Guild Wars 2

as already discussed in this thread, the point per tick mechanic eliminates the balancing effect of having 3 (instead of 2) servers matched against each other.

Anet should get rid of PPT entirely!

Points should be awarded on event completion only. This would solve the coverage problems since if a server “nightcapped” everything they would only get points when they first captured each objective. It would also greatly reward defending, since a long siege can go through several defense events but only 1 (if successful) capture event.

Thoughts?

I don’t think the current scoring system is the answer, but I don’t like eliminating PPT either. You have to remember that for a lot of players, defense is boring. They want to open field fight, or roam, or attack targets. A different scoring system equally rewarding any game type would be ideal. The system also needs to reward lower ranked servers to compensate for the population differences

Wouldn’t the guys that are obsessed by PPT under the current system just exploit your system by keeping all their structures permanently ‘aggroed’ by 2nd accounts so as to farm defence events?

I agree about defense being boring, heh. They could keep the PPS (point per stomp) mechanic in to encourage more open field fighting, and make the outmanned buff give more PPS and more points per event also to help the lower pop servers.

Lurch.9517:

Wouldn’t the guys that are obsessed by PPT under the current system just exploit your system by keeping all their structures permanently ‘aggroed’ by 2nd accounts so as to farm defence events?

yeah that’s a good point. i guess if there’s a way to exploit something, people will find it. i wonder if anet have anything in place to detect/ban people that run 2 accounts on separate servers in the same match already??

Lurch.9517:

Wouldn’t the guys that are obsessed by PPT under the current system just exploit your system by keeping all their structures permanently ‘aggroed’ by 2nd accounts so as to farm defence events?

First, I think we can all agree that “Defense Events/Contesting” should take more than a single person attacking.

Second, how is that any worse than the wXP Trains we have going with their farming and flipping? Or just allowing a Server to rack up points overnight while not fighting anybody?

Defense is boring mostly because it’s largely ineffective, which partially stems from most commanders not bothering to set up defensive siege when they take an objective.

Even from behind reinforced walls, and even with siege, a smaller group has little to no chance at defending a point from a larger group.

I’ve seen defense work pretty well. I would say with siege one person can handle 2 – 4 easily.

Defense is not boring – actual defense is exciting when someone is attacking. Sitting at an asset when no one is attacking is what is boring – but that’s not defense.

mcarswell.3768:

as already discussed in this thread, the point per tick mechanic eliminates the balancing effect of having 3 (instead of 2) servers matched against each other.

Anet should get rid of PPT entirely!

Points should be awarded on event completion only. This would solve the coverage problems since if a server “nightcapped” everything they would only get points when they first captured each objective. It would also greatly reward defending, since a long siege can go through several defense events but only 1 (if successful) capture event.

Thoughts?

Each time you capture something, it is an event: meaning you get points on events only. The three servers are not meant for balance, they are meant for another dynamic. If you want to gang up, obviously you stop attacking the server you want to ally with.

PPT is really the only solution to track (with snapshots) what is going on at any given time. Overall, those who hold the map longest (based on the snapshots) should win the matchup. Ganging up on the weak server is usually the sign of weak and lazy commanders.