Guild Wars 2

…?

New players don’t have AC mastery.

And golems are better at knocking down gates regardless.

@OP Long post. I definitely agree with one thing. Players want to be able to PvP without a lot of gimmicky siege or NPCs. Given that WvW is turning more into PvE every day, I do think that is helping drive the GvG scene. GvG would happen regardless but the WvW direction is definitely helping.

style.6173:

@OP Long post. I definitely agree with one thing. Players want to be able to PvP without a lot of gimmicky siege or NPCs. Given that WvW is turning more into PvE every day, I do think that is helping drive the GvG scene. GvG would happen regardless but the WvW direction is definitely helping.

You’re definitely right about that. Before May, there was still a thriving GvG scene, but I think it’s growing much faster due to there being so few good fights outside of GvG.

The main point I’m trying to make is that I used to have a lot of fun fighting in keeps and towers, and now I don’t. That sucks and I wish it wasn’t that way.

Towers and forts should either give the defenders a huge advantage (like in real life) or they should just get rid of them all together, imho.

I would personally like to see fewer towers and keeps on the map and a lot more open space.

an arcade game for PvE players to do in between living story releases

Unfortunately I believe most Dev’s think this way about WvW.

I agree with this post largely. I’ve said before that all siege except rams/cat apults should be removed. That’s a half joking remark, but mainly is because the fun of WvW isn’t in siege warfare.

Some of the worst burnouts we’ve had on Mag were facing servers that used heavy siege to the point where anything you attack would require 2-3 HOURS for you to get any fight at all. The game mode revolves around getting actual combat, and Carts are the main offender in preventing fights from ever happening.

Siege placement is a super cool part of defending anything in WvW, but it’s become a main focus. Actually, no, it’s not even siege placement, it’s arrow cart placement. Operating arrow carts requires no skill, and it’s easy to throw up a bunch of them and mow down an army. That’s lame.

A lot of fights now purely come down to “will we be spotted” and “does the enemy have supply”, and if it’s yes to both, then you’d really may as well give up unless you’ve got the entire map with you. :x

what if the Outnumbered buff gave that server the ability to take reduced AC damage?

OR

the buff gave the outnumbered server the ability to deploy arrow carts controlled by an npc (assuming bugs are minimal/nonexistent [lul]).

Achilles.2197:

what if the Outnumbered buff gave that server the ability to take reduced AC damage?

OR

the buff gave the outnumbered server the ability to deploy arrow carts controlled by an npc (assuming bugs are minimal/nonexistent [lul]).

If the new Orbs reduced AC damage I would be the happiest person on the planet.

MacLeod.4208:

Towers and forts should either give the defenders a huge advantage (like in real life) or they should just get rid of them all together, imho.

I would personally like to see fewer towers and keeps on the map and a lot more open space.

But they already do. Defenders have always had a great advantage over attackers even before that AC mistake Anet made.

I also agree very much with the OP. I had an idea of going back to the old AC thread (I have a couple of posts in that thread actually) and saying that I was wrong. AC’s didn’t ruin the game entirely. The players just went out of their way to avoid the new arrowcarts. One obvious example being GvG or like you said how you just abandan objectives because there is no point in attacking them anymore. The fair fights are gone and it is no longer fun.

Thanks for making this post.

I asked for a buff to siege in general so your statement that no one asked for a buff is incorrect.

Siege still needs to hit a bit harder.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

I asked for a buff to siege in general so your statement that no one asked for a buff is incorrect.

Siege still needs to hit a bit harder.

I appreciate you responding, but you should read more than the first paragraph.

I don’t think siege needs to hit any harder. If you’re arguing that siege discourages blobs, I think it encourages them, because blobs can carry more supply and build more counter siege.

On my server, one of the commanders told me he doesn’t even attack keeps unless he has 600+ supply available to him. That’s what arrow carts have done to the game.

Caliban.3176:

MacLeod.4208:

Towers and forts should either give the defenders a huge advantage (like in real life) or they should just get rid of them all together, imho.

I would personally like to see fewer towers and keeps on the map and a lot more open space.

But they already do. Defenders have always had a great advantage over attackers even before that AC mistake Anet made.

I also agree very much with the OP. I had an idea of going back to the old AC thread (I have a couple of posts in that thread actually) and saying that I was wrong. AC’s didn’t ruin the game entirely. The players just went out of their way to avoid the new arrowcarts. One obvious example being GvG or like you said how you just abandan objectives because there is no point in attacking them anymore. The fair fights are gone and it is no longer fun.

Thanks for making this post.

I agree completely. The guilds avoid the objectives almost completely now, and that’s just really… boring. The game isn’t ruined, just less fun to play like we used to.

We adjusted the fun meta, as it is. ACs are imba… to fun.

“But they already do. Defenders have always had a great advantage over attackers even before that AC mistake Anet made.”

-What advantage was that?

And like I said, I would rather see fewer towers (which should be very difficult to take) and more open fields to fight in.

ParaldaWind.4523:

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

I asked for a buff to siege in general so your statement that no one asked for a buff is incorrect.

Siege still needs to hit a bit harder.

I appreciate you responding, but you should read more than the first paragraph.

I don’t think siege needs to hit any harder. If you’re arguing that siege discourages blobs, I think it encourages them, because blobs can carry more supply and build more counter siege.

On my server, one of the commanders told me he doesn’t even attack keeps unless he has 600+ supply available to him. That’s what arrow carts have done to the game.

I didn’t care to read further. It started out as a complaint against siege so I’m going to ignore the rest.

If you didn’t complain, I would have read further. Since you did, I don’t care about your issue.

MacLeod.4208:

“But they already do. Defenders have always had a great advantage over attackers even before that AC mistake Anet made.”

-What advantage was that?

And like I said, I would rather see fewer towers (which should be very difficult to take) and more open fields to fight in.

The ability to engage when they want, to buff up in safety to go back into the tower. To rain down damage from the walls while your melee jumps on them. The ability to let them in and use the opening as a choke. The ability even to build an arrowcart, even before that ridiculous buff it provided for good cover and decent pressure. It wasn’t so overpowered that it was totally unsportsmanlike.

Those might seem like small advantages but in capable hands they can be used in the right way and let you keep your tower/keep.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

ParaldaWind.4523:

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

I asked for a buff to siege in general so your statement that no one asked for a buff is incorrect.

Siege still needs to hit a bit harder.

I appreciate you responding, but you should read more than the first paragraph.

I don’t think siege needs to hit any harder. If you’re arguing that siege discourages blobs, I think it encourages them, because blobs can carry more supply and build more counter siege.

On my server, one of the commanders told me he doesn’t even attack keeps unless he has 600+ supply available to him. That’s what arrow carts have done to the game.

I didn’t care to read further. It started out as a complaint against siege so I’m going to ignore the rest.

If you didn’t complain, I would have read further. Since you did, I don’t care about your issue.

Whelp, thanks for adding to the discussion, I guess.

If you want peace and quiet, if you want easy access to GvG without the hordes of people flooding your battle. Come to EU mid tiers.

You will be able to GvG, roam, zerg, whatever.

Caliban.3176:

MacLeod.4208:

“But they already do. Defenders have always had a great advantage over attackers even before that AC mistake Anet made.”

-What advantage was that?

And like I said, I would rather see fewer towers (which should be very difficult to take) and more open fields to fight in.

The ability to engage when they want, to buff up in safety to go back into the tower. To rain down damage from the walls while your melee jumps on them. The ability to let them in and use the opening as a choke. The ability even to build an arrowcart, even before that ridiculous buff it provided for good cover and decent pressure. It wasn’t so overpowered that it was totally unsportsmanlike.

Those might seem like small advantages but in capable hands they can be used in the right way and let you keep your tower/keep.

Fair enough. Thanks for the response. =)

It has always seemed to me way too easy to take a tower. Maybe I have just never seen a well played defense.

Oh, a post not insulting half the player base while making cohesive arguments. I knew I ♥‘ed Maguuma for good reasons. I feel like I can respond to this without being eaten alive. You’ve given me some things to think about, I think I am on the fence.

On one hand, the AC changes have been gr8 for small groups to defend against larger groups and even the field a little, for which I am grateful as I run in a 5 man 75% of the time, on the other hand, you’re right, I am also getting tired of sieging things for 2+ hours only for it all to end in an unbreakable choke, and now I also have to worry about getting my supply taken from trebs (different argument I guess).

I think it’s getting to the point where instead of feeling like a long siege was a good investment of my time (like it used to be when it ended in an explosive throwdown in the lord’s room) I know I’ll just regret it in the end since it will have taken a sizeable %age out of my night where I could’ve been having a great actual pvp fight w/o siege elsewhere. Meat grinders used to be rare and a rallying cry for an outpopped server, now they’re expected in lieu of even fights. You can’t realistically expect to take keeps with anything less than 15 people anymore, whereas I feel like I did this much more often in the past. I don’t dislike siege at all, I do think it has turned into a crutch though.

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

Oh, a post not insulting half the player base while making cohesive arguments. I knew I ♥‘ed Maguuma for good reasons. I feel like I can respond to this without being eaten alive. You’ve given me some things to think about, I think I am on the fence.

On one hand, the AC changes have been gr8 for small groups to defend against larger groups and even the field a little, for which I am grateful as I run in a 5 man 75% of the time, on the other hand, you’re right, I am also getting tired of sieging things for 2+ hours only for it all to end in an unbreakable choke, and now I also have to worry about getting my supply taken from trebs (different argument I guess).

I think it’s getting to the point where instead of feeling like a long siege was a good investment of my time (like it used to be when it ended in an explosive throwdown in the lord’s room) I know I’ll just regret it in the end since it will have taken a sizeable %age out of my night where I could’ve been having a great actual pvp fight w/o siege elsewhere. Meat grinders used to be rare and a rallying cry for an outpopped server, now they’re expected in lieu of even fights. You can’t realistically expect to take keeps with anything less than 15 people anymore, whereas I feel like I did this much more often in the past. I don’t dislike siege at all, I do think it has turned into a crutch though.

That’s a good point, and I think you’re right on a lot of things.

The siege buff, in my opinion, was intended to allow small groups to have a counter to larger groups. It makes sense, on paper, but I feel like it’s effectively just changed the rules of WvW. Now people don’t attack keeps for fights, and don’t try to siege with even numbers, they just kind of zergball things down because they have to. While it is great for 5 people to be able to defend against 20, those 20 just come back with 60 and steamroll through. It hurts only the 20-30 man groups, which, while large, are a lot more fun to run in and run against than the 60-80 man blobs we see so regularly now.

It’s still too easy to take a tower. Siege needs to be buffed more I think.

It’s called siege for a reason. It’s not meant to be easy and fights are meant to be prolonged and a desperate struggle for supply on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege

Excalibur.9748:

It’s still too easy to take a tower. Siege needs to be buffed more I think.

The only buff to siege that will make towers harder to take is a buff that automates siege. The reason towers are too easy to take is not because they cannot be defended but because they aren’t being defended.

This should not encourage some Anet dev to actually make automated siege happen, that would be a terrible idea.

Excalibur.9748:

It’s still too easy to take a tower. Siege needs to be buffed more I think.

I don’t think that it should take a long time to take objectives, personally. Taking objectives makes fights happen. Fights are fun. Siege makes fights not happen. Therefore, siege is not fun.

This is just my opinion, but I think a lot of other guilds share it. We like the PvP aspect, not necessarily the score or points. Before the AC change, we could get the PvP aspect by sieging keeps or towers, but now it doesn’t feel the same way.

I want to contribute to my server’s score, and I think that I mostly do, but I would play the game as intended a LOT more if ACs didn’t completely invalidate most strategy. My guild can only really raid for 3-4 hours a night, tops. Do you really think we want to spend half of that on one objective? If we roam open field, we can get 5-6 fights in that same amount of time. We used to be able to get good fights in keeps, but we can’t anymore, because of the overpowered arrow carts and other siege.

ParaldaWind.4523:

That’s a good point, and I think you’re right on a lot of things.

The siege buff, in my opinion, was intended to allow small groups to have a counter to larger groups. It makes sense, on paper, but I feel like it’s effectively just changed the rules of WvW. Now people don’t attack keeps for fights, and don’t try to siege with even numbers, they just kind of zergball things down because they have to. While it is great for 5 people to be able to defend against 20, those 20 just come back with 60 and steamroll through. It hurts only the 20-30 man groups, which, while large, are a lot more fun to run in and run against than the 60-80 man blobs we see so regularly now.

It’s true, instead of it being a hard counter it just buys you another defense tick pretty much. With the new golem meta ACs are little less effective on the initial push, at least. I also think instead of players thinking “siege is buffed, now I will be more strategic with my placement, less is now more!” it turned into “siege is buffed, let’kitten the siege cap in one keep alone!” I am starting to think this mentality also actually undermines the effectiveness of long term, solid, keep defense, and pushes the karma train/zergballing harder, since you’re pouring hundreds of supply into siege and basically none into restoration if you manage to push the enemy out. They’ll just return in full force, manmode the gate down that wasn’t repaired, and the neo-keep siege/defense cycle continues until attrition by AC happens. I am rambling and that’s moving off topic a little though. Sorry.

bradderzh.2378:

It’s called siege for a reason. It’s not meant to be easy and fights are meant to be prolonged and a desperate struggle for supply on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege

It’s a mistake to aim a game toward being thematically correct at the cost of, you know, fun.

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

ParaldaWind.4523:

That’s a good point, and I think you’re right on a lot of things.

The siege buff, in my opinion, was intended to allow small groups to have a counter to larger groups. It makes sense, on paper, but I feel like it’s effectively just changed the rules of WvW. Now people don’t attack keeps for fights, and don’t try to siege with even numbers, they just kind of zergball things down because they have to. While it is great for 5 people to be able to defend against 20, those 20 just come back with 60 and steamroll through. It hurts only the 20-30 man groups, which, while large, are a lot more fun to run in and run against than the 60-80 man blobs we see so regularly now.

It’s true, instead of it being a hard counter it just buys you another defense tick pretty much. With the new golem meta ACs are little less effective on the initial push, at least. I also think instead of players thinking “siege is buffed, now I will be more strategic with my placement, less is now more!” it turned into “siege is buffed, let’kitten the siege cap in one keep alone!” I am starting to think this mentality also actually undermines the effectiveness of long term, solid, keep defense, and pushes the karma train/zergballing harder, since you’re pouring hundreds of supply into siege and basically none into restoration if you manage to push the enemy out. They’ll just return in full force, manmode the gate down that wasn’t repaired, and the neo-keep siege/defense cycle continues until attrition by AC happens. I am rambling and that’s moving off topic a little though. Sorry.

Your rambling is good, though. I think it shows that there are a lot of unintended consequences that accompany such sweeping buffs without much testing. I know the devs didn’t intend for this to happen, but I think that they need to at least sit down and talk to us about the effects that the changes have made, because, as you noted in your post, there are a LOT of really complicated consequences to their actions, especially when the changes are so drastic.

Beyond the excellent arguments of the op, in my opinion it would be sufficient to submit the acs to the laws of physics.

Right now the acs can shoot through walls and ceilings, and this is just absurd, and to be honest even the skill cd is ridiculous. Come on, just a couple of seconds to reload a weapon that shoots dozens of arrows, are you kidding me?

Edeor.9720:

Beyond the excellent arguments of the op, in my opinion it would be sufficient to submit the acs to the laws of physics.

Right now the acs can shoot through walls and ceilings, and this is just absurd, and to be honest even the skill cd is ridiculous. Come on, just a couple of seconds to reload a weapon that shoots dozens of arrows, are you kidding me?

I’ve long said that this would be an appropriate fix, as well. Make the spell have an actual cast time, like a ballista, require it to have psuedo-LOS, and then maybe make the projectiles blockable with spells like swirling winds or wall of absorption.

It may be that siege weapons aren’t the problem, but rather you have simply gotten sick of the less competitive nature of objective fights and are just wanting more skill based combat.

dreztina.4820:

It may be that siege weapons aren’t the problem, but rather you have simply gotten sick of the less competitive nature of objective fights and are just wanting more skill based combat.

I’m sure that’s part of it, but I used to have some really fun fights in keeps, now I avoid those as much as possible.

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

That’s interesting. Would you figure all projectile-based siege should have this? Do you think there could be a mechanic to feed it more ammo, but it would cost you?

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

While that help a lot I think it opens up too many possibilities for griefing. I do like the general idea of having to tactically pick the right time to use the AC. Maybe give it 20 shots before it goes on a full cooldown for 60s or more. Something to reduce the spam.

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

That’s interesting. Would you figure all projectile-based siege should have this? Do you think there could be a mechanic to feed it more ammo, but it would cost you?

For other projectile based siege.. it’s iffy. They don’t hold the same “lock down” power that ACs do. It would be really interesting to decide.. upgrade Garrison or treb Bay? Now you can do both really easily.

If there was a way to “reload” them, take it from available supply in the Keep but only after a worker upgrade. You upgrade your workers to “Ammunition Mechanics” for 300 supply and they will reload X number of AC every Y minutes.

The spammability of ACs puts them in-line with thieves, thus creating problems.

Caliban.3176:

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

While that help a lot I think it opens up too many possibilities for griefing. I do like the general idea of having to tactically pick the right time to use the AC. Maybe give it 20 shots before it goes on a full cooldown for 60s or more. Something to reduce the spam.

The reasoning was the spam-ability of ACs. Making them more tactical is my reasoning behind such a move/change.

Pinko.2076:

bradderzh.2378:

It’s called siege for a reason. It’s not meant to be easy and fights are meant to be prolonged and a desperate struggle for supply on both sides.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege

It’s a mistake to aim a game toward being thematically correct at the cost of, you know, fun.

Are the fights in keeps not that much more intense when a prolonged siege has melted away both parties supply to the point where attackers are forced into making decisions like “kitten we really need supply for more siege but can we risk sending guys out to run supply? If the enemy notice they could rush the position and drive us out”

On the same token, defenders will often be thinking “this is it guys, our last 100 supply, we gotta make this count, defend those AC’s at all costs because we won’t be getting any more!”

I have had some great battles at inner keeps because the lack of supply added an element of uncertainty and vulnerability to either side whereby you could react on the others action and turn the tide. Almost like interrupting a heal, rushing an enemy position cating your walls while some of them ran for supply can mean the difference between losing or keeping your structure.

LilMcGinley.3890:

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

That’s interesting. Would you figure all projectile-based siege should have this? Do you think there could be a mechanic to feed it more ammo, but it would cost you?

For other projectile based siege.. it’s iffy. They don’t hold the same “lock down” power that ACs do. It would be really interesting to decide.. upgrade Garrison or treb Bay? Now you can do both really easily.

If there was a way to “reload” them, take it from available supply in the Keep but only after a worker upgrade. You upgrade your workers to “Ammunition Mechanics” for 300 supply and they will reload X number of AC every Y minutes.

The spammability of ACs puts them in-line with thieves, thus creating problems.

I like this. I would also think it could replace siege timer. There would definitely be a steep learning curve for pugs not to just fire ACs willy nilly, but I get kind of tired of catering to that end of spectrum when it means throwing away would could be an interesting tactical change. The option to reload in a tower or keep would also keep them out of the open filed fights more. Hmm. You are right, as it stands now you don’t have to choose between sieging a nearby objective and upgrades, you get the whole shebang which doesn’t require a lot of thought. So maybe over time this encourages upgraded keeps before sieging surrounding towers and that, I do like.

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

That’s interesting. Would you figure all projectile-based siege should have this? Do you think there could be a mechanic to feed it more ammo, but it would cost you?

For other projectile based siege.. it’s iffy. They don’t hold the same “lock down” power that ACs do. It would be really interesting to decide.. upgrade Garrison or treb Bay? Now you can do both really easily.

If there was a way to “reload” them, take it from available supply in the Keep but only after a worker upgrade. You upgrade your workers to “Ammunition Mechanics” for 300 supply and they will reload X number of AC every Y minutes.

The spammability of ACs puts them in-line with thieves, thus creating problems.

I like this. I would also think it could replace siege timer. There would definitely be a steep learning curve for pugs not to just fire ACs willy nilly, but I get kind of tired of catering to that end of spectrum when it means throwing away would could be an interesting tactical change. The option to reload in a tower or keep would also keep them out of the open filed fights more. Hmm. You are right, as it stands now you don’t have to choose between sieging a nearby objective and upgrades, you get the whole shebang which doesn’t require a lot of thought. So maybe over time this encourages upgraded keeps before sieging surrounding towers and that, I do like.

Well honestly.. WvW is more like “hot-join zerg warfare” rather than anything close to being tactical warfare, which it should be. A change like this would change the dynamic of WvW overnight. So many interesting dynamics will come into play if siege was limited use.

The only choice in WvW now is which commander to follow and which tower/keep to PvDoor with 80 people. That needs to change.

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

SHAKA ZULU.3128:

LilMcGinley.3890:

Give Arrow Carts limited ammo.. problem solved. You want 20 ACs? congratz you just blew all your supply when you have to rebuild them

That’s interesting. Would you figure all projectile-based siege should have this? Do you think there could be a mechanic to feed it more ammo, but it would cost you?

For other projectile based siege.. it’s iffy. They don’t hold the same “lock down” power that ACs do. It would be really interesting to decide.. upgrade Garrison or treb Bay? Now you can do both really easily.

If there was a way to “reload” them, take it from available supply in the Keep but only after a worker upgrade. You upgrade your workers to “Ammunition Mechanics” for 300 supply and they will reload X number of AC every Y minutes.

The spammability of ACs puts them in-line with thieves, thus creating problems.

I like this. I would also think it could replace siege timer. There would definitely be a steep learning curve for pugs not to just fire ACs willy nilly, but I get kind of tired of catering to that end of spectrum when it means throwing away would could be an interesting tactical change. The option to reload in a tower or keep would also keep them out of the open filed fights more. Hmm. You are right, as it stands now you don’t have to choose between sieging a nearby objective and upgrades, you get the whole shebang which doesn’t require a lot of thought. So maybe over time this encourages upgraded keeps before sieging surrounding towers and that, I do like.

This is a bit complex, but anything would be better than the crazy godlike deathmachines that arrow carts have become.

ParaldaWind.4523:

Devon Carver

Holding a tower against all odds with some smart siege placement and a bit of luck may be one of the most fun things I’ve ever done in a video game.

Maybe for you, Devon, but not for all of us.

Your retort basically boils down to “Speak for yourself, I speak for everyone”.
Here’s an idea, how about you speak for yourself too.

Mif.3471:

ParaldaWind.4523:

Devon Carver

Holding a tower against all odds with some smart siege placement and a bit of luck may be one of the most fun things I’ve ever done in a video game.

Maybe for you, Devon, but not for all of us.

Your retort basically boils down to “Speak for yourself, I speak for everyone”.
Here’s an idea, how about you speak for yourself too.

I didn’t say I speak for everyone… I was specifically speaking about myself and my guild. Hence why I didn’t say something like, “You’re the only one who feels this way.” I’m sure there are people who like using arrow carts to wipe zergs… I’m just not one of them.

ParaldaWind.4523:

This is a bit complex, but anything would be better than the crazy godlike deathmachines that arrow carts have become.

Definitely complicated, not realistic and probably offputting to a lot of people, I am biased because I have about 1K hours in WvW so it sounds more appetizing to me than a new person just trying it out, I’m sure many others have more time than me invested too. It comes back to what I read to be a crux of your argument that rabid AC use doesn’t really have any consequences right now. Spam 1 to win, see many white numbers, all the loot with none of the dying. Going out to fight, dying, and hoofing it back or waiting for a rez, however, are consequences. So you can choose to be tactical with your siege or you can choose to be tactical with your fight, but neither is guaranteed to win you anything if you don’t plan (assuming the limited use siege is in effect). Keeps siege in the meta game with all of its buffs and benefits, but you can’t just spam it.

ParaldaWind.4523:

I’m sure there are people who like using arrow carts to wipe zergs… I’m just not one of them.

Well whether you like it or not, siege warfare is one of the fundamental design elements of WvW. Stop demanding WvW to be changed to something it was never intended or claimed to be.

Mif.3471:

ParaldaWind.4523:

I’m sure there are people who like using arrow carts to wipe zergs… I’m just not one of them.

Well whether you like it or not, siege warfare is one of the fundamental design elements of WvW. Stop demanding WvW to be changed to something it was never intended or claimed to be.

So is the 2nd part, I don’t see it all that often though.

“sieging and controlling objectives and about open field combat”

Whether siege is buffed or nerfed, it will always favor the group with larger numbers. There’s nothing that makes siege inside of a tower safer than the siege outside of it given you have more numbers to defend it and you have people willing to exploit their screen size, so it’s a linear force multiplier plain and simple. What we’re left with is whether it’s fun or not. Devon Carter might think it is, but I’d hazard that the majority of people who have stuck around this long disagree.

So here we are. As much as I love playing defense in everything real and virtual, the buffed siege weapons and trait lines have drastically altered the dynamic. Walls go down faster and structures submit to karma trains near instantly. There is nothing fun about that. Kitten PPT.

ParaldaWind.4523:

This game has a very high skill cap for group combat, and it’s completely accidental. The diversity of builds, boon and condition management, micro and macro, bombing and regroups, it’s all very fun and engaging. It takes a lot of work and dedication to be good, and it’s completely 100% ignored by the devs. They made this amazing PvP mode that required real work and skill to be good at and then just completely marginalized those groups by playing to the lowest common denominator.

I could not disagree more. The nature of sharing all buffs outside parties eliminates consideration of group composition, instead it becomes “horde” composition. Further, hardcore wvw/gvg is composed of “Save Yourself” stacking through guardians, might stacking in an ele’s fire field, then running through the other blob like a bunch of trained seals with down syndrome. stop, stack, blast, balance this ball on your nose, repeat until your commander begrudgingly approves of the performance and attributes the success to his “leadership.” congratulations, you’re a red guard now.

there is no skill in that, no tactics, no pride or thought. there is no need for class variety or condition management when 1 single class brings all the buffs and cleanses you need. the only things guardians arent bringing are combo fields and veil, and it has a huge negative impact on any group play large enough to incorporate guardian stacking.

ParaldaWind.4523:

WvW has always been, in my opinion, the only true end-game to GW2.

This i agree with. Fractals is offered as high level PvE content but its not compelling to complete without being tied to the main story. the living story isnt even compelling because it also isnt tied to the main story (at least until a few more weeks, when Anet will fix it by saying “All this random crap was part of a single conspiracy #instaStory”).

Raven.9603:

snip

So it doesn’t take skill to be one of, if not, the best? Learn something new every day.

Skill is a very “person based” thing. If person A is a master theory-crafter, person B is a master gear theory-crafter, person C is a great and motivational leader and person D is flawless in their execution of skills/utilities/attacks.. Aren’t all 4 of those types of people just as important to a group and guilds success as the others?

The answer is yes by the way.

AC mastery has removed this from WvW and like VoTF pushed hard for months back, it needs to change.

LilMcGinley.3890:

Mif.3471:

ParaldaWind.4523:

I’m sure there are people who like using arrow carts to wipe zergs… I’m just not one of them.

Well whether you like it or not, siege warfare is one of the fundamental design elements of WvW. Stop demanding WvW to be changed to something it was never intended or claimed to be.

So is the 2nd part, I don’t see it all that often though.

“sieging and controlling objectives and about open field combat”

No one is demanding open field combat be removed from the game.

Raven.9603:

I could not disagree more. The nature of sharing all buffs outside parties eliminates consideration of group composition, instead it becomes “horde” composition. Further, hardcore wvw/gvg is composed of “Save Yourself” stacking through guardians, might stacking in an ele’s fire field, then running through the other blob like a bunch of trained seals with down syndrome. stop, stack, blast, balance this ball on your nose, repeat until your commander begrudgingly approves of the performance and attributes the success to his “leadership.” congratulations, you’re a red guard now.

there is no skill in that, no tactics, no pride or thought. there is no need for class variety or condition management when 1 single class brings all the buffs and cleanses you need. the only things guardians arent bringing are combo fields and veil, and it has a huge negative impact on any group play large enough to incorporate guardian stacking.

If you think this is all that happens in a organised, good guild group like RG was then you couldnt be more wrong. People figured out positioning for buff sharing and focus their dmg. Figured when to run as train and when to spread out. A simple “stack, blast fire field, push straight line” doesnt work for some months now. Even the most boring blobby servers on EU got their players to use tanky gear and blast fire fields. If you want to beat that, you need to outsmart them in different ways.
Ofc there are some guilds that think bringing 16 guards, 3 eles and 1 veil will win them every fight. I never saw any of those succeed.