Guild Wars 2

There is a reason why FoeFire is the best map and everyone always vote for it.

How can you play staff ele and capture a small point when you can’t keep your range and you die in 2 hit as soon as you get stunned or immob.

I see 2 options:
1- You can change the game mode around the current balance
2- You can rebalance the classes properly around the game mode

I think I would rather have the classes balanced properly, as they were 2 years ago.

foefire is not the best map, not even close.

its picked the most because its the most straight forward.

I like big mid points. I am in favor of making them all Legacy size. I suppose the side points could be kept smaller to balance it out.

I don’t mind that fights at big points are longer, in fact, I enjoy them because of this. It feels more strategic. On the small points, it is such a spam fest that after its over I’m left thinking WTF just happened (whether my team wins or not). Forest mid is notorious for this, and Khylo is small and has the friggin treb too.

Also I think most of the problems this season with the DH are not because the class is OP now, but because so many points are small.

Play all classes, but do go thru cycles of preference with different ones. Also have a HoT and Non-HoT account so coming from that angle. Prefer the smaller cap points. Have noted that it changes the dynamic of the fight. If you want the point you will be in a more condensed spot and it does intensify the fights. Risk=reward. It also means I need to weigh and measure my build versus what’s going on more. Can I hold, do I have CC to clear them off point, do I need to range and rotate, am I running interference for those capping. Smaller cap points makes people think versus stack on the point.

I feel the small circles should all be made 30-40% larger than they are at the moment. I’m a fan of having a brawl mid-point that’s larger than the rest. The mid point on coliseum is way too small, just as the capricorn bell is also too small.

I wouldn’t be opposed to keeping things the way they are if you implement no class stacking in ranked like you do with pro tourneys. But honestly it’s ridiculous facing 2-3 DH on the opposing team when having to fight over small circles, bell ring, etc..

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

Hey everyone,
This has come up before and I thought I would give some insight as to why the capture points are the way they are.

When we look at the data we have for capture points, we notice that fights on bigger capture points tend to run much longer than capture points that are smaller. It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point, instead of the missing players that are on point but running around the outskirts of the point. This means on smaller cap points players will need to weigh the risk of being on the point and know when you need to rotate out.

Question time:
How do we like smaller capture points knowing that they reinforce fights coming to an end?
Would you change the mid point to be larger?
Would you change the side points to be larger?

We don’t like smaller capture points AT ALL because they extremely heavily favor 2 of the 9 classes, considering there are no other game modes as an alternative.

Completely redesign all PVP maps, rotate Capricorn into ranked

Completely redesign all PVP maps, rotate Capricorn into ranked

I would also shrink the size of every single ground-targeted AoE and trap in the game in every game mode.

@ Om Im

You would still be rewarded for 1v2ing due to pulling numbers away from your mate’s nodes, allowing them to more easily take those nodes, regardless of it the 2 players would slowly be able to decap you within time. You’re just not being overly rewarded if they can slowly decap you and that would be a good thing to help the viability of other builds which are mobile and DPS oriented.

Right now, it’s too rewarding in conquest for players to run fat bunkers and lure 1v2s. That’s why so many people run those specs. It’s honesty easy gameplay to over defense on a point without ever needing to worry about running DPS role. In fact it’s so easy that these types of builds dominate conquest to the point that players complain when they even see a thief on their team at all or w/e non-sustainish build that can’t stay on point that it may be.

If a point could be slowly decapped out from under a bunker simply because 2+ guys were against him, it would stress more importance on rotations and give things like thieves or w/e mobile peel it is, that much more of an important role.

Remember that that #1 complaints in this forum are about class balance but are the classes really imbalanced? or is it conquest’s match dynamic that is imbalanced? Maybe conquest rewards certain build archetypes just a bit more than it does others. Maybe this is what we need to focus on for balancing rather than pointing the finger at classes all the time.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

Hey everyone,
This has come up before and I thought I would give some insight as to why the capture points are the way they are.

When we look at the data we have for capture points, we notice that fights on bigger capture points tend to run much longer than capture points that are smaller. It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point, instead of the missing players that are on point but running around the outskirts of the point. This means on smaller cap points players will need to weigh the risk of being on the point and know when you need to rotate out.

Question time:
How do we like smaller capture points knowing that they reinforce fights coming to an end?
Would you change the mid point to be larger?
Would you change the side points to be larger?

So you would rather heavily favor classes that can dump crap load of (instant low CD) AoE on point than actually have balanced game? Why am i not surprised. Do you even play this game, ever?

- smaller points? How about NO? See reason above. If anything AoEs (sup DH traps, scrapper hammer, necro staff etc.) need their radius reduced. YOU devs, yes YOU deemed black powder (the tiny blinding circle) as broken!!!!! and nerfed it, yet you allowed brainless crap like DH traps happen – WHAT DID GO THROUGH YOUR HEAD!!!?? FAVORITISM MUCH?

- i think mid point on every map should be as big as on Foefire. Mid is always where most team fights happen. Once again, favoring classes with massive aoe is just wrong from dev perspective- you shouldn’t be taking sides and favoring certain class, but your actions show otherwise.

- Either that or reduce size of AoE that classes can dump on point (see first point).

Nothing should be designed to guarantee hits on points/nodes. If you can’t even aim your AoE it doesn’t deserve to hit anything period.

Running around the outskirts of the points to contest is an extremely valid strategy and heck at least it requires more skill than dumping all your stuff onto one node.

What you’re basically saying is there should be no downsides to blindly throwing AoE onto a point with people on it. What?

Just when I thought the game couldn’t be more brain ded.

BurrTheKing.8571:

I’ve posted many times in the past that a Battlefield-like system could potentially work well in GW2 PvP. This would mean that:

1. The team with the most number of players on point would start to cap.

2. The cap speed would be greatly reduced if contested.

This might help keep the game from slowing down too much and would allow for larger capture points. It would be nice to also see different terrain on the points like large tombstones on Graveyard that can be used for cover and the like.

Larger capture points would also hopefully help with visibility because you could avoid bunching up. It might make certain builds more viable as well.

Yeah i support that type of system, if you decide to 3 vs 1 someone just to get the cap point faster so you can leave to help the other two on a point. Issues occur if you decide all go as a zerg through each point. But you could fix that by making points slowly degenerate back to netrual if no one on point what will keep forces equally spread out and less static.

After reading the comments here, may i suggest a new version of cap point?

A splitted one, a small circle (primary point) in the middle, when you stand on that point you can capture the point

And a secondary point, bigger and sourounding the small circle, if nobody is on the primary point, the secondary point works just like a normal capture, but if someone is in the primary point, the secondary point can neutralize the the point forcing a fight – that way the secondary point would just work as a delay when capturing/decapturing

That way Bunkering a point woruld be much harder, but capturing easiyer – stay in the middle- there would emerge new strategy, and a point would only truly belong to a party if they are victorious

I like smaller points. Sure it favors aoe’s but that just means they can be brought in line with other skills opening up more builds. This also means other forms of cleave have a stronger effect on the points as well.

Entenkommando.5208:

For the love of the 6.

Always reppin the 6. OVO

Smaller capture points are more fun because you 1 team can’t bunker it for the whole match. they can literally run bk after getting ressed

Makes it easier for druids or long ramger skills to go off imo

Also,

Why is Anet so shapest? Sure, we’ve seen some progression since HoT with the introduction of rectangular AoE (Warrior LB burst skill for example), but PvP is behind in the times, still favoring the dominant single sided circle. Would it be so terrible to have a square somewhere? Or perhaps a triangle to mix up the diversity of fights a little? You can bet if Sesame Street had the same one shape bias in it’s show the way GW2 does, there’d be hell to pay!

I’ll leave Cookie Monster to explain
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfNalVIrdOw

Point size is good as is. Certain classes would be able to contest points for too long. Smaller points promote rotating in an out of points in team fights.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

Hey everyone,
This has come up before and I thought I would give some insight as to why the capture points are the way they are.

When we look at the data we have for capture points, we notice that fights on bigger capture points tend to run much longer than capture points that are smaller. It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point, instead of the missing players that are on point but running around the outskirts of the point. This means on smaller cap points players will need to weigh the risk of being on the point and know when you need to rotate out.

Question time:
How do we like smaller capture points knowing that they reinforce fights coming to an end?
Would you change the mid point to be larger?
Would you change the side points to be larger?

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

Ragion.2831:

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

The problem with longer fights is longer fights changes how the rotation games works. If the fights take too long then rotation becomes devalued and strategy turns to simply taking home and bunking mid.

A example of this is 3point maps in SW:TOR (back when it had 8v8 ranked) where that game’s more difficult capping system meant that teams simply take close and contest mid, and the team that capped their close first wouldn’t even need to cap mid. Thus winning simply became about getting the first cap and the rest of the match was just for show.

Thieves would actually be less useful with large nodes because with large nodes the gameplay turns away from rotations and towards bunking. And thieves strength as always been in rotations.

Kuya.6495:

Keep in mind kittens that while a lot of you bring up dh cleave as a reason for why small capture are bad, a larger capture point is easier to hold on tk making bunker dh harder to kill since they have a lot of space to kite in.

Not just DH AoE, any class with AoE skills that cover an entire capture node is a problem. Yes, larger nodes can make it harder to kill classes. That is a good thing, that will differentiate average players from good players, because you will have to think about what you are doing instead of placing all of your AoE on point and just dealing constant damage to the other team unless they let you cap the node. That is not good game design. The nodes do not need to be as large as graveyard, but halfway between that and the tiny nodes on almost every other capture point in PvP is a good size.

Trevor Boyer.6524:

@ Om Im

You would still be rewarded for 1v2ing due to pulling numbers away from your mate’s nodes, allowing them to more easily take those nodes, regardless of it the 2 players would slowly be able to decap you within time. You’re just not being overly rewarded if they can slowly decap you and that would be a good thing to help the viability of other builds which are mobile and DPS oriented.

Right now, it’s too rewarding in conquest for players to run fat bunkers and lure 1v2s. That’s why so many people run those specs. It’s honesty easy gameplay to over defense on a point without ever needing to worry about running DPS role. In fact it’s so easy that these types of builds dominate conquest to the point that players complain when they even see a thief on their team at all or w/e non-sustainish build that can’t stay on point that it may be.

If a point could be slowly decapped out from under a bunker simply because 2+ guys were against him, it would stress more importance on rotations and give things like thieves or w/e mobile peel it is, that much more of an important role.

Remember that that #1 complaints in this forum are about class balance but are the classes really imbalanced? or is it conquest’s match dynamic that is imbalanced? Maybe conquest rewards certain build archetypes just a bit more than it does others. Maybe this is what we need to focus on for balancing rather than pointing the finger at classes all the time.

That last part is really important. If you’ve ever spent time in dueling servers you’ll find that almost any single build can be beaten. There were some absurdly powerful builds like the old D/D Ele and Shoutbow Warrior – but even they were beatable with the right spec. The problem is that the game mode simply makes some builds better than others. A specialized duelist isn’t as good as a build that can sustain itself for ages on a point while doing decent damage (in the case of Rev good damage and some good team support too).

Having the game be more focused around being in the right area and ensuring you’re outnumbering your enemy will make bunker builds less appealing in theory because if you don’t kill them fast the side with more players on point is just going to steal the point away. It’ll hopefully take away some of the importance of builds and and instead be more about teamwork and knowing how to rotate. Rotations are important now, but I would say builds that take advantage of the game design are more important.

BurrTheKing.8571:

That last part is really important. If you’ve ever spent time in dueling servers you’ll find that almost any single build can be beaten. There were some absurdly powerful builds like the old D/D Ele and Shoutbow Warrior – but even they were beatable with the right spec. The problem is that the game mode simply makes some builds better than others. A specialized duelist isn’t as good as a build that can sustain itself for ages on a point while doing decent damage (in the case of Rev good damage and some good team support too).

You’re right that any build can be beaten in 1v1, but the reason it doesn’t work in 5v5 has nothing to do with points.
The reason counter builds don’t work in 5v5 is because they are often countered by other builds.

Lets say hypothetically that X build counters Y, that Z counters X, and W counters Z.
X can’t counter Y if Z is around.
Thus X and Z can’t be meta at the same time, and X and Y can’t be meta at the same time.
However X and W can be meta at the same.

An example of this is how Aura Elementalist completely shut DH out of the meta, while at the same time the counters of Aura where shut out by the comps usually run with Aurashare.

Why does the point always have to be a circle? What about a square or a rectangle or an octagon…perhaps giving the point the same amount of area, but in the form a different shape would give way to some new strategies on how to cap/hold/take a point. Most traps are circles, so if the point were square shaped, there would be some wiggle room around traps/aoes in theory.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

Hey everyone,
This has come up before and I thought I would give some insight as to why the capture points are the way they are.

When we look at the data we have for capture points, we notice that fights on bigger capture points tend to run much longer than capture points that are smaller. It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point, instead of the missing players that are on point but running around the outskirts of the point. This means on smaller cap points players will need to weigh the risk of being on the point and know when you need to rotate out.

Question time:
How do we like smaller capture points knowing that they reinforce fights coming to an end?
Would you change the mid point to be larger?
Would you change the side points to be larger?

I choose both! When a point is contested for a prolonged period of time it slowly shrinks then grows radius repeating this over and over

Fights will come to an end because folks eventually will get into a shrinking phase where to contest they get pulled closer and closer to the center. This gives rotating advantage to whole point classes for periods of the fight, but not the whole fight.

Crinn.7864:

Ragion.2831:

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

The problem with longer fights is longer fights changes how the rotation games works. If the fights take too long then rotation becomes devalued and strategy turns to simply taking home and bunking mid.

A example of this is 3point maps in SW:TOR (back when it had 8v8 ranked) where that game’s more difficult capping system meant that teams simply take close and contest mid, and the team that capped their close first wouldn’t even need to cap mid. Thus winning simply became about getting the first cap and the rest of the match was just for show.

Thieves would actually be less useful with large nodes because with large nodes the gameplay turns away from rotations and towards bunking. And thieves strength as always been in rotations.

Before, the June 23rd patch that killed core thief, i was a combat thief so i would run S/D and D/P, rune of lyssa, 30 points in trickery, improvisation trait and old feline grace trait. I ran this because i really hated (and still do) stealthing but i liked the evade gameplay.

I noticed that this build was really good at fighting revealed and did really well in team fights and outnumbered fights against other classes. This was really useful on a large point because when i recalled out of range to avoid a pin i would still be on the point or very near it so i could still contest. This doesnt work anymore after all the changes.

Nowadays with smaller points thieves cannot participate in a team fight well because of DH traps and all the random AoE, Often times i would see a thief hanging back looking at a fight waiting for an aoe skill to end before jumping in, waiting because going to another point isnt a good option at that moment for whatever reason.

This is why Helseth (i think) said they dont pay any attention to what thief is doing.

DH traps are really bad for the game, the amount of stealth on thieves also really bad for thieves. Ive said this for months its only now people are finally beginning to understand why.

Ragion.2831:

Crinn.7864:

Ragion.2831:

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

The problem with longer fights is longer fights changes how the rotation games works. If the fights take too long then rotation becomes devalued and strategy turns to simply taking home and bunking mid.

A example of this is 3point maps in SW:TOR (back when it had 8v8 ranked) where that game’s more difficult capping system meant that teams simply take close and contest mid, and the team that capped their close first wouldn’t even need to cap mid. Thus winning simply became about getting the first cap and the rest of the match was just for show.

Thieves would actually be less useful with large nodes because with large nodes the gameplay turns away from rotations and towards bunking. And thieves strength as always been in rotations.

Before, the June 23rd patch that killed core thief, i was a combat thief so i would run S/D and D/P, rune of lyssa, 30 points in trickery, improvisation trait and old feline grace trait. I ran this because i really hated (and still do) stealthing but i liked the evade gameplay.

I noticed that this build was really good at fighting revealed and did really well in team fights and outnumbered fights against other classes. This was really useful on a large point because when i recalled out of range to avoid a pin i would still be on the point or very near it so i could still contest. This doesnt work anymore after all the changes.

Nowadays with smaller points thieves cannot participate in a team fight well because of DH traps and all the random AoE, Often times i would see a thief hanging back looking at a fight waiting for an aoe skill to end before jumping in, waiting because going to another point isnt a good option at that moment for whatever reason.

This is why Helseth (i think) said they dont pay any attention to what thief is doing.

DH traps are really bad for the game, the amount of stealth on thieves also really bad for thieves. Ive said this for months its only now people are finally beginning to understand why.

And I think this is why I’m seeing so many P/P thieves in mid-high ranked and why you almost never see a non-P/P thief in unranked. If they get even remotely close to melee range they melt from untargeted AoE and Unload will kill or come close to killing most classes most of the time plus it’s on a short enough cooldown they can usually get 2-3 off before they’re caught. It’s a cheese build and not viable at ESL levels but it’s enough to make them not-useless at Ruby/Diamond/lower Legendary.

“It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point” I liked this part, how about removing dodge and immunities too, remove stability too to make sure that abilities hits the target =p

I am surprised by the amount of people that wants small capping points, it is just bad design, if you have issues with bunkers or kiting that’s different matter that should be fixed but saying " It makes sense, when players are able to use skills to guarantee hits on players that are on point" just add everything like Mesmer’s mantra and get it over with including traps.

And your AOE damage is not weak at all I am just saying … you will see people not even bothering to know where you are, they will just spam their aoe on the capping points.

Again if people have issues with bunkers or kiting fix that issue, and from what I can see lots of the issues came with HoT spamming, BOONS spam etc pretty much everything is spammed even revealed was spammed in wvw =p

OH and another thing please separate the balance for spvp, wvw and pve. (Wall vs Wall mainly player)

Lucred.1802:

Ragion.2831:

Crinn.7864:

Ragion.2831:

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

The problem with longer fights is longer fights changes how the rotation games works. If the fights take too long then rotation becomes devalued and strategy turns to simply taking home and bunking mid.

A example of this is 3point maps in SW:TOR (back when it had 8v8 ranked) where that game’s more difficult capping system meant that teams simply take close and contest mid, and the team that capped their close first wouldn’t even need to cap mid. Thus winning simply became about getting the first cap and the rest of the match was just for show.

Thieves would actually be less useful with large nodes because with large nodes the gameplay turns away from rotations and towards bunking. And thieves strength as always been in rotations.

Before, the June 23rd patch that killed core thief, i was a combat thief so i would run S/D and D/P, rune of lyssa, 30 points in trickery, improvisation trait and old feline grace trait. I ran this because i really hated (and still do) stealthing but i liked the evade gameplay.

I noticed that this build was really good at fighting revealed and did really well in team fights and outnumbered fights against other classes. This was really useful on a large point because when i recalled out of range to avoid a pin i would still be on the point or very near it so i could still contest. This doesnt work anymore after all the changes.

Nowadays with smaller points thieves cannot participate in a team fight well because of DH traps and all the random AoE, Often times i would see a thief hanging back looking at a fight waiting for an aoe skill to end before jumping in, waiting because going to another point isnt a good option at that moment for whatever reason.

This is why Helseth (i think) said they dont pay any attention to what thief is doing.

DH traps are really bad for the game, the amount of stealth on thieves also really bad for thieves. Ive said this for months its only now people are finally beginning to understand why.

And I think this is why I’m seeing so many P/P thieves in mid-high ranked and why you almost never see a non-P/P thief in unranked. If they get even remotely close to melee range they melt from untargeted AoE and Unload will kill or come close to killing most classes most of the time plus it’s on a short enough cooldown they can usually get 2-3 off before they’re caught. It’s a cheese build and not viable at ESL levels but it’s enough to make them not-useless at Ruby/Diamond/lower Legendary.

warrior shield makes p/p thief kill itself.

sophiewhite.3149:

Lucred.1802:

Ragion.2831:

Crinn.7864:

Ragion.2831:

so the reason for smaller cap points is to shorten the duration of the fight? You understand that some classes are better at fighting on smaller cap points than others right? and that is a huge problem since the matchmaking doesnt take profession mix into account

You have just basically said that shorter fights are more important than classes fighting on an even footing. You are saying, it doesnt matter if two (even 3) thieves are staring down a multi DH, multi condi war comp it doesnt matter as long as the thieves die quickly without wasting time bothering about contesting. This is why people have a problem with anet devs.

Lol im done.

The problem with longer fights is longer fights changes how the rotation games works. If the fights take too long then rotation becomes devalued and strategy turns to simply taking home and bunking mid.

A example of this is 3point maps in SW:TOR (back when it had 8v8 ranked) where that game’s more difficult capping system meant that teams simply take close and contest mid, and the team that capped their close first wouldn’t even need to cap mid. Thus winning simply became about getting the first cap and the rest of the match was just for show.

Thieves would actually be less useful with large nodes because with large nodes the gameplay turns away from rotations and towards bunking. And thieves strength as always been in rotations.

Before, the June 23rd patch that killed core thief, i was a combat thief so i would run S/D and D/P, rune of lyssa, 30 points in trickery, improvisation trait and old feline grace trait. I ran this because i really hated (and still do) stealthing but i liked the evade gameplay.

I noticed that this build was really good at fighting revealed and did really well in team fights and outnumbered fights against other classes. This was really useful on a large point because when i recalled out of range to avoid a pin i would still be on the point or very near it so i could still contest. This doesnt work anymore after all the changes.

Nowadays with smaller points thieves cannot participate in a team fight well because of DH traps and all the random AoE, Often times i would see a thief hanging back looking at a fight waiting for an aoe skill to end before jumping in, waiting because going to another point isnt a good option at that moment for whatever reason.

This is why Helseth (i think) said they dont pay any attention to what thief is doing.

DH traps are really bad for the game, the amount of stealth on thieves also really bad for thieves. Ive said this for months its only now people are finally beginning to understand why.

And I think this is why I’m seeing so many P/P thieves in mid-high ranked and why you almost never see a non-P/P thief in unranked. If they get even remotely close to melee range they melt from untargeted AoE and Unload will kill or come close to killing most classes most of the time plus it’s on a short enough cooldown they can usually get 2-3 off before they’re caught. It’s a cheese build and not viable at ESL levels but it’s enough to make them not-useless at Ruby/Diamond/lower Legendary.

warrior shield makes p/p thief kill itself.

I never killed myself to this but I did kill an ally DH that stood between me and the Warrior…… I couldn’t stop laughing when I realized what happened.

This whole thread relies on the assumption that your entire team needs to stand on a point. You only need to have one person on the point at any given time to contest it.

There’s already a counter to AOE, which is to avoid stacking up on point. Rotate people on and off as needed.

If there is a large point, it should be far enough from spawn that downing the enemy bunker reliably secures the point. On Foefire, (depending on team comps) you can lose your bunker at mid but contest the point long enough via kiting and LOSing for your bunker to respawn and rejoin the fight, which essentially resets the whole endeavor.

ResJudicator.7916:

This whole thread relies on the assumption that your entire team needs to stand on a point. You only need to have one person on the point at any given time to contest it.

There’s already a counter to AOE, which is to avoid stacking up on point. Rotate people on and off as needed.

If there is a large point, it should be far enough from spawn that downing the enemy bunker reliably secures the point. On Foefire, (depending on team comps) you can lose your bunker at mid but contest the point long enough via kiting and LOSing for your bunker to respawn and rejoin the fight, which essentially resets the whole endeavor.

Your entire team doesnt need to stand on a point, but every teammate should be able to contest because there will be times you need to. Not just contest, but go in to the fight and assist instead of spending half the time waiting for everyone’s one shot skills to end.

Its really so bad, thief has been reduced to spam or die, either you spam dp stealth, death blossom, unload or vault, using any of the other skills especially in a team fight is pretty much a waste of initiative.

The most ridiculous thing about this is they cant just buff thief to fight better with the team, because stealth will make any thing anet does look broken, the same way traps make any buffs dh gets look broken. Its amazing how ridiculous these devs are

Ragion.2831:

ResJudicator.7916:

This whole thread relies on the assumption that your entire team needs to stand on a point. You only need to have one person on the point at any given time to contest it.

There’s already a counter to AOE, which is to avoid stacking up on point. Rotate people on and off as needed.

If there is a large point, it should be far enough from spawn that downing the enemy bunker reliably secures the point. On Foefire, (depending on team comps) you can lose your bunker at mid but contest the point long enough via kiting and LOSing for your bunker to respawn and rejoin the fight, which essentially resets the whole endeavor.

Your entire team doesnt need to stand on a point, but every teammate should be able to contest because there will be times you need to. Not just contest, but go in to the fight and assist instead of spending half the time waiting for everyone’s one shot skills to end.

Its really so bad, thief has been reduced to spam or die, either you spam dp stealth, death blossom, unload or vault, using any of the other skills especially in a team fight is pretty much a waste of initiative.

The most ridiculous thing about this is they cant just buff thief to fight better with the team, because stealth will make any thing anet does look broken, the same way traps make any buffs dh gets look broken. Its amazing how ridiculous these devs are

Which is funny that people see stealth as OP with all of the Nerfs thrown at it i.e. Directly or by increasing the amount of Reveal being thrown around, right now it is almost pointless to go into stealth while in combat due to the stealth attack nerf and the amount of initiative required to stealth., while other classes get more reliable Stealth access with none of the down sides

Lol this same argument,this is the same argument people made when i said traps were going to make the dh look broken after they buff the sustain. Less than 2 days after patch day everyone and their mothers were yelling DH is broken.

Stealth is just an easy get out of jail free card, which would have been fine but too much of it forced the class into the +1 decap role. Do you think they will give it engi sustain so it does better in team fights when they can pretty much always become untargetable? and always gain attack advantage?

You know a class is skrewd when people say they dont even pay attention to what it is doing and they just kill its team 5v4.

So long as DH have high defensive sustain and stackable passive traps that encompass the entire point, sPvP will always be hostile to skill based play over AoE spam.

Players often have to pop traps, avoid the point until they finish and then decap despite nobody actually being on point. AoE spam is bad enough but hight passive damage is an outright horrible design.

I’m seeing more and more fights at the start of matches that look like ping pong matches, where both players are meters back from the actual table.

Essentially everyone unloads their AOE onto point, no-one stands on it, and both sides glare at each other over the bone noone can have.

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

As someone who’s usually playing one of the builds that melts on point, I can say that smaller points usually make my life easier. My job isn’t to hold points, it’s to +1 and get quick downs. When the points are small, the enemy bruiser is under more pressure, which makes it easier to burst the enemy bruiser down.

ResJudicator.7916:

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

This would make more sense if half the bunker classes weren’t also the prime culprits in the AOE spam battle.

See:
Scrapper fields
DH traps and symbols
Condi Warrior fire fields

Formerly:
Ele fields

Ubik.8315:

ResJudicator.7916:

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

This would make more sense if half the bunker classes weren’t also the prime culprits in the AOE spam battle.

See:
Scrapper fields
DH traps and symbols
Condi Warrior fire fields

Formerly:
Ele fields

The point is that the aoe spam places pressure on the bruisers. That the bruisers themselves are also able to pressure each other just adds to this dynamic. (And of course a bruiser build would spec for cleave.)

As a result, for most team fights a larger point actually favors bruisers, not roamers. The ability to kite around and avoid AOE means the bruiser can space out his defensive CDs more and possibly buy time for his next round of defensive CDs to come off cooldown.

Duels are different, since a large point could allow the roamer to kite around indefinitely without conceding the point (depending on the matchup).

This doesn’t mean small points are good, or that large points are bad. But large points aren’t universally better, and they certainly aren’t the solution to the difficulties roamers face (in fact, they’re the opposite). I wouldn’t mind some maps that make use of larger capture points, but the map should be carefully designed so that they don’t tend to become an endless respawn fight like Graveyard.

Separately, I would agree that AOE/Cleave as a whole makes teamfights a little bit too hostile for roamers. But the root cause of this problem are the AOE skills, not the size of the capture points. Even when you’re not fighting on a capture point, roamers still can get wrecked by AOE spam because all the other players tend to be clustered up and cleaving each other like a hedgehog orgy.

ResJudicator.7916:

Ubik.8315:

ResJudicator.7916:

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

This would make more sense if half the bunker classes weren’t also the prime culprits in the AOE spam battle.

See:
Scrapper fields
DH traps and symbols
Condi Warrior fire fields

Formerly:
Ele fields

The point is that the aoe spam places pressure on the bruisers. That the bruisers themselves are also able to pressure each other just adds to this dynamic. (And of course a bruiser build would spec for cleave.)

As a result, for most team fights a larger point actually favors bruisers, not roamers. The ability to kite around and avoid AOE means the bruiser can space out his defensive CDs more and possibly buy time for his next round of defensive CDs to come off cooldown.

Duels are different, since a large point could allow the roamer to kite around indefinitely without conceding the point (depending on the matchup).

This doesn’t mean small points are good, or that large points are bad. But large points aren’t universally better, and they certainly aren’t the solution to the difficulties roamers face (in fact, they’re the opposite). I wouldn’t mind some maps that make use of larger capture points, but the map should be carefully designed so that they don’t tend to become an endless respawn fight like Graveyard.

Separately, I would agree that AOE/Cleave as a whole makes teamfights a little bit too hostile for roamers. But the root cause of this problem are the AOE skills, not the size of the capture points. Even when you’re not fighting on a capture point, roamers still can get wrecked by AOE spam because all the other players tend to be clustered up and cleaving each other.

All would be fine and dandy if same bruisers didn’t have decent mobility (e.g. druid has RTL on 15 sec which allows him to keep watch on 2 points at the same time).

ResJudicator.7916:

Ubik.8315:

ResJudicator.7916:

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

This would make more sense if half the bunker classes weren’t also the prime culprits in the AOE spam battle.

See:
Scrapper fields
DH traps and symbols
Condi Warrior fire fields

Formerly:
Ele fields

The point is that the aoe spam places pressure on the bruisers. That the bruisers themselves are also able to pressure each other just adds to this dynamic. (And of course a bruiser build would spec for cleave.)

This doesn’t add to any mechanic, its just poor game design (you seem to use the word bruiser in place of bunker). Bunkers should not be doing damage. They shouldn’t have huge access to CC (a control build is different from a bunker build, and one that right now GW2 does not support), or massively damaging AoE. A bunker shouldn’t be able to pressure you off point, they should instead be built to withstand the pressure you are putting on them, trying to make them move off point. At which point yes AoE helps, but relying on AoE means either they are overtuned (which some of them are) or you don’t know how to fight them.

Truth of the matter is that capture points that are small enough to be covered by 95%+ of the AoE skills in the game are far too small. They promote passive gameplay (especially leaving traps behind on a capture node, and then leaving for another node. Those should never be able to cover an entire node) and actively take skill out of the fights. Bunker builds can be slightly overtuned, massively overtuned in a team setting, but that doesn’t mean that the capture point size is the problem, it means that some builds are just too good at what they do.

Capture nodes need to be large enough to remove passive gameplay from PvP. Which means that they need to be larger than most of the AoE skills in the game. Add 50 units to the radius of all of the non huge capture points in PvP and they would be in a pretty good state, certainly much better than they are now.

OriOri.8724:

This doesn’t add to any mechanic, its just poor game design (you seem to use the word bruiser in place of bunker). Bunkers should not be doing damage. They shouldn’t have huge access to CC (a control build is different from a bunker build, and one that right now GW2 does not support), or massively damaging AoE. A bunker shouldn’t be able to pressure you off point, they should instead be built to withstand the pressure you are putting on them, trying to make them move off point. At which point yes AoE helps, but relying on AoE means either they are overtuned (which some of them are) or you don’t know how to fight them.

I chose the word “bruiser” intentionally, because we don’t really have “bunkers” in the meta right now. There is no class that can safely hold the point for a meaningful amount of time when outnumbered. The role of bunkers has been supplanted by a combination of bruisers (like scrapper/druid) and support (like auramancer), which work together to provide peels for teammates. Unlike a traditional “bunker,” all the bruisers in the meta will die to coordinated pressure (at least at higher levels of play).

Here’s a classic example to illustrate the difference between bunker and bruiser. If two pre-spec bunker guards are fighting on a point, a thief probably will not make an impact by +1ing the fight. The outnumbered guardian will still last for a long enough time to make the thief’s rotation bad. If two meta scrappers duel each other and a (good) thief +1’s, the outnumbered scrapper is going to either die or lose the point (due to elixir S popping).

The classic “bunker” role you’re asking for was the epitome of “passive” play, and overall made the game less fun (at least for me). Case in point: bunker mesmer from Season 1, which could tank incredibly well but did negligible damage.

OriOri.8724:

Truth of the matter is that capture points that are small enough to be covered by 95%+ of the AoE skills in the game are far too small.
…
Capture nodes need to be large enough to remove passive gameplay from PvP. Which means that they need to be larger than most of the AoE skills in the game. Add 50 units to the radius of all of the non huge capture points in PvP and they would be in a pretty good state, certainly much better than they are now.

You’re arguing off a false assumption. Almost none of the AOE skills that have been mentioned in this thread cover an entire node. DH traps, DH symbols (even traited), necro wells, scrapper Hammer5 — none of that covers the whole node even if placed perfectly at the center. And the reality is that people usually don’t drop their AOE dead-center on point because that’s often not the best place to put it. So there’s usually even more “safe” space.

OriOri.8724:

Bunker builds can be slightly overtuned, massively overtuned in a team setting, but that doesn’t mean that the capture point size is the problem, it means that some builds are just too good at what they do.

That’s exactly my point (except I think we’re really talking about bruisers), and I think we’re in agreement here.

OriOri.8724:

ResJudicator.7916:

Ubik.8315:

ResJudicator.7916:

Yes, the size of the points means that some AOE attacks cover most of the point (although there’s almost always somewhere you can stand along the periphery to avoid it). I think the idea is that this places reliable, consistent pressure on the bunker builds that are trying to hold the point. This makes life harder for the bunkers (which everyone complains is boring and passive), and means that teams need to rotate players in and out of the point.

This would make more sense if half the bunker classes weren’t also the prime culprits in the AOE spam battle.

See:
Scrapper fields
DH traps and symbols
Condi Warrior fire fields

Formerly:
Ele fields

The point is that the aoe spam places pressure on the bruisers. That the bruisers themselves are also able to pressure each other just adds to this dynamic. (And of course a bruiser build would spec for cleave.)

(you seem to use the word bruiser in place of bunker). Bunkers should not be doing damage. They shouldn’t have huge access to CC (a control build is different from a bunker build, and one that right now GW2 does not support), or massively damaging AoE. A bunker shouldn’t be able to pressure you off point, they should instead be built to withstand the pressure you are putting on them, trying to make them move off point. At which point yes AoE helps, but relying on AoE means either they are overtuned (which some of them are) or you don’t know how to fight them.

Truth of the matter is that capture points that are small enough to be covered by 95%+ of the AoE skills in the game are far too small. They promote passive gameplay (especially leaving traps behind on a capture node, and then leaving for another node. Those should never be able to cover an entire node) and actively take skill out of the fights. Bunker builds can be slightly overtuned, massively overtuned in a team setting, but that doesn’t mean that the capture point size is the problem, it means that some builds are just too good at what they do.

Capture nodes need to be large enough to remove passive gameplay from PvP. Which means that they need to be larger than most of the AoE skills in the game. Add 50 units to the radius of all of the non huge capture points in PvP and they would be in a pretty good state, certainly much better than they are now.

I disagree with everything you stated. It’s a bruiser meta out there not a bunker one, Resjudicator is correct.

The passive, repetitive plays, takes place on Foefire’s large middle where Rangers, Ele’s and Engi’s have advantages. It’s also one of the reasons Cele Ele received so much scrutiny and was one of the reasons why they were hard to balance.

Now that everyone are bruisers, Large nodes are not as problematic but they still promote repetitive, drawn out, plays. That’s what the devs are trying to reduce here.

Engineers, Ele’s, Revs, Rangers, are at an advantage while DH, Mesmers, War, Necro, even Thieves, are at a disadvantage on large points. It’s a different story on Coliseum and that’s fair in my book.