Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Aneu.1748

Aneu.1748

The 5 new points that will be introduced on each map in an upcoming update will create an even bigger disparity between servers. It is impossible for servers to be balanced and this is something Anet understands and has come to terms with but what they fail to understand (or understand but simply disregard) is their mechanical favouring of the zerg and of the bunker.

The new buff will mean if you hold 3 points out of 5 you will gain +50 stats per borderland which can turn into +150 over all 3. This quite simply is not the way the game should be taken, this once again will favour zergs and stacked servers thus creating even more inequality between servers and increasing the frustration of many servers over and over.

With the work already having been done and the maps already having been edited I highly doubt that the idea of introducing a truer concept, that will stand up to what WvW is about, will be introduced but we can try. I am also understand that generally speaking the legalities behind a development studio using an idea from a player is quite crazy which is why I include the following: I hereby release all legal ownership and affiliation with the following idea, I expect no financial remuneration in any form nor compensation be it financial or otherwise.

So onto the idea. Rather than implementing a buff that will create more instability and zerging why not introduce a multitude of buffs that will not only serve the purpose of spreading people out but also introduce a form of strategy not seen within the game.

5 Points on the map, spread around where the lake currently is. While these points are easily accessed they should not be easily taken.

Each point should have a different buff given to it and the strength of this buff determines its capture time.

Point 1. 20s stealth to everyone from the aligned server on the current map (Active – Requires activation) – Capture time 2min – Recharge time 5min

Point 2. 1 PPT per stomp (Passive) – Capture time 2min

Point 3. 1 PPT per stomp (passive) – Capture time 2min

Point 4. 60s siege damage reduction to players (90%) (Active – Requires activation) – Capture time 5min – Recharge time 10min

Point 5. 100% damage to siege damage on structures (Passive) – Capture time 10min

As you can see some of these buffs are quite hefty in their use, they are for particular situations and will help in a variety of ways but the main point of them is that they REQUIRE defence and they require time in order to capture meaning you will need to have people in the open field consistently defending and capturing these points, you will also need people moving about defending your structures and if you wish to use one of these buffs in order to attack then if you take your entire force to capture one then you leave your structures at risk.

This would be a true zerg-splitter, this is where people need to make choices on whether they wish to defend or attack, bunker inside a keep will mean enemies may gain a 100% damage boost to their siege meaning your structures can be taken that much quicker.

The capture is initiated as soon as someone from a server stands on the point. The capture will stop if all people from said server either get off the point or get fully downed. Guilds can “own” points that require activation meaning that only that guild can activate it (which will help stop the trolls). To capture a point from another server you need to kill everyone on said point and the capture will start for your server – As soon as you start to capture a point off another server the passive buff is nullified from the previous owning server. If they wish to take the point back they only need to stand on the point for the amount of time you have attempted to capture.

Example, Server A/B/C
Server A attacks point 5 which requires 10min in order to capture. They sit on the point for 5min and are killed by server B. Server B sits on the point for 5min which means the bar shows a 50/50 split between server A and server B (Both servers only need to hold the point for another 5min before the point is captured). Server C wipes server B off the point and sits on it for 10min capturing the point. Server A attacks the point wiping server C off it and starts to capture it. They sit on the point for 3min and server C comes back and wipes server A off the point, server C sits on the point for 3min and recaptures the point.

This stops servers feeling like they have a window of opportunity (10min in this case). The point must be 100% captured in order to get the buff.

To me this feels like a far more valuable gameplay mechanic that should be added to the game as opposed to the zerg-inducing nonsense that will be added soon.

Please note that the buffs themselves and the timers are all just put there to give an overview of how it could work, not how it should.

Aneu

Aneu | [VoTF]
http://www.votf.net

(edited by Aneu.1748)

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Aneu.1748

Aneu.1748

Getting PM’s instead of replies. The reason for the buff to stop as soon as another person steps on (without any of the owning server being on the point) instead of the “10 min” is because smaller servers will still be able to participate in nullifying the buff plus it will give roamers and 5 man gangs more to do that is worth while to their server.

Aneu | [VoTF]
http://www.votf.net

(edited by Aneu.1748)

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: MiLkZz.4789

MiLkZz.4789

Sounds very interesting, it adds these extra ‘layers’ to WvW. Makes the game more complex and strategical instead of the mindless zerging.

Think nobody can complain if this switches in with the bloodlust buff, meaning EVRYONE you hear that Anet EVERYONE will be happy.

You have my vote.

Warrior of [VcY], guild from Seafarer’s Rest
First troll to receive 10/10
Best golem driver EU

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Xenn.3809

Xenn.3809

Miles better than a stat buff.

Xenn [TDA]
Mesmer | Guardian | Necro | Ele
The Banana Team | www.tda.nu

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Tellerion.8102

Tellerion.8102

I fully support this idea.

~~Ayeres~~

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Lurch.9517

Lurch.9517

better idea than proposed ones except the ‘guild claim’ part that would be a definite no no, I am sure I don’t need to explain why if you think about it again for a moment.

Lurch
Gandara

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: UrMom.4205

UrMom.4205

I hate the idea of the stat boost so i’m for these buffs…the only one i’m not sure about is the 20s of stealth. I know it’s on a 5 min cd but 20s is a looooong time. I’d put it around 12-15s

The flat stat boost is going to be terrible for the already weekly unbalanced matchups. The heavier server will be buffed to kitten all week, which will make it even more difficult for the under popped servers to do anything about it, frustration will hit and then everyone will go to pve or play another game for the week.

Team Raven [TR](Dead)
Wu Táng Financial [Táng] – YB

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: AndrewSX.3794

AndrewSX.3794

Miles better than a stat buff.

Anything at this point would be better than the stat buff.

Seafarer’s Rest EU – PvE/WvW – 8 × 80 chars.
Most used: Guard/Mes/War/Nec/Ele.
Yes, i use 5 chars at time. Because REASONS.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Fastbucks.5073

Fastbucks.5073

You guys realize that as long as smaller scale combat is happening within the new borderlands areas, its not like 1 server will have 3 buffs for any length of time. Any if the zergs all focus on maintaining the buffs, that takes away from people cap the towers / keeps etc.

I think the buffs are a great idea and promote small scale combat for people who don’t like to zerg.

If server A has the buff, server B or C can take a group and take that buff back.

I see it that servers will try to maintain the buff on their home borderlands first and then attempt at the other BLs.

I also see Anet changing it if it gets out of hand also.

Your ideas are great also, and maybe they will take some of those into consideration.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Xenn.3809

Xenn.3809

I think the buffs are a great idea and promote small scale combat for people who don’t like to zerg.

I would say the new area is great to promote small scale – I love the new areas, just don’t see need for stat increase. To me any stat increase in PvP isn’t a good idea – plenty of ways the format isn’t balanced (and fine, isn’t supposed to be) – but adding more? nah.

Xenn [TDA]
Mesmer | Guardian | Necro | Ele
The Banana Team | www.tda.nu

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Larosh.1605

Larosh.1605

You guys realize that as long as smaller scale combat is happening within the new borderlands areas, its not like 1 server will have 3 buffs for any length of time.

If the servers had a balanced population, you’d definitely be right. But as a matter of fact, most of the times there is one server that can field way more players than the others making it very difficult to take away the bloodlust buff.

I guess we’ll have to see it on the field, and by the way the developer already said there won’t be any additional WvW update until December, but the feeling is that on every match-up except maybe T1 NA there will be 1 server keeping the buff for itself for at least half a day, every single day.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

Point 1. 20s stealth to everyone from the aligned server on the current map (Active – Requires activation) – Capture time 2min – Recharge time 5min

Completely pointless. We already have veil for the people who actually want coordinated stealth, random “he stood on a node” stealth is worthless to just about everyone.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

Point 2. 1 PPT per stomp (Passive) – Capture time 2min
Point 3. 1 PPT per stomp (passive) – Capture time 2min

This is far too weak on its own, the majority of large scale encounters have little stomping. The biggest problem is that, to your average pugger, its an irrelevant buff.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

Point 4. 60s siege damage reduction to players (90%) (Active – Requires activation) – Capture time 5min – Recharge time 10min

Undependable at best, the buff itself is borderline worthless in fair fights. What is 90% siege damage reduction going to do for you, in 60 seconds, exactly? Attacking a lord’s room stocked with siege? Easier to just cata/treb everything down. Stuck in the lord’s room facing siege walls? You’re probably screwed and getting 2v1ed anyway.

You’re not going to get through a door/wall in 60 seconds unless it undefended paper and you have an army of golems, at which point siege was irrelevant anyway.

The zerg won’t even care about it. (Not to mention that this completely empowers more man power servers to completely crush a smaller server stuck on the defensive as they won’t have the man power to defend and cap a node over five minutes. The larger server will cap this and walk over the lesser, completely nullifying the whole point of siege for defenders.)

Point 5. 100% damage to siege damage on structures (Passive) – Capture time 10min

More golem wars! Yay! The moment this thing caps, and it will cap by the stronger server, the game is pretty much over. Nightcapping or “PvD” will simply become PvAir as the structures simply open their doors and let the attackers in free of charge.

No one wants to sit around for 5/10 minutes capping a node.

B-but muh fair fights!

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

(edited by Vena.8436)

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Aneu.1748

Aneu.1748

No one wants to sit around for 5/10 minutes capping a node.

B-but muh fair fights!

But people want to sit around for hours using siege, so why not?

Aneu | [VoTF]
http://www.votf.net

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Johje Holan.4607

Johje Holan.4607

The zerg won’t even care about it.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

I think that’s part of the point.

(Not to mention that this completely empowers more man power servers to completely crush a smaller server stuck on the defensive as they won’t have the man power to defend and cap a node over five minutes. The larger server will cap this and walk over the lesser, completely nullifying the whole point of siege for defenders.)

While I agree with your comment, anything that grants stat buffs across the board is going to completely empower the stronger server.

Unless its an irrelevant buff (like magic find) or only granted to the weaker server(s), it is going to do nothing but make the strong stronger.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Dual.8953

Dual.8953

The zerg won’t even care about it.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

The zerg won’t even care about it.

I think that’s part of the point.

(Not to mention that this completely empowers more man power servers to completely crush a smaller server stuck on the defensive as they won’t have the man power to defend and cap a node over five minutes. The larger server will cap this and walk over the lesser, completely nullifying the whole point of siege for defenders.)

While I agree with your comment, anything that grants stat buffs across the board is going to completely empower the stronger server.

Unless its an irrelevant buff (like magic find) or only granted to the weaker server(s), it is going to do nothing but make the strong stronger.

That last statement isn’t necissarily true. If a large server gets control of the buffs, it won’t be because the formed a massive zerg and facerolled all the points. It’ll be because they COORDINATED themselves and set up at least 9 separate forces to defend the buff in the open field, while what’s left of thier main force decides what to do with the buff. This begs the question, does that server have enough players to defend their buff defense forces from a focused attack? Are they going to really ask 9 groups of to just sit there on a point so no one can snag thier buff?

Registered Altaholic
Part-time Kittenposter

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: bradderzh.2378

bradderzh.2378

Can see it now, Zerg capping hills they kill all the guards and the enemy is running to save it. Cap gets to 99% and some troll activates mapwide stealth for 20 seconds lol

In reference to ascended items:
Nar: I love that it will take me time and money to
reach the same level I’m at right now… …said no one, ever.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

But people want to sit around for hours using siege, so why not?

People sit around for hours scouting and they don’t really enjoy it. I don’t think anyone actually just sits on a piece of siege for hours on end giggling maniacally.

I think that’s part of the point.

I think the point is to force the zerg to split and manage the central buffs; stats are, simply, very shinny for your average random and hold decent value for your coordinated strike teams to fight over. Long buffs as suggested here (either in capping or effect) break up the flow, along with being largely disinteresting to your average random.

Here’s my random suggestion:
I say, make the outmanned buff scale Siegerazor and his path. The higher the disparity the stronger his buff and the further he goes to the point where he will begin attacking the keep if the populations are truly desolate by comparison. (When the populations are 100:1, he turns into an Ancient Karka.)

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

(edited by Vena.8436)

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Dream In A Dream.7213

Dream In A Dream.7213

bump

Devon and co, this is a good direction to take with these buffs. Have them situational and affect other engagements. So 2 teams communicating at the same time can benefit each other.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: lollasaurus.1457

lollasaurus.1457

Much better and more fair than a raw stat bonus.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: AndrewSX.3794

AndrewSX.3794

I think the point is to force the zerg to split and manage the central buffs;

Issue is, with maps not getting enlarged and all 5 points being clumped so close each other in the “lake area”, i don’t think zergs will split up at all.

And, if stat based buffs are surely shiny, they’re also dangerous, overpowering and toxic for wvw in every aspect – being it roaming, gvg or whatever fight with a player.

They got rid of orbs for a reason.
And no, it wasn’t just “too easy to hack”.

Seafarer’s Rest EU – PvE/WvW – 8 × 80 chars.
Most used: Guard/Mes/War/Nec/Ele.
Yes, i use 5 chars at time. Because REASONS.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

Issue is, with maps not getting enlarged and all 5 points being clumped so close each other in the “lake area”, i don’t think zergs will split up at all.

I question the voracity of such a claim, particularly because someone has to be sitting around capping and defending the nodes, but this is a “wait and see” sort of thing.

And, if stat based buffs are surely shiny, they’re also dangerous, overpowering and toxic for wvw in every aspect – being it roaming, gvg or whatever fight with a player.

The only thing its more toxic to than any regular day in WvW is structured combat (GvG). Roaming or whatever fights with a player have never been fair in WvW because there’s absolutely no normalization of stats or player numbers (or even levels). You could engage a 1v1 and end up in a 1v20. You could engage a 1v1 and end up getting killed by a boar.

When my crew roams around with a group of five or so, we aren’t exactly looking for nor expecting fair fights. A buff of 150 stats in the worst case scenario, isn’t going to break our backs anymore than another random player showing up to fight during an already started engagement.

They got rid of orbs for a reason.
And no, it wasn’t just “too easy to hack”.

Ok we already had this posted in another thread, it was a lot of things but hacking was the prime culprit.

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Yamiga.7863

Yamiga.7863

I think the point is to force the zerg to split and manage the central buffs;

Issue is, with maps not getting enlarged and all 5 points being clumped so close each other in the “lake area”, i don’t think zergs will split up at all.

Blobbing should be vunerable to split groups who can ninja cap structures while the zerg is away, but currently 2 players sitting on ACs can easily defend agaisnt such small groups. The siege resistance/siege effectiveness buffs would allow such ninja caps. If the zerg choses to ignore the buffs, it will be punished by those small buffed groups, effectively promoting map-wide (and server-wide during offpeaks) strategy/tactics AND rewarding player/guild skill.

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Aneu.1748

Aneu.1748

I think the point is to force the zerg to split and manage the central buffs;

Issue is, with maps not getting enlarged and all 5 points being clumped so close each other in the “lake area”, i don’t think zergs will split up at all.

And, if stat based buffs are surely shiny, they’re also dangerous, overpowering and toxic for wvw in every aspect – being it roaming, gvg or whatever fight with a player.

They got rid of orbs for a reason.
And no, it wasn’t just “too easy to hack”.

Even though the buffs are clumped together you need to invest time in them to attain them. Leaving a small group of 5 people there to capture the buff may mean they get wiped out so people need to balance the chances of taking the buff against the requirement of defence of a keep or tower. If they want to do both at the same time then they will need to split.

Servers that run around in mostly guild groups will have an easier time with this as they already run around in groups of 30 but those servers that keep everyone on a single map around a single commander will need to adapt in order to take advantage, or they will simply get hit from too many sides to cope.

Aneu | [VoTF]
http://www.votf.net

Bloodlust in the borderlands: A truer concept

in WvW

Posted by: Aneu.1748

Aneu.1748

They got rid of orbs for a reason.
And no, it wasn’t just “too easy to hack”.

Ok we already had this posted in another thread, it was a lot of things but hacking was the prime culprit.

No, it wasn’t the prime culprit. Hacking was prolific in the top tier but in lower tiers it just didn’t happen (as much if at all). The reason the Orb was removed because it made the strongest servers even stronger and assisted with bunkering inside a keep, that is the reason it was removed, not to say hacking wasn’t a factor but it wasn’t the main one.

Aneu | [VoTF]
http://www.votf.net