Guild Wars 2

Anybody else really annoyed by fire keep’s layout ? Just a sprawling, underground mess to navigate.

Removal of barricades and some structural modification of the landscape surrounding fire keep has helped, but it’s really not enough. The dbl still has major pacing issues and its structure still prevents players from coming together for sieges.

Main problems: the two northern towers hold no tactical significance for a subsequent keep push, sentries in the middle of nowhere not really doing anything, hay bales aren’t widely distributed, both fire and air keeps have a huge amount of unnecessary stairs/dead-ends/drops to your death.

less annoying with the patch but still kitten compared to alpine bl.

DBL are great. They just have one big problem: They are too large. It takes too long to get from A to B. The keeps are too large. It took me ages to check every single wall/gate. I need a simpler structure inside.

If I just take the air-keep as example. There are plenty of pathways up and down which are just useless (unless you want to hide). There are basically 2 ways from the outer south gate to the inner south gate. It is similar for the north or middle gate. The rest of the keep is useless. When I die in the keep, it takes long to run from the middle-keep to the air-keep (not to talk about citadel).

One more rather tiny problem I got with DBL is, that the armor repair is too far away from the wp. If I take the air-keep as an example (again). I would have to walk up the stairs for repair and then down again.

i had this long wall of text counter point to this idea that the abl towers have strategic value but the forum decided i wasnt logged in when i hit post. bye bye deep thoughts.

maybe its for the best though >.>

how many times have you been defending the abl garri from a zerg when the 3rd server takes the north tower on the opposite side? they build trebs and pretty soon youre defending from both servers inside your walls but are avoiding each other? does that sound familiar?

the dbl keeps doesnt give attacking servers the ability to avoid each other as easily. they cant sit back in safety slowly working down a wall while the other 2 servers exhaust each other. dbl garri is about the same is this regard but when 2 servers start fighting its much more difficult for the 3rd sever to take advantage and charge in behind.

but your also thinking… muh havoc guild! another organized havoc force could easily stop trebs from the south towers. the havoc guild is just hoping for pug defenders to roll over. if they were actually good enough to roll over all pug defenders anyway they would just use a quicker method.

the strategic value of the abl towers encourages double teaming.

to be honest, i like your post, i never disliked any of the borderlands, but Alpine is old bs.

And bringing back the old will never renew the game, am i against it no, would i play it (played it over 2 years got totally bored with it and it wasn’t that great either) no, i would prolly go to EBG when its introduced replacing Desert totally.

Maybe i should troll the Alpine guys like they trolled the Desert guys, thought we were all adults doesn’t seem t be the case.

I like desert i like the changes.

Will it ever change the opinion of ppl talking here no!

There’s to much Sentiment, qq ing, there’s no logic. So in the end seeing its a black/white discussion it will only lead to more division amongst players what side they are doesn’t even mather.

In the end we all loose cause WvW will die cause players are unable to compromise.
I’m sorry i’m just fed up with all the whining.

It’s better but still needs a lot of work.

The whole center of the map is useless now so essentially you have a left corridor and right corridor. The NE and NW towers hold no strategic value. In the old BL’s you could treb Garri from these towers making them desirable for players both for attack and defense.

More a HoT problem than a WvW problem but guild progression is still based on PvE grind. Why cant we start trading in badges of honour, guild commendations, proof of heroics, resonating slivers and memories of battle. Seems backwards, to advance in WvW as a guild we need to farm PvE, shouldnt what you gain in WvW via participation in WvW push your guild forward?

Some of the upgrade stuff was totally stupid, cloaking waters lol. Very little char progression in WvW, in other games you could buy abilities or stats for your char as you progress. In GW2 you are lucky to get a skin and anyone that has played any substantial amount of WvW has every WvW ability capped. Of which the only ones that were what i would consider char progressive were removed(guard killer stacks).

gennyt.3428:

Anybody else really annoyed by fire keep’s layout ? Just a sprawling, underground mess to navigate.

Agreed there. I like the Air keep a lot more, though I still dislike all the verticality going on there. It’s still too much.

ALL keeps have completely uncounterable siege spots at inner and outer. Everything is full of chokes and verticality. There are still a kittenload of stupid pve mobs everyhwere and the Shrine gimmicks are still as inconsequential and nerv-battering as on day 1. They fixed a few minor things i didnt even care about, the big issues are still the same. thank god the laser-event is gone though, thats a major upgrade for the map. The overall TACTICAL design is still just sad and a testament to how little the designers understand about WvW. Bring back alpine and trash this crap please.

Less annoying but still terrible. Too much verticality still, non strategically placed objectives, too big of a map.

Alpine is much better designed.

The increased numbers make the maps less annoying, but it still takes too long to get back in to the action (and you have to remember the convoluted route back).

The map still doesn’t link up in any coherent way, so gaining one objective makes no difference to taking another.

In the quieter times it’s just too big and you can wonder around the map and not see an enemy at all.

Still prefer Alpine. Some of the vertical bits in the keeps in Deserted can be fun for fighting, but overall I’m still an Alpine fan.

Maybe next time the designers will involve some wvw players in design from the outset and design a map that works for wvw.

Maybe make every objective give a small bonus- so holding guard posts grants a 2% defence bonus, holding a camp gives a 2% attack bonus (for the next tick) so planning camp attacks etc could be strategic. Just a thought, needs careful weighing up.

I’m not sure the maps are too big now, tbh. The routes (now simplified) just take a bit of learning, as they did in ABls back in the day. I would get rid of the popup rocks around ‘Garri’ that just seem to irritate all sides in a fight, but that’s nitpicking.

The simple fact is ANet have never worked out what to do with the middle of the borders. Everything they have tried has (largely) failed. Sure the ruins had some admirers but they were still largely neglected except when there was a daily! Actually the shrines in DBl, although admittedly placed differently, are far more popular for the buffs they provide.

Anet definitely need a rethink about the middle of ABl and DBl. maybe 4th time will be a charm.

Jong.5937:

I’m not sure the maps are too big now, tbh. The routes just take a bit of learning, as they did in ABls back in the day.

The simple fact is ANet have never worked out what to do with the middle of the borders. Everything they have tried has (largely) failed. Sure the ruins had some admirers but they were still largely neglected except when there was a daily! Actually the shrines in DBl, although admittedly placed differently, are far more popular for the buffs they provide.

Anet definitely need a rethink about the middle of ABl and DBl. maybe 4th time will be a charm.

A good point. Maybe there could be some sort of recreative combat zone there? An arena?

I would definitely like to see the northern towers have a strategic role, as on the ABls. If it is just to hard to move them, maybe there could be a new kind of fixed siege in those towers with ‘airship targeted’ (I.e. aerial view) surface to surface missiles (new tech from the war against Mordy!) that can hit the outer Garri and support attacking troops in parts of the outer courtyard. The treb spots in the northern towers of the ABl were pretty fixed anyway. Of course there would need to be counters.

I wish DBL’s and EotM maps would stay the hell away from WvW .. forever and have them make maps NOTHING like the lame gimmicky bouncy glop of PVE poo they are and actually make maps where the objectives are not far apart and have quick direct routes that can be attacked from any direction by any method to add more strategic options instead of a linear limited mess and that reward players for fighting over objectives and give no rewards for PvD/PvE nonsense in a PvP game mode. Maps should be designed to keep players engaged in nonstop challenging, strategic, fun PvP action the entire time they are on the maps or the maps do not belong in a PvP game mode.

Maps need to be the OPPOSITE of DBL’s so it is going to be difficult to " tweak" something that is wrong from the ground up for a large scale PvP game mode.

The stupidest Ideas I have heard is " how about we have EotM , EBG, Alpine AND DBL maps and do different things on them". The problem is you have people who refuse to got to EotM/ DBL maps so if the score is involved with either of those maps they cannot be in the game mode an be able to play the game effectively. The " bad map" exploit will just be used to run up scores on the bad maps and effectively run more off from the game mode. You have to be able to play the game the same way by the majority of the people on all the maps in order for them to be considered part of the score and be enjoyable to the majority of the players. So they need to be something they actually consider not only playable but actually enjoyable to them.

Prior to HOT MANY players left due to the failure to properly reward PvP both in score and personal player rewards in a PvP game mode and rewarding PvE avoid PvP instead. This is still the case with the " reward track" rewarding PVE and AFKers ( why does the participation go up to 100% repeatedly while afk eating dinner standing in a a keep not pressing any buttons?!!) and something much more has to be done to solve this if they wish to actually increase players to the game mode longer term.

They would have to nerf NPC chests and rewarding PvD and killing NPC"s instead replacing it with greatly increasing rewards to killing other players while fighting over objectives to solve the issue.

If players only get ascended and legendary drops and PPK in WvW for killing other players inside objectives without the use of siege, they will be doing that instead of fighting empty structures having their zergs siege humping or dying fast to go PvD instead since there will be no benefit to doing so for the score or rewards if it based primarily on PPK instead.

All maps should be considered playable by the majority of the players in the game mode otherwise they do not belong in the gamemode due to them handicapping the score for servers who have more players who refuse to play on them than others. Putting them in will only ensure that those players who refuse to play them leave the game entirely.

They can put them in EotM or elsewhere, but as long as there is a wvw score, they should not be in there as only servers who have people who will go on them will be able to compete and the rest will stop playing all together eventually over it due to their existence making the game unplayable and not being able to play the game the way they have enjoyed since they purchased it.

For sure I think ppk should be substantially increased and, yes, probably, rewards should be balanced in that way too. It would be interesting to see what would happen if ascended drops could only come from players! Of course, this is all a little off-topic, but interesting none the less.

Jong.5937:

For sure I think ppk should be substantially increased and, yes, probably, rewards should be balanced in that way too. It would be interesting to see what would happen if ascended drops could only come from players! Of course, this is all a little off-topic, but interesting none the less.

It isn’t actually off topic though , as long as the maps are part of the score the score is directly tied to the maps viability. The maps and scoring system are intertwined.

Players who want the scoring system to be based on PvP in a PvP game mode rather than on PvE would ALSO need the maps removed from the game, not just the PPT players if they do not wish to play on them as they would also impact the score due to population imbalance on those maps due to the sheer number of players who refuse to use them would impact both PPK and PPT. If the game is to reward the better fighters rather than the guys who can die fast to go PvD instead as it should have been from the beginning, having the maps in play would still be rewarding the team over a " bad map handicap" instead of actual better fighters.

If they keep the maps in game and remove them from the score to avoid the " bad map handicap" you are back to having them in the EotM, where they don’t bother everyone else. ( which I think is one of the only viable options tbh)

Trying to summarise this thread (always a dangerous thing, but anyway!) it seems clear the community cannot agree on the value of the modified DBls. They have fans and haters! Regular rotation seems the best option, so no one is stuck playing a map they don’t like for weeks on end.

Things I think we all pretty much do agree on are:

- northern towers need fixing, to give them an importance similar to ABls
- centre needs fixing. Big wasted space
- probably some work still to be done to make travelling the map less “frustrating”

If there is anything else you think has consensus then let’s bring it to the top by reposting.

lil devils x.6071:

Jong.5937:

For sure I think ppk should be substantially increased and, yes, probably, rewards should be balanced in that way too. It would be interesting to see what would happen if ascended drops could only come from players! Of course, this is all a little off-topic, but interesting none the less.

It isn’t actually off topic though , as long as the maps are part of the score the score is directly tied to the maps viability. The maps and scoring system are intertwined.

For sure I agree it’s important, but it isn’t specific to the DBls or even the Bls in general, that was all I was saying.

Jong.5937:

lil devils x.6071:

Jong.5937:

For sure I think ppk should be substantially increased and, yes, probably, rewards should be balanced in that way too. It would be interesting to see what would happen if ascended drops could only come from players! Of course, this is all a little off-topic, but interesting none the less.

It isn’t actually off topic though , as long as the maps are part of the score the score is directly tied to the maps viability. The maps and scoring system are intertwined.

For sure I agree it’s important, but it isn’t specific to the DBls or even the Bls in general, that was all I was saying.

I added more to the post above. Yes, it actually is specifically related to the DBLs and the ABLs as long as the score is kept on them. If there is no score kept on them then they are no longer related and their playablity isn’t as important, but then again that would be just having them in the EotM instead. Their playablity either makes them a handicap or a benefit tot he score depending on how many players on the server will even go to them. If players will not go on them then they really should not be in the game because there is something wrong with them. New maps should be something that makes people cheer not / uninstall. Next time they make a map, they should drink a bottle of tequila then try to navigate them for the first time. IF they cannot do that, they need to be binned because players will not use them.

I went from disliking it to being just okay with it. I never hated the map but I definitely don’t love it either. The uneven terrain really makes fights hard because some skills like hammer 2 for revenants just doesn’t work. There are too many choke points and small areas where there needs to be more room to fight. For example, the NWT is hard to fight in because of its layout. I definitely liked that they removed that big rock area just coming out of your garrison to the west. That was nothing but an eyesore and wasn’t even necessary to have. One thing I always liked about the map is that there was flavor for each tower and keep. I’m glad that the champions don’t just sit still and take it like they do in EB despite some of them like the Earth keep moving around a little too much. Necropolis is pretty awesome though.

Sirendor.1394:

Jong.5937:

Anet definitely need a rethink about the middle of ABl and DBl. maybe 4th time will be a charm.

A good point. Maybe there could be some sort of recreative combat zone there? An arena?

Just a thought, probably loads of flaws, feel free to shoot down! It’s probably already been suggested several times; it’s not that original! Sosorry to anyone who got there before me.

SM seems to work pretty well. It improves mobility and is a pretty good spot to fight. How about a relatively open, walled “surface mine” or some such, that provides resourcing boons to the side that holds it (faster supply camp drops? On all maps similar to how the ruins work?), gates and portals that only they can use, and maybe an extra WP, when upgraded. This could then be a good spot for more open field fights in both types of Bl.

PabbyGaul.9682:

Alpine map will look,like 8bit video game comparatively.

well, we dont play wvw for the looks you know….. if u want nice maps try pve….

and yes i still hate dbl. its still a complex maze and too pve oriented and based on a pve map anyways, just with a bit less lag now and a few less gimmicks and unbalanced buffs.

I liked the changes. But the missing dune above fire keep killed my warrior. Autorun and map are a bad comb XD

I never hated DBL in the first place. I just thought it needed work. One could say the same about Alpine…

Blackarps.1974:

I went from disliking it to being just okay with it. I never hated the map but I definitely don’t love it either. The uneven terrain really makes fights hard because some skills like hammer 2 for revenants just doesn’t work. There are too many choke points and small areas where there needs to be more room to fight. For example, the NWT is hard to fight in because of its layout. I definitely liked that they removed that big rock area just coming out of your garrison to the west. That was nothing but an eyesore and wasn’t even necessary to have. One thing I always liked about the map is that there was flavor for each tower and keep. I’m glad that the champions don’t just sit still and take it like they do in EB despite some of them like the Earth keep moving around a little too much. Necropolis is pretty awesome though.

Did you mean the Air keep? Earthkeep lord literally never moves anywhere D:

Just copy paste alpine layout and add the desert environment. Put a sphinx in the middle (instead of the lake) and boom, there you have it. Your reworked desert BL.

Hate is a strong word… I have never liked them and doesn’t do it after this patch either and looking forward to the old borders return

A lot of people sound like they have nostalgia goggle on when talking about the old maps. While I never loved DBL that was mainly due to the mechanics of it at the launch, with the new changes I’m quite happy and do not want these to go away. I’m fine with a rotation but it’d be really silly for good maps like these to get taken out of the game when they are now better then the old maps.

The problem with the map is the original concept with the idea that everything in there should be a choke point in order to break down the zergs, much like the alpine ruins were done to try and split groups up. But it doesn’t work.

The south towers were designed to be the quick passageway to the middle of the map which then would lead to quick routes to the north areas, which is why everything is so far from each other to try and make that middle area more valuable to access.

They added a clumsy pve event in the middle of the map to help put pressure on the defending team while adding more strength to gates and walls to counter. They added barricades and extra breakable walls incase people wanted to get through quickly without the tower, which was annoying for roamers and havoc but not so much zergs. So why take the tower then? well waypoints were added to give those south towers more value and a closer place for players to spawn from.

Now they’ve disabled the middle event, gates and walls were toned down, added a tunnel through the south wall, they took away barricades and the extra walls, moved the waypoints back to keeps and back to their original design, and now the south towers are left with no value because you can’t even siege keeps from there. The north towers never had any value other than seeing a different boss.

The only thing I see that could work is to borrow from ebg and put a castle in the middle area like another smc type building but not as big, it’s really the only middle concept that has worked, not the quaggan lake, not the ruins, not the giant cannon.

Then to make the towers useful again I’ll borrow from warhammer online, tie the castle to the 4 towers (increase their lord RI to 10-15mins), if you own 3 of the 4 you can attack it. The 3 keeps values are the waypoints. Add more ppt to the castle like smc, and a big fat chest of something and maybe even the bloodlust buff. Then every 3 hours after a cap it kills everyone inside and powers down back to neutral.

Lots of stuff they could do with that idea, but the towers need some value again.

EDIT: If they want to keep the middle cannon concept then take out the dino dropping power cell stuff and maybe tie the cannon to the towers instead to powering it up, that way you make players fight over those towers.

@lil devils

You’re trying to change the essence of the game

Its the same as saying dump it all, all go PVP and introduce it over all maps.

All the reasons you give are valid cause they are close to whats troubling players in the WvW game-mode, but the way you use them as an excuse to remove:

- all forms of siege
- reduce all rewards for escorting, building up stuff
- emphasise PPK over PPT
- reducing the gameplay option in WvW because you dislike map-rotatition including Desert borderlands

Its totally wrong

Tactical

WvW is a total warfare package with tactics overviewing supplies to built up camps towers and keeps, a second part is your army you keep in the field a third is the siege you use to attack and defend.

Strategic:

The location where your army fights: your commanders abilities, good communication (do all use teamspeak) size, group, equip weapons, armour traits and skillz per category, battle-style aggressive or defensive, the conditions you fight under without siege with siege, without defenders attacking you with siege or with, the conditions applied to the location of your battle-field.

The only solution is balancing it out and adding map-rotation so players have choices where to play and more possibilities instead of reducing the game to mere PVP. If i want to do PVP i’ll go PVP not WvW.

In the end there will always be maps you like more than others, but there are also other players that like those maps more than playing yours.

So what do you wish to do fuel the black/white discussion about the borderlands that is already raging or offer a stable solution acceptable for all players instead of a narrow group?

Chasing other WvW players out of a game they love to play aswell isn’t an option sorry.

Angel Heart.6739:

@lil devils

You’re trying to change the essence of the game

Its the same as saying dump it all, all go PVP and introduce it over all maps.

All the reasons you give are valid cause they are close to whats troubling players in the WvW game-mode, but the way you use them as an excuse to remove:

- all forms of siege
- reduce all rewards for escorting, building up stuff
- emphasise PPK over PPT
- reducing the gameplay option in WvW because you dislike map-rotatition including Desert borderlands

Its totally wrong

Tactical

WvW is a total warfare package with tactics overviewing supplies to built up camps towers and keeps, a second part is your army you keep in the field a third is the siege you use to attack and defend.

Strategic:

The location where your army fights: your commanders abilities, good communication (do all use teamspeak) size, group, equip weapons, armour traits and skillz per category, battle-style aggressive or defensive, the conditions you fight under without siege with siege, without defenders attacking you with siege or with, the conditions applied to the location of your battle-field.

The only solution is balancing it out and adding map-rotation so players have choices where to play and more possibilities instead of reducing the game to mere PVP. If i want to do PVP i’ll go PVP not WvW.

In the end there will always be maps you like more than others, but there are also other players that like those maps more than playing yours.

So what do you wish to do fuel the black/white discussion about the borderlands that is already raging or offer a stable solution acceptable for all players instead of a narrow group?

Chasing other WvW players out of a game they love to play aswell isn’t an option sorry.

Of course I am trying to change it, to what the players on the surveys they used to create it actually asked for since that is the reason the game mode has been hemorrhaging players since it’s release. Thousands of players wrote in" LARGE SCALE PVP " because that is what they wanted. Anet then acknowledged that “Most of the players asked for large scale PvP” and told us that was what were getting. We buy the game then then find out that was not what it was.. Of course we want them to keep their promise. If they do, the MANY who believed them that left since the game started might be willing to give them a second chance.

Not rewarding PvP in a PvP game mode is like trying to ice skate in Stabilicers. That is just what is necessary to make the game mode grow rather than die in the long run.

" Chasing other wvw players out of the game" is EXACTLY the option you are promoting as more have left of failure to treat it as a PvP game mode than would leave over rewarding PvP in a PvP game mode. Why do you think the large scale gaming sites and communities guilds all left the game for the most part?

The few players that would leave over the DBL will be made up for in droves by the ones who will play with their removal. No you should not chase out the majority of the players to satisfy the few who want some gimmicky junk in the game. It would not make sense to run off the majority of the players as you are suggesting.

I guess I’m in the minority…I don’t like the changes. The barricades and terrain were good strategical/tactical challenges, and very useful for defense. The Southeast Air Shrine was a perfect example. Before, you could only access it from the ravine, and could use the jump pad to go up to a spot that wan’t accessible except from the pads. Now it has stairs and can be reached from the top.
And I don’t like the extra population level with merged servers. I love running with a squad, but I also liked being able to run with just a friend or two in the off times.

The terrain/obstacle changes were good, but the fundamental problem with DBL is that it’s too big, and moving waypoints to tier 3 has made that problem worse.

Still don’t like the desert map. I have vision issues and it’s harder for me to see.

Kanebrake.6192:

I think the key is that the increased population makes it much more enjoyable but when that dips down again I don’t think it’s going to be any different than before.

Don’t forget the numerous posts about Alpine Borderlands being dead even before DBL was released guys.

Restoring Alpine was never the right move imo.

ionix.9054:

Kanebrake.6192:

I think the key is that the increased population makes it much more enjoyable but when that dips down again I don’t think it’s going to be any different than before.

Don’t forget the numerous posts about Alpine Borderlands being dead even before DBL was released guys.

Restoring Alpine was never the right move imo.

They switched to dbl and we know how that went, it probably did more damage to wvw (along with other things) for the past 6 months than alpine ever did in 3 years.

That’s not to say alpine is almighty great, because it wasn’t and was behind ebg as well in popularity, the map is 3 years old and wvw population was slowly dying off because the gamemode is stale.

Hopefully they can get the rotation out so we can stop having these pointless arguments and everyone gets their “favorite” map to play on.

I never hated DBL. I’ve spent ALOT of time in them. I think the changes were mostly great. I’m not sure if the fact that towers and keeps can’t treb each other is a bad thing or good thing. They function much differently than they did on the alpine maps.

The old alpine maps were not that great either. Trying to defend bay was no picnic. Scouting was too easy because it was so flat. Garrison was quite exposed being in the middle of the map. The alpine maps were also very empty most of the time.

The issue I have with DBL is that the side keeps are not like fortresses at all. They are nothing like a keep, they are modern nuclear bunkers. Instead of being a tall, imposing structure, on strategically important positions that allow whomever controls them to exert influence and keep watch on the surrounding area, they are tucked away in a remote corner, with lots of obstacles around them that make it really hard to get a clear view on the surrounding area.
In the current map design, they simply serve no purpose whatsoever.

i never hated it, the problem i had was population

naphack.9346:

The issue I have with DBL is that the side keeps are not like fortresses at all. They are nothing like a keep, they are modern nuclear bunkers. Instead of being a tall, imposing structure, on strategically important positions that allow whomever controls them to exert influence and keep watch on the surrounding area, they are tucked away in a remote corner, with lots of obstacles around them that make it really hard to get a clear view on the surrounding area.
In the current map design, they simply serve no purpose whatsoever.

it’s exactly that…. New WP system change a little that issue… But what you say is true.

They’re fine but I do think having them rotate is the best thing for the game so it doesn’t get stale.

didn’t like them at first, but the most recent changes made them significantly better. But there are still a few things I’d like to see changed.

One, give the towers some sort of strategic purpose other than points. They’re absolutely pointless other than to take it for the tick.

Two, the keeps (particularly air keep) have too much space. Too many paths, rooms, areas which don’t have much purpose other than to confuse someone. The layouts are too large and unnecessarily complicated. It leaves a good portion of the keep completely unused.

Hello Folks,

Nothing is more humorous than capturing, building, then using a trebuchet in the enemy north camp to hit the inner wall of their garrison. Then finally to see them respond with 30 to 40 mindless group while only having 8 people at most.
In the eyes of the mindless mob, those few who dare are referred to as pugs in some cases. I refer to them as the Independents, and they can make the difference.
Prior to the current changes the DBL’s had chokes, better cover and interesting places for siege due to the terrain. With the removal of the terrain it made it far less interesting as the “gates” are still there and serve no purpose and is completely backwards.
Previously the terrain it made it interesting by making one consider routes for either offense or defense regardless of being alone, a havoc or a zerg. Which I will only just mention the falling buff is excellent as it adds its own element.
Removal of terrain, is great for mindless mobs <cough> EB </cough>. Terrain is great for those who think on the move and consider their methods of attack and retreat as needed. Barriers can work both ways, but do not delay large groups or zergs much <humor> unless they all have sacrificed power for condition </humor>.

dank.3680:

At first I hated the Desert Borderlands. Being that I don’t like the lag of EBG and always spent my time on Alpine at first I couldn’t wait for it back.

Since the latest patch with navigation changes and a newly revived population, I actually find myself really enjoying the new bl.

In fact now when I think about my fights and experiences over the years on Alpine compared to what types of options this new map offers, I’m pretty sure I like the DBL better.

Personally I still think they have a few issues, but I make this topic because I am curious how many others there are like me, whos opinions have changed.

As a roamer I liked them before, and I love them now.

I got around pretty good before because I took the time to learn the map, but now instead of 1 or 2 ways to get from A to B, I have more like 4-6. Which makes it easier to roam.

The population in the borderlands makes it harder, but, still, Mesmer. Thieves and I are made for this.

As for all the people that are complaining that you can’t treb keeps from the towers, I can’t recall anytime in history people building their fortresses on purpose in range of enemy siege. The towers being out of range means you have to gasp, shock take the field and have FIGHTS to get siege on a keep and take it, like it should be.

Crazy, a WvW map that encourages fights…

Can’t stand it. DBLs are a convoluted mess. Fire keep is just a fustercluck. There’s a reason sieging and taking a keep is much faster now compared to ABLs, the defended could respond much faster, the attackers could get right back to the action in the ABLs. It made for better fights, better sieges and just plain more fun for both, or all three if you were lucky.

Kylden Ar.3724:

dank.3680:

At first I hated the Desert Borderlands. Being that I don’t like the lag of EBG and always spent my time on Alpine at first I couldn’t wait for it back.

Since the latest patch with navigation changes and a newly revived population, I actually find myself really enjoying the new bl.

In fact now when I think about my fights and experiences over the years on Alpine compared to what types of options this new map offers, I’m pretty sure I like the DBL better.

Personally I still think they have a few issues, but I make this topic because I am curious how many others there are like me, whos opinions have changed.

As a roamer I liked them before, and I love them now.

I got around pretty good before because I took the time to learn the map, but now instead of 1 or 2 ways to get from A to B, I have more like 4-6. Which makes it easier to roam.

The population in the borderlands makes it harder, but, still, Mesmer. Thieves and I are made for this.

As for all the people that are complaining that you can’t treb keeps from the towers, I can’t recall anytime in history people building their fortresses on purpose in range of enemy siege. The towers being out of range means you have to gasp, shock take the field and have FIGHTS to get siege on a keep and take it, like it should be.

Crazy, a WvW map that encourages fights…

…… You realize having towers that threatened the keeps made people gasp, shock fight for the towers right?

Puck.9612:

…… You realize having towers that threatened the keeps made people gasp, shock fight for the towers right?

No, it made people take camps to cut off supply. Which was at least some extra fights.

If they rotate in ABL without moving the towers, all it will do is ensure that those towers ALWAYS have a sabotaged depot in them.

Kylden Ar.3724:

Puck.9612:

…… You realize having towers that threatened the keeps made people gasp, shock fight for the towers right?

No, it made people take camps to cut off supply. Which was at least some extra fights.

If they rotate in ABL without moving the towers, all it will do is ensure that those towers ALWAYS have a sabotaged depot in them.

Are you saying people didn’t fight over the towers? Because I have about 4 years of experience that says otherwise.
I agree people also fought over the camps, that’s partly because of the better upgrade system that made supply more valuable and partly because of how connected each objective on the alpine map was.
SW camp was especially great for forcing people to hop off their siege and come fight since you could use it to attack bay.

Still don’t like the Desert BL’s. If I can’t get into EB (and I haven’t been able to in weeks), I just go play something else.