get one name of will keep being 3 separate names.

(Maybe the topic name should be changed to “Silverwastes”.)

Dusty place like Dry Top. Building and defending (oil, mortar) taken from WvW are nice addition.

Yea I those plant monsters are really irritating and can be quite difficult
sometimes… I always thought they should be toned down a tad, I just didn’t want people calling me a noob.

I really dislike the idea of multiple WP in a zone, I say get rid of most of them and add mounts to help with immersion and bringing older zones to life.

Wetpaw.3487:

I really dislike the idea of multiple WP in a zone, I say get rid of most of them and add mounts to help with immersion and bringing older zones to life.

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

New waypoints can be builded through base upgrades like WvW. It’s not like we won’t be seeing more waypoints if the maps are doing well.

I personally would prefer waypoints, running across a zone to get to an event and having to deal with mobs trying to slow and immobilize you constantly is pretty annoying. I just want to get to the event where actual fun with other people is taking place, not kill random trash by myself because it was in the way and insisted that I stay and kill it and probably miss the event.

If not waypoints, mounts. Swiftness is not enough.

Jure Simich.6154:

I would also add my voice to those who are annoyed and frustrated with the lack of waypoints. No waypoints and above average difficulty foes really makes for a frustrating experience.

Wait is this end game?
Is end game suppose to be easy or average or should it be somewhat challenging???
Ask yourself if everything is easy will you start to lose interest faster because you have everything due to how easy everything is?

My only concern right now is that having success in the map is a little dependent on it being well-populated. Which is 100% fine in principle and I absolutely love the concept they’re going for here, but it makes the experience kind of lackluster if you end up on a poorly populated map.

I know the megaserver is supposed to help with this. Perhaps if people make a point of taxi’ing, like with labyrinth, we will see a more robust experience all around. I have not yet checked LFG in relation to Silverwastes, so for all I know, people are already doing so.

I never understood the “I don’t like way points, they make the world feel small/ make me lose my immersion” crowd.

There’s a very easy way to fix that. DON"T USE THEM….problem solved

For those who enjoy way points…..the reverse is not easy in instances like this. As such I am of the belief that they should be there.

do you think we will get new areas to clear, new quests, maybe waypoints farther apart and incentive to work together with other players to progress forward rather than just farm?

i wrote that as soon as i heard “point of no return” and wondered if it was just a promo talking point or had something to do with the gameplay this patch…

i’m glad they did this patch the way they did
+1

Kite.2510:

New waypoints can be builded through base upgrades like WvW. It’s not like we won’t be seeing more waypoints if the maps are doing well.

That’s only shortterm. Longterm expect to see those maps mostly in the unconquered state.

If the no waypoint thing becomes a staple (which, I am an advocate for), I can see mounts serving more than just a cosmetic purpose in the future

Latorn.4209:

If the no waypoint thing becomes a staple (which, I am an advocate for), I can see mounts serving more than just a cosmetic purpose in the future

Well, that’s one more reason then to ask for more waypoints.

It has it’s good sides and bad sides. On the long run, the lower that map’s population gets, having no WP gets irritating.

For the type of zone that silverwastes is I think its a good thing. Its a situational thing imo and ANET hit the nail on the head on this one.

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

hydeaut.1758:

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

I think like most maps, its long-term activity will hinge on the rewards. If people get all the special rewards they want and then decide that the farming rate in SW is not worth it, then yeah, it’ll probably end up abandoned.

If, on the other hand, people decide that the rate is strong enough for farming, then we might see it become a consistently popular map.

I’m of the complete opposite opinion. I HATE that there is only one waypoint, especially when you can just randomly die dropping into the Sarlacc pit those gaping mouth things (even just slowly dropping in).
I think there needs to be at least one, maybe two more waypoints added (which I hope the one npc is correct and once we have ‘control’ over the forts/towers they’ll install waypoints). Having to run across the whole map (to get to Amber or Blue) is a real pain in the kitten. Sure its only a couple minutes to run across, but that could be the difference in getting credit for an event (such as one of the 4 legendaries or 4 end champs).

Essence Snow.3194:

I never understood the “I don’t like way points, they make the world feel small/ make me lose my immersion” crowd.

There’s a very easy way to fix that. DON"T USE THEM….problem solved

For those who enjoy way points…..the reverse is not easy in instances like this. As such I am of the belief that they should be there.

I can’t agree with this more. If you don’t like something and you don’t have to use it, don’t try to get it removed just so others have to suffer your preference.

I love it too.
I’d like to see how the game plays if every pve map has only 1 waypoint at a major intersection/city/camp etc. Cities obviously still have multiple.

Or what would also work is 1 major waypoint for each map that you have to teleport to if you want to go there from outside that map and then minor waypoints inside for no cost at all. (Still less waypoints then currently maybe)
Kind of like WvW plays. If you want to enter WvW you’ll spawn at one of the 3 major keeps or that once camp in the battlegrounds. Then move on like usual.

Having a system like any of the above would concentrate the player base to certain waypoints and meeting-spots. Making a great spot to meet and prepare for a tour for example. The world would also seems more busy on those major intersections.
Also it would encourage staying alive and make exploring more interesting.
Currently you just hop from WP to WP hoping to travel as fast as possible.
That way you miss out on a lot of small details in the world :<

Agreed OP.

I don’t ever really die but when/if I get downed it does make it a bit more exciting.

/whisper “Maybe fewer waypoints could introduce mounts someday…”

I believe that in the case of waypoints, less is more.
In the original Guild Wars you were able to map travel to towns and outposts, never specific areas on the map.

Sometimes you had to even travel across an entire zone before you could make it to the zone where you were headed, and then make it to your destination.

Maps like The Falls are a good example of this.

Even if you made it to the falls by crossing a few other areas first, there was only one resurrection shrine right at the entrance to the zone….. so after you traveled 20 minutes or so into the zone, if you died you were sent all the way back to the beginning of the area.

It adds a sense of exploration.
A desire to fight and stay alive.

Players should be traveling/playing the game a little more instead of waypointing everywhere they want to go.

The only problem with implementing this now is that removing waypoints will no-doubt receive backlash from the community.

Maybe in the future we will see “resurrection points” instead of waypoints on newer maps.

They would essentially be waypoints that only work when you are dead and already on that particular map.

Anyway…. I like the lack of waypoints.

Good decision.

TheBlackLeech.9360:

I believe that in the case of waypoints, less is more.
In the original Guild Wars you were able to map travel to towns and outposts, never specific areas on the map.

Sometimes you had to even travel across an entire zone before you could make it to the zone where you were headed, and then make it to your destination.

Maps like The Falls are a good example of this.

Even if you made it to the falls by crossing a few other areas first, there was only one resurrection shrine right at the entrance to the zone….. so after you traveled 20 minutes or so into the zone, if you died you were sent all the way back to the beginning of the area.

It adds a sense of exploration.
A desire to fight and stay alive.

Players should be traveling/playing the game a little more instead of waypointing everywhere they want to go.

The only problem with implementing this now is that removing waypoints will no-doubt receive backlash from the community.

Maybe in the future we will see “resurrection points” instead of waypoints on newer maps.

They would essentially be waypoints that only work when you are dead and already on that particular map.

Anyway…. I like the lack of waypoints.

Good decision.

And for some of us, it gave us even less of a reason to go to those zones. Some of us don’t have the time (or just don’t want to waste the time) to have to foot slog it across one zone just to get into another.

skullmount.1758:

TheBlackLeech.9360:

I believe that in the case of waypoints, less is more.
In the original Guild Wars you were able to map travel to towns and outposts, never specific areas on the map.

Sometimes you had to even travel across an entire zone before you could make it to the zone where you were headed, and then make it to your destination.

Maps like The Falls are a good example of this.

Even if you made it to the falls by crossing a few other areas first, there was only one resurrection shrine right at the entrance to the zone….. so after you traveled 20 minutes or so into the zone, if you died you were sent all the way back to the beginning of the area.

It adds a sense of exploration.
A desire to fight and stay alive.

Players should be traveling/playing the game a little more instead of waypointing everywhere they want to go.

The only problem with implementing this now is that removing waypoints will no-doubt receive backlash from the community.

Maybe in the future we will see “resurrection points” instead of waypoints on newer maps.

They would essentially be waypoints that only work when you are dead and already on that particular map.

Anyway…. I like the lack of waypoints.

Good decision.

And for some of us, it gave us even less of a reason to go to those zones. Some of us don’t have the time (or just don’t want to waste the time) to have to foot slog it across one zone just to get into another.

You, my friend, are a spoon-fed waypoint child.

Where is your sense of adventure?

Where is your sense of exploration?

I’ve only ventured to the end of the falls probably 3 or 4 times over seven years, and when I got there every single time I would feel a sense of accomplishment.

Even if there was no quest or mission I was trying to complete.

Just the thrill of adventure…. the feeling of “man I just did that.”

Like climbing to the top of a mountain.

There isn’t much thrill in clicking on a waypoint.

Can we have a moment of silence for the once glorious taxis! GW1 for life! R.I.P Taxi builds.

The amount of time running from A to B is what I like LEAST about WvW.

I think it’s a royal pain.

I do think it would be totally okay if the Sivlerwastes had a waypoint in each fort – they would of course be contested most of the time anyway.

Not having a second wp feels a bit annoying when you die and have to run back across the map. But I love the fact that because this is a new border area and a war zone that there isn’t a wp across the map. It helps make it feel like this is the edge of our territory and beyond it is Mordremoth’s demesnes.

I like not having the waypoints on the map, it reminds me of my gw1 days (which is better then my 3,100 Hours in gw2)

I enjoy the new map. From my perspective, the single waypoint is purposeful in that if there were others, they would always be contested or have you spawn on mobs. Considering the vines in the Silverwastes blocking the paths to the west, my guess is that more areas are coming and those areas will have additional waypoints. Dry Top started with two, but the next two parts only had a single waypoint on each of them.

And no to mounts. I enjoy the waypoint system.

hydeaut.1758:

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it.

This is a far superior approach to larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging). The result is a more immersive world that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run. As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur.

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. Increased emphasis on reviving, healing, and team play. The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

hydeaut.1758:

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it.

This is a far superior approach to larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging). The result is a more immersive world that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run. As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur.

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. Increased emphasis on reviving, healing, and team play. The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design.

Everything there is subjective. Obviously everyone does not feel the same way. Why would it be better to force other players to play the way you’d like when you have the option to play the way you like when they have the option. The only thing it would accomplish is to take the other players desired play style away.

Let me see if I can explain this by putting the shoe on the other foot.

They introduce a zone where you MUST use way points. Some players love it and suggest all zones should be that way regardless of others liking to run everywhere and immerse themselves in the journey, b/c it feels more efficient to them. Even though they already have the option to use way points in all the other zones, they still want to force you to use them too.

Doesn’t seem like quite such a good idea does it?

Essence Snow.3194:

Duke Blackrose.4981:

hydeaut.1758:

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it.

This is a far superior approach to larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging). The result is a more immersive world that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run. As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur.

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. Increased emphasis on reviving, healing, and team play. The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design.

Everything there is subjective. Obviously everyone does not feel the same way. Why would it be better to force other players to play the way you’d like when you have the option to play the way you like when they have the option. The only thing it would accomplish is to take the other players desired play style away.

Let me see if I can explain this by putting the shoe on the other foot.

They introduce a zone where you MUST use way points. Some players love it and suggest all zones should be that way regardless of others liking to run everywhere and immerse themselves in the journey, b/c it feels more efficient to them. Even though they already have the option to use way points in all the other zones, they still want to force you to use them too.

Doesn’t seem like quite such a good idea does it?

Your starting quote is actually false. “Everything there is subjective?”

No. Some of that was most definitely fact. It is a fact that less waypointing encourages exploration because it forces it. It is an observable fact that fewer waypoints increases the importance of revives. It is a fact that smaller maps spread the population less.

None of these are subjective qualities. To say otherwise is to not understand the definitions of subjective and objective.

Now, can you make a point that waypointing is efficient and convenient and that some players will prefer this style of gameplay? Yes. Yes you can. And balls to your efficiency; virtually every flaw with the game’s dungeon metas has been the direct result of players pursuing efficiency. There. Now THAT is subjective.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

Essence Snow.3194:

Duke Blackrose.4981:

hydeaut.1758:

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it.

This is a far superior approach to larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging). The result is a more immersive world that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run. As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur.

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. Increased emphasis on reviving, healing, and team play. The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design.

Everything there is subjective. Obviously everyone does not feel the same way. Why would it be better to force other players to play the way you’d like when you have the option to play the way you like when they have the option. The only thing it would accomplish is to take the other players desired play style away.

Let me see if I can explain this by putting the shoe on the other foot.

They introduce a zone where you MUST use way points. Some players love it and suggest all zones should be that way regardless of others liking to run everywhere and immerse themselves in the journey, b/c it feels more efficient to them. Even though they already have the option to use way points in all the other zones, they still want to force you to use them too.

Doesn’t seem like quite such a good idea does it?

Your starting quote is actually false. “Everything there is subjective?”

No. Some of that was most definitely fact. It is a fact that less waypointing encourages exploration because it forces it. It is an observable fact that fewer waypoints increases the importance of revives. It is a fact that smaller maps spread the population less.

None of these are subjective qualities. To say otherwise is to not understand the definitions of subjective and objective.

Now, can you make a point that waypointing is efficient and convenient and that some players will prefer this style of gameplay? Yes. Yes you can. And balls to your efficiency; virtually every flaw with the game’s dungeon metas has been the direct result of players pursuing efficiency. There. Now THAT is subjective.

And balls to your not using efficiency. That is one of the main reasons why i play this game, because it is so efficient. Dont make others have to do things the longer and more tedious way when they don’t have to. Just do your own thing and don’t bother others.

And what is wrong with the current dungeon meta? If you don’t want to do or use it, then don’t. Have you heard of making your own post on the lfg for your own run?

I suggest some of you guys give it more time and see how it plays out. Tbh, I thought it felt a little big at first, but as you get used to traversing the zone, it will seem smaller.

Also, rewards are looking real nice so far, comparatively. This could be become a strong zone for farming once people get used to the mechanics.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel feel denotes subjection as not everyone will have the same reaction towards it bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it again not everyone will be encouraged by the same things, some players are likely to avoid the area due to this.

This is a far superior approach open to debate thus subjectiveto larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging)this doesn’t allow grouping anymore than way points do as they are allowed just fine with them and some players like zerging. The result is a more immersive world some players may not like that, thus subjective that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run what? any kind of proof of this? I’d wager no . As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur. and it may cause players to avoid the zone causing an entire dead zone

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. not everyone like exploring much less over and over again Increased emphasis on revivingsome players might think less skilled players should not rely on others to carry them and get better, healing some players believe the best defense is a good offense , and team play a lot of players enjoy playing without a group . The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design. again your opinion

Your starting quote is actually false. “Everything there is subjective?” pretty sure the above bolded explains why it’s not false

No. Some of that was most definitely fact. It is a fact that less waypointing encourages exploration because it forces it no it doesn’t, we still have to explore the 1st time to activate waypoints, anything beyond that is purely optional . It is an observable fact that fewer waypoints increases the importance of revives or killing things before dying, rallying, being better, relying less on others, and or discouraging playing in the zone. It is a fact that smaller maps spread the population less. this is irrelevant to waypoints

None of these are subjective qualities. To say otherwise is to not understand the definitions of subjective and objective. I kinda think you might want to look back over what subjective means

Now, can you make a point that waypointing is efficient and convenient and that some players will prefer this style of gameplay? Yes. Yes you can. if you admit some players prefer it then you’ve just contradicted what you said earlier And balls to your efficiency; virtually every flaw with the game’s dungeon metas has been the direct result of players pursuing efficiency. There. Now THAT is subjective.

I’ll bold it to make it easier.

Essence Snow.3194:

Duke Blackrose.4981:

hydeaut.1758:

Fernling.1729:

Yeah, the waypoints make the world feel tiny.

And no waypoints make a tiny map feel big . . .

This map needs a ton of players and coordination to beat it, lack of waypoints and mechanics like damage over time in lost castles won´t help to fill it in the long run.

This will probably end with an empty map – except for planned, coordinated runs like Tequatl or dry top rank 6.

In attempting to refute his argument, you literally just explained why fewer waypoints is a perfect system.

The Silverwastes single/few waypoint system allows content to feel bigger without actually being bigger, increasing its value while also encouraging players to explore it.

This is a far superior approach to larger maps with more waypoints, as it has nowhere near the population spread. This allows players to group up more (while split-encouraging mechanics like those of Silverwastes prevent mindless zerging). The result is a more immersive world that is much less resource-intensive to update and to run. As an added bonus, this type of content holds up FAR better to subsequent updates. A world of large zones will quickly become overstretched, causing worse and worse community spread and more dead zones. Hell, we have already seen this occur.

And that’s not even mentioning the gameplay benefits. Encouraged exploration. Increased emphasis on reviving, healing, and team play. The list goes on.

Quite frankly, Guild Wars 2 would be twice the game that it is now if it had launched with this form of design.

They introduce a zone where you MUST use way points. Some players love it and suggest all zones should be that way regardless of others liking to run everywhere and immerse themselves in the journey, b/c it feels more efficient to them. Even though they already have the option to use way points in all the other zones, they still want to force you to use them too.

Doesn’t seem like quite such a good idea does it?

Now I’m going to address this part of your post, simply and reasonably.

The hilarious irony of your statement is that the scenario you’ve described already exists. Every map aside from The Silverwastes has “forced” waypointing, as they are all designed with waypoints in mind as the best way of traversing, reaching events, and gaining loot. There is no “compromise” between two opposing crowds from a design standpoint. In any given case, one side is going to feel alienated. “Just don’t use the waypoints” is not an argument. The player who refuses to waypoint is intentionally gimping themselves; risking missing events, tackling content much less quickly, and, as a consequence, earning less than the waypoint enthusiast.

In other words, for two sides to be equal, they must have equal opportunity while sticking to their desired playstyles. This is obviously not the case for reasons not stated.

The brilliance of this map is that it appeals to a group that has been thus far ignored, and it does so brilliantly, in a way that allows them to gain strong rewards while coordinating under a game explicitly designed for their playstyle.

I’ve bolded this last part because it is important. You can bend content to any rules you so desire, so long as it is within the capabilities of the game, but there is a difference between manipulating a play experience and having one come about naturally. The second is going to feel better, and it’s going to be much more appealing to the crowd that it targets. Furthermore, because the mechanics of this map are explicitly designed around the lack of a waypoint, all of the challenges associated with this, from traversal of the map to enemy encounters to the difficulty of taking and defending forts are all uniquely tailored to the one-waypoint experience.

At no point have I argued that all existing maps should be renovated to this new system. I would CERTAINLY argue that this style of fort defense would be incredible for areas like Orr and the Harathi Hinterlands, but this does not imply a need for serious (or any) waypoint reduction. In fact, removing the extra waypoints from all maps would only worsen things, as these maps are proportionately designed with waypoint travel in mind – they are too large for base mobility to be an effective means of experiencing their content, and this ties back into my first paragraph.

What I WOULD argue, however, comes in two parts: 1) The Silverwastes should stay as it is in regards to waypoints and 2) There should be more new zones like the Silverwastes – at least one per region, eventually. This will ensure that this style of exploration-geared player has a variety of content at their disposal and can tackle mobs of their choice while experiencing said content.

That is MORE than fair.

Duke Blackrose.4981:

Now I’m going to address this part of your post, simply and reasonably.

The hilarious irony of your statement is that the scenario you’ve described already exists. Every map aside from The Silverwastes has “forced” waypointing, as they are all designed with waypoints in mind as the best way of traversing, reaching events, and gaining loot. There is no “compromise” between two opposing crowds from a design standpoint. In any given case, one side is going to feel alienated. “Just don’t use the waypoints” is not an argument. The player who refuses to waypoint is intentionally gimping themselves; risking missing events, tackling content much less quickly, and, as a consequence, earning less than the waypoint enthusiast.

In other words, for two sides to be equal, they must have equal opportunity while sticking to their desired playstyles. This is obviously not the case for reasons not stated.

The brilliance of this map is that it appeals to a group that has been thus far ignored, and it does so brilliantly, in a way that allows them to gain strong rewards while coordinating under a game explicitly designed for their playstyle.

I’ve bolded this last part because it is important. You can bend content to any rules you so desire, so long as it is within the capabilities of the game, but there is a difference between manipulating a play experience and having one come about naturally. The second is going to feel better, and it’s going to be much more appealing to the crowd that it targets. Furthermore, because the mechanics of this map are explicitly designed around the lack of a waypoint, all of the challenges associated with this, from traversal of the map to enemy encounters to the difficulty of taking and defending forts are all uniquely tailored to the one-waypoint experience.

At no point have I argued that all existing maps should be renovated to this new system. I would CERTAINLY argue that this style of fort defense would be incredible for areas like Orr and the Harathi Hinterlands, but this does not imply a need for serious (or any) waypoint reduction. In fact, removing the extra waypoints from all maps would only worsen things, as these maps are proportionately designed with waypoint travel in mind – they are too large for base mobility to be an effective means of experiencing their content, and this ties back into my first paragraph.

What I WOULD argue, however, comes in two parts: 1) The Silverwastes should stay as it is in regards to waypoints and 2) There should be more new zones like the Silverwastes – at least one per region, eventually. This will ensure that this style of exploration-geared player has a variety of content at their disposal and can tackle mobs of their choice while experiencing said content.

That is MORE than fair.

You can’t be serious. Events are either on timers or reoccur rather frequently. Regardless of way points players will always be there ahead of others and they will complete them. …You know what…nvm I don’t need to refute your post as you do it yourself.

While I do like the idea of having a single waypoint, I think bringing in the sun crystals from the Zephyrites would be nice to have if you like to hurry over to a particular area. Think of it as the Zephyrites way of helping out the Pact after what happened to their home.