Guild Wars 2

Well in the other post we saw a few posts where people did want new maps, no matter what, and dont care it they are bugged, unbalanced or untested.

So how do you feel? Are you tired and bored to the current Borderlands map we’ve had to 2 years now? Do you want something new?

Of course we want dedicated WvW maps, but others have said they would even be happy is the devs just took a current PvE zone map and threw a few towers and keeps in the corners and let us at it without testing or anything! That’s how bored we are!

So post is you want new WvW dedicated maps, and post what you think about the PvE converted maps, would you like to try them yourselves if the dev gave us them?
Or do you have other suggestions for a map? Or would you rather wait a year, or 2, or even longer! for dedicated, tested and “balanced” maps?

How about fixing the old ones first?

Make symmetrical maps if balance is a problem.

EoTM is cluttered with way too much stuff. Most WvW players would be happy with blank terrain dotted with a few keeps.

If they would just do that, I imagine testing and balance would be significantly easier than creating dozens of new NPCs, mechanics, seige, consumables etc.

A new map doesn’t have to be a work of art.

Yes I’d take unbalanced untested maps.

PvE maps would be awesome.

I don’t want to wait a year or two for more maps. In fact I won’t, I’ll just move on and stop playing.

Johje Holan.4607:

Yes I’d take unbalanced untested maps.

PvE maps would be awesome.

I don’t want to wait a year or two for more maps. In fact I won’t, I’ll just move on and stop playing.

Seconding this. The map design in this game is beautiful, and there are many structures that could easily function as towers, keeps, and camps that exist in the world already.

Even if they weren’t completely balanced in terms of keep/tower location, as long as they didn’t give statistical advantages (Overgrowth buff) I think most players would be fine with it.

A major part of the fun is discovering new things about maps and how you can use them to your advantage. This includes finding those sketchy spots so you know what to watch for from your enemy.

nty, I like my maps fully tested and cleaned of bugs.

I’d rather them not touch WvW at all than make changes that could possibly screw it up.

If they’re going to change something, they should take their time and do it right.

Honestly, if I didn’t enjoy the game/map/fights as-is I would have stopped playing a long time ago

msalakka.4653:

How about fixing the old ones first?

Seconded, this game has plenty of other things that need some TLC well before we should be worrying about new maps, let alone untested buggy ones. ANET are way too much professionals to be that callous with their game. No band-aid fixes plz. ><

If you have that short of attention span that WvW is boring to you unless you get new maps well guess what . . . those maps will only feel “new” for a short time and then what? Start crying all over again? Just take a break and play a different game for awhile instead of trying to drag this one down. Come back after 6mo’s and everything will seem new again.

No, fix all the other issues that need addressing rather than get us to test buggy content or what Eotm ended up being.

CrimsonNeonite.1048:

No, fix all the other issues that need addressing rather than get us to test buggy content or what Eotm ended up being.

The main thing wrong with the ETOM map itself is that it does not have a score. There is no point to it.

Take the map itself – the terrain not the NPC’s or new siege – and drop it into WvW proper and it would work. (Fix that one keep too though with all the breakable walls).

By now we should have had new, tested and balanced maps. Instead, we have the universally derided bloodlust ruins and EoTM. Massive waste of dev time.

I’d love new ‘untested’ maps, here’s why:

- Winning and losing doesn’t mean skritt outside of tournaments.
- Fun matters.
- Nothing stale is fun.
- New maps are not stale.

Even if the layouts are a bit imbalanced in whatever way, with user feedback the issues are ironed out.

Winning and losing during the “off season” means nothing, so mucking around with new maps during the off season has only positives, no negatives.

If a tournament comes around, and the new maps aren’t fully balanced, then use the old maps for the tournament.

Simple.

Ty for reading Devon. Chop chop on the new maps. Just don’t make it like EOTM, make it like ACTUAL WVW.

Realist.5812:

I’d love new ‘untested’ maps, here’s why:

- Winning and losing doesn’t mean skritt outside of tournaments.
- Fun matters.
- Nothing stale is fun.
- New maps are not stale.

Even if the layouts are a bit imbalanced in whatever way, with user feedback the issues are ironed out.

Winning and losing during the “off season” means nothing, so mucking around with new maps during the off season has only positives, no negatives.

If a tournament comes around, and the new maps aren’t fully balanced, then use the old maps for the tournament.

Simple.

Ty for reading Devon. Chop chop on the new maps. Just don’t make it like EOTM, make it like ACTUAL WVW.

I think the poster also made the mistake of thinking that anet would or should be making completely new maps from scratch, why not use the ones we have? imagine a place as simple as queensdale where 3 servers can go out and fight each other, we have so much unique and even beautiful geography in the game thats basically underused currently in the pve world,remember its close to 2 years after release.

These new maps dont even need caps/towers/keeps if it would take long to implement, just go out, fight and explore is an amazing new area

Honest question here,

How would it be any different from what we have now ? Bugs/exploits that have been around since beta, lopsided tower/keep placements to allow advantages to X color over Y color, glitches all over the place.

Seriously how would it be any different then the current maps ?

Im still happy playing on borders, only thing I would change would be the ruins they added, that was a waste of time and space as far as I’m concerened, but anyway other than that I would just like to see a few things changed.

For one the way ranks are displayed only to the enemy is just backwards and should be fixed, then there should be a vendor to sell useful stuff for badges of honor, 20 slot bags for example, maybe even unique finishers.

Also there needs to be new masterys to spend rank points on, because once you are maxed out then rank points become useless, it all feels very unfinished.

Bottom line is I just want better rewards and goals for my time.

Nuzt.7894:

Honest question here,

How would it be any different from what we have now ? Bugs/exploits that have been around since beta, lopsided tower/keep placements to allow advantages to X color over Y color, glitches all over the place.

Seriously how would it be any different then the current maps ?

We’d get new bugs and glitches and exploits to complain about. NEW!

Sure, I’ll take some untested maps. Not in WvW proper mind you, but I’ll take them all the same. This is precisely the reason why good gaming companies have test realms for this sort of thing. It alleviates the burden on the developer to do all of their own testing and gives players access to new content at the same time. They did exactly that with EotM before they introduced it, and they should pursue that method even further.

There is literally no reason whatsoever to be conservative here.

The problem is content for the sake of new content, sure follow in the ways of the EoTM beta tests, but releasing untested content to the public would be a PR disaster waiting to happen.

Ragnar.4257:

Most WvW players would be happy with blank terrain dotted with a few keeps.

If given the choice between a rolling plains map and something as complex as even the ruins, I’d prefer the plains. Too much stuff just gets confusing and annoying, especially when dealing with classes that can easily run away by teleporting up a cliff or something.

No, would be so much topics on forum about bug here bug there, abuse here and so on.

There are so many interesting maps already, it seems like a waste to develop new WvW maps from scratch. I would much rather see them pick a bunch of PvE maps of varying sizes and environments (including cities), and turn them into 4-hour WvW overflow matches similar to EotM (but with PPT so they don’t turn into karma railroads). Here’s how I would do it:

- Select a few suitable maps. Perhaps through in-game polling

- Move all waypoints out to the edges of the map, tone down the PvE content (i.e. number of mob spawns and events), and make all hearts into capture points/objectives that provide PPT

- A few waypoints are assigned randomly to each world at the start of the match, and ownership of the waypoints are then randomly rotated between the worlds in certain intervals (e.g. 10-30 minutes), so as to avoid spawn camping, and further reduce the need for balancing (since there would be no designated “corners”)

- The player cap for each world is set relatively low on each overflow, but the number of worlds on the map are instead increased (e.g. from 3 to 9, or dependent on map size). Low population worlds are thus spread across fewer overflows, avoiding inequalities in coverage, while high population worlds are spread across a greater number of overflows, avoiding queues

- PPT generated from these overflows can be standardized, e.g.: x * (total points / number of overflows), where the constant x is chosen based on how many points these overflows should generate in relation to the normal WvW maps. This would further make high population and low population worlds equal, as a low population world that does well in a few maps, would get as many points as a high population world that does well in many maps

- Make it so that pre-made groups and guild groups are more likely to be pitted against other pre-made groups and guild groups of similar sizes

These maps would be all about open field fights and control of territories (from mountain ranges, caves, and valleys, to cities and villages), rather than siege warfare, so walls, gates, trebs, catas, etc, are not as necessary, which even further reduces the need for balancing. If certain areas turn out to the better than others, then more worlds will want to fight over them, thus making them more risky. Also, there can perhaps be some kind of resource system (similar to supply) that the worlds can fight to control, but it should be kept simple

I put forward an idea similar to this last week: I outlined what a strategically unbalanced map might entail, I think it’s a fabulous idea to bring in maps, as long as we know WHO has the advantage, and the match making system gives the advantage to the right server.

If anyone cares to read my wall of text suggestions for unbalanced maps, or refine them you can check it out here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Proposal-PvP-Map-Rotation-for-Borderlands/first#post4124210

By all means keep discussion going on this thread though.

If they switched to objective based scoring rather than capture the flag PPT, they could use any map. Each side would be tasked with multiple objectives on a map such as escorting while the other server is tasked with killing the escort or holding a point on the map. The objectives would change each tick and would have varying requirements.

In that system they could take any map, say Queensdale, add in some objectives and let the fighting commence. A huge side benefit is that multiple objectives means a new layer of organization is needed to win. Blobbing to one objective would win a battle but lose the war so to speak.

As for EotM… gahhh… the runs are too long, too many choke points and far too easy to get knocked off for most players to care.

IMO Anet overthink their maps. As in, their maps would be better if they didn’t tweak the geography to limit/allow siege placement in exactly N good locations.

It is the sandbox/dynamic element of WVW that makes it fun, IMO they ought to get maps to a playable level (no terrain seams, unseen obstacles, falling through the world etc) and then out it out there as a “beta” map, and then let it evolve organically from player feedback and usage.

I’d much rather see ANet work on balancing out the zergs. I’m sick of reliving Massada 10 times a night. ( look it up if you don’t know the reference.. very apropos to the current situation in WvW )

Put the new “untested” maps on a couple of “test servers”. Allow the rewards (e.g. wvw) to carry over. If you earn laurels, dailies, wvw exp, it would stay on your real account.

Let players who want to play these new maps knowing they could be broken go for it. Let others stay.

Bombsaway.7198:

Put the new “untested” maps on a couple of “test servers”. Allow the rewards (e.g. wvw) to carry over. If you earn laurels, dailies, wvw exp, it would stay on your real account.

Let players who want to play these new maps knowing they could be broken go for it. Let others stay.

They will never do test servers. (ok well they did for EOTM for a while)

But the simple alternative would be to make the maps playable but not count for anything, just like EOTM.

But to get accurate feedback, it would be better to replace the BL’s and EB with the new maps if even for one week at a time, then bring the original BL’s and EB back while they continue working on the maps until the next time they publically test it.

If it isn’t a tournament, it doesn’t matter what map we play on.

Make 3 identical unbalanced maps for borderlands – this automatically balances because:

Whichever side has the advantage on one, has a disadvantage on the other 2.

Ragnar.4257:

Make symmetrical maps if balance is a problem.

EoTM is cluttered with way too much stuff. Most WvW players would be happy with blank terrain dotted with a few keeps.

If they would just do that, I imagine testing and balance would be significantly easier than creating dozens of new NPCs, mechanics, seige, consumables etc.

A new map doesn’t have to be a work of art.

This ^^. ANET tries to make things too gimmicky (and also why it takes them a year to implement a map). Just create a symmetrical 3 way map and launch it. It will make players happy and will be much less effort for ANET as well. Everyone wins.

I’m fine with what we’ve got. New maps would certainly be welcome but I don’t play for the maps I play for the excitement. I enjoy the skirmishes, conversations, zergs, strategies and all of the other aspects in WvW, maps are only the basis for which it all occurs. So if we don’t get new maps no big deal, if we do cool, more to explore.

I absolutely agree on converting PvE maps into WvW maps. There are many well designed PvE maps in this game and the majority of them would make very cool WvW battlefields, but the best part; ArenaNet would be using development resources on both PvE and WvW at the same time when developing maps, and seeing as development resources are the primary reason WvW is getting little attention, I see no reason why not to go down this path.

I personally don’t care if a supply dolyak takes 10 seconds longer to dump supplies at Y tower compared to X tower. I rather see the game continuously refreshed with different maps that cycle every 1-2 weeks.