Guild Wars 2

Add supercannons like the one eotm has near Overgrowth base to the the north desert borderland towers, This will add flavour to them and you can pressure the keep and garrison with it. This would stop the hurr durr north dbl towers so bad hurr durr. Even add them to south towers so the enemies can pressure the keep, not the garrison.

http://imgur.com/6TGcuKW

Yeah… Add more PvE stuff because the map was so badly designed that we need to try fix it with more gimmick…

Sich.7103:

Yeah… Add more PvE stuff because the map was so badly designed that we need to try fix it with more gimmick…

Are you kidding me? This would fix the problem, do you even play wvw? You say the towers are so useless, why do you even care that they are useless, this would fix this and yet you kitten about it. So everything that isnt 1111 guard staff is pve? People cry about how useless the towers are in dbl, now they have a cannon to pressure gates/walls, problem solved.

It’s not PvE if it is maneuvered by a player. I like this idea: after an upgrade, you could use supply to build such a cannon (or better, a themed weapon, since you would be forced to build it inside the tower), and it would give a purpose to these towers. Sure, changing the layout of the map to allow trebbing would be better, but it’s not gonna happen, realistically.

No no no, you are all wrong!

What WvW needs is more PvD!

I say make all the home BLs only accessible to players from that server.
Add a decay timer so that a tower become neutrally owned so that players have to recap it per tick.

Well first up. We’re in ABL now. Did you mean that? Or are you talking about the desert borderlands that won’t be back for a couple months? Two different towers/two different strategies.

Second: What Sich said. We just got rid of a pile of gimmicks. Gimmicks + WvW don’t tend to go well together. The simpler the better for WvW maps. Players are creative enough to curate content without gimmicks.

Third: Sich plays SOLELY defense. He may have an unhealthy relationship with Hills, but he knows home BL better than almost anyone else I know. I don’t think he 111 guard staff enough to even have Ultimate Dominator tag for his sig line. Cough.

Give the towers in DBL waypoints at T2 and people will fight tooth and nail over them.

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

The suggestion isnt that outlandish.

In the alpine borderlands it’s possible to build trebs in the north towers in order to break down the outer of Garrison. The purpose of these towers is to put pressure on Garrison.
Basicly what the guy is asking for is for the northern towers in the desert borderland to serve an identical role.

Request to move to PVE forums please.

Supercannons in the North and way points availability in the south are both interesting. Since objective to objective flow is a concern for many potentially some additional smaller towers that inter-link the south towers and threaten a portion of air and fires’ outer walls might also be beneficial. Still favor a conversion to a three sided map but these would be interesting to see draw up. Again the size of the keeps were allowing a lot of opportunity for assault already but this would be creating a situation where the towers are more of staging groups to the next objective.

I’m saying waypoints in all 4 towers at T2. T3 still offers defensive advantages, but it’s straightforward to make a tower T2. The size of the map (a major complaint) becomes a lot smaller if you can bounce around it on waypoints. It also puts a lot of value into holding camps to make sure those towers hit T2 and a sense of urgency to flip them before they get that far.

Hesacon.8735:

I’m saying waypoints in all 4 towers at T2. T3 still offers defensive advantages, but it’s straightforward to make a tower T2. The size of the map (a major complaint) becomes a lot smaller if you can bounce around it on waypoints. It also puts a lot of value into holding camps to make sure those towers hit T2 and a sense of urgency to flip them before they get that far.

Is T2 too soon? Do you remember how many supply deliveries that was? I see your point that it would create a serious threat to the back lands if an enemy was able to hold the north towers long enough.

imo. you can add those canons. But tower needs to be at least t2 so a blob just cannot cap it. build the canon and then start firing at the garrison. and garrison itself needs to have a similar weapon to put pressure on th towers as well. Don’t forget that in Alpine border you could treb both ways.

Jayne.9251:

Well first up. We’re in ABL now. Did you mean that? Or are you talking about the desert borderlands that won’t be back for a couple months? Two different towers/two different strategies.

Second: What Sich said. We just got rid of a pile of gimmicks. Gimmicks + WvW don’t tend to go well together. The simpler the better for WvW maps. Players are creative enough to curate content without gimmicks.

Third: Sich plays SOLELY defense. He may have an unhealthy relationship with Hills, but he knows home BL better than almost anyone else I know. I don’t think he 111 guard staff enough to even have Ultimate Dominator tag for his sig line. Cough.

dbl, one of the apparent issues people had with dbl was that the towers were useless. With supercannons they are not. People had issues with dbl being hard to navigate, they fixed that. People had issues with the meta-event, they removed that. Now that all the issues are resolved with the supercannon we can go back to dbl and not 2012.

You need objectives for interesting battles, pirateshipping eachother til the other one runs off is not interesting. Yes, the towers happen to not have a significant location but this supercannon gimmick would fix this. At this point I wouldnt be suprised if anet removed everything on the maps leaving nothing but wide open grass that you all could pirateship eachother one, beaquse that’s what you like. The same people who are kitten about dbl towers locations are kitten about the pvd, how does that even makes sense? why do 111 guards care about its location. Easier towers to cap translates in more enemies trying to cap it.

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

valheru.7891:

imo. you can add those canons. But tower needs to be at least t2 so a blob just cannot cap it. build the canon and then start firing at the garrison. and garrison itself needs to have a similar weapon to put pressure on th towers as well. Don’t forget that in Alpine border you could treb both ways.

In Alpine you fire with invulnerable trebs from the spawn.

Terrahero.9358:

The suggestion isnt that outlandish.

In the alpine borderlands it’s possible to build trebs in the north towers in order to break down the outer of Garrison. The purpose of these towers is to put pressure on Garrison.
Basicly what the guy is asking for is for the northern towers in the desert borderland to serve an identical role.

Correct, beaquse that seems to be the main issue people have with dbl. People on the Alpine border place invurnerable trebs at spawn tho, to pressure the northern towers.

TheGrimm.5624:

Hesacon.8735:

I’m saying waypoints in all 4 towers at T2. T3 still offers defensive advantages, but it’s straightforward to make a tower T2. The size of the map (a major complaint) becomes a lot smaller if you can bounce around it on waypoints. It also puts a lot of value into holding camps to make sure those towers hit T2 and a sense of urgency to flip them before they get that far.

Is T2 too soon? Do you remember how many supply deliveries that was? I see your point that it would create a serious threat to the back lands if an enemy was able to hold the north towers long enough.

T1 is 20, T2 is 40 (more), T3 is 80 (more). If it’s done at T2, that’s 60 total. The walls are barely not paper, so it’s not all that PvD-ish flipping them (another major complaint with DBL).

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

Hesacon.8735:

TheGrimm.5624:

Hesacon.8735:

I’m saying waypoints in all 4 towers at T2. T3 still offers defensive advantages, but it’s straightforward to make a tower T2. The size of the map (a major complaint) becomes a lot smaller if you can bounce around it on waypoints. It also puts a lot of value into holding camps to make sure those towers hit T2 and a sense of urgency to flip them before they get that far.

Is T2 too soon? Do you remember how many supply deliveries that was? I see your point that it would create a serious threat to the back lands if an enemy was able to hold the north towers long enough.

T1 is 20, T2 is 40 (more), T3 is 80 (more). If it’s done at T2, that’s 60 total. The walls are barely not paper, so it’s not all that PvD-ish flipping them (another major complaint with DBL).

Sorry but what is the complaint, that the towers are not easy to cap? I thought people said dbl was karmatrain map. not /s

That DBL was too much PvD. A T3 wall can absorb a lot of punishment, a T2 one can’t. Defending a T2 tower is trickier than arrow carts and shield generators.

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

I didn’t say you wouldnt need to build them? you need to build the supercannons in alpine at ruins if they still there. Someone suggested they would be a t2 upgrade. This would allow any wvw lovers to fight over this object, both defenders and people trying to capture it. People argued that the towers location is irrelevant strategic postion, yes, they do. With cannons they dont. What’s the problem?

I’d gladly go to eotm, I love the map and the rewards were nice before they nerfed it. But I prefer fights with level 80s and teamspeak.

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

People are doing the exact same thing in ABL right now. You do have to build them if you bothered to read other peoples posts. Its a blueprint that becomes available when the tower reaches a certain tier. Like a cannon emplacement. It would still probably cost a tower full of supply so it would take TIME and resources to build that either a group of players would work together to make or an individual would take a long time to make.

Super Cannons would work exactly the same way that a treb inside the NE and NW towers of ABL do right now. And would work to draw people out of garrison the way they do right now.

Take the time to read what other people are righting before replying. Or you just end up making yourself sound like a hypocrite. As for trebs being able to be countered in alpine. Please. Unless you build shield gens you can’t get a treb up fast enough to stop trebs from another tower from killing you. And if both sides DO get shield gens up its just a case of “well guess we wait till the other one gets bored”.

So let me put it this way. Super Cannon on the towers would do more to draw people out into the field and start a fight. Instead of having two emplacements shoot at eachother. Or relying on invulnerable treb bug to take back the towers.

Again. None of your points hold up to scrutiny here.

Edit: Edited out annoying caps. My bad

Shadelang.3012:

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

People are doing the exact same thing in ABL right now. You do have to build them if you bothered to read other peoples posts. Its a blueprint that becomes available when the tower reaches a certain tier. Like a cannon emplacement. It would still probably cost a tower full of supply so it would take TIME and resources to build that either a group of players would work together to make or an individual would take a long time to make.

Super Cannons would work exactly the same way that a treb inside the NE and NW towers of ABL do right now. And would work to draw people out of garrison the way they do right now.

Take the time to read what other people are righting before replying. Or you just end up making yourself sound like a hypocrite. As for trebs being able to be countered in alpine. Please. Unless you build shield gens you can’t get a treb up fast enough to stop trebs from another tower from killing you. And if both sides DO get shield gens up its just a case of “well guess we wait till the other one gets bored”.

So let me put it this way. Super Cannon on the towers would do more to draw people out into the field and start a fight. Instead of having two emplacements shoot at eachother. Or relying on invulnerable treb bug to take back the towers.

Again. None of your points hold up to scrutiny here.

Edit: Edited out annoying caps. My bad

Yeah I’m sure it will draw people out to fight the same way the the dino skyhammer gimmick did right?
Oh wait… it was just abused by the strongest server or completely ignored after a couple weeks when people were completely sick of that kitten map.

And only making it available at a certain tier!? Yeah, that won’t benefit the strongest server….

I see your forum signature says “Mods on this forum deletes all threads of value” – if they’re deleting all of your threads, and they’re anything like this one, there is no value in them and it should tell you something.

Puck.9612:

Shadelang.3012:

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

People are doing the exact same thing in ABL right now. You do have to build them if you bothered to read other peoples posts. Its a blueprint that becomes available when the tower reaches a certain tier. Like a cannon emplacement. It would still probably cost a tower full of supply so it would take TIME and resources to build that either a group of players would work together to make or an individual would take a long time to make.

Super Cannons would work exactly the same way that a treb inside the NE and NW towers of ABL do right now. And would work to draw people out of garrison the way they do right now.

Take the time to read what other people are righting before replying. Or you just end up making yourself sound like a hypocrite. As for trebs being able to be countered in alpine. Please. Unless you build shield gens you can’t get a treb up fast enough to stop trebs from another tower from killing you. And if both sides DO get shield gens up its just a case of “well guess we wait till the other one gets bored”.

So let me put it this way. Super Cannon on the towers would do more to draw people out into the field and start a fight. Instead of having two emplacements shoot at eachother. Or relying on invulnerable treb bug to take back the towers.

Again. None of your points hold up to scrutiny here.

Edit: Edited out annoying caps. My bad

Yeah I’m sure it will draw people out to fight the same way the the dino skyhammer gimmick did right?
Oh wait… it was just abused by the strongest server or completely ignored after a couple weeks when people were completely sick of that kitten map.

And only making it available at a certain tier!? Yeah, that won’t benefit the strongest server….

Or maybe they had to remove it beaquse the event itself caused massive lag for all parties on the map. All sides present on the map literally worked together to get it done asap.

@Puck I love how your only seeing what you want to see and ignoring everything else>.<.

You keep saying gimmick while ignoring that said gimmick is already in ABL. The BL that everyone one was screaming to get back. In the form of trebs on NE and NW tower. This already exists. Comparing it to skyhammer is just your attempt to divert the topic by comparing it to something and invoking a negative emotion THROUGH that comparison. You can do better than that. If your gonna make a comparison lets stick to honest ones alright?

As for makiong it available at a certian tier. Their is a few things your either missing or choosing to ignore.

A: It probably can only hit garrison due to the layout of the map and the nature of the other keeps. Meaning it can only be used to assault garrison. Making it VERY hard to “abuse” because of the second part.

B: Keeping it locked till a certain tier does 2 things. One it prevents a high power server from just nabbing both towers nad force upgrading them. They will have to defend not only those towers but also the supply camps and the yaks running to them. This strecthes out the forces of the group attempting for upgrade them. This gives the defenders of garrison ALOT of targets they can hit in order to slow down/stop the upgrades entirely.

5 roamers could stop the process entirely.

The other thing it does is makes it so that a team that loses map control (say they got night capped and there BL was flipped entirely) has a starting point towards retaking garrison. They can hit the side towers and camps and start working on those cannons. If they guard the camps/towers/yaks then you will need more than the origianl 5 roamers to stop them. Meaning that the foreign group will have to send out troops which will leave garrison vulnerable. Making it easier to take by traditional means.

These towers would take a pretty big commitment by the owners to utilize effectively. If they succeed garrison is vulnerable. If they fail its because there were fights. Everyone wins.

Let me be clear. I am not for or against this idea one way or the other. I will leave wvw development to the dev team in charge and just offer my 2 cents. What I HATE are hypocritical posts that do nothing but derail a thread.

Shadelang.3012:

@Puck I love how your only seeing what you want to see and ignoring everything else>.<.

You keep saying gimmick while ignoring that said gimmick is already in ABL. The BL that everyone one was screaming to get back. In the form of trebs on NE and NW tower. This already exists. Comparing it to skyhammer is just your attempt to divert the topic by comparing it to something and invoking a negative emotion THROUGH that comparison. You can do better than that. If your gonna make a comparison lets stick to honest ones alright?

As for makiong it available at a certian tier. Their is a few things your either missing or choosing to ignore.

A: It probably can only hit garrison due to the layout of the map and the nature of the other keeps. Meaning it can only be used to assault garrison. Making it VERY hard to “abuse” because of the second part.

B: Keeping it locked till a certain tier does 2 things. One it prevents a high power server from just nabbing both towers nad force upgrading them. They will have to defend not only those towers but also the supply camps and the yaks running to them. This strecthes out the forces of the group attempting for upgrade them. This gives the defenders of garrison ALOT of targets they can hit in order to slow down/stop the upgrades entirely.

5 roamers could stop the process entirely.

The other thing it does is makes it so that a team that loses map control (say they got night capped and there BL was flipped entirely) has a starting point towards retaking garrison. They can hit the side towers and camps and start working on those cannons. If they guard the camps/towers/yaks then you will need more than the origianl 5 roamers to stop them. Meaning that the foreign group will have to send out troops which will leave garrison vulnerable. Making it easier to take by traditional means.

These towers would take a pretty big commitment by the owners to utilize effectively. If they succeed garrison is vulnerable. If they fail its because there were fights. Everyone wins.

Thank you for your input

It was mentioned before in one of the other dbl threads, but yes it’s a decent idea to try and make the north towers useful in hitting garrison. Obviously a T2 upgraded tower would be needed to use it since those towers can be supplied fairly quickly. It’ll be like the statuary cannon in eotm, but it should be made destructible.

Also this idea isn’t any different than setting up trebs in north towers in alpine, quit your kitten bellaching about pve, this isn’t a super cannon in the middle of the map powered up by dino crap that blasts all doors down for half life kitten .

while adding tactical value to towers would be nice i do not think that supercannons would be the way to go

Sarrs.4831:

while adding tactical value to towers would be nice i do not think that supercannons would be the way to go

What would you like for them to add? I doubt they will move them closer to the keeps or garri to give them more of an strategic location.

Sarrs.4831:

while adding tactical value to towers would be nice i do not think that supercannons would be the way to go

I agree. It seems the wrong solution.

I think the only reason I would be remotely for it would be the opportunity to talk like Dr. Evil and put my hands up to make the quotes sign whenever I say the word laser.

I had this idea as well, but to make it viable:

Cannon would have to do less overall damage than standard siege (and our wvw traits would have no effect on it)

It would only do damage to structures, and range would only be enough to hit outer walls.

I think there’s merit in this idea. I made a similar one here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Do-you-still-hate-the-Desert-BL-after-patch/page/2#post6125752

Let’s just assume, for a minute, that the DBls are coming back! I know some don’t want it, but Anet said it’s happening so…..

How do we make these maps better? Lots have raised that the northern towers have no purpose, unlike in the ABls and I agree. Ideally they would move them. But if they can’t, some kinda fixed location, souped-up weapon that can reach, only outer, Garri from the towers sounds like a plan.

- The siege can still have to be built, just like a treb. Maybe even cost more.
- The treb spots in the ABl are effectively fixed anyway – only one effective spot in each tower, so no change there really
- There would need to be effective counters to each – no reason why the spots chosen should not be attackable, just like the northern towers in ABl.

So, accepting some just don’t even want the DBls fixed, they just want them gone, if they are coming back better the northern towers come into play rather just being karma-train spots!

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

Yo, Jim Hunter/Puck.

Stop being casual.

You heard him.

TallBarr.2184:

Jayne.9251:

Well first up. We’re in ABL now. Did you mean that? Or are you talking about the desert borderlands that won’t be back for a couple months? Two different towers/two different strategies.

Second: What Sich said. We just got rid of a pile of gimmicks. Gimmicks + WvW don’t tend to go well together. The simpler the better for WvW maps. Players are creative enough to curate content without gimmicks.

Third: Sich plays SOLELY defense. He may have an unhealthy relationship with Hills, but he knows home BL better than almost anyone else I know. I don’t think he 111 guard staff enough to even have Ultimate Dominator tag for his sig line. Cough.

dbl, one of the apparent issues people had with dbl was that the towers were useless. With supercannons they are not. People had issues with dbl being hard to navigate, they fixed that. People had issues with the meta-event, they removed that. Now that all the issues are resolved with the supercannon we can go back to dbl and not 2012.

You need objectives for interesting battles, pirateshipping eachother til the other one runs off is not interesting. Yes, the towers happen to not have a significant location but this supercannon gimmick would fix this. At this point I wouldnt be suprised if anet removed everything on the maps leaving nothing but wide open grass that you all could pirateship eachother one, beaquse that’s what you like. The same people who are kitten about dbl towers locations are kitten about the pvd, how does that even makes sense? why do 111 guards care about its location. Easier towers to cap translates in more enemies trying to cap it.

I would prefer to see them move the towers in DBL to be more in line/more serviceable like NWT and NET on alpine. Being able to hit another target is reason enough to want to own it and give you leverage on the map.

Jayne.9251:

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

Yo, Jim Hunter/Puck.

Stop being casual.

You heard him.

I’m trying. Instead of being a 111 guard I’m a 12345 guard. That’s how you become a pro right? If I just keep hitting every skill on cooldown that’s like….. max effort.

Puck.9612:

Jayne.9251:

Puck.9612:

TallBarr.2184:

Jim Hunter.6821:

They can add as many sky hammers and Dino bullkitten as you’d like as long as they never bring the map back to wvw. I’m sure pve players would love having some stupid gimmicky map added to the silver wastes area, or they can rotate it with eotm.
Just keep that stupidity out of WvW.

I’m pretty sure casual wvw players like you need to learn how to adapt to changes. These cannons would work as any other siege we currently have and make the towers relevant with their placement.

Work like any other siege……
except you don’t have to build them, so no supply management
will have much farther range than other siege so it can’t be countered the way trebs can in alpine

It sounds like another gimmick that will allow the dbl lovers to avoid fighting the same way the dino skyhammer was. Go back to eotm.

Yo, Jim Hunter/Puck.

Stop being casual.

You heard him.

I’m trying. Instead of being a 111 guard I’m a 12345 guard. That’s how you become a pro right? If I just keep hitting every skill on cooldown that’s like….. max effort.

I thought it was just doing 1,000 faceplants. It appears I’ve been doing it wrong.

TallBarr.2184:

What would you like for them to add? I doubt they will move them closer to the keeps or garri to give them more of an strategic location.

I don’t know. I thought that the idea of giving them waypoints could be interesting.

I don’t think they need to follow the Alpine paradigm of “applies pressure to the garrison”. That would be boring map construction. DBL is DBL and it should be different from ABL.

I think that, in trying to find the answer, it should follow a few rules:
1. It shouldn’t be identical to the ABL north towers’ strategic advantage
2. It shouldn’t involve a new gimmick. It shouldn’t be a buff, it shouldn’t be a supersiege.

Well I’ve always thought it’d be cool if the towers gave a small buff across the map based on your profession:

• Academy: Elementalists, Mesmers and Guardians
• Necropolis: Necromancers and Revenants
• Outpost: Thieves and Rangers
• Depot: Engineers and Warriors

Could be some small buff as the Minor Bloodlust of ABL, just to spice things up. It wouldn’t be crucial to have the tower but it’d definitely add up a bit when launching a siege against a keep. Besides I think it’d encourage people to pick a favorite tower and find new creative ways of protecting it.

Rednar.4690:

Well I’ve always thought it’d be cool if the towers gave a small buff across the map based on your profession:

• Academy: Elementalists, Mesmers and Guardians
• Necropolis: Necromancers and Revenants
• Outpost: Thieves and Rangers
• Depot: Engineers and Warriors

Could be some small buff as the Minor Bloodlust of ABL, just to spice things up. It wouldn’t be crucial to have the tower but it’d definitely add up a bit when launching a siege against a keep. Besides I think it’d encourage people to pick a favorite tower and find new creative ways of protecting it.

That’s actually kind of a neat idea.

Doesn’t make them any more tactically useful, but still neat.

I think the OP lost alot of people when they said change this to be more like EOTM, then asked if another poster even plays wvw.

The borderlands aren’t the same as EOTM and therfore shouldn’t have the same stuff. Now, if you were to suggest that this upgrade be added to SM, that might open a good debate, since SM is the only object that can be held by 1 server at a time and is the most hotly contested object on any wvw map.

What if to make the north towers a strategic asset they made it so that you must take a tower to be able to attack Gari?

Probably the only way to do that is to totally block off the access so that the attacking team needs to go through the tower. I think that would be great – it would concentrate all forces at one location for a massive must have battle.

Of course some people probably wouldn’t like that either. I would predict that YB Gari would never be taken lol.

HazyDaisy.4107:

I think the OP lost alot of people when they said change this to be more like EOTM, then asked if another poster even plays wvw.

The borderlands aren’t the same as EOTM and therfore shouldn’t have the same stuff. Now, if you were to suggest that this upgrade be added to SM, that might open a good debate, since SM is the only object that can be held by 1 server at a time and is the most hotly contested object on any wvw map.

“The borderlands aren’t the same as EOTM and therfore shouldn’t have the same stuff.”

Nice logic, that applies to everything else in the game to right? bye bye wvw reward tracks, beaquse you know.. pvp got those and we cant copy pvp.

“that might open a good debate, since SM is the only object that can be held by 1 server at a time and is the most hotly contested object on any wvw map.[/quote]”

Sorry but what, towers can be held by 2 teams?

“I think the OP lost alot of people when they said change this to be more like EOTM, then asked if another poster even plays wvw.”

You might wanna quote the post I said that beaquse I dont think I did. i said eotm got these cannons and they are fun to use and would work on the dbl to make the towers relevant.

Alpine Citadel needs several Super Mega Cannon’s!!!! The fact that players put trebs in the citadel shows a desire and need for it.

btw… screw the DBL and hope it never returns

North towers are already relevant on ABL in the fact that you can hit garrison from both north towers and Bay from SW tower with trebs. The relevance of the north towers is that home hold them so garri os better protected.

What you propose is to make a change to DBL, which is all well and good, but the proposed change would no doubt affect ABL at rotation as well as ALL towers everywhere. Plus, DBL already is setup so the team with the most people can cap everything with little to no effort, WHY provide the zergs another place to hide out while they mindlessly shoot seige at a keep?

Towers shouldn’t have that kind of power in any BL since some are ridiculously easy to take and camp already.

SM on the other hand, as I said is most fought over object and is easily held by 1 server currently for long periods of time if its defended right. Therefore, if a cheesy upgrade of that caliber was implemented, SM would be the place for it.

Don’t mind having different style of maps have differing techniques to them. But each objective on the map should provide a strategical value or have something to it that encourages all sides to want to have it. A tower doesn’t need to be in range of a keep unless its value is to pressure that keep. A great example above is the waypoints. I wouldn’t want an enemy a fast travel deeper into my territory. This doesn’t just apply to DBL, its all maps and any new ones. Sentries for example in the old ABL, if they can’t stop a yak travelling the road, what’s there point. That’s why they were reworked for DBL.

Same thing with map space. It should have a role to it, is it an open space for GvG, are there pathways to bypass main roads, is it an overwatch point. Citadel in ABL, way too big, cut that down to a 3rd of that size and open space between NC and create a new path between NET and NWT, home side still has advantage since they will always have an open waypoint but its more important now to keep NC and NET and NWT.

Map size differences are also ok as long as there are ways to address them. Example, ABL people were saying prior to HoT that they didn’t split up the zerg and biggest side has advantage. DBL people say too far run back, but we don’t want to get back to zerg favor. So WPs may be good middle ground to still slow down map backs and allow for reasons to hold and build.

No idea how this would work or not, but curious what would happen if towers blocked yak’s from reaching keeps. So you had to either baby sit a yak past, or take the tower if you ever wanted to upgrade keeps.

That would make them "tactical".