Guild Wars 2

That was the last time I invested even a copper in upgrading towers. And yes, I am only QQing. I am pretty patient and not easily angered, but that was enough. I spend like an hour upgrading a tower (not the first time), so that the enemy Zerg runs in in a matter of seconds. Btw, I downed like 10 of them with a sup arrow cart. but due to ressing in a zerg beeing much more effective than any kind of tactical play, they overrun the tower within minutes…

That’s happening in a game, that would only be released, when it is truely finished. So it’s working as intended I guess…

its wvw objects r ment to be taken

walls and siege are not intended to allow 1 defender to hold off a zerg indefinitely. they should be able to hold off a zerg long enough for you to get some defenders in. if you can get 10-15 people inside before a wall or gate goes down, you should be able to hold out for a long time, assuming you had a fair amount of siege pre-built in places where it can’t easily be aoe’d down from outside.

the primary purpose of a lone player guarding a tower isn’t actually to defend or upgrade it — your job is to watch for the enemy and call for reinforcements with a minimum of delay. when the enemy zerg is big enough, you can’t afford to wait 30 seconds for swords to appear on the map (assuming people are paying attention to the map to begin with).

the actual defense is the responsibility of your whole team, and paying for upgrades is too. your teammates should be swinging by as they roll around the map to help pay to start the next upgrade or drop another blueprint before they’re off to the next thing. and they need to be ready to come back at an instant’s notice.

enemy zergs are opportunities for your side to farm bags, and lots of them. the trick is figuring out where they are and getting the word out.

-ken

Remove the coin cost from upgrades. Hundreds of supply is enough of a cost already.

I would say however the prices of the upgrades need to be looked at. I feel like the cost of the upgrade should be about the amount that you would get back defending it against a average zerg. With 10-20 people.

slingblade.1437:

Remove the coin cost from upgrades. Hundreds of supply is enough of a cost already.

Yes.

The supply and time it takes is enough. There shouldn’t be any cost out of the players pockets.

The cost is a gold sink.

However, it does not work as intended, because only a small group of people consistently pay into upgrades. They get to see their investment disappear far more often, and get increasingly frustrated. Because while they spend time and money on upgrades, they are removed from most of the action a.k.a. loot/WXP making the loss even more apparent.

So I tend to agree, remove cost, at least for Towers, as controlling the upgrade process is easy by sniping Dolyaks and capping camps. The gold sink is ineffective.

I agree on removeing the cost.

And regarding the “call for help”. There was no time. They had opened the gate in a matter of a minute or two… granted, there was not much siege prebuilt. By the time the first reinforcements arrived (if they were able to get in), the tower was gone…

However, I have desided that upgrading a tower is not worth it, by the rate, it is being flipped. I could have run with our own Zerg and could have farmed badges and WXP, but I wanted to provide some defensice ability to our fortifications… a mistake I won’t make again. Farming with the Zerg is so much more effective. Leading to situations where some majors don’t know how to make superior siege or how to proper place an arrow card on a tower, while I as a scout do know such things…

Esprit Dumort.3109:

The cost is a gold sink.

However, it does not work as intended, because only a small group of people consistently pay into upgrades. They get to see their investment disappear far more often, and get increasingly frustrated. Because while they spend time and money on upgrades, they are removed from most of the action a.k.a. loot/WXP making the loss even more apparent.

So I tend to agree, remove cost, at least for Towers, as controlling the upgrade process is easy by sniping Dolyaks and capping camps. The gold sink is ineffective.

I personally think lowering the cost of the upgrades would increase the number of people upgrading making it work as a gold sink a lot better. I think that they should be reduced to about half of what they are especially with the frequency that they get flipped in some areas.

Perhaps to offset the lower costs add a maintenance fee. This would also work on making it harder to defend.

The core of the problem is only a small group of people consistently pay for the upgrades. Also this group of people is also frequently the ones that do not join in on the action where the majority of the zerg is. So their income is generally less.

anzenketh.3759:

I personally think lowering the cost of the upgrades would increase the number of people upgrading making it work as a gold sink a lot better.

The core of the problem is only a small group of people consistently pay for the upgrades. Also this group of people is also frequently the ones that do not join in on the action where the majority of the zerg is. So their income is generally less.

To the bolded part: To add to that, those players more often than not feel obligated to pay for the upgrades as no one else would do it. Their own nature betrays them. It’s those core players that provide the backbone to the server that allows the others to roam freely, knowing they will be warned when a tower is threatened. Yet they are rewarded the least, despite providing one of the most valuable functions.

An idea was floated a while back, to let people pay into a sort of tower gold vault which would fund the upgrades. The idea was, rather than being forced to front the cost of a whole upgrade (Keep and Castle upgrades are expensive…to WvW’rs), they could pay for part of it, allowing the cost to be spread around easier. To prevent abuse, allow a Guild who claimed it priority to upgrades (e.g. queue upgrade order). Of course if there is money in the tower when it is lost, you’d lose the money. But tiering the vault size like the max supply cap would reduce how much players would lose if they had funded all the upgrades at tier 0. The max gold allowed would be the sum of unlocked upgrades.

I’ve spent an hour tonight guarding bay in the borderlands, placed sup siege, repaired wall , watched out for the enemy, and when they finally came I called out and defended. Of course they took it really fast. Not the first time, not the last time. Waste of not only the sup siege, but also 1+ hours of my time, and all the loot I could have had if I said ‘screw the fact were in the reach of the 1st place I’ll join the train in EB’ like most others. I mean that is undisputedly THE single best way to do WvW to get max gold, drops, badges, karma , exp AND WXP – to blob. The current system still favors it.

In some other games, killing an enemy that has been tagged by say 20 people would give you only 1/20 of the exp and loot. Here however, you can tag the entire raid, wipe it, and get full exp and loot.. you see the problem?

If you pay say 50s for an upgrade, it should count FOR YOU, not just for the team. Each successful defense of a tower that you invested in, should grant you 20% of your money back. This means, if you upgraded a tower single handedly you would be getting a load of money back, IF your team defends them. This is good investment. If you placed siege, and that siege was used to deal damage to players or walls, you should get extra credit, gold and exp for it when the defense event ends. This would give incentive for poeple to siege up towers to the max, and guard them, because they can expect to get their money back with percentage if it stays up for a long time.

I might do a few cheapy camp upgrades or donate to someone upgrading a keep or SM if we have a decent presence at the time, otherwise it’s a black hole for my hard earned gold.

The zerg is where it’s at. It’s laughable how prepping defense stacks up against prepping offense in this game. At this rate, Anet might was well just open all the structures and just have them there to mix things up when it comes to using the environment in battles.

zerospin.8604:

…This would give incentive for poeple to siege up towers to the max, and guard them, because they can expect to get their money back with percentage if it stays up for a long time.

The problem I see coming out of that is that you’ll have people draining supplies and there would be so many build sites that nothing will get built lol. There are already people wasting sups at the worst possible times for their dailies.

The problem is, the amount of effort needed to upgrade a tower is infinity higher than the amount of effort needed to capture it.

And to make matters worse, upgrading isn’t rewarded (when you consider the upgrade costs, it’s actually penalized), while capturing is rewarded.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

slingblade.1437:

Remove the coin cost from upgrades. Hundreds of supply is enough of a cost already.

Yes.

The supply and time it takes is enough. There shouldn’t be any cost out of the players pockets.

Completely agree.

zerospin.8604:

If you pay say 50s for an upgrade, it should count FOR YOU, not just for the team. Each successful defense of a tower that you invested in, should grant you 20% of your money back. This means, if you upgraded a tower single handedly you would be getting a load of money back, IF your team defends them. This is good investment. If you placed siege, and that siege was used to deal damage to players or walls, you should get extra credit, gold and exp for it when the defense event ends. This would give incentive for poeple to siege up towers to the max, and guard them, because they can expect to get their money back with percentage if it stays up for a long time.

This makes sense. Though I’d go further and say that if you’ve paid into upgrades, as long as the structure is held by your team and you are in the zone, you get a tick of coin back in return for your investment. Upgrading and defending a tower should be a money-maker IMO.

Yeah – it might promote people making stupid upgrade choices just to get in on the pay out, but I’m really not sure of the value in having the choices in the first place so I’d be ok with upgrading being a fixed, optimal path with no choices.

zerospin.8604:

If you pay say 50s for an upgrade, it should count FOR YOU, not just for the team. Each successful defense of a tower that you invested in, should grant you 20% of your money back. This means, if you upgraded a tower single handedly you would be getting a load of money back, IF your team defends them.

Great idea and would definitely help to overcome the reluctance to upgrade.

Agree +1. I believe strongly in defense and in the same breath, I’m often one of the poorest. Upgrading, refreshing siege and keep guard duty are all essential parts of success in wvw and yet the rewards are few to none. I’d like to see more mechanics that encourage such duties, and reward those who will stay behind.

Of all the things in WvW I enjoy least, being penalized for trying to do the right thing tops the list. This is a prime example of that.

It doesn’t seem right that the core support people on a map are often left out of the rewards, only then to enjoy some salt in the wound by watching all of their hard effort and money disappear because their zerg is halfway across the map and people would rather try to retake camps that have RI up for 3min vs. saving a tower (and possibly having to pay repair costs if they wipe).

Honestly, we all know that the game mostly favors zerging and flipping towers endlessly, especially with how the rewards are set up. The people who buy upgrades, escort yaks/etc. only do it because they’re stubbornly good-hearted, I suppose. Definitely gives you a taste of “nice guys finish last” syndrome…

Finally, it makes you feel downright stupid sometimes to forgo the fun and rewards of mindlessly taking towers vs. staying behind to sink gold, time, and supply into towers that will flip anyway after the enemy zerg so much as looks at them funny.

I realize this is maybe not such an issue on some of the “better” WvW servers, but it certainly sucks the life out of WvW’ing when you’re on a server that struggles with maintaining coverage and where a majority of the people, unsurprisingly, have decided upgrading and placing siege in your holdings just isn’t worth it.

TyPin.9860:

And regarding the “call for help”. There was no time. They had opened the gate in a matter of a minute or two… granted, there was not much siege prebuilt. By the time the first reinforcements arrived (if they were able to get in), the tower was gone…

I don’t know what you were expecting but don’t ever rely on a building’s own siege or NPCs. The latter are almost entirely useless and the former is only good if it’s backed up by player-created siege, due to being placed in crappy vulnerable locations that are frequently a death sentence to a lone operator. A mesmer will just use a LOS-ignoring AOE pull and rip you right off the wall to be swarmed and die.

If I ever upgrade something that doesn’t have sufficient siege on it already, I always make sure there’s enough incoming supply, and enough easy access to more for me to run manually and make siege at the same time as it upgrades itself.

TyPin.9860:

However, I have desided that upgrading a tower is not worth it, by the rate, it is being flipped. I could have run with our own Zerg and could have farmed badges and WXP, but I wanted to provide some defensice ability to our fortifications… a mistake I won’t make again. Farming with the Zerg is so much more effective. Leading to situations where some majors don’t know how to make superior siege or how to proper place an arrow card on a tower, while I as a scout do know such things…

This is entirely situational, and deciding it is or isn’t inherently worthwhile makes no sense. You can’t just upgrade something and think ‘yup, it’ll be fine’, you need to actually consider the circumstances and what you think they’ll turn into. Is your supply constantly being cut? Are there enough allies around to respond even if they want to, and have any actually bothered to defend other places? Is it likely to be the first place attacked by enemies coming that way, and if so, will it even have time to upgrade? Can it be attacked from a place it can’t reasonably protect itself from, like SMC or an enemy keep? And of course – can you afford to lose it?

Maybe someday they’ll reduce or remove the upgrade costs… but you’ll still be perfectly capable of wasting your time, so either way you’re better off thinking it through. There’s no possible way they could buff the upgrades to the point one person can reliably hold off a large force determined to take it, all of WvW would pretty much grind to a halt as suddenly defending became the new CoF path 1. You have to count on delaying them long enough for reinforcements, which basically means preparing your siege to wipe out theirs as they build it. When you’re lucky they’ll give up after that, but if not, eventually you’re going to need more people either inside or out.

Safir.9203:

I realize this is maybe not such an issue on some of the “better” WvW servers, but it certainly sucks the life out of WvW’ing when you’re on a server that struggles with maintaining coverage and where a majority of the people, unsurprisingly, have decided upgrading and placing siege in your holdings just isn’t worth it.

Believe me its an issue on all servers.

I only started to play WvW serious a few weeks ago(when they introduced rank chests). And so far I never paid for upgrading towers… I’m not much of gold farmer and I want to save the money for myself. I still get rewards(even more and better) if the towers are lost and then retaken(more events).

And last 2 matchups we either were a lot stronger or a lot weaker… meaning:
a lot stronger = no upgrade needed cause we can hold stuff even with upgrades
a lot weaker = no use upgrading… cause with 20 against 100 we can’t do much even if we upgrade

And it it is a balanced matchup there is still the issue with players sleeping(we are not a 24/7 server) while other servers might have players online capturing stuff.

Not a real incentive… maybe they should increase the points per tick for upgraded stuff… like: everything T1 researched gives 1.2 times the amount of points for that objective. Everything T2 researched 1.5 times the amount. Everything T3(now really EVERYTHING) upgraded 2.0 times the amount of points.

Only thing I like to upgrade is the supply upgrade for camps. 10 silver is cheap – even I can afford it(even though the camps are lost even more frequently) and it brings tons of supplies to the towers where others paid much more money to buy the upgrade and need that supplies there(also increases max storage of camp to 125 nice for more players to resupply there).

@LameFox:
It is nice of you sharing your insights. But I know all of them. Just before the BT Zerg attacked the tower, we had a Zerg of arround 30-40 ppl on the map. I upgraded the tower behind them sieging and attacking SM. I had constant supply income and allways made upgrades in an order, to secure there being enough supply in the tower. However, our Zerg desided to leave the map, after the upgrades were done. The tower had full supply at the time BT cut the supply income and attacked the gate. There was one superior arrow cart prebuilt (I agree that there was not much defensive siege). But with me as a lone defender, more siege wouldn’t have helped anyway.

You ask what I expect? Well I learned my lesson. In the current meta there is no real point in upgrading a tower, while the rest of my server farms badges and WXP. I only wish, defending a tower had some worth wile reward. I would still gladly upgrade the towers, if some players would stay to defend. But the moment I saw the first reinforcements, the tower gate was at 5% or so.

The only upside upgrading the tower, was earlier that day. When the wall upgrade finsihed the very moment, one of the wall was broken due to treb from SM. But such things are occuring so rarely.

I think the core problem is that a lot of players think that it is not worth it to upgrade. After all it is just going to be flipped by the next zerg that comes along.

There are two reasons for this. One reason is that there is this stigma that EB is where all the action is at and no-one wants to come to the boring borderlands to help defend. A cry goes out and no-one comes so the towers and keeps get flipped. Feeding more into the what is the point attitude. Another reason is some servers are severely outnumbered so even if there were enough defenders it would be significantly harder to hold them off.

So far we have discussed the following would be helpful to the small defending community.

1.) Reduce/eliminate the cost of upgrades or don’t require just one person to pay for it. Create a vault to where someone can put a bit here and a bit there into the upgrade.
2.) Make a more defined path for upgrade. So bad upgrade choices are not made causing the coin invested previously to be lost because there is not enough supply in reserves to siege up and defend. Perhaps require 1 or 2/3 of the supply cost to be there before a upgrade is allowed.
3.) Reward the players that pay for the upgrade for their investment. Maybe a small bit of karma/WxP or coin per tick that it is held for those that purchased the upgrades.

One more idea that I came up with is perhaps there needs to be some sort of bullhorn to call all players on your server both in PvE and PvP for re-enforcements so that they can arrive. This would help the morale of those defenders to put out a bullhorn then all the sudden see a larger group come to the call.

The problem here is that people are way too focused on “rewards” (Loot, WXP, etc) instead of winning.

Bovinity.8610:

The problem here is that people are way too focused on “rewards” (Loot, WXP, etc) instead of winning.

I agree that winning should be it’s own reward but it is not. This is because it is a MMO and the reason why people play WvW varies from getting the legendary to completing the daily to having fun. If those all were taken away we would have a lot less people playing WvW. Which is why we are suggesting rewarding for defending more.

Bovinity.8610:

The problem here is that people are way too focused on “rewards” (Loot, WXP, etc) instead of winning.

That’s because WvW ist not about winning. If you want to play something for winning you play tPvP.

Luthan.5236:

Bovinity.8610:

The problem here is that people are way too focused on “rewards” (Loot, WXP, etc) instead of winning.

That’s because WvW ist not about winning. If you want to play something for winning you play tPvP.

For some it is about winning, for other’s it is not. The problem is it brings numbers of both types on to the same playing field.

i just think they should allow the reinforced gate upgrades first rather than the walls and lower the cost of the 2nd worker. I think this would be a good start.

THE Dentist.5960:

i just think they should allow the reinforced gate upgrades first rather than the walls and lower the cost of the 2nd worker. I think this would be a good start.

Yes, it’s completely backwards that we’re forced to do a wall upgrade before a gate upgrade.

current system is designed so that towers and keeps usually belongs to the weakest servers are flipped as frequent as possible for us to maximize them on the WXP. you flip, i flip back, rinse and repeat, got that ?

enjoy it while it last…..

azizul.8469:

current system is designed so that towers and keeps usually belongs to the weakest servers are flipped as frequent as possible for us to maximize them on the WXP. you flip, i flip back, rinse and repeat, got that ?

enjoy it while it last…..

It should not be that way though. The re-enforcements should help a smaller group stand up to a larger group.

Esprit Dumort.3109:

The cost is a gold sink.

However, it does not work as intended, because only a small group of people consistently pay into upgrades. They get to see their investment disappear far more often, and get increasingly frustrated. Because while they spend time and money on upgrades, they are removed from most of the action a.k.a. loot/WXP making the loss even more apparent.

So I tend to agree, remove cost, at least for Towers, as controlling the upgrade process is easy by sniping Dolyaks and capping camps. The gold sink is ineffective.

So agreed with this. I really hate spending two hours upgrading camps for a tower, upgrading tower, building siege only to have a zerg take it because my server are off somewhere else, cannot get back in time, don’t care etc. They are getting all the loot, I am wasting all my loot. Frustrating, but that is how it is.

I sometimes feel the same way as OP: never upgrading again. Nothing worse than paying 2 kittening gold to upgrade walls in SM and it gets taken in a few hours and being away from the action I make zero money back. So yes, my own fault I suppose.

Having upgrades cost in-game currency may be a gold sink, but it also makes defense even less rewarding for those who do it. Why would I want to spent 1.5 gold to upgrade a keep when it’s unlikely I’ll even make that money back over several hours of defending it?

I understand that this game needs gold sinks, but they need to find a way to not punish players for doing what they should be doing. Armor repair also punishes dedicated players who stay and fight to the death, but at least armor repair fees are a drop in the ocean compared to upgrade fees for towers/keeps.

Hello there, I just want to add my thoughts:

- First of all I think that since siege blueprints can be bought in 2 different ways:
by gold or by badge

Also for upgrades there should be a choice between gold and badges.
This change in my opinion would let more people to start an upgrade than now.

- Second thing, and here I will steal a nice idea I have read from someone else in this forum, I think it could be very interesting to find a way to let more people to pay for the upgrades since every upgrade in wvw will benefit everyoine so it’s ok if everyone pays for it.

A simple way for achieving this would be to add a small tax for everyone that joins WvW. Keep reading please before starting to flame me

I think this small tax should be payed once a day, only for people that enters in a WvW map.
It should be something like 20\30 silver per day, that is not something realy hard to afford for everyone.
The gold from this tax will be accumulate in a “Server Bank”.

Then every time someone will start an upgrade, he will automatically use the gold on the Server Bank, that comes from everyone playing WvW and so everyone will be also encouraged in defending upgraded keeps for not wasting its own gold.

Now there are 2 cases that may occur:

1-The gold in the Server Bank will run out soon:
in this case everyone that wants to upgrade a keep once there is no gold left in the bank, will automatically use his own gold (exactly how it is now), with the exception that the day after the bank will be filled again with new gold from people entering WvW the next day.

2-The second case will occure when one server doesn’t use all the gold in the Server Bank till the end of the week.
In this case the gold left will be redistributed to all the people that joined WvW during the Whole week and for that reason payed the tax. Of course it won’t be the full amount of gold they payed but at least it will be some incentive.

If this system would ever be utilized by A-Net, well then it could also be possible to give back the gold to the three servers according to their position at the end of the week.

I mean the first server could be rewarded with the double of the gold left in the bank at the end of the week, while the second and third server could only be rewarded with the exact amount of gold left, obviously in any case the amount will be divided by the number of people that joined WvW during the whole week.

I left on purpose the second and third server having back the same amount of gold left in their respective banks for one reason. I think that only in this way, without making any difference for second and third spot, it will allow both servers to fight for the first spot and not viceversa.

“Tax” should be taken from the money you make with events.
Edit: And since the PvE players also profit from the “Power of the Mists” they also should pay the tax… should be really small amount… since a lot of events will be generated by a lot of players(especially if there is a “PvE server” with high populiation – but not many people playing WvE… still a lot doing PvE events).

Well of course I have shared some ideas. We all agree that the current state of WvW upgrade is wrong, I hope A-Net will take a lot from different ideas and will make some changes.

If there is a tax something like

1 Silver tax for each event completed for each person. So if 50 people take a tower, thats 50 silver to put towards upgrade. It wont pay for everything, but a good portion of it. The same sentiment can be used for camps. Keeps should be 2 silver for each person to complete.

Good Lord, we pay enough taxes in the real world, already. I don’t want an AIRS (Anet Internal Revenue Service) in my gaming life, too :p . Anet has enough control over the rewards, costs, the general economy and so many other aspects of the game they should be able to fix what’s broken without charging taxes. First it’s a WvW tax, then a Dungeon tax, then a sales tax (I know, there’s already a TP fee on the seller, but why not one on the buyer, too, eh?), then a Festival tax. Be very careful what you ask for.

I see paranoid tax hating crazies exist on the internet as well.

I don’t think that taxes are the way to do it. Especially one from events. Might as well just remove the cost then. Even thought it would allow PvE only players to work a bit towards the rewards they are getting from points in WvW. It still needs to be a gold sink. But either lower the cost or allow players to contribute what they have and are willing to contribute.

well the way I put it down, it will reward servers at the end of the week by giving back to people all the gold saved plus an incentive for winning the match up… and how is it possible to not spend al the gold from the “Server Bank”? well simply defending upgraded stuffs so it’s not necessary to upgrade again once lost.
it will simply incentive people in defending stuffs and winning and since it’s everyone’s gold that is going to be spent I hope everyone would be personally involved.

The problem now is that so few people spend money on upgrade but they need many for keeping safe their upgraded stuffs.. and people that don’t spend their gold usually tend to not care much.

I also think that removing at all the upgrading cost would be a bad idea, we need some kind of gold sink, only we don’t need that just few people spend their gold for the benefit of many people.
An upgraded keep will benefit all

personally, cost of gold and supply is reasonable; I would not QQ if lowered though! ; )

Bovinity.8610:

I see paranoid tax hating crazies exist on the internet as well.

(I’ll see your hyperbole and raise you, one time) Of course they do. Just as taxes-are-the-answer-to-every-problem-so-long-as-I-personally-pay-little-to-no-taxes-myself loons exist, too.

Anyway, taxes are, IMO likely an over-complicated answer to one problem, whereas there is a possible solution that would address multiple problems. If they want to take money out of the economy via WvW, make zerging a diminishing-returns reward system, as others have proposed. The bigger the zerg, the smaller the average reward. I’m always amazed at how much loot, badges and WXP I get when I take a break from upgrading, sieging, scouting and defending the home BL and instead go into EB, follow the blue icon, and spam 1. The less I think for myself, the less I invest in time and effort doing the hard/boring stuff, the greater my reward in drops. How much of a gold sink can upgrades really be, anyway, considering the relatively few number of servers, and how people are less and less inclined to upgrade?

Honestly, I don’t really understand why somebody would want to upgrade a tower, let alone hold onto it.

Really, in the end, what does holding onto that tower get you per tick? A bit of points? What do the points equate to? Possibly a win/loss in the grand scheme of things? Big deal, I believe most people agree they WvW for the fights and loot. I don’t really think i’ve ever seen anybody mention they join WvW just to have a high PPT score.

What do you get for taking over that tower? A decent amount of silver, karma, and WxP. Continue flipping that baby, and you’ll see that silver, karma, and WxP rack up fast. Yes you get the same for defending, but honestly (at least in my experience), towers get taken over 8/10 times anyway regardless of how well it’s defended.

Keeps, Garrisons, and SM I can understand holding onto because of the Wp’s. Towers on the other hand.. meh, far more lucrative to just let them go and take them back again.

My nicely fortified tower will draw in the enemy and gather them into a nice packaged ball of loot, badges, and WXP. The upgrades let it last until the friendly zerg rofflestomps them all.

I was just thinking about this today. “Why am I wasting all this time and gold?”.

Not going to be upgrading anything again until this is fixed.

Esprit Dumort.3109:

My nicely fortified tower will draw in the enemy and gather them into a nice packaged ball of loot, badges, and WXP. The upgrades let it last until the friendly zerg rofflestomps them all.

Yes… but sometimes it does not work if their zerg of 80 people roflstomps your friendly zerg of 20 people(and you don’t have more than 20 people)… or they just wait until everyone is asleep and you don’t even have 5 people online.

DeadlySynz.3471:

Honestly, I don’t really understand why somebody would want to upgrade a tower, let alone hold onto it.

Really, in the end, what does holding onto that tower get you per tick? A bit of points? What do the points equate to? Possibly a win/loss in the grand scheme of things? Big deal, I believe most people agree they WvW for the fights and loot. I don’t really think i’ve ever seen anybody mention they join WvW just to have a high PPT score.

What do you get for taking over that tower? A decent amount of silver, karma, and WxP. Continue flipping that baby, and you’ll see that silver, karma, and WxP rack up fast. Yes you get the same for defending, but honestly (at least in my experience), towers get taken over 8/10 times anyway regardless of how well it’s defended.

Keeps, Garrisons, and SM I can understand holding onto because of the Wp’s. Towers on the other hand.. meh, far more lucrative to just let them go and take them back again.

You measure success by how much loot and points you get. That’s your prerogative. Some people measure success in a competitive setting, which is what wvw is, by winning v. losing.

If you capture them back again you win. If you lose them you can capture them back more often… so you win more.

And regarding the “end win” with the points ticking: Nobody really cares… cause the match is 1 week and barely anyone plays 24/7 the whole match. So it is not “your” win. Not much incentive to fight for win there. sPvP is different cause you play the whole match(cause it is only <15 mins). You can affect the whole match and then feel good because you won.

Here you feel nothing… cause you might only be able to play a small amount of time… and then not even have time to play at the reset. There is no real “win”. Not a feeling like in sPvP in a tournament match.

The only small wins you feel are after you take a tower or keep(and this feels better if there was a long battle)… but then again if you just lose it and can capture other stuff to get “wins” it doesn’t matter if you lose stuff.

Luthan.5236:

If you capture them back again you win. If you lose them you can capture them back more often… so you win more.

And regarding the “end win” with the points ticking: Nobody really cares… cause the match is 1 week and barely anyone plays 24/7 the whole match. So it is not “your” win. Not much incentive to fight for win there. sPvP is different cause you play the whole match(cause it is only <15 mins). You can affect the whole match and then feel good because you won.

Here you feel nothing… cause you might only be able to play a small amount of time… and then not even have time to play at the reset. There is no real “win”. Not a feeling like in sPvP in a tournament match.

The only small wins you feel are after you take a tower or keep(and this feels better if there was a long battle)… but then again if you just lose it and can capture other stuff to get “wins” it doesn’t matter if you lose stuff.

This is exactly how the game should not be played in my opinion. The game was designed to cap and hold not cap and fold. It is this attitude that is discouraging those who want to play the game like it was designed.

My Question is what is causing players to have this attitude? What in the game is encouraging them to have it?