Guild Wars 2

Hi,

first things first, English is not my first language, so don’t bother being a grammar Nazi, because I don’t really care. I try my best and am confident that my text is understandable but there will be mistakes. When you really want to point something out, write a PM. I am always open to improve my (english)skills ;)

I am an active tPvP-Player who is playing on a higher level (not pro or something) and I am skeptical when looking at the current Meta.

Every good or professional Team has at least two people who are playing as a nod defender (bunkerspecs) that are solely there to buy time and/or pointcontrol for their team. This sometimes goes for example on maps like Legacy of the Foefire so far, that there are two bunkers in the middle and even when one of them dies, the other one will last long enough to let the first one respawn and get back to the point.

I myself am playing a bunkerguard for my team and know firsthand how strong it can be. You survive while outnumbered against good enemies what makes the game kinda static for me.

That should be enough explanation, because everyone of you should know the problem and this thread is to explain a solution.

One possibility would be to further nerf bunkerspecs, separate Skills for PvE/PvP but in my opinion there is an easier (better?) way to fix the metagame.

I explained above that the strength of bunkerspecs is that they can outlast enemies while outnumbered. However, this would be absolutely irrelevant, when they wouldn’t stop the point from being captured by just standing on it.

My solution is obvious:

A point should get captured by the team, which has more people standing on it.

At the moment the only chance of capturing a point is to annihilate (or knock off) the whole enemy team standing on it. It takes 4 seconds to neutralize a Point and another 10 seconds to capture it for the team.

When this would be changed so that you capture a point while outnumbering the defender, bunkerspecs would lose quite a bit of their strength, but they wouldn’t be completely meaningless.

However, the time to neutralize and capture a point shouldn’t be too fast. The Teams need time to react, else the whole defend a point concept would be meaningless. The exact numbers should be tested and perhaps map dependent but to give you an idea I give you a small list.
Not defended point: 5 seconds to neutralize, another 10 seconds to capture it (more or less like it is)
Defended point, 1 player more than the defender (f. e. 3vs2): 10 seconds to neutralize, another 20 seconds to capture it
Defended point, 2 players more than the defender (f.e. 4vs2): 5 seconds to neutralize, another 15 seconds to capture it

A further increase like 4/5vs1 would be meaningless.

With this change both teams would be forced to react faster when their points are engaged. People would have to call incs early and precise.
There wouldn’t be situations where you see a 1vs3 in the middle that lasts for 20 or 30 seconds (when that’s enough) until you finally get the bunker downed/stomped and start neutralizing the point.
The whole Lineups would go for a more damage (not glassy) oriented build, because they aim to kill people and not to tank them. Glasscanon- and bunkerspecs would lose a bit of their strength, but in the right Lineup they would still be a good choice.
Last but not least the game would be more interesting to watch. There would be more fighting and a lot more movement on the map. New tactics would come up and hopefully there would be not only one way to go.

What do you think about this? Would this fix the current problem in the Meta? Or would it make it worse? In my opinion this would be great.

Greets
LeGi

I like this idea, as I think it would bring a lot more team coordination in point defending, compared to Bunker down till help arrives.

not sure, if thats will not only lead to more bunkers standing on one point with some more portal mesmers trying to overrun this.

It might work on the 5v5 scale. But I still fear it might backfire make the Bunkers fall into disuse in favour of burst builds to quickly gain an advantage in player numbers, and encourage teams to group up into zerg, to maximize their effectiveness in confrontations.

I agree with Aragiel to some degree. This could definitely cause mesmer portals to be even more of a necessity.

I would think that there should be no difference between having 1 more or 3 more players than your opponents (to discourage portal zerg between two points). I would think 15 sec to neutral and 30 to cap would be good enough when you have numbers advantage on a node.

I think they need to go back to the roots of GW1 and put in some variety.

The only way to win in Legend of Foefire should be to kill the Guild Lord. The 3 capture points should give a WvW orb type bonus for controlling them.

There should be different ways to win each map, requiring a creative build that is capable of winning in all maps, rather than – oh if we have 5 bunkers with perma-speed boosts we can get to all the nodes first and never die.

I think its a good idea.. Maybe not the best solution as it could promote zerging vs skill

Anyway I think it points out one problem : “sitting on the spot to win”.

As soon as you leave someone can instantly contest, you can’t interupt him and if/when you do so, the ennemy doesnt really have to start again, he just keeps contesting until he gets it.
So, lets say (maybe kitten example) bunker rush 3v1, kb everyone out, spot is contested… He does not have to win/kill anyone just contesting by standing there in bunker mode.

In Rift game domination map, you had to click a flag, like objects u use or activate in GW2, in order to contest/control a node.
It was taking something like 4seconds (channeled activation) to contest a node and indeed it could be interupted, then you would have to start over.
→ This promotes kill or chain cc ennemies so teammate can contest…
→ Defenders can interupt so versus good players its always the team that actually win the fight that gets the node.
Then you had to click it again for 4seconds to have the node on your side.
So lets say you kill defenders, node gets neutralised, then their roamers/ rest of team can also interupt you while you try to gain control of the node.
→ Again it promotes battle versus standing there to gain control.

Its actually more a domination game as you need to really control an area, not just stand on a single point while eventually being “dominated”.
Any class / build could control a point… Bunkers would obviously stand at flag, while ranged builds would climb nearby rock/stairs or glasscannon would hide and gank roamers .. things like that.

More group strategy, more classes can fulfill the control the point role, roaming and controlling an area actually makes sense, ie domination game … not just kitten camping.

Maybe its just a personal opinion, but I get more personal rewards for dominating an area than just standing inside that circle alone for 15 mins cause their roamer gave up after 2 failed attempts.

So most of time you see yourself camping a spot, eventually running to help your team nearby but porting/running back like a kitten cause u just can leave a spot alone.

I wouldn’t dismiss this idea because of Mesmer portals. I would just change how the portal works.

More bunkers doesn’t always mean survivability. A 3v3 of 3 bunkers vs 3 balanced, the balanced team ‘should’ win imo.

CeCaKonVeu.5734:

I think its a good idea.. Maybe not the best solution as it could promote zerging vs skill

Imo zerging can be a tactic in tPvP and you can still counter it with another tactic.

think of a situation, where 4 people engage your point. you leave 1 bunker there to slow the capturing process and the rest of the team splits on the other 2 points. when your team has the “perfect” overview you can solocap the undefended point and just rush with the rest to the last point to 3vs1 the defender.

its just an example and of decisionmaking. “is it worth to defend this point or is it better to get the other points?”

that’s a nice idea, i just guess like on above stated, the meta would change to something like portal mesmers all over the place or super movementheavy burstthiefs or smth, then there would be ppl complaining about that movementorientated meta (and i dont mean the tactical movement to avoid dmg i mean like 100% uptime speed teams or the likes) and cry for more of a defensive way to play etc.

imho one should just wait until there are other modes, like CtF (only 1 bunker needed) or Deathmatch (NO bunker needed, because well its enough to have one dps with nice support he cant heal anyways) or whatever will come =)

a nice day everyone

Well, even the movement oriented Lineups have to be able to outlast the enemy. When you just run on a point with 3 ppl where 2 ppl are defending and run of when you have it capped you wont win.

You have to win the fights and for that you need to have sustain (by not speccing glasscanon or have a supportspecced teammate with you) and damage to actually kill the enemy.

I too think movement can be abused with this change but i think this will bring more action into the fights.

Why should i care about all those “Speedy Gonzales Teams” when they have to cap a point where i can stomp them and a teamfight.

I really like the idea of changing up how capturing works. I’m not too experienced in tPVP yet, but what if having more players at a point will just neutralize it?

Consequently neither side could capture the point until the point was no longer contested. That way the single bunker does not gain points for his team by simply standing there and focusing on himself. Once a team is involved, the bunker can then carry out his/her role as tough-to-kill support resser and prevent node captures.

This wouldn’t be a hard counter to the bunker system, as it’s partly the same system. I would assume that one node would always be in conflict and neutralized.

But two things; if both teams decide to stay and fight at a single node, the game becomes a deathmatch as long as each team keeps a point, which I honestly don’t know if that would make for a faster or slower game, and secondly, as stated above, high-movement teams would maybe just dance around the slower team in a zerg-format. I don’t know at this point what would be the ideal or optimized path to winning in a system like this.

I am definitely in favor of something more dynamic though in terms of point capturing.

ya id rather change the scoring rather than say.. umm.. i dunno play the “burn ever person down” game

moderator edit: This post has been edited to remove a violation of the forum code of conduct

A point should get captured by the team, which has more people standing on it.

I was actually pretty surprised when this didnt happen in the game.
I feel the neutralizing part is a bit iffy, and fast, and stuff. Perhaps we can polish and make that more important by making the team with the most players on it able to neutralize the point, but not fully capture it. Maybe just to see how that works.

I can see it also making people want to actually stomp others, to stop the point income from the base as soon as possible. Better for the game than just letting people bleed out in downed.

bunker build won’t just disappear because of some cap points change….you can try to put your idea, still will be bunkers. you can suggest if a cap point is disputed, it is blank…will be still bunkers. i think it is the build itself that needs to be nerfed

I am actually surprised that this is not the case. Bunker builds would essentially become more support tanks, but still have the capability to relentlessly defend a point from a roamer. It would encourage groups to have better synergy.

Sounds like a good idea might needs some tweaks if the debs do decide to look at it much better then the players screaming for nerfs all day long and then not actually suggest a solution.

Yes its not the final version of my idea but i think a good start for testing and/or discussion.

It’s an interesting idea, though in its simplest form it would cause a lot of problems. Possibly a very good starting point for discussion though.

Perhaps something like:

- Outnumbered on point flips point to neutral after 6-10 seconds
- After that, to regain full point control works as it does now

That way, bunkers can’t prevent a point being contested indefinitely, but the outnumbering team doesn’t gain full point control until they can actually kill the bunker.

xiv.7136:

It’s an interesting idea, though in its simplest form it would cause a lot of problems. Possibly a very good starting point for discussion though.

Perhaps something like:

- Outnumbered on point flips point to neutral after 6-10 seconds
- After that, to regain full point control works as it does now

That way, bunkers can’t prevent a point being contested indefinitely, but the outnumbering team doesn’t gain full point control until they can actually kill the bunker.

Legi and Xiv these are both great ideas, as me and my guildies have been playing free and paid tonre’s recently and all we seem to get is double or even triple bunker in some cases, which I have no problem as they can be countered but especially with Legacy of the foe fire who ever wins middle first has the upper hand through out the game and it snowballs from that as you just cannot move the bunker.

I think this idea will motivate people to attack points together rather than just charging in by yourself hoping that you can knock him out of the circle which is a task and a half at graveyard :p.

Doesn’t it just seem like it would be a round robin of people running circles in the Map to cap and neutralize points? The whole bunker “problem” is only a problem because of the capture the point play style, if it were a different type of match bunkers wouldn’t even be an issue.
I haven’t gotten to Tpvp much so I will leave this discussion to the tpvp’rs, just trying to point out possible problems.

Only because you can capture (or just neutralize) points like this wont stop the fighting on the points. so “running circles” wont win you the game

Given that the downed and rally system already give amplified favor to whichever team brought more people to the fight, how would this change not devolve the tactics into: everyone team fight in mid.

I actually really like this idea. Maybe if one team is outnumbered, instead of neutralizing the point and capping it the point is just neutralized and no one gains any points? Just a suggestion. I also think that (in general) the more people are on a point the faster it should cap.
to the OP:
You did a much better job writing in English then most people on this forum. +1

@ryston: that is what i ment with decisionmaking of the team. you have to react on the enemy. when they bring 4 people to a point you have to decide if you can win the fight or if you would just buy time and prevent it from being taken by the enemy.

@ Zunhar: thank you

I like this idea. ANOTHER! Smashes idea in the ground

Get a randomass bunker. Get him to the middle of the point and let him faceroll CD’s.
Get a randomass elementalist(“support” cuz we’re to hypster ot say OP"). Get him to stack aoe on the bunker.
Get a randomass bunker engi(must not contain a soul). Put his kitten on the close point and let him faceroll mechanicis.
Get a randomass “offensive guardian” (offensive guardian means , he has 10% less hp from a bunker and 20% less brust from a glass cannon , yet has most of the survivalabilities of a bunker). Put his kitten next to the aoe effects on the map a.k.a bunkerzone.
Get a randomass necro/thief/mesmer – must either oneshotpeople or fear.
setup 2:
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on mid
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on mid
Get a randomass condition/bunker. Put his kitten on mid
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on the close point
Get a randomass thief/mesmer. Put his… it’s a mesmer he’ll be aaait
setup 3.
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on their close point
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on their close point
Get a randomass bunker. Put his kitten on mid
Get a randomass “support staff elementalist”. Put his kitten on mid
Get a randomass mesmer/thief or someone with fast map travel. Put his kitten on your close point.

Enjoy your game and don’t forget to /m gg
p.s anet stated that they are looking closesly at bunker guardians / staff eles / and mesmers , yet they have done NOTHING whatsoever to make tournaments different from a World of Warcraft : The Burning Crusade S1-2-3 RMP (rogue mage priest) mega gameplay. YAY FOR DYNAMIC PVP .. not

Fenixz.7194:

Enjoy your game and don’t forget to /m gg
p.s anet stated that they are looking closesly at bunker guardians / staff eles / and mesmers , yet they have done NOTHING whatsoever to make tournaments different from a World of Warcraft : The Burning Crusade S1-2-3 RMP (rogue mage priest) mega gameplay. YAY FOR DYNAMIC PVP .. not

3v3 slayer = 5v5 point control. you sir have literally blown my mind

I like the Rift mechanic of having to activate a flag at the point.

I will say that I ‘m not sure if that is going to work but it is some idea. But that all states the problem here. I with my team play just TPVP just like you LeGi. We all noticed that there are more and more bunkier teams and more of them go bunkier builds. To that I personally got 2 ideas.
A far as I am aware bunkier build should hold the point but the down side of that should be that he can’t do any dmg. Im not sure if you noticed that but when the fight lasts you cant kill bunkier but bunkier will slowly take your health down. 3 bunkiers will kill 3 dmg spec players because the extend fight. Just like you said by the time you kill 1 another is comming back.

Another thing is about your idea. Meaby if you got more ppl in point you can neutralize it but cant capture it ? That way bukier can hold the point but it still would be about having to win the team fight? Not sure if that will work.

The flag capping and interrupt on damage was much more enjoyable in other games. If anything, Rift’s capping was a bit too fast – the right time should be between 5 and 10 seconds.

I still think maps and teams are both too small (both actual size and the cramped fighting conditions and poor visibility that was part of their map design) but those aren’t gonna get changed because the whole “esporty” thing is unlikely to happen with 15 man teams and the revamps would take unreasonable amounts of work after abandoning what we already have.

I do hope that one day structured will be as much a reason for me to play the game as WvW is.

5 man mesmer team, portal’s up on all points, zerg>port>zerg>port>zerg, don’t even have to kill anything ? Would not work…you may as well of also said “Pets, illusions and summons should also count towards decapping” …you just didnt think about how much this would destroy the game before posting.

I think a better solution is a switch like every other game that has capture and hold pvp has. That doesn’t really solve the bunker problem though.

I wish the maps were about 30% larger and had 2 maybe 3 more smaller minor nodes and they worked like resource nodes like from the Warhammer rts. Which you could use to summon bosses etc. Also the bosses could be more challenging to put it lightly.

The maps need to be less Zerg friendly possibly the addition of more npc enemies would be nice.

No thanks to more NPCS in sPvP. Larger maps with more nodes are a major plus though. Just look at the difference between WoW’s Arathi Basin that was huge and had 5 nodes vs the one they release in Cata that had 3 nodes and was about 1/4th the size. One was a zerg fest, the other was an awesome Battleground that I enjoyed for years.