Guild Wars 2

Yes I will buy the xpac as will most people I assume…

Those that seem to blame whatever problems they have in WvW on “balance” issues just need to adjust their builds to counter the high dps thieves put out… I bet most are running zerker gear and complain when they have no survivability.

For some odd reason the GW2 community is very toxic lately and people keep making up all sorts of rumors and accusations that really don’t hold any water. Why don’t you just wait till we actually know whats being released before joining the toxic bandwagon with stupidity

Siggy.9275:

Yes I will buy the xpac as will most people I assume…

Those that seem to blame whatever problems they have in WvW on “balance” issues just need to adjust their builds to counter the high dps thieves put out… I bet most are running zerker gear and complain when they have no survivability.

For some odd reason the GW2 community is very toxic lately and people keep making up all sorts of rumors and accusations that really don’t hold any water. Why don’t you just wait till we actually know whats being released before joining the toxic bandwagon with stupidity

Who is basing their information on rumors? What people are upset about is what Anet stated in their interviews. When the developers tell you this is what it is and isn’t, that is not rumor, that is confirmation. as for rumors, the only rumors I have heard yet are guesses at how much it will cost and when it will be released. The rest is what developers have discussed during interviews.

http://www.pcgamer.com/guild-wars-2-heart-of-thorns-interview/

http://www.tentonhammer.com/interview/gw2-heart-thorns-interview-mike-o%E2%80%99brien-and-colin-johanson

I think the balance issues most affecting wvw is between server imbalances, not build/ class imbalances. T3 is completely broken right now, for example and the only way to really resolve it is to either get rid of servers or reduce the number of NA servers.

Well they sure are not going to reduce the number or servers before or shortly after the launch, as the expansion will quite likely bring a big surge of new and returning players to WvW.

So any problem we have with the population now will have to wait up until 2016 or even 2017 before it becomes a bigger problem again.

Tom Gore.4035:

Well they sure are not going to reduce the number or servers before or shortly after the launch, as the expansion will quite likely bring a big surge of new and returning players to WvW.

So any problem we have with the population now will have to wait up until 2016 or even 2017 before it becomes a bigger problem again.

Yea, they probably will not resolve the issue prior to the expansion, although that would be the best time to resolve it permanently, so that when new players coming in get to play good wvw matches instead of getting stuck in a broken tier. Showing players the best wvw experience when they come in is more likely to keep them playing rather than getting them stuck in a broken tier and telling them " if you don;t like it pay to transfer to a non broken one" that just isn’t good customer service. The best time to resolve the issues with wvw is BEFORE they bring in more people to see it.

Ideally they would greatly reduce the number of NA servers to about 6 or so, then add more active maps that can be populated at the same time per server, thus increasing the number of players allowed in each match to reduce the ques without causing a crash. Creating a system that allows for more maps during peak hours and reducing the number of active maps during slow hours would make for much more balanced and enjoyable wvw experience since 1) Less ques but allows for more players playing at once. 2) More active maps to choose from. 3) No dead servers reduces the imbalance issues since they actually have 24/7 coverage for 6 servers thus allowing players to always have other people to play with on their server and not leaving them in a ghost town.

If you’re primarily a WvW player and you buy the expansion, you’re telling them they don’t need to make content/fix hackers & trolls/fix bugs for WvW and you’ll still give them your money. At the very least, wait to buy it when it’s on sale.

dancingmonkey.4902:

Lord Kuru.3685:

If you’re primarily a WvW player and you buy the expansion, you’re telling them they don’t need to make content/fix hackers & trolls/fix bugs for WvW and you’ll still give them your money. At the very least, wait to buy it when it’s on sale.

Keep your false assumptions to yourself please. You do not have the slightest clue what they will add to WvW, you have no clue what they will fix, change, redesign, or revamp. As well, stop assuming your personal desires, wants, and needs, reflect that of myself or anyone else.

His assumptions are more accurate than anything you suggest.
When you base the future of WvW on what the devs have released in the last 3 years, well you can see it wont be much, it’ll be the minimum anet feels they need to do for WvW, whilst they continue to make new Living Story and start work on another expansion.

So far all we have is one new WvW borderlands maps, and undisclosed changes to the mechanics to the current map where more will be focused on defense. I know I for one do not want to wait another 3 years for a new WvW map.

Buy Some Apples.6390:

dancingmonkey.4902:

Lord Kuru.3685:

If you’re primarily a WvW player and you buy the expansion, you’re telling them they don’t need to make content/fix hackers & trolls/fix bugs for WvW and you’ll still give them your money. At the very least, wait to buy it when it’s on sale.

Keep your false assumptions to yourself please. You do not have the slightest clue what they will add to WvW, you have no clue what they will fix, change, redesign, or revamp. As well, stop assuming your personal desires, wants, and needs, reflect that of myself or anyone else.

His assumptions are more accurate than anything you suggest.
When you base the future of WvW on what the devs have released in the last 3 years, well you can see it wont be much, it’ll be the minimum anet feels they need to do for WvW, whilst they continue to make new Living Story and start work on another expansion.

So far all we have is one new WvW borderlands maps, and undisclosed changes to the mechanics to the current map where more will be focused on defense. I know I for one do not want to wait another 3 years for a new WvW map.

I do not care what he bases the future of WvW on. He is welcome to his opinion. I care what he claims to suggest my action represent. Similarly to the way your first sentence implies you are making implications toward my opinion. As well, mininul, in this case, is subjective. And you are simply trying to force your idea of that, down my throat.

I do not consider this stuff as mnimul as you do

-They took out the water and added an entire new mechanic for points for spiking.

-They added righteous indignation to prevent flip spamming. Made multiple changes to it.

-Removed orbs from EB.

-Added WvW seasons.

-Added, restructured WvW trait lines.

-Ran tests for PPK

-Ran test for sword removal.

-Completely changed population cap per server map.

-Completely changed AoE cap to 5 due to massive community outcry.

-Completely changed boon buff cap due to massive community outcry

-Added different PIN colors.

-Added Art of war upgrades.

-Added siege razor to aid with under populated times on a server.

-Added new maps through edge of the mist due to massive community outcry

- Added siege names to the build sites to prevent troll siege from being built.

- Added slimmed down ram build sites.

- Added siege disablers.

I couldn’t care less if you guys do not enjoy it, and thus, do not buy it. That is your business. All I stated is that I have enjoyed every single minute I have spent in WvW since release, thus, I will buy the expansion. You do not have to agree with my view, but if you actually think I was making any assumption, you are lacking some comprehension skills.

If I enjoy my experiences to date, therefor I support what they have offered me to enjoy, enough to support a future purchase. I am making no assumptions. I am making an investment in potential fun based on the expansive pay out I made from my previous investment.

lil devils x.6071:

Yea, they probably will not resolve the issue prior to the expansion, although that would be the best time to resolve it permanently, so that when new players coming in get to play good wvw matches instead of getting stuck in a broken tier. Showing players the best wvw experience when they come in is more likely to keep them playing rather than getting them stuck in a broken tier and telling them " if you don;t like it pay to transfer to a non broken one" that just isn’t good customer service. The best time to resolve the issues with wvw is BEFORE they bring in more people to see it.

I’m pretty the resulting massive queues would be even worse experience than low populated maps. And about your solution…

Ideally they would greatly reduce the number of NA servers to about 6 or so, then add more active maps that can be populated at the same time per server, thus increasing the number of players allowed in each match to reduce the ques without causing a crash. Creating a system that allows for more maps during peak hours and reducing the number of active maps during slow hours would make for much more balanced and enjoyable wvw experience since 1) Less ques but allows for more players playing at once. 2) More active maps to choose from. 3) No dead servers reduces the imbalance issues since they actually have 24/7 coverage for 6 servers thus allowing players to always have other people to play with on their server and not leaving them in a ghost town.

How would you propose to handle PPT with dynamically created and deleted maps? If a server is holding most of the map when it’s deleted, wouldn’t they feel cheated out of their hard earned points?

Tom Gore.4035:

lil devils x.6071:

Yea, they probably will not resolve the issue prior to the expansion, although that would be the best time to resolve it permanently, so that when new players coming in get to play good wvw matches instead of getting stuck in a broken tier. Showing players the best wvw experience when they come in is more likely to keep them playing rather than getting them stuck in a broken tier and telling them " if you don;t like it pay to transfer to a non broken one" that just isn’t good customer service. The best time to resolve the issues with wvw is BEFORE they bring in more people to see it.

I’m pretty the resulting massive queues would be even worse experience than low populated maps. And about your solution…

Ideally they would greatly reduce the number of NA servers to about 6 or so, then add more active maps that can be populated at the same time per server, thus increasing the number of players allowed in each match to reduce the ques without causing a crash. Creating a system that allows for more maps during peak hours and reducing the number of active maps during slow hours would make for much more balanced and enjoyable wvw experience since 1) Less ques but allows for more players playing at once. 2) More active maps to choose from. 3) No dead servers reduces the imbalance issues since they actually have 24/7 coverage for 6 servers thus allowing players to always have other people to play with on their server and not leaving them in a ghost town.

How would you propose to handle PPT with dynamically created and deleted maps? If a server is holding most of the map when it’s deleted, wouldn’t they feel cheated out of their hard earned points?

If you have " stable maps" that are constant, and " event maps" that are timed, you know ahead of time you get the bonus ppt for those maps only for set times when the maps appear, then those maps disappear and you get to go to new ones, and it resolves the issues with ques. As long as players are aware that map isn’t going to be there all the time, I don’t see a problem with adding them as needed for a set time period, and it solves the issues of ques and ghost towns allowing more players to play when it is busy and not giving too many maps to populate when they do not have the numbers to cover them.

All this idea does is make population exponentially more powerful. The suggestion will increase the problem and complaining about 10 fold.

coglin.1867:

All this idea does is make population exponentially more powerful. The suggestion will increase the problem and complaining about 10 fold.

How so? For a matchup to get more maps, you would have to have ques for all servers in the matchup, not just one, that also prevents server stacking since if everyone is on one server, they will have ques. Reducing the number of servers solves the problem of no pop servers, as players will be concentrated on to 6 servers, just more active maps at a time to accommodate.

Of course population is important and powerful to all mmos, the whole purpose of playing a massively multiplayer online game is to have massive amounts of people playing together, otherwise it may as well be a corpg, or a single player rpg instead.

As it is now in Tier 1 servers, Havoc and roamers are still effective, even with higher populations on the maps. As long as they do not make the maps " Take x objective to access y part of map or take x to be able to take y" roamers and havoc will still be very much relevant. Currently even on Tier 1 servers, you can go solo a tower or a camp as it is, as long as they make it so you can attack from any direction in many ways it will remain so, as no one wants to guard a tower forever. Of course that is why I am concerned about their description of their new maps thus far, as they seem to be forcing out roamers and havoc groups with choke points to access map. I feel doing so is detrimental to wvw rather than improving it. If they just give players personal loot or a chest for defending more people will do it, as it currently is boring and personally unrewarding to do so is why they do not. It ALREADY matters to ppt to defend, so adding to that doesn’t get more actual players to participate, it just makes the few who do have to do that as well. The only way you get more players to want to defend is through personal loot… They want the shinys too. Who wants to sit there in a tower forever while everyone else gets good fights, bags and chests? OH yea and talk about the personal expense of throwing defensive siege as well, they are out the money for the siege and if they stay there guarding it, they cannot even make some of what they spent back since they do not get loot for doing so. That is the problem with the current set up. Personal loot is the only thing that will change that.