Guild Wars 2

@Mods: Pls do not move this thread to the “suggestion” section.
This is not meant to be suggestions to changes but more a platform for discussion about how certain possible changes might affect WWW game play in general.
/Thx

The basic idea of WWW is to put 3 servers against each other and by Victory Points decide which server is the strongest/ best organized of the three at the end of the week.

To day VPs is decided every 15min by static objects on the field, camps(5VPs) towers(10VPs) keeps(25VPs) and finally Stone Mist Castle (35VPs).
When these objectives are claimed the victor is also rewarded karma/xp/wxp and money.
Whilst defending said objects also rewards karma/xp/wxp and money each time a defensive event is finished.

These are in a basic way all that matters in WWW, the VPs.
Players might still play WWW for other reasons, fun, karma farming etc etc, but at the end of the week its about the VPs.

So with this in the back of our heads lets discuss what would happen, good or bad if certain changes where put in.

1st.
What if the time for VP tick for static objects where changed to every hour instead of every 15 min?
And in addition to this add a mechanic that gives VPs on player deaths.
IE, when a player kills another player 1 VP is given to the killers server.
You could also add another buff to static objects that rewards higher VPs/kills around that object, +1 for camps, +2 for towers, +3 for keeps and +5 for castles.

This would mean that defending a static object will reward your server during the fight and not just reward the owner after the fight.
This opens up a lot of tactical thinking when it comes to trying to claim a keep.., is it worth the risk of rewarding your enemy 150VPs in player deaths or should you try and spread out your forces to attack many keeps/towers at the same time.

It also opens up for roaming players and small scale group play to actually help your server in terms of VPs for your server.

2nd.
Put in a mechanic that splits the karma/xp/wxp rewards for static objects amongst all participants.
This change I think would also counter the karma trains that goes from object to object just for the karma reward and promote to attack on multiple fronts on the map.

3d.
Buff the rewards for killing a player to the same amount as claiming a camp.
Since player kill rewards today are in fact split amongst all involved all this would do is make solo kills more attractable and in such way encourage smaller roaming groups without destroying the point to zerg, zerging should still happen IMO its part of www and some players really enjoy it and it is wrong to take that away from them.

4th.
The removal of the AoE cap.
This is one of the biggest things that buggs me in WWW.
There are one good thread discussion the reasoning for aoe cap and I recommend using that thread instead, but it wouldnt be bad to have this change in here as well, due to how it would affect the other changes.

5th.
Put in a mechanic that makes it so you have to be out of combat to be able to revive someone from defeated, downed players can still be revived normally.

This would IMO change alot of things in zerg vs zerg fighting.
It basically means that reviving downed players is more important, but also prevents suicide squads to go in and do massive aoe attacks just to die and be revived later and go in again.
So to make zerg vs zerg abit more tactical.

When addressing any of these topics pls write the section number first to make it easier to follow.

+1 to all but 5th. Dont really see the effect. But some ideas are really good and been on my mind to.

I also agree with everything here, especially the 1hr timer change (makes wanting to upgrade your locations on the map much more appealing than it already is,) but with a minor change to #1. Servers should be given points for player kills, but it should be within the ‘attack / defend _’ event confines for it to count, and 1 point should be awarded per 5-10 kills.

All in all I like the ideas presented here!

And in addition to this add a mechanic that gives VPs on player deaths.
IE, when a player kills another player 1 VP is given to the killers server.

Kills should never ever matter in non-competetive open world combat. Why? Because its so kitten easy to abuse, not to mention its completely unfair. Oh look the entire enemy server is outside our spawn location because our server dont have manpower for WvW. Lets give them some extra points for their effort!

Such a change would probably make me stop playing GW2 WvW. It would stop being fun.

I really like the ideas presented, but #3 is just gonna cause griefing, and unsportsman like behavior. I can see the abuse of this mechanic already.

I know zergs are the biggest gripe lately, but they do serve a purpose. If you really think of medieval warfare, it wasn’t conducted in 5 man assaults. It was army on army. With small strike teams pillaging the countryside.

With that said; All the constant favoring toward zergs is getting a little much. There is little to no reward for not being in a zerg. Anet implemented the sentries in the beta to give solo and small teams things to do. They understood back then that this was what folks wanted; More small team objectives. But somewhere along the way, they forgot about this and just kept hindering the small team play to the point of almost not even “fun” anymore.

For the record; I only play small team tactical strike groups. I think its the best part of WvW, but I also get next to no rewards for my efforts. It made me sick to hear Anet congratulating someone getting lvl 30 in Wxp before the first reset after the patch. I’m still only lvl 6, yet I’m in there for 3+hours a night.

Completely disagree with kills giving points- I feel like world vs world should be about taking objectives, not an arena death match, also have you considered how easy it would be to abuse?

Dawdler.8521:

And in addition to this add a mechanic that gives VPs on player deaths.
IE, when a player kills another player 1 VP is given to the killers server.

Kills should never ever matter in non-competetive open world combat. Why? Because its so kitten easy to abuse, not to mention its completely unfair. Oh look the entire enemy server is outside our spawn location because our server dont have manpower for WvW. Lets give them some extra points for their effort!

Such a change would probably make me stop playing GW2 WvW. It would stop being fun.

This is a very good concern, a mechanic should never reward an already stronger part, how ever I do not believe this mechanic does that.
Let’s take your example.

If your server is out manned to the point of hopelessness there is nothing you can do about it with current mechanics.
If your opponent have decided to claim VPs at a borderland they will stay there during the entire time due to VP ticks every 15 min basically making it so you cant enter the map.

With this change the underdog would have a higher chance of fighting back, if the enemy forces are to strong on one map, go to another and get rewarded for kills, since if you are so out manned already you can’t take objectives any way.

And if static VPs only tick 1 every hour they do not need to camp you spawn, in fact it hurts them more to do so.
They have no reason to be at your map constantly to protect the VP ticks, its enough to have a few scout grps to warn if a bigger zerg is gathering, and their zerg will go and try to claim objectives they dont have on other maps, or fight enemy zergs.

So I believe this system actually helps the underdog more then the spawn camper.
It takes away the need for the server already leading to be at your map protecting VP ticks all the time.
It promotes smaller groups to roam in hunt for other smaller scout groups from the bigger server.

But the biggest change would be that your small server, if owning a tower will earn VPs deffending just that tower against the big zerg, today you dont earn anything for doing so, you will always lose static objectives if your server is out manned, but this change makes it so you can still earn VPs for your server by go down fighting!

Digikid.7230:

Completely disagree with kills giving points- I feel like world vs world should be about taking objectives, not an arena death match, also have you considered how easy it would be to abuse?

If you are thinking of abuse in using diff accounts to “farm” VPs that is just a bannable offense and should be easy enough to monitor.
And with normal DR mechanincs I dont think it would be much of a problem.

But I agree, WWW should be about large scale war, ie objectives.., how ever I do not think that current mechanics is the best way to promote that.

These changes will still reward the most fighting around objectives and trying to defend the once you already own.
The only thing this change from the bigger picture, is that its worth to try to defend multiple objectives with smaller forces then to move as one big zerg in PvDoor.

The big zergs job would be to counter the other servers big blobs, and isnt that what many wants, the zergs actually fighting the zergs?

Take a SM battle with all three servers present.
SM in itself is only worth 35VPs every hour with these changes, say the owner has to defend against both servers, they will get alot of VPs from the fighting killing players.
But, so will the other two servers aswell, so VP total will change DURING the fighting, you could see the numbers turn in every encounter.
And it also promotes some nice backstabbing from the two attackers, ´cause why not charge in to first wipe the other attacker, get VPs from them then charge at the SM defenders.

Owning objectives becomes so much more important with these changes, even if it means cutting their VP/hour worth by 75%

Its killing players at the objectives that you own that will be the big thing with these changes, not spawn camping etc etc.

I believe the biggest change we will see if this happened would be just how huge the battles defending your servers towers would be, rather then today, lets just lose it so we can retake it for the karma tick.

It would be cool to read some of the reasons from the players against this, Im interested in what scenarios you picture would happen.

what would be the nightmare scenarios?

The points for killing players will make every other objective VP worthless. You will be able to kill more players in the hour the you would get for holding a tick. Therefore making spawn camping the best strat to use. Siege set up around every spawn exit just to get those player kills…

Player kill points should never enter WvW. That is a sPvP thing.

Windmoor.9834:

The points for killing players will make every other objective VP worthless. You will be able to kill more players in the hour the you would get for holding a tick. Therefore making spawn camping the best strat to use. Siege set up around every spawn exit just to get those player kills…

Player kill points should never enter WvW. That is a sPvP thing.

But then you are discounting the +1/2/3/5 to kills around objects.
If a server where to be spawned camped by 40 players at your spawn they would get less VPs/kill then the defenders, so the longer they camp you the more VPs you will get ahead of them.
So if you are getting spawned camped, bring your zerg, kill the enemy and get 3 times more VPs/kill then they get for killing you.

If a server would want to spawn camp, it would be better to do it from the nearest tower, and do a mega defense there.., but then the other server could just ignore that tower and reclaim the other objectives and camp those.., ie large scale warfare.

I understand concern about spawncamping, I just dont see how it could in any way benefit the camping side.

Objectives will still be the most important things in WWW, but the change would be that defending your objectives gets more important then claiming them due to the increased VPs/kill you would get.

If something your worries of spawn camping as a the best way to get VPs would only lead to the best way to find the enemy zerg and wipe it ^^

Say that ANet do it like a poster said earlier, VPs for player kills would only be during object events, defending/breakout etc, would that make a difference for the worries of spawn camping?

This day and age in any type of competitive game, if you offer rewards to killing other players, regardless of any other type of reward available; People will go for the player kills first.

As it stands right now, the rewards for killing p-layers are so nominal, that it frankly isn’t worth it, yet on every server at anytime of day, you can see squads of people just out looking for other players to kill.

I accept PvP in my WvW, but rewarding them in such a substantial way, just creates an environment of griefing. Its bad enough there are no real rewards for winning outside bragging rights. Now to extend those same bragging rights directly to killing plaers…well Anet might aswell remove every structure on the field and just call it SPvP on roids.

Windmoor.9834:

This day and age in any type of competitive game, if you offer rewards to killing other players, regardless of any other type of reward available; People will go for the player kills first.

As it stands right now, the rewards for killing p-layers are so nominal, that it frankly isn’t worth it, yet on every server at anytime of day, you can see squads of people just out looking for other players to kill.

I accept PvP in my WvW, but rewarding them in such a substantial way, just creates an environment of griefing. Its bad enough there are no real rewards for winning outside bragging rights. Now to extend those same bragging rights directly to killing players…well Anet might as well remove every structure on the field and just call it SPvP on roids.

I dont understand what you want from WWW if not PvP?
Isn’t the point of WWW to have 3 servers PvP each other to decide who is the most organized?
Shouldn’t PvP then be a factor in the WWW Score?
At present time, defending an object VS a larger force is useless in VP terms, better to lose it and try and reclaim it later.
With VPs on kills a defending server could still come out ahead in a battle in terms of VPs and in such will promote more fighting around objects then today.
If you defend a tower with 10 players VS a force of 50, you will always lose the objective, and you should, So why even defend it? ´cause players wants to PvP.
And with a change to VPs those 10 defending players could actually contribute to the server score by doing what they want to do.

And if player kill VPs only where active on event triggers, then spawn camping or ganking wouldn’t be a problem.

The whole premise to your argument is that people will fight around these objectives, but reality is; killing players is easier then trying to cap a keep of defend. Making the player kills the sought after point tick.

As for my personal view of WvW; Its a giant 3 sided game of chess to me. PvP is part of the game, but not the fun factor. Out playing other players tactics is more fun.

I agree with it being a bad idea for playing kills to be rewarded with points, for reasons already mentioned. I think it would be better to put in a lot more small scale objectives in the map, and this can be anything really. Owning sentries should actually serve some purpose as well, because right now they are practically useless.

What about introducing something like sentry towers (very weak gates and walls, an objective that is fairly easy for a small team to capture unless defended), providing sight range on the map, with enemies showing as red dots as they move in range. These could also provide something like 1 point per tick. And this is just one example that could make WvW a bit more dynamic, not sure if it’s any good or broken/overpowered, but I think it shows there’s plenty of stuff that could be introduced for WvW that could give small groups more purpose and things to do.

Windmoor.9834:

The whole premise to your argument is that people will fight around these objectives, but reality is; killing players is easier then trying to cap a keep of defend. Making the player kills the sought after point tick.

As for my personal view of WvW; Its a giant 3 sided game of chess to me. PvP is part of the game, but not the fun factor. Out playing other players tactics is more fun.

But if player kills is only worth VPs around objectives, why do you not think people would fight around objectives more then now?
So around every objective today we have an event, defend the point.
And the change would add a Kill/VP mechanic that favors the defender.
How would you see it if the VP ticks for the objectives where changed to once/hour but also increased to be worth the same as today, ie 4*value/hour instead of value/0.25hour?
Would that change your opinion on player kill/VPs or is it just a fundamentally wrong mechanic?

Im trying to see what can be done to the www mechaninc that would encourage more defending but also to reward all types of www players.
Some wants to command and play chess, some wants to roam, some wants to zerg and some wants to farm karma.
And I believe that a good system should in fact encourage and reward all type of PvP players.

for the record, I like to roam, I never engage in a fight I see more beneficial for me then my opponent, I want a challenge not a free kill.
I like to lead small groups fighting big groups and I like the tactical part of zone control, ie where are my enemy going and how can I with the recourses at hand screw over their life the most ^^

Dawdler.8521:

And in addition to this add a mechanic that gives VPs on player deaths.
IE, when a player kills another player 1 VP is given to the killers server.

Kills should never ever matter in non-competetive open world combat. Why? Because its so kitten easy to abuse, not to mention its completely unfair. Oh look the entire enemy server is outside our spawn location because our server dont have manpower for WvW. Lets give them some extra points for their effort!

Such a change would probably make me stop playing GW2 WvW. It would stop being fun.

You’d prefer the reverse? Like it is right now? And just cycle-cap the bases while giving absolutely no kitten about the rest?

“Why do you waste your time fighting that guy soldier, you should be hitting that door already, you’re fired.”

I totally am on board with everything you are suggesting, except the player kills. This one is a “fundamentally wrong mechanic”. I also understand what you are trying to do, and though we disagree on this 1 issue, I am on your side to make serious changes.

As far as the capping vs defending debate. My suggestion would be a bonus tick everytime you get the reward for being part of it. This tick amount cannot be to outrages as to cause an imbalance, but enough to make a difference. in the ball park of 3 points per 3min defence. THIS NUMBER IS TOTALLY SUBJECTIVE AND VERIABLE.

Not 3 points per player defending, but 3 points total, for a successful 3 min tick defence. The 3 min tick is the point at which u get your gold/silver/bronze reward.

So AFK in a tower for 55 minutes, then run out and cap a camp. The buff lasts 5mins and you get the points for the tick. Alt-tab for another 55 minutes and repeat.

The more frequent the score ticks, the less emphasis there is on ‘The Tick’ and the more fluid it is.

1:
Trebs are firing
“Wall is down! Capture for victory!”
“No! Don’t rush in noobs! The score just ticked, wait another 57 minutes otherwise EnemySever will recaputre!”

“Enemy over there, let’s kill them!”
“No MrNewtogame, you’ll just die and give the enemy points! Please just help the server by disconnecting!”

2:
“Can all you non-MyGuild please GO AWAY! We don’t want our XP stolen by bandwagoners!!
“No! You didn’t contribute anything either!”
“I put in 10 supply!”
[Meanwhile in VOIP] “MyGuild fall back, let the noobs die so we can capture without losing XP!”

3:
[1-2 man thief squad]
“Upscaled player over there trying to get the vista! Let’s crush him and camp his spawn for good XP!”
“Yes! I love spawncamping noobs, it’s so advantageous to my progression!”

4:
Insert pages of forum threads already on this issue

5:
I would actually be in favour of this, except for a few things.
A) The ‘out-of-combat’ thing is often buggy.
B) Being downed would become much more critical, which would highlight the totally broken rally-mechanic and the massively imbalanced downed-state abilities of different classes.
C) It would make people even more hesitant to die, resulting in more stagnant sieges.
D) Stealth would be even more powerful (used as a way to get out-of-combat).

I like all the original posters suggestions. The zerg ball and ppt are the big problems i feel. If they uncap AOE the zerg ball will be fixed. And points per kill rewarding in some small part your servers score would be nice to encourage small skirmishes. I wouldn’t grant rewards though if your zerged down, IE huge mass outside the portal keeps There are options to portal camping like roaming guards.

One other thing i would like to see is give more strength to the out-maned teams like stronger veterans, stronger gates and walls, and higher point rewards for the out-maned team and make the out-maned buff determined by present server pop on all maps. Servers with large rvr pops can easily fill 4 maps While smaller ones can only fill one.

Now this is good we are getting some scenarios, Im really trying to prevent this thread to end up in the suggestion part of the forums, so more scenarios of what you think would happen and suggestions to counter that etc etc, ie theory crafting.

@Grumpdogg
Good concerns, but I think you are looking at the changes from how players play WWW with current mechanics.
Today, if we are generous in the numbers, maybe 30% play for the pride of the server and VPs 60% plays for karma/xp/whatever and 10% plays ´cause honestly this is what I love, I care not for any changes I will still play www.

So why do people zergs with the current mechanics?
´cause its the easiest route to the highest reward.
The majority(60%) logg in, look for a blue icon and head there knowing that it will take you to the highest rewards of WXP/karma and loot.

If these changes where all put in, where would the most reward for the least effort lie?
If static objects got their rewards shared amongst participants, that wouldnt be it.
So where would those players go and what would they do?

My guess is, orange swords and static objects under attack.
The single commander Icons days would probably be gone, there would be no need to just zerg up for the easiest route to the highest reward, you could just head over towards any crossed sword icon on the map, or! as a small group (no need to go to the blue icon) go and take a supply camp.

What would this mean for the 30% which play for server pride and VPs?
Well, zerging towers and keeps will no longer present an appealing reward for the mobs, so they will not go there, instead they will make sure every supply camp is capped.., always, as soon as a camp is flipped the mobs will head over there for the easiest reward.
So these players would actually get to focus even more on server tactics, looking for enemy zergs, draining supplies and preparing for that big push before the VP tick.

so, your concerns of;
1:
Trebs are firing
“Wall is down! Capture for victory!”
“No! Don’t rush in noobs! The score just ticked, wait another 57 minutes otherwise EnemySever will recaputre!”

Will probably more likely be, the organized guilds WILL take a keep before the tick, and the masses will flood there to defend it, defense yields higher rewards then attack.

2. your guild want even need to say this, let the karma farmers take the easy pickings and you go kill enemies.

3. your worries here are very very good, the reason I wanted to up the reward /player kill was to encourage more roaming, BUT not to make it the best way farming karma/wxp, this needs to be looked in to, maybe just an increasd bonus to player worth at objects, ie kill a player at a camp, get value*10/amount of players involved.