Guild Wars 2

The more I think about it I think the cap was needed, but it should be increased to at least 10. when you have 60 players fighting another 60, only attacking 5 at a time is a tiny % of that zerg, they can pretty much rez players faster than I can kill those 5.

10-15 cap would be perfect I think

I’d be thrilled with a 10-15 cap. Anything to let people take a bigger chunk out of stacked players.

Siphaed.9235:

Top AoE classes:

1) Elementalist

2) Necromancer

3) Engineer

4) Ranger

5) Guardian

FYI this list is nowhere near accurate. My thief does more AOE damage than my Ele, my necro is about equal or slightly better than Ele too, and mesmers probably do even more than both. Engie must also be near the top too.

re: cap, I think they should trial raising the cap to 8, possibly for WVW only. 5 is too few, the prevailing strategy to deal with player AOE in WVW is to stack up, which is just ridiculous. The AOE is already marked on the ground in red kitten

Reading through the posts and everyone is talking about the zerg being the most effective method when it actually isn’t lol. I been in WvW matches where our zerg was outmanned and had to split up into 2 different groups to defend against 2 massive zergs. Knowing who is following you as a commander is more important then just a mindless group. If i had a choice i would force people in my group into certain builds and weapons just so that the group could work together better. Since you can’t (unless your in a guild) you just make due with what you got.

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

The Rooster.2615:

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

Have you ever heard of the zerg stacking up? Even if it did then you stack the AOE covering fire. The only reason why it doesn’t happen is cause there is no overlying commander. The limit has no effect really from my experience in WvW other then prevent just a couple of people from eliminating an entire zerg. Also before people bring up the counter argument they could just move out of the red circle. It is really hard to see that red circle when there is spells going off all over and people littering the ground.

Why not remove the AoE cap but limit/cap any single attack to a specific amount of damage.
So if you have 50 people standing obligingly inside your red circle, the ones directly in the center get the majority of the damage and those towards the edges get significantly less. But in no way can you wipe them because there is an upper limit on the amount of damage the attack can do.

Suddenflame.2601:

The Rooster.2615:

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

Have you ever heard of the zerg stacking up? Even if it did then you stack the AOE covering fire. The only reason why it doesn’t happen is cause there is no overlying commander. The limit has no effect really from my experience in WvW other then prevent just a couple of people from eliminating an entire zerg. Also before people bring up the counter argument they could just move out of the red circle. It is really hard to see that red circle when there is spells going off all over and people littering the ground.

I don’t mean to sound rude, but which server do you WvW on?

The prevalent tactic for all zergs is to stack up and charge in and is seen consistently in JQ, BG and SOR. I can’t speak for the rest, but on those 3 servers, it’s all we do as it’s undeniably the superior tactic at the moment.

Stacking AOEs does not necessarily damage different targets. If you have 10 people together and stack 2 aoes on them, it doesn’t spread evenly between all 10. Depending on positioning, it will hit the same 5 targets until they’re dead before touching the next 5. Apply this to a zerg of 40+ and instead of your aoe damaging a large number of people, you damage 5 until they’re dead. Then the next 5. Then the next 5. This is why stacking up is the superior tactic as you minimize your losses to aoe.

Infernia.9847:

Why not remove the AoE cap but limit/cap any single attack to a specific amount of damage.
So if you have 50 people standing obligingly inside your red circle, the ones directly in the center get the majority of the damage and those towards the edges get significantly less. But in no way can you wipe them because there is an upper limit on the amount of damage the attack can do.

I like this idea. It would work. Basically it’s a dartboard concept where the more points are in the middle and the further out you go the less points there are.

Although, the “upper limit” would have some things to be tweaked about. For example, critical hits and how they multiply the damage the attack does. If the Upper Limit was on an individual target basis, taken into account an Upper Limit and Upper Crit Limit for the same person, then that would work really well. This would probably be very hard to program for the developers, and also take into consideration new players going into the red-ring circle and other players moving out mid AoE.

lemora.1304:

This the first and only game I’ve ever seen, where people would see a bunch of AoE coming their way and yell “AoE’s are coming! Quick! Everyone stack together!”

Does that make any sense?

It’s funny because it’s true.

Unfortunately, zerg vs zerg is what most WvW players are doing at any given time and this change would make it impossible to be viable as anything other than a ranged AoE class if AoE had no cap as it would just be a quick AoE nukefest even worse than Warhammer was.

To all the people who think this change will stop zergs, think again:

By removing this cap it may make them spread out (who knows, really, it all depends on how retaliation and area boons are treated with such a change), but people will still zerg. If all 50 of us focus one person, he is going to die. It doesn’t matter if there is such a cap, zergs will still be powerful.

I thought about the effects of such a change for a while and decided that it doesn’t really make anyone that much more OP (although there will be a bazillion elementalists everywhere because there are still chokepoints where everyone has to funnel through).

I agree that it would remove zerg balls, but am of the opinion that it won’t really be for the better as we will now have messy cluster kittens everywhere. At least zerg balls get stuff done. Anyone who’s ever fought in large fights but without any coordinated stacking knows what I mean. The two sides just poke at each other forever. Also choke points might actually be useful. Although there’s so few of them anyway.

Edit: Any sort of coordinated spike into the enemy formation will be (you guessed it!) AoE-ed down without any cap.

Its so hard to forgive for maybe 3 seconds your hate for elementalists and think that without aoe cap people would SPREAD ON THE BATTLEFIELD?

SO aoe becomes a detriment to nost stack….and doesn t really change in terms of usefulness.

What will change instead is the effectivness of melee and single target classes that will manage to find their place in large scale battles.

Its not that removing aoe cap suddenly force your opponent to stack in a spot…if they do they are committing a huge tactic mistake and THUS they deserve to eat any single aoe.

That is infact the point…..remove the cap to make people stop blobbing because if they do they die to aoe as it should be…..

Note also as that was the natural evolution of real warfare tactics….you don t see huge army in a tiny square, u see guerrilla….etc. mostly…..mostly since gunpowder (AoEs?)started to become effective.

When the zerg spreads it already works out now as AE has full effect on small groups. Simply removing the cap will make AE OP when the zerg doesn’t behave “correctly”, even if it may (and that’s not even sure!) have the positive side effect of enforcing more spread. And even worse, as only some classes have very good AE damage capabilities – namely eles – it would make them uber-OP. And it wouldn’t really solve the underlying problem of zerging, people would just keep a little more distance, this is not what the general goal is. The goal is, and that is also ANet’s official position from what you hear, to make it more rewarding to spread out across the map in smaller groups. So even if there’s not a 50 person zerg but a 20 or 10 person group, AE as it is now without a cap will still be OP. The way WoW solves this now with DR is the correct way, or let’s say a very good one as there may be other good ideas, to do it.
http://www.wowwiki.com/Area_damage_caps

/e: and for god’s sake, please stop comparing WvW to real life. This is so wrong in so many ways.

Ayrilana.1396:

AoE limits affects everyone including those in the zerg. It would be ridiculous when two or three players could stack their attacks essentially wiping a zerg. It would then come down to who could cast their spells the quickest/soonest.

I’ll also add that tactics like flanking do still work very well if done correctly. Staff ele is support, not main dps. They should generally not be on the front lines so speed is not an issue.

Yeah. silly. Kinda like how artillery only affects 5 troopers in an assault. Don’t wanna get kittened by AoE? Don’t ball up, kinda how they do irl. Funny how infantry can figure out how to minimize real life AoE damage but gamers can’t

If there was no cap there would be nothing but well Necro’s in WvW. They are bad enough the way it is. I have been in groups that have marked/welled up the portal coming out of a keep and watched most of the zerg coming out get downed almost instantly. Without a cap whoever had the most necro’s wins.

I would love to see the cap go away as I have a well necro/staff ele/glamor Mesmer. Lol I didn’t even think about Mesmer, can you imagine a whole zerg of confusion mesmers with no AoE cap LOLOLOLOL Throw down a feedback and watch an entire zerg melt ha. I see why the AoE cap is in place. Please remove the cap so we can run around with full zergs of confusion mesmers and well necros.

They don’t need necessarily to remove the cap, just try raising it to ~8 instead of 5.

Ruprect.7260:

I would love to see the cap go away as I have a well necro/staff ele/glamor Mesmer. Lol I didn’t even think about Mesmer, can you imagine a whole zerg of confusion mesmers with no AoE cap LOLOLOLOL Throw down a feedback and watch an entire zerg melt ha. I see why the AoE cap is in place. Please remove the cap so we can run around with full zergs of confusion mesmers and well necros.

And confusion isn’t even affected by retaliation. Way to go, I’m playing a glamour mesmer myself and I’m all against simply removing or increasing the AE cap. The nerf hammer that would have to follow will hurt far more.

Iruwen.3164:

Ruprect.7260:

I would love to see the cap go away as I have a well necro/staff ele/glamor Mesmer. Lol I didn’t even think about Mesmer, can you imagine a whole zerg of confusion mesmers with no AoE cap LOLOLOLOL Throw down a feedback and watch an entire zerg melt ha. I see why the AoE cap is in place. Please remove the cap so we can run around with full zergs of confusion mesmers and well necros.

And confusion isn’t even affected by retaliation. Way to go, I’m playing a glamour mesmer myself and I’m all against simply removing or increasing the AE cap. The nerf hammer that would have to follow will hurt far more.

I agree, my post was more joking at how ridiculous it would be to increase or remove the cap. They would have to do so much nerfing it is just easier to have the cap. Removing the cap would not discourage zerging, it would make it worse.

Wow, just wow. The massive number of posts that show responses from people who clearly can’t read is amazing. I’ve seen several responses along the lines of “removing caps makes AoE classes uber powerful.” Seriously? Is everyone high?

Removing the AoE caps introduces a choice, much like a Mesmer’s Confusion in sPvP. That choice is to ball up in a big zerg and be very vulnerable to AoE, or spread out into smaller spread out groups who by the nature of being spread out and small are less vulnerable to big AoEs.

It seems exceedingly simple to me, yet I can’t fathom how so many people seem to keep missing the point. Removing the AoE cap isn’t going to make AoE-centric professions super god awesome, its simply going to force everyone into the choice mentioned above, which means logically people will spread out to avoid AoE.

As to those who argue that removing the cap would mean AoE would have to be nerfed, why? A player who doesn’t stand in a Meteor Shower, Barrage or is dodging through Wells takes zero damage. Lava Font could do a gajillion damage, but effectively does zero if no players are dumb enough to stand in it.

And that’s the main problem with people arguing against cap removal. They don’t see the issue, they just see numbers on skills that in their arguments assumes an automatic hit. GW2 combat is much more mobile and twitchy than most MMOs, which means part of the game balance must be on player reaction time and skill, which ANet can account for but should not put training wheels on.

Ironically, unlimited AoE would make melee professions more powerful. Why you ask? Its simple, now the hard hitting single target professions become the hard counter to the AoE professions. A Meteor Storm can hurt a big group, but a Warrior can knockdown the Ele and crush him, eliminating the AoE threat entirely. Where melee becomes powerful is in their ability to quickly remove the threat. A small roving band of Thieves and Warriors can function as an assassin squad, taking out the artillery barrage being conducted by squishy casters.

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

Kaleban.9834:

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

This. Many seem to be basing an argument against cap removal off of the game’s current state. But if you remove the aoe cap, strategies would change. Tactics would change. Roles would change. And that’s the idea. To introduce some tactics and strategy into the game instead of the prevalent “Stack up and charge in” approach.

Confusion mesmers are a whole different beast. Arguably the strongest wvw profession at the moment when played right. If your condi removal is down, you’re left with a choice to either die slowly or die quickly. But that’s a topic for a different thread.

In all honesty, the best way to get rid of zerging is to design a map that you can’t travel across so quickly. Make a real consequence to having all of your players in the same area, like leaving most of your territory not only undefended but unreachable. But the likelihood of something like this actually being designed is minute to say the least. Removing the aoe cap is a much simpler and more realistic fix.

I think an aoe limit is reasonable and a positive element, but it’d nice to see different limits on different skills to add more variety. Like you’d think something with 360 radius would have a higher cap than something with a 120 radius.

Removing the cap could devastate zergs. One or two glas eles and you wipe out all players in a 360 radius. (Though I guess it would teach people to spread out?), which would be devastating because of choke points like doors. While that could make things more interesting/fun in some instances 3 people should be able to destroy 50+ in an instant with a surprise attack.

The Rooster.2615:

Suddenflame.2601:

The Rooster.2615:

Suddenflame.2601:

Real world battle tactics still apply in the game. Rome did not conquer most of the world from just zerging its enemy. Using their battle tactics in a sword/magic game makes life a hell lot easier and by far more effective. Rangers/mages rain down covering fire for warriors while thieves use stealth to disrupt the enemy. As well thieves are used to kill enemy eles. Warriors used as front line as they have highest base hp and have many skills to reduce damage. Guardians are the main support for warriors and complement them in the advance. With the massive concentrated fire from the rangers and mages along with advancing warrior and guardians the enemy zerg would have to pull back or get wiped. Battle tactics > sheer numbers.

This is exactly what WvW should be like, yes. But it just isn’t like this at the moment. Mainly because the “covering fire” that you mention doesn’t really cover much at all as if the zerg stacks up, it only hits 5 out of the 40+ that are there.

It’s extremely zergy because zerging has become both the most effective tactic and the tactic that generates the most rewards for the group.

Have you ever heard of the zerg stacking up? Even if it did then you stack the AOE covering fire. The only reason why it doesn’t happen is cause there is no overlying commander. The limit has no effect really from my experience in WvW other then prevent just a couple of people from eliminating an entire zerg. Also before people bring up the counter argument they could just move out of the red circle. It is really hard to see that red circle when there is spells going off all over and people littering the ground.

I don’t mean to sound rude, but which server do you WvW on?

The prevalent tactic for all zergs is to stack up and charge in and is seen consistently in JQ, BG and SOR. I can’t speak for the rest, but on those 3 servers, it’s all we do as it’s undeniably the superior tactic at the moment.

Stacking AOEs does not necessarily damage different targets. If you have 10 people together and stack 2 aoes on them, it doesn’t spread evenly between all 10. Depending on positioning, it will hit the same 5 targets until they’re dead before touching the next 5. Apply this to a zerg of 40+ and instead of your aoe damaging a large number of people, you damage 5 until they’re dead. Then the next 5. Then the next 5. This is why stacking up is the superior tactic as you minimize your losses to aoe.

Your statement is untrue about stacking it does not minimize your loses at all since it actually creates more loses. If AOE just damages random 5 people each sec and all aoe stacked then it would damage 5 people randomly each sec and if there is 40 and only 2 aoe circles then 0 deaths as damage are spread out, but if there it damages the same 5 people with the 2 there are 5 deaths not 0. It is greater lose then if it were random.

Lucky I know that it is random/sec and does not constantly effect the same 5 people. If there is 40 of them you would need 40/5 = 8 AOE circles just to damage them all at least once. Since most wouldn’t stand in the same circle but some will those who remain would be destroyed. Lets say 30 move out of the circles, but 10 stay which means there are 8 AOE circles just draining their HP before they can move.

I am in Fort Aspenwood server, and when I do play as a commander I usually play defensive and give orders for battle tactics. So far proven to be very effective at delaying or outright stopping a siege even if numbers are 4 to 1 with downed walls. I even was in Stormbluff Isles and managed to get to the lords room of Storm Mist Castle with only 10 people and held off 30 down a single corridor for 20mins.
Tactics > Zerg.

Sure most zerg but soon as there is an organized group (can’t say zerg as it wouldn’t be mindless) any large zerg would just crumble.

As well realistically when stacking AOE usually only 5 stay within 3 circles which means they die pretty much instantly. With longbow Rangers and staff eles casting it becomes one hell of deathtrap as there is stuns and cripples with heavy damage constantly. Larger groups with 50 people would just be nuts if cooridnated correctly as they could utilize fields from thieves and mesmers more effectively.

Really wish I could hear the dev’s “vision” for what WvWvW is supposed to be. Do they really want it to be the equivalent of playing a zergling assaulting protoss bases? And are there any ideas for improvements/fixes on the horizon that will make WvWvW not lamesauce?

Kaleban.9834:

Really wish I could hear the dev’s “vision” for what WvWvW is supposed to be. Do they really want it to be the equivalent of playing a zergling assaulting protoss bases? And are there any ideas for improvements/fixes on the horizon that will make WvWvW not lamesauce?

They want it like that, or else it wouldn’t be like that. There was even talk a couple months back of a few nerfs to aoe effectiveness, so unless there is a general uprising of the player population asking for it to change, don’t expect it to.

If you’re going to stand under a bunch of flaming meteors don’t you deserve to die?
Taking away the aoe limit reintroduces situational awareness to WvW and may lead to smarter, more competetive WvW.

Kaleban.9834:

Wow, just wow. The massive number of posts that show responses from people who clearly can’t read is amazing. I’ve seen several responses along the lines of “removing caps makes AoE classes uber powerful.” Seriously? Is everyone high?

Sorry, but I actually stopped reading there. Try leaving something like that out next time you try to come up with an argument. You could as well just have written “you just don’t get it”.

Kaleban.9834:

Really wish I could hear the dev’s “vision” for what WvWvW is supposed to be. Do they really want it to be the equivalent of playing a zergling assaulting protoss bases? And are there any ideas for improvements/fixes on the horizon that will make WvWvW not lamesauce?

I don’t know what their actual ideas are, but in one stream they said they want to reduce zerging and make group play more efficient. Removing the AE cap isn’t the way to solve this though, they have to make other actions more rewarding. Their idea of nerfing AE, or let’s say bring it en par with direct damage, in the future surely doesn’t mean they’re gonna remove the cap.

OhhGasm.9604:

If you’re going to stand under a bunch of flaming meteors don’t you deserve to die?
Taking away the aoe limit reintroduces situational awareness to WvW and may lead to smarter, more competetive WvW.

No, it leads to imbalance. But let’s do the same experiment other games did over and over again, just to realize it doesn’t work out. There has to be some kind of diminishing return. Or we could simply do it right from the beginning instead of introducing just another intermediate solution. I’m still pretty sure they only went with the easy approach of a hard limit because the servers couldn’t take the increased load that comes with DRs. And there’s a lot more to consider than just a few AE damage spells. In its current state, removing the cap would simply be gamebreaking.

Kaleban.9834:

Really wish I could hear the dev’s “vision” for what WvWvW is supposed to be. Do they really want it to be the equivalent of playing a zergling assaulting protoss bases? And are there any ideas for improvements/fixes on the horizon that will make WvWvW not lamesauce?

That implies that the defenders are Zealots.

Which would be awesome. My life for Tarnished Coast!

The limit on AoEs is something I’ve never fully understood.

I think it’s because of how sieges work in WvW – with everyone, more or less, forced to cluster around the gate the defenders would have a huge advantage if AoEs did not have a limit.

That is the only logic I can think of and I don’t agree with it.

A better solution to AoE damage would be counter AoE abilities to protect groups from AoEs (reducing or even, potentially, limiting damage for short periods of time) but I suppose it was easier just to put a cap on AoE and move on.

Maybe there was a PvE reason behind the original decision? Like, to prevent someone from gathering up 20 NPCs and then AoEing them down? Hmm.. could be.

I still don’t like the decision.

Kaleban.9834:

Wow, just wow. The massive number of posts that show responses from people who clearly can’t read is amazing. I’ve seen several responses along the lines of “removing caps makes AoE classes uber powerful.” Seriously? Is everyone high?

Removing the AoE caps introduces a choice, much like a Mesmer’s Confusion in sPvP. That choice is to ball up in a big zerg and be very vulnerable to AoE, or spread out into smaller spread out groups who by the nature of being spread out and small are less vulnerable to big AoEs.

It seems exceedingly simple to me, yet I can’t fathom how so many people seem to keep missing the point. Removing the AoE cap isn’t going to make AoE-centric professions super god awesome, its simply going to force everyone into the choice mentioned above, which means logically people will spread out to avoid AoE.

As to those who argue that removing the cap would mean AoE would have to be nerfed, why? A player who doesn’t stand in a Meteor Shower, Barrage or is dodging through Wells takes zero damage. Lava Font could do a gajillion damage, but effectively does zero if no players are dumb enough to stand in it.

And that’s the main problem with people arguing against cap removal. They don’t see the issue, they just see numbers on skills that in their arguments assumes an automatic hit. GW2 combat is much more mobile and twitchy than most MMOs, which means part of the game balance must be on player reaction time and skill, which ANet can account for but should not put training wheels on.

Ironically, unlimited AoE would make melee professions more powerful. Why you ask? Its simple, now the hard hitting single target professions become the hard counter to the AoE professions. A Meteor Storm can hurt a big group, but a Warrior can knockdown the Ele and crush him, eliminating the AoE threat entirely. Where melee becomes powerful is in their ability to quickly remove the threat. A small roving band of Thieves and Warriors can function as an assassin squad, taking out the artillery barrage being conducted by squishy casters.

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

So I am assuming you are on a lower Tier server and really have no idea what would happen if AoE cap was removed. You say don’t stand in a red circle lol. I will try to find a screenshot of all of the marks and wells on the ground in most of our fights. Wanna talk about area denial, I have seen zergs completely surrounded by so many marks there is no way a melee class could get in there to kill the AoE classes.

If the AoE limits were removed instead of a zerg being hammer warriors/glamor mesmers/well necros you would see zergs that are nothing but glamour mesmers/well necros/staff ele’s.

You are delusional if you think people will suddenly break up into small groups if AoE limits are removed. If you think that by removing the limit that a small group would have a better chance against the zerg you are so wrong and you should feel bad. The small group would never get close enough to the zerg to hit them. The zerg is here to stay, if you want small group PvP go sPvP.

whiran.1473:

Maybe there was a PvE reason behind the original decision? Like, to prevent someone from gathering up 20 NPCs and then AoEing them down? Hmm.. could be.

I still don’t like the decision.

You can already feasibly gather 20 NPCs and then AOE them down. It just takes longer. Even with uncapped AOE, the main problem of pulling 20 NPCs is that unless you’re very careful with your play and mob choice, you’re going to die anyway.

I play on Blackgate and I do know what a field of red circles stacked on top of red circles is like. I still support uncapping the AoE if it’s done right. As in there is direct correlation between damage and the center/point of impact is. Bulls-eye or dart board type design. Center = most damage and it diminishes from there to negligible damage at the outer part of the circle.
Possibly Anet could cap the maximum damage that a single AoE attack can generate.
There are some really good ideas in this thread for other ways to make this even more feasible. Rams upgraded with roofs to keep player using it safe until it’s health runs out.
I also know that balling up is a very common practice on my server and those we fight against. Argue for/against this tactic but at the moment it works and zergs will use it to their advantage until it no longer does.
The most fun I’ve ever had playing zerg vs zerg was between two keeps and no one balled up. The entire battlefield was spread out and it was an amazing battle. It is a shame this doesn’t happen more often.

Ruprect.7260:

You are delusional if you think people will suddenly break up into small groups if AoE limits are removed. If you think that by removing the limit that a small group would have a better chance against the zerg you are so wrong and you should feel bad. The small group would never get close enough to the zerg to hit them. The zerg is here to stay, if you want small group PvP go sPvP.

I don’t think removing the cap to AoEs and doing -nothing- else would be a viable option. If caps were removed from AoEs then a new set of counters should be added to the game. Skills / spells that limit the effectiveness of incoming AoE damage so that a zerg could, if there were enough people doing it, counter incoming AoE damage.

This would option up tactical options. Do you negate AoE damage? In doing so you are not doing damage yourself. Do you try to kill the AoE damage dealers? Do you try to out-DPS them? Do you move?

Why can’t necros REMOVE circles on the ground? Why can’t templars have a shield bubble that reduces incoming AoE damage by 10%? With enough templars, you could negate the incoming damage or, at the very least, reduce it to manageable levels. Rogues could provide some sort of counter measure as well. Basically, each class that can do AoE damage would also have a counter AoE ability.

This type of counter would add another layer of complexity (skill) to zerg battles. But, it’s way easier just to cap AoEs and be done instead of trying to figure out how to provide counters without making one set more powerful than another.

I agree with the zerg being there to stay. Regardless of what mechanics are introduced people will group up to form zergs. The only way to avoid this is a hard population cap. But, why would you? zergs warfare isn’t a bad thing unto itself. The issue with it is that there aren’t enough options for players within a zerg to feel like they are doing something other than attacking.

I think that ArenaNet should focus on expanding the things that a zerg can do. As more players form up provide systems for structuring the zerg (perhaps introduce role designations, sub commanders, group bonuses, group defenses, etc etc) instead of trying to remove something that will never go away. Still, all of that is development time and costs so why would ArenaNet bother doing it?

WvW doesn’t pay the bills. They’d need to find a way to better monetize WvW to justify doing this sort of thing and so far they haven’t displayed any imagination or desire for doing that. Monetizing WvW is tricky because if it is done wrong it would destroy WvW. WvW as it is now is popular, it works, and it’s easy for ArenaNet.

They really don’t have much incentive to mess with it or to devote resources to improving it.

Infernia.9847:

I play on Blackgate and I do know what a field of red circles stacked on top of red circles is like. I still support uncapping the AoE if it’s done right. As in there is direct correlation between damage and the center/point of impact is. Bulls-eye or dart board type design. Center = most damage and it diminishes from there to negligible damage at the outer part of the circle.
Possibly Anet could cap the maximum damage that a single AoE attack can generate.
There are some really good ideas in this thread for other ways to make this even more feasible. Rams upgraded with roofs to keep player using it safe until it’s health runs out.
I also know that balling up is a very common practice on my server and those we fight against. Argue for/against this tactic but at the moment it works and zergs will use it to their advantage until it no longer does.
The most fun I’ve ever had playing zerg vs zerg was between two keeps and no one balled up. The entire battlefield was spread out and it was an amazing battle. It is a shame this doesn’t happen more often.

Agreed, the best fights are 3 ways at keeps or even large 2 ways. Everyone is more spread out and you can actually pick out individual players to fight. I don’t know why everyone hates zerg fights. To me they are like epic battles on the scale of LoTR movies. 2 hugs armies going to battle. Or a huge army trying to take a keep, while a smaller force tries to hold them off.

How dumb would those movies have been if 5 ogres ran up to helms deep and took the keep lol. WvW is set up for large epic scale battles. I am not sure why everyone wants to change it to suit their small scale gameplay. I am in T2 and never have a problem running around in a small group of about 10 and capping camps. Sometimes you come across the zerg and get wiped and other times you come across another small group and fight it out. This to me is how WvW should be. A mix of large zergs and small groups working together.

whiran.1473:

Ruprect.7260:

You are delusional if you think people will suddenly break up into small groups if AoE limits are removed. If you think that by removing the limit that a small group would have a better chance against the zerg you are so wrong and you should feel bad. The small group would never get close enough to the zerg to hit them. The zerg is here to stay, if you want small group PvP go sPvP.

I don’t think removing the cap to AoEs and doing -nothing- else would be a viable option. If caps were removed from AoEs then a new set of counters should be added to the game. Skills / spells that limit the effectiveness of incoming AoE damage so that a zerg could, if there were enough people doing it, counter incoming AoE damage.

This would option up tactical options. Do you negate AoE damage? In doing so you are not doing damage yourself. Do you try to kill the AoE damage dealers? Do you try to out-DPS them? Do you move?

Why can’t necros REMOVE circles on the ground? Why can’t templars have a shield bubble that reduces incoming AoE damage by 10%? With enough templars, you could negate the incoming damage or, at the very least, reduce it to manageable levels. Rogues could provide some sort of counter measure as well. Basically, each class that can do AoE damage would also have a counter AoE ability.

This type of counter would add another layer of complexity (skill) to zerg battles. But, it’s way easier just to cap AoEs and be done instead of trying to figure out how to provide counters without making one set more powerful than another.

I agree with the zerg being there to stay. Regardless of what mechanics are introduced people will group up to form zergs. The only way to avoid this is a hard population cap. But, why would you? zergs warfare isn’t a bad thing unto itself. The issue with it is that there aren’t enough options for players within a zerg to feel like they are doing something other than attacking.

I think that ArenaNet should focus on expanding the things that a zerg can do. As more players form up provide systems for structuring the zerg (perhaps introduce role designations, sub commanders, group bonuses, group defenses, etc etc) instead of trying to remove something that will never go away. Still, all of that is development time and costs so why would ArenaNet bother doing it?

WvW doesn’t pay the bills. They’d need to find a way to better monetize WvW to justify doing this sort of thing and so far they haven’t displayed any imagination or desire for doing that. Monetizing WvW is tricky because if it is done wrong it would destroy WvW. WvW as it is now is popular, it works, and it’s easy for ArenaNet.

They really don’t have much incentive to mess with it or to devote resources to improving it.

What you are saying here would actually make sense. The problem is you are completely redesigning WvW, which I doubt will happen. What you are describing is the way it should have been implemented maybe. I like WvW the way it is, the fights are fun in both zerg and small scale. If anything I would like to see another map or bigger maps.

Kaleban.9834:

Wow, just wow. The massive number of posts that show responses from people who clearly can’t read is amazing. I’ve seen several responses along the lines of “removing caps makes AoE classes uber powerful.” Seriously? Is everyone high?

Removing the AoE caps introduces a choice, much like a Mesmer’s Confusion in sPvP. That choice is to ball up in a big zerg and be very vulnerable to AoE, or spread out into smaller spread out groups who by the nature of being spread out and small are less vulnerable to big AoEs.

It seems exceedingly simple to me, yet I can’t fathom how so many people seem to keep missing the point. Removing the AoE cap isn’t going to make AoE-centric professions super god awesome, its simply going to force everyone into the choice mentioned above, which means logically people will spread out to avoid AoE.

As to those who argue that removing the cap would mean AoE would have to be nerfed, why? A player who doesn’t stand in a Meteor Shower, Barrage or is dodging through Wells takes zero damage. Lava Font could do a gajillion damage, but effectively does zero if no players are dumb enough to stand in it.

And that’s the main problem with people arguing against cap removal. They don’t see the issue, they just see numbers on skills that in their arguments assumes an automatic hit. GW2 combat is much more mobile and twitchy than most MMOs, which means part of the game balance must be on player reaction time and skill, which ANet can account for but should not put training wheels on.

Ironically, unlimited AoE would make melee professions more powerful. Why you ask? Its simple, now the hard hitting single target professions become the hard counter to the AoE professions. A Meteor Storm can hurt a big group, but a Warrior can knockdown the Ele and crush him, eliminating the AoE threat entirely. Where melee becomes powerful is in their ability to quickly remove the threat. A small roving band of Thieves and Warriors can function as an assassin squad, taking out the artillery barrage being conducted by squishy casters.

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

I guess I am high, since I disagree with almost every point you make. First is the actual AOE that is in this game. There simply is far to much to start with. For many classes their AOE is actually their highest dps ability and is used for single target or multiple (gaurdian greatsword as example) so, no… they will not start re-inventing themselves to be assasins

It will do nothing to stop zerg action, it wont even stop the stacking that we all see happening right now. What it will do is force more people to take retaliations and stack even tighter. It will also start to force people to have specific builds, from forced range AOE specs to forced retaliation/heal specs. One of the truly good things about GW2 WvW so far is the lack of this “you must use this spec or get out of my group” mentality that exist in so many other games

The only thing removing AOE cap will do is allow small groups of ranged AOE to cause a lot more havoc in specific choke point situations (like ramp leading to lord in tower). It will simply increase the insane AOE that already exists

You want less zerg and more small groups. Maps must be increased in size with more objectives that force the giant zergs to split up or they simply will not be able to cover enough. Bigger maps…. more small groups

deracs.1762:

Kaleban.9834:

Wow, just wow. The massive number of posts that show responses from people who clearly can’t read is amazing. I’ve seen several responses along the lines of “removing caps makes AoE classes uber powerful.” Seriously? Is everyone high?

Removing the AoE caps introduces a choice, much like a Mesmer’s Confusion in sPvP. That choice is to ball up in a big zerg and be very vulnerable to AoE, or spread out into smaller spread out groups who by the nature of being spread out and small are less vulnerable to big AoEs.

It seems exceedingly simple to me, yet I can’t fathom how so many people seem to keep missing the point. Removing the AoE cap isn’t going to make AoE-centric professions super god awesome, its simply going to force everyone into the choice mentioned above, which means logically people will spread out to avoid AoE.

As to those who argue that removing the cap would mean AoE would have to be nerfed, why? A player who doesn’t stand in a Meteor Shower, Barrage or is dodging through Wells takes zero damage. Lava Font could do a gajillion damage, but effectively does zero if no players are dumb enough to stand in it.

And that’s the main problem with people arguing against cap removal. They don’t see the issue, they just see numbers on skills that in their arguments assumes an automatic hit. GW2 combat is much more mobile and twitchy than most MMOs, which means part of the game balance must be on player reaction time and skill, which ANet can account for but should not put training wheels on.

Ironically, unlimited AoE would make melee professions more powerful. Why you ask? Its simple, now the hard hitting single target professions become the hard counter to the AoE professions. A Meteor Storm can hurt a big group, but a Warrior can knockdown the Ele and crush him, eliminating the AoE threat entirely. Where melee becomes powerful is in their ability to quickly remove the threat. A small roving band of Thieves and Warriors can function as an assassin squad, taking out the artillery barrage being conducted by squishy casters.

In this way, removing the AoE cap gives professions a more defined role in WvWvW, makes the map and mode more interesting, and probably makes the whole thing a lot more fun. At the very least it would cut back on the mindless zerging. But it would require the players to re-think their roles, strategies and tactics, you would of course have the obligatory whining about needing to nerf AoE from players who kept standing in red circles expecting lame game mechanics to save their stupid hides, but they would probably be the minority as the rest of the playerbase would get used to the much more dynamic and challenging WvWvW combat.

I guess I am high, since I disagree with almost every point you make. First is the actual AOE that is in this game. There simply is far to much to start with. For many classes their AOE is actually their highest dps ability and is used for single target or multiple (gaurdian greatsword as example) so, no… they will not start re-inventing themselves to be assasins

It will do nothing to stop zerg action, it wont even stop the stacking that we all see happening right now. What it will do is force more people to take retaliations and stack even tighter. It will also start to force people to have specific builds, from forced range AOE specs to forced retaliation/heal specs. One of the truly good things about GW2 WvW so far is the lack of this “you must use this spec or get out of my group” mentality that exist in so many other games

The only thing removing AOE cap will do is allow small groups of ranged AOE to cause a lot more havoc in specific choke point situations (like ramp leading to lord in tower). It will simply increase the insane AOE that already exists

You want less zerg and more small groups. Maps must be increased in size with more objectives that force the giant zergs to split up or they simply will not be able to cover enough. Bigger maps…. more small groups

There is nothing wrong with zerg action! It’s more of when the zerg becomes a bunch of brainless sheep following around the commander which is what I have a problem with!

Increasing the AoE cap will make WvW high risk and high reward system which will make the more skillful/planned commander stand out. People will not be required ball up into groups because it takes less effort and people and more co-ordination to wipe those groups out.

The high-risk, high-reward system would really bring the spice/strategy back into WvW and it might make me come want to get back into WvW.

I love the brainless sheep following a commander on the other servers. Last night for example, we ran into 2 full zergs, both outnumbered us. Server 1 runs in and gets wiped, they had no strat just run in and die I guess, same with server 2. An organized team will almost always beat a brainless one even if outnumbered. I am not sure how removing the AoE cap would do anything to help that. It would just make it possible for a brainless team to mindlessly spam AoE and wipe a smaller more organized group.

I’m sure this has been mentioned already, but I’m not reading 6 pages to find out lol. My thinking is this: the aoe cap was reduced because people complained that it was op. It was op… in the sense that you have to move around or die. People complain that Meteor Shower is op because multiple elementalists can cast them on the same area, but the thing is they cant make you stand in it. Most classes have some invuln or port to avoid it, but it would require players to pay attention to the field of battle and not tunnel vision in on one guy like they’re in SPvP. All this being said, I play 6 characters. Ele, Mes, War, Thief, Engi, and Necro. That’s not to say I’m awesome, or the best, just that I have a decent understanding of AoE mechanics in GW2. An ele casting meteor shower is vulnerable to range or thieves, a shatter mesmer is the same. I accept that Guild Wars 2 was made for casuals, but at the same time, that doesn’t mean that it should cater to the lowest common denominator… or the laziest denominator

This doesn’t have anything to do with laziness or incompetence. In a zerg on zerg siege attack situation, there’s so much effects and general action going on that it’s simply impossible to see all AE indicators. Also there’s a lot of CC plus you can just place AE in a way that makes it impossible to escape, like the overlapping AE in the Temple of Grenth has been pre nerf.
The problem, as already mentioned countless times, is that uncapped AE with no DR is absolutely unbalanced compared to direct damage. Again, WoW is a good example before they introduced a cap and then a DR system later. Who would want to play a class with limited to no AE capabilities when you can just jump in and nuke everything (WoW frost mage anyone?).

Probably should be no AoE limit in PvE. But in tier 1 WvW it gives longer fights.

I can see why people don’t want AoE limit. These people want more realism in the game.

Zerg fighting can be fun if the players on the field of battle are spread out. So many times a commander or two will shout to ‘stand on me’. The whole zerg of 50+ people stands on top of him/them. That zerg ball becomes a shield and a huge ball of people casting everything they have: boons, AoE’s, conditions, shouts, banners, etc. If 5 people go down, they are back up in seconds. And the zerg can still attack in this ball so it’s like a giant warped disco ball of spells & attacks & heals.
That is not fun to try to attack and not really fun to be inside of. It’s a cheap trick but it works very well for survival. I have seen commanders build inside the ball and then people use ballista at the enemy zerg outside the ball.

This strategy is what needs to be eliminated. What some here have suggested is that removing the AoE cap could do this. Maybe it’s not the solution.
The strategy certainly is a major cause of frustration and the AoE as it stands will not eliminate a zerg ball. Even if you outnumber that mass of bodies 2:1.

DAOC had no AOE caps, and it worked well. DAOC AOE however had falloff – targets closer to the geometric centre took 100% damage and targets at the extremities took around 50%.

WVW was directly copied from DAOC, and shares all of its characteristics, it’s certain that no AOE could also be made to work in WVW. No AOE cap didn’t eliminate zerging in DAOC because of the way /sticking and movement worked, but pure-balled-up zerging was a lot less successful in DAOC for sure.

In fact the more time goes on the more I come to appreciate the genius of game design in that game.

Five
Five
Five Dolla Footloooooong!

Well AoE limit is oke if everything is logic. I will not take an Ele but a arrow-card as example. An arrow-card has 19 wholes. I also counted how many times it shoots when you trigger it and I don’t remember exactly but I think it was something like 8 times in 4 sec. Let’s say that is accurate for the example you shoot 19 arrows every 0,5 seconds. Irl if an arrow hits you I think you have 50% change you die. The surface looking from the top is about 50% head (dead) and 50% shoulders (not dead).
The next thing you do is seeing how many characters would fit into the circle of the arrow-card. All characters have the same hitbox so that would be easy. I am not acting like if there is collision detection (if you ask me it should be in WvW) so you can not stand inside of each other. Now let’s say 50 people fit in to the circle (it a big circle) then every 0,5 seconds you have 38% change of getting hit. And because I said there is a 50% change you get killed in the game we can change that to getting about 50% damage (depending on your armor). If you do it like that AoE limit is valid.
To make it even better check how fast those things could be reloaded in reality and how long it takes the arrows to hit the floor (in reality). Then make it so that you can only shoot once and have a cool-down for the time it would really take to reload. The arrow on the ground appears the moment you shoot and the arrows hit the moment they would also do in reality (more or less).

At the same time you remove the cap from siege weapons and you have a pretty realistic way that has a limited. And also make collision detection for siege weapons so you cannot place them inside each other. In that way you also have a limit to the number of arrow-cards you can place even how many you can place on one wall.
Why going to all this trouble? Because it that way you never get it OP and you never get it to weak. It is just realistic. (I know the game itself is not realistic but still try to get logic into the game and it will fix many problems) Doing it like this also means good tactics can easily win over zergs. But just nerving or just making people stronger in a not logical way, but just to try and counter something usually results in problems instead of fixing them.
I also still wonder why they took consumables out of WvW. People where thinking out of the box, they were using their brain, there were using tactics and took consumables from PvE into the WvW matches. That is great. I love to see that. That makes fights interesting, then tactics start to count. But apparently that’s not appreciated because the developers took it out. Like every time somebody thinks of a tactic that possibility gets removed because the developers did not what you to play that way (other example is not anymore being able to stop bounty’s from walking by talking to them). It’s a game, people should play it like they want and if they find smart ways to do something that’s great, it should not be removed.

mjharrison.3209:

DAOC had no AOE caps, and it worked well. DAOC AOE however had falloff – targets closer to the geometric centre took 100% damage and targets at the extremities took around 50%.

WVW was directly copied from DAOC, and shares all of its characteristics, it’s certain that no AOE could also be made to work in WVW. No AOE cap didn’t eliminate zerging in DAOC because of the way /sticking and movement worked, but pure-balled-up zerging was a lot less successful in DAOC for sure.

In fact the more time goes on the more I come to appreciate the genius of game design in that game.

Now that’s something I could see working well. No limit to the number of targets, but have scaling damage by the proximity to the epicenter of the AoE.

Would also encourage people playing primarily AoE professions and builds to be more tactical with their attacks, as a Lava Font or Well edge would do much less damage than hitting the center.

If this change occurred (unlimited targets with scaling damage) then only a few things would need to be changed. First, the ground target circles would need to have their graphic adjusted to be similar to an archery target, perhaps with a bright red center (bullseye) and each concentric circle fading in hue. Certain skills (i.e. Meteor Storm, Barrage) would need the bulk of their projectiles to hit near the center, with fewer at the edges. The damage would need to be adjusted for each “ring” with 100% at the bullseye, decreasing incrementally per ring to 25% or 33% at the edge.

It also makes sense for boons and beneficial effects. The further away you are from the center of effect of a boon (either an AoE circle or a character, such as in the case of a Warrior shout), the shorter the duration. It could even work for skills like Shadow Refuge. Not sure how it would work with “line” skills like Temporal Curtain and Unsteady Ground, perhaps they should remain as is (making them stronger) since hitting with a line is generally harder than a circle.

But yes, in the event that ANet uncaps AoE (and I really think it would do the game, especially WvWvW a world of good) instituting proximity scaled damage/boon duration to AoE would be a good idea. It then feeds into the anti-zerg choice I’ve been harping on about, that yes groups could STILL clump on a commander for boons, but the opposing force is then presented with a very juicy target.

One thing, while i support the idea of raising the aoe cap, they will become unable to solve skill lag with increased aoe cap. More aoe cap means more calculation for server

rhodoc.2381:

One thing, while i support the idea of raising the aoe cap, they will become unable to solve skill lag with increased aoe cap. More aoe cap means more calculation for server

Not really. The effects will be the same, just more people will be effected by those effects. Skill lag would only be minimally affected.

rhodoc.2381:

One thing, while i support the idea of raising the aoe cap, they will become unable to solve skill lag with increased aoe cap. More aoe cap means more calculation for server

pretty sure that’s not the issue, as others have stated it wasn’t in the beta and that’s back when performance was even worse and i personally didn’t notice any lag back then. so to me this point is irrelevant, no offense.

now onto players complaining about small groups becoming over powered,i feel this point is also irrelevant. as a necro i have used death shroud(skill 2) many times as a means to bypass aoe’s and other skills. it’s not like i’m the only class that can jump past aoe’s, hell i’m not even the best for it. its not that hard to play smart and bypass a small area of aoe’s, start dealing some damage and moving on.

while completely removing the cap may not be the best answer, something needs to be done. when a small group can’t even slow a zerg down, when they’re “inside a fort” there’s a problem. for me this isn’t about getting rid of the zerg, this is about improving gameplay in WvW and i feel this is one needed step in the right direction.

My thoughts:
-To start just increase the cap, or like others said remove limit and make sure damage is escapable.
-As for stacking Ele on a tower for defense, I see no problem just stack ele to counter in your attack. No different then 2 roaming thieves backstabbing a single target from stealth before they can realize they have been hit.
-As for zerg crush what about a penalty for being near more than 20 people in wvw? There are zone buffs for when your outnumbered so why not take this mechanic to a smaller opposite level. The more people within a 3-4k range (weapon range) the more penalty to your stats you suffer.