Guild Wars 2

The event was avesome. There was more big openfield fights and also more opportunity for little teams to cap/flip. Now every germans sit in the tower and pewpew with 683 sup AC

This. This so much.
Just tried to cap a camp from gandara – Once i had cleared the t2 camp guards, which i did quite quickly, a steady stream of gandarans started flowing in from all directions. What happened after that is they built a superior ac to the camp and left two people to guard it.
Bullkitten. During sneak attack i could very well play four to five hours a day. Today’s gaming session was twenty minutes, I logged out after that.

ya its already back to zerg fests and the small groups are drying up fast.
map communication is down, unless youre on world ts.

+1000 to bring back no white swords.

What was this event?

I know a long, long time ago Anet managed to bug EB so that no stationary siege could be built, only golems. Best time we’ve ever had in WvW, alot of people loved it.

Sadly, they where quick to fix it and never recognized what it caused. Their response to everyones cry on how awesome fights it created was to buff arrowcarts by 100%. And then add masteries to buff them another 100% on top of that. Can you imagine that arrowcarts where once considered weak, sigh…

So if they created something that people liked, expect to never see it again. Its the curse of WvW.

Tseikk.9032:

This. This so much.
Just tried to cap a camp from gandara – Once i had cleared the t2 camp guards, which i did quite quickly, a steady stream of gandarans started flowing in from all directions. What happened after that is they built a superior ac to the camp and left two people to guard it.
Bullkitten. During sneak attack i could very well play four to five hours a day. Today’s gaming session was twenty minutes, I logged out after that.

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

Dawdler.8521:

What was this event?

I know a long, long time ago Anet managed to bug EB so that no stationary siege could be built, only golems. Best time we’ve ever had in WvW, alot of people loved it.

Sadly, they where quick to fix it and never recognized what it caused. Their response to everyones cry on how awesome fights it created was to buff arrowcarts by 100%. And then add masteries to buff them another 100% on top of that. Can you imagine that arrowcarts where once considered weak, sigh…

So if they created something that people liked, expect to never see it again. Its the curse of WvW.

That sounds terrible, low pop servers already have a hard time against blobs. With no siege there is no way you can defend your keep from larger blobs.

bloodletting wolf.2837:

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

idk about the person you quoted but white swords bring the zerg, not a small group. there was also more scouts and roaming groups during no white swords, which made small scale fights more common.

oneply.9586:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

idk about the person you quoted but white swords bring the zerg, not a small group. there was also more scouts and roaming groups during no white swords, which made small scale fights more common.

That’s funny my experience is that there where less small scale fights and more ktrain blobbing with the sneak attack event. I don’t know what tier you are in but zergs don’t generally show up to swords on a camp and if they do you lead them on a merry chase half way across the map wasting their time. I will repeat this one more time – stack might before you enter the camp and cap it before they pop.

bloodletting wolf.2837:

oneply.9586:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

idk about the person you quoted but white swords bring the zerg, not a small group. there was also more scouts and roaming groups during no white swords, which made small scale fights more common.

That’s funny my experience is that there where less small scale fights and more ktrain blobbing with the sneak attack event. I don’t know what tier you are in but zergs don’t generally show up to swords on a camp and if they do you lead them on a merry chase half way across the map wasting their time. I will repeat this one more time – stack might before you enter the camp and cap it before they pop.

T1
some worlds run more than a single zerg on a map.
granted my play time is also during peak NA hours as well.

bloodletting wolf.2837:

oneply.9586:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

idk about the person you quoted but white swords bring the zerg, not a small group. there was also more scouts and roaming groups during no white swords, which made small scale fights more common.

That’s funny my experience is that there where less small scale fights and more ktrain blobbing with the sneak attack event. I don’t know what tier you are in but zergs don’t generally show up to swords on a camp and if they do you lead them on a merry chase half way across the map wasting their time. I will repeat this one more time – stack might before you enter the camp and cap it before they pop.

Fully upgraded camp took me around a minute to cap, which i consider very quick. Their “zerg” did not appear, but instead, around 10 people came. That’s more than enough to fend off a solo roamer. Worse than that it doesn’t even help my server that much if they decide to chase me since we were already outnumbered and lost our keep and towers, while they were steamrolling around with 9 times more people.

Imagine if each server could only have a set amount of players on the map. Stacked servers would sort out and individual skill would mean more than having high population.
But oh well, transfers are the only thing that anet makes money with wvw.

I still hope we get some additional rule variants and a feedback thread on the temp changes. Already seeing less roving scouts then during the event and some people back to we can just flip it back since there is less reward. PPK and no swords were a good combo of changes to try together. Let’s see what’s next.

I do agree that on evening(our prime time) the small guild trying to cap towers and even keeps are gone. It would be better for that period. With some of the new players I would even have the whole swords thing removed. Also saves you from running to a camp to see those stupid hyleks of ogres there :/

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Tseikk.9032:

This. This so much.
Just tried to cap a camp from gandara – Once i had cleared the t2 camp guards, which i did quite quickly, a steady stream of gandarans started flowing in from all directions. What happened after that is they built a superior ac to the camp and left two people to guard it.
Bullkitten. During sneak attack i could very well play four to five hours a day. Today’s gaming session was twenty minutes, I logged out after that.

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

Yes, a lot of litle team have problem with t3 towers with 70 defender and 15 sup ac

McWolfy.5924:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Tseikk.9032:

This. This so much.
Just tried to cap a camp from gandara – Once i had cleared the t2 camp guards, which i did quite quickly, a steady stream of gandarans started flowing in from all directions. What happened after that is they built a superior ac to the camp and left two people to guard it.
Bullkitten. During sneak attack i could very well play four to five hours a day. Today’s gaming session was twenty minutes, I logged out after that.

So you are mad that you had to fight more than npc’s? White swords are there to bring the fights to you. If you don’t want white swords on a camp stack might and cap it before they pop.

Yes, a lot of litle team have problem with t3 towers with 70 defender and 15 sup ac

I’m gonna be real honest with you here. Big ole blobs that want nothing more than a ktrain have a problem with t3 towers with 3 defenders and 15 sup ac. They don’t want to take the time to crack the tower. Why shouldn’t small teams have problems taking a t3 tower? If you want those defenders out of the tower so you can take it go ring the doorbell on their keep or take something else and they will follow you.

Signed, A tower defender

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Signed, A tower defender

I knew it.

I loved the sneak event… I have no problem sentrying, but with the white swords being shown, it makes it kind of pointless.

My solution to the Sneak Attack experiment? I tried it and saw how awful it was for my low population server and defensive play, and took a month off of GW2. If you don’t care about defense, I’m sure sneak caps against empty towers and keeps are great fun but they are horrible for the person who spent 3 hours trying to get a tower or keep upgraded and sieged up, only to watch it flip while their back is turned.

Seriously, if reliable and fast capping of empty towers is so much fun and what everyone really wants (judging by EotM, it may be), the solution seems pretty simple to me. ANet should build a PvE map that uses WvW mechanics but everyone is on the same side, so towers will never be defended by anything but a handful of NPCs that can quickly and reliably be defeated.

Population imbalance problem? Solved. Everyone is on the same side. Frustrated defensive players tired of spending their afternoon upgrading a site only to have it flip in a couple of minutes to a zerg or when caught off guard? Gone. There won’t be any defensive play. Players getting bored because the karma train has stalled on some defenders. Won’t happen. No more risk of unexpected death to a well operated siege weapon or defenders showing up to defend.

Nice, safe, and predictable without enemy players showing up to gum up the works and it can be perfectly balanced just like the rest of PvE.

Tseikk.9032:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Signed, A tower defender

I knew it.

You forgot so add

Signed, A ktraining zergling

No. Stop trolling please.

Berk.8561:

My solution to the Sneak Attack experiment? I tried it and saw how awful it was for my low population server and defensive play, and took a month off of GW2. If you don’t care about defense, I’m sure sneak caps against empty towers and keeps are great fun but they are horrible for the person who spent 3 hours trying to get a tower or keep upgraded and sieged up, only to watch it flip while their back is turned.

Seriously, if reliable and fast capping of empty towers is so much fun and what everyone really wants (judging by EotM, it may be), the solution seems pretty simple to me. ANet should build a PvE map that uses WvW mechanics but everyone is on the same side, so towers will never be defended by anything but a handful of NPCs that can quickly and reliably be defeated.

Population imbalance problem? Solved. Everyone is on the same side. Frustrated defensive players tired of spending their afternoon upgrading a site only to have it flip in a couple of minutes to a zerg or when caught off guard? Gone. There won’t be any defensive play. Players getting bored because the karma train has stalled on some defenders. Won’t happen. No more risk of unexpected death to a well operated siege weapon or defenders showing up to defend.

Nice, safe, and predictable without enemy players showing up to gum up the works and it can be perfectly balanced just like the rest of PvE.

i thinking it makes a difference what your world population is. on T1 there was lots of defensive battles, scouts were posted so someone was there to cause trouble until the backup arrived. if you have the population the sneak attack was alot of fun. i could see how a low pop world would find it a kittenty thing. but that imo is the biggest problem in WvW, population imbalance. it would be nice if they merged the lowest pop worlds together.

also, i would HATE your idea, again its a misunderstanding from someone who plays on a low pop world thinking that its no different in a high pop server.

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Tseikk.9032:

bloodletting wolf.2837:

Signed, A tower defender

I knew it.

You forgot so add

Signed, A ktraining zergling

Signed, a solo roamer.

oneply.9586:

i thinking it makes a difference what your world population is. on T1 there was lots of defensive battles, scouts were posted so someone was there to cause trouble until the backup arrived. if you have the population the sneak attack was alot of fun. i could see how a low pop world would find it a kittenty thing. but that imo is the biggest problem in WvW, population imbalance. it would be nice if they merged the lowest pop worlds together.

also, i would HATE your idea, again its a misunderstanding from someone who plays on a low pop world thinking that its no different in a high pop server.

And a misunderstanding to think the other way around – that a “one size fits all” decision (like no white swords) is a good thing.

You want fun matchups where people don’t cry “WvW iz ded!” because they can’t find a tag leading 60+? The lower tiers have that. My own server just got up into silver a couple of weeks ago and last night (which was a Tuesday) we had a queue for EBG.

Granted, it was only a queue of three or four, but we’re the smallest (population) server in our matchup. And on our own forum, with very few dissenters, we hated no white swords. I seem to remember that, based on the many threads spawned here, pretty much everybody hated having no white swords outside of of gold in fact.

So in my humble opinion, the population imbalance you speak of could be fixed by ANet unstacking the T1 servers and distributing their population to tiers with a marked lack of population equiity. :-)

After all, gold as a whole is a minority compared to the rest of the servers! Ha!

Rimmy.9217:

oneply.9586:

i thinking it makes a difference what your world population is. on T1 there was lots of defensive battles, scouts were posted so someone was there to cause trouble until the backup arrived. if you have the population the sneak attack was alot of fun. i could see how a low pop world would find it a kittenty thing. but that imo is the biggest problem in WvW, population imbalance. it would be nice if they merged the lowest pop worlds together.

also, i would HATE your idea, again its a misunderstanding from someone who plays on a low pop world thinking that its no different in a high pop server.

And a misunderstanding to think the other way around – that a “one size fits all” decision (like no white swords) is a good thing.

You want fun matchups where people don’t cry “WvW iz ded!” because they can’t find a tag leading 60+? The lower tiers have that. My own server just got up into silver a couple of weeks ago and last night (which was a Tuesday) we had a queue for EBG.

Granted, it was only a queue of three or four, but we’re the smallest (population) server in our matchup. And on our own forum, with very few dissenters, we hated no white swords. I seem to remember that, based on the many threads spawned here, pretty much everybody hated having no white swords outside of of gold in fact.

So in my humble opinion, the population imbalance you speak of could be fixed by ANet unstacking the T1 servers and distributing their population to tiers with a marked lack of population equiity. :-)

After all, gold as a whole is a minority compared to the rest of the servers! Ha!

i understand we are the “minority”. but you’ll notice i have never said what other people want, only what i want/like.
i do think that people from the low pops would enjoy a higher pop world. that comes after talking to people who transfered up and how much more they enjoy the game. but that is a small sample size.
personally i would like to see them do 2 things with wvw.
1. merging/combing/transferring the lowest pop worlds.overall reducing the # of worlds. close off T1 and maybe T2 for transfer.
2. make it so each world can have a set # of players on a map. and until all worlds reach that number it will not increase. so say the limit is 50 per world, once all 4 main maps are filled then the limit would increase by “x” amount for each world. (this would also depend on what the servers can handle for lag/etc. just throwing numbers out there for clarity sake).

and we are only the minority by # of worlds, not necessarily by player population. of course that is all speculation because we dont have a dev that would actually come into this forum and clarify it.
also, using the forums as an indication of what the player base wants is silly. i doubt even a forth of players ever come to the fourms.

oneply.9586:

i understand we are the “minority”. but you’ll notice i have never said what other people want, only what i want/like.
i do think that people from the low pops would enjoy a higher pop world. that comes after talking to people who transfered up and how much more they enjoy the game. but that is a small sample size.
personally i would like to see them do 2 things with wvw.
1. merging/combing/transferring the lowest pop worlds.overall reducing the # of worlds. close off T1 and maybe T2 for transfer.
2. make it so each world can have a set # of players on a map. and until all worlds reach that number it will not increase. so say the limit is 50 per world, once all 4 main maps are filled then the limit would increase by “x” amount for each world. (this would also depend on what the servers can handle for lag/etc. just throwing numbers out there for clarity sake).

and we are only the minority by # of worlds, not necessarily by player population. of course that is all speculation because we dont have a dev that would actually come into this forum and clarify it.
also, using the forums as an indication of what the player base wants is silly. i doubt even a forth of players ever come to the fourms.

Well, I was speaking tongue-in-cheek in my post of course. But it’s also silly to speculate what percentage of WvW players come to the forums.

And you know, the servers outside of gold have moved around a lot. When my own server was at the absolute bottom (T8 / rank 24) it’s not like we forgot what being in T3 was like, after all. And many of us have had transfers down from gold by individuals and guilds who prefer the playstyle that less stuffed servers can offer.

I used to be in favour of your dynamic map population caps, but I’ve been leaning away from it lately. It seems to me that the idea isn’t to punish servers that have more population by locking people out of a map until their opponents can field a comparable number – that will generally mean that people who play anything other than prime time hours could well find themselves unable to play WvW at all if their opponents don’t have people on during those times… and that is a real possibility once you get out of gold. That’s not fair to people who do shift work, or are stay-at-home parents, or any of the many other reasons people don’t play during prime time.

I’m much more in favour of buffs and bonuses to the servers in second and third place at any given time in a matchup, and something of real substance being granted if you have the “Outnumbered” buff.

Swords could be one of those – no white swords if you’re in first place, white swords after thirty seconds (the current default) if you’re in second place, instant swords (like it used to be) if you’re in third place. That sort of thing.

Or, you can’t waypoint keeps if you’re in first place and any already constructed ones get locked off, normal waypoints in second place, and contested waypoints can still be used if you’re in third place.

The idea is to never keep people from playing WvW (and dynamic map caps would do that), although I admit to still being in favour of lowering the current map cap down to sixty or so to see if that would unstack some of the population from gold and redistribute it.

Rimmy.9217:

I used to be in favour of your dynamic map population caps, but I’ve been leaning away from it lately. It seems to me that the idea isn’t to punish servers that have more population by locking people out of a map until their opponents can field a comparable number – that will generally mean that people who play anything other than prime time hours could well find themselves unable to play WvW at all if their opponents don’t have people on during those times… and that is a real possibility once you get out of gold. That’s not fair to people who do shift work, or are stay-at-home parents, or any of the many other reasons people don’t play during prime time.

thats were combine someworlds i think would help. #2 doesnt work without #1 being implemented properly.

I’m much more in favour of buffs and bonuses to the servers in second and third place at any given time in a matchup, and something of real substance being granted if you have the “Outnumbered” buff.

Swords could be one of those – no white swords if you’re in first place, white swords after thirty seconds (the current default) if you’re in second place, instant swords (like it used to be) if you’re in third place. That sort of thing.

Or, you can’t waypoint keeps if you’re in first place and any already constructed ones get locked off, normal waypoints in second place, and contested waypoints can still be used if you’re in third place.

The idea is to never keep people from playing WvW (and dynamic map caps would do that), although I admit to still being in favour of lowering the current map cap down to sixty or so to see if that would unstack some of the population from gold and redistribute it.

im not a big fan of buffs but i like this thought process as well.

From the posts I’ve seen over the last months, there has also been a lot of people that liked the no-white-swords, and not only from the upper tiers. But notably more people from the upper servers seems to have liked it, while less of the lower population servers seemed to like it.

Personally I’m entirely undecided, almost a month after it ended, and I’m still not certain which I liked better.

oneply.9586:

thats were combine someworlds i think would help. #2 doesnt work without #1 being implemented properly.

The thing is, nobody wants their server to be merged (and thus effectively destroyed). People want more population equality in WvW, but merging servers really doesn’t do that – most servers in North America have their peak play at prime time and significantly less action at other times… so if you mush two or three servers together, what do you get? More people on at the same time, and the same lack of coverage otherwise.

And that means that the server that has even a handful of people on during the graveyard shift, or even EU time still has the same advantage… so what was the point of merging the servers in the first place?

Make it harder to hold first place, or rather make it so that first place can’t simply rest because it’s in the lead. If you want to win, it should be for more than just having more people online. The other two servers won’t win that way, so why should the remaining one?

Smashy smashy!

I miss it too but I have to admit that no white swords made it a lot easier to do your daily in WvW quickly if you didn’t have much time to play and I haven’t been able to play in WvW as much since no white swords left so I might be biased. I thought the sneak attack was good fun for small scale on T1 as there were a lot more unscripted little skirmishes going on and the map chatter and scouting felt higher quality as well as more useful. Once defense gets a stronger emphasis for reward in HoT I think it Sneak Attack might even have less downsides for the lower tiers.

joneirikb.7506:

From the posts I’ve seen over the last months, there has also been a lot of people that liked the no-white-swords, and not only from the upper tiers. But notably more people from the upper servers seems to have liked it, while less of the lower population servers seemed to like it.

It’s true, and I wouldn’t pretend otherwise. But white swords provokes and attracts fights, and no white swords means one less mechanism for player on player interaction. It isn’t really the cure for the lower population servers in a matchup to flip stuff more easily, unless the over-populated server in the matchup has only a slight advantage in coverage. Larger imbalances means that scouts (even roving ones) can bring a response in a way that the lower population servers can’t, and those same servers still have fewer players which means that their stuff flips more frequently.

No white swords seems like more of a benefit for k-trainers, PvErs, and people who are afraid to be returned to spawn – NOT for people who remember the “versus” in World versus World (versus World).

Sneak Attack was really neat. I look forward to AnreaNet doing other WvW styles. So I made a topic for an idea of mine. Forum Link. I think it could also be a short-term WvW style.