Guild Wars 2

It just feels like ZergVsZergVsZerg rather then anything tactical.

Join an organized guild and stop pugging solution number one two get on a. Voip three roam if you’d like a lot do

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

zerging is cool though. maximum loot, WXP, and kills

There shouldn’t be new incentives not to zerg. A lot of people play that way simply because it is fun for them.

Instead a better solution is new maps that cater more to smaller teams. This way zergs can do what they want, and roamers/small team fans can have what they want

Because you don’t need any tactics in WvW. Only combat tactics when zergs fight against each other.

For strategy and tactics we would need a way more complex system. How this might look, though, I have no idea Maybe something like chaining points together. Like, before you can take a keep the attacking faction has to claim all towers first. And in order to claim a castle you need both keeps. Or something like this. You get the idea.

Problem is, though, the huge population differences between the servers. Those servers with more player count and better coverage could easily beat servers with a lower population in this scenario.

I might add that M.A.G had some nice tactic gameplay in their 128vs128 mode. And Planetside 2 is also working kitten improving their “meta” game.

Gab Superstar.4059:

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

Unfortunately, I think I may have just read a painful truth. RIP WvW.

Gab Superstar.4059:

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

Eh what? That statement makes 0 sense. Giving you alternatives to zerging does not mean casuals would stop WvW… they can and still will do it as before. But they would also be able to do MORE than just zerg, and options are never a bad thing. In fact, if they introduced the new defense reward system I just proposed, it would get more players into WvW than ever before, and they wouldn’t just zerg.

Some people prefer zerging, some people prefer leading large groups, mass numbers against numbers; but mostly zergs provide safety. Safety in numbers. If you don’t play every day, only log on to unwind after work, etc., what is there for you to do BUT zerg? Do you expect the person that only logs on once/twice a week to run 5-man or solo? It’s a refuge of relative safety where you can play and still have fun and not worry if you forget to heal before that bleed tics, or go to deep behind enemy lines, or whatever. If that’s what they want to do, LET THEM!

Well, I kind of want rewarded for doing other stuff besides grouping with 100 people and lemming rushing half akittento events.

Daecollo.9578:

It just feels like ZergVsZergVsZerg rather then anything tactical.

If you want tactical, then start your own guild and train them how to be “tactical”, otherwise just put up with all the zerglings….they aren’t going away anytime soon no matter what Anet does, so at least keep the mindless zerg players huddled up doing something remotely productive I suppose.

as long as there is no AOE cap and no xp/loot penalty for farming outmanned the ‘ZERG’ is here to stay.

there is no tactic vs zerg except bigger zerg, tactics are good when the odds are close, not when youre overwhelmed by zerg.

do you know why 300 spartans could hold the persian zerg for couple of weeks before dying? because there WAS NO AOE CAP!

do you know why gengis khan took half of asia? because they had AOE cap (or no aoe at all.. auto attack only…)

Zerg is just another name for casual WvWvW. Typically you will not see organized W3 Guilds seeking out and running exclusively with the Zerg.

The best way to eliminate the Zerg (IMHO) is to discourage the casual player from joining in W3. This is something ANET will never do, nor something I would want pr propose. Sometimes I just like to jump on the Karma train for an hour or so for some mindless fun.

My opinion is, ANET does not consider W3 as a “serious contest”. Real competition takes place in SPvP. They want HUGE epic battles in WvWvW.

zerospin.8604:

Gab Superstar.4059:

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

Eh what? That statement makes 0 sense. Giving you alternatives to zerging does not mean casuals would stop WvW… they can and still will do it as before. But they would also be able to do MORE than just zerg, and options are never a bad thing. In fact, if they introduced the new defense reward system I just proposed, it would get more players into WvW than ever before, and they wouldn’t just zerg.

Why change something that works? Do you think the sad minority that roams these forums have an impact on WvW development?

Casuals don’t want to do more than just zerg. In fact, I would go as far as saying if a casual WvW player could do away with all enemy resistance they would. That’s the whole point of cowering in a 70 man zerg.

Nothing can touch you. You do away with the PvP aspect completely, and you can focus solely on rewards. The point of bringing a 40-man zerg when your enemy has a 20-man zerg is not to beat them in the open field. It’s to make them stop bothering you completely.

Sadly, all I’ve seen in WvW lately is zerg vs .zerg. There is a definite lack of incentive to try any other tactic. Right now WvW will favor whoever manages to bring in more people, which really cheapens any kind of strategy. I hope the next WvW patch (hopefully this month) address this issue.

There ARE incentives not to zerg, but they involve doing things that are either somewhat risky or give benefits to your team that aren’t well documented.

Right now all people really see are the point-per-tick tallies on the scoreboard and think that holding keeps is all that matters. (Ever wonder why the scores aren’t always multiples of 5 if points-per-tick is all that matters?) Therefore just following the zerg around and flipping keeps seems to be the only way to get anything done, by their estimation.

As long as the Zerg is the most effective way to let untrained people be very successful there will be Zergs.

Beat the Zerg and it will disappear

Complaining that it beats you makes it stronger

Gab Superstar.4059:

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

I have to disagree.

In the other MMO’s I’ve played involving massive world PvP this was never an issue. DAOC, Warhammer…. always had a public battlegroup or warband for casual players to join.

In my experience…..

There was ALWAYS a public or open grouping system available for casual players to join… even when private grouping systems were available.

Servers or teams know that coordination and organization are key to being successful, and having a place for casual PvP players to join is important. Implementing an option for “private” squads in GW2 will still allow casual players to join WvW easily as public commanders will always be present.

The LACK of flexible grouping systems in GW2 is one of it’s greatest drawbacks. It’s a one trick pony atm.

Ahmrill.7512:

Gab Superstar.4059:

No. If they did that then casuals would no longer be attracted to WvW and it would die / Arena Net loses revenue.

I have to disagree.

In the other MMO’s I’ve played involving massive world PvP this was never an issue. DAOC, Warhammer…. always had a public battlegroup or warband for casual players to join.

In my experience…..

There was ALWAYS a public or open grouping system available for casual players to join… even when private grouping systems were available.

Servers or teams know that coordination and organization are key to being successful, and having a place for casual PvP players to join is important. Implementing an option for “private” squads in GW2 will still allow casual players to join WvW easily as public commanders will always be present.

The LACK of flexible grouping systems in GW2 is one of it’s greatest drawbacks. It’s a one trick pony atm.

I think your mistake is assuming that casual people 10 years ago are the same as casual people today.

:)

I don’t quite understand how UI issues actually keep people from forming whatever size groups they need in WvW. Never seems to have been a problem from where I’m sitting.

Bovinity.8610:

I don’t quite understand how UI issues actually keep people from forming whatever size groups they need in WvW. Never seems to have been a problem from where I’m sitting.

I guess that depends what gives you enjoyment and what is “fun” to you or your guild members / friends. Most of our guild and friends do not enjoy “zerging” we enjoy more focused and smaller combat in WvW. We also often have more than 5 people and multiple groups, this leaves us with two options:

A) Pin up and create a squad. The only problem is our friends are looking for smaller fights and everyone flocks to the pin and expects you to lead. This is the opposite of what we enjoy doing. We enjoy a havoc force of multiple groups that uses speed and ambushing tactics…. hard to do effectively when a extra 40 random people join you.

B) Form multiple seperate groups and run together. Mark a “driver” with a bullseye to follow and require everyone to use a 3rd party voice program to coordinate. This is what we end up doing and it’s not nearly as effective as a visual commander pin and squad system with dedicated chat channel.

Option B is the only realistic way to group if you enjoy running multiple group in GW2. For a modern day MMO it’s horribly ineffective and clunky. There is no reason they can’t make some simple changes and allow players to use the grouping system that works best.

Allowing players to hide the commander pin AND still retain all the functions of a squad would be the easiest. Players can now create public or Private squads to be used for whatever way works best and gives them enjoyment.