Guild Wars 2

W3 is at its best when you have major armies on all three sides duking it out.

I believe that is something we all can agree on. It’s also the premise W3 was designed around.

Hence I propose that W3 should be the most rewarding when exactly that is happening. My suggestion is to scale the point rewards in W3 according to the current player activity.

Afaik the Eternal Battleground allow for 166 players on each side, ergo 500 players in total. Due to this limit we know that the game does actively track the amount of players currently active in W3. So the tech is there.

Now the idea is to scale the point rewards according to the total number of active players.

-Taking a total of 300 players as the basis for 100% this would mean.

-If 500 active players are currently competing in W3, then the points accumulate at 166% the standard rate.

-If 300 players are currently competing in W3, then point accumulate at 100% the standard rate.

-If 100 players are currently active, then the W3 score accumulates at 33% the current rate.

This ties the score reward directly to the amount of PvP going on in W3, which only seems fair since it’s a PvP competition.

Things to note:

1. The number is based on the total number of active players. Population imbalances are irrelevant. If one realm has 166 active players and the other have 0…they still get the 56% rate.

2. The game updates the current number of active players live…just before each “tick”.

Thoughts?

No, it’s a pretty horrible idea.

All you’re doing is reducing the overall impact of the points during the off peak. This ain’t fair for the people playing then and it does not change the fact that the map can be easily capped by the realm with an higher population.

So no.

Dee Jay.2460:

W3 is at its best when you have major armies on all three sides duking it out.

I believe that is something we all can agree on. It’s also the premise W3 was designed around.

For starters this suggestion has been made and argued over many times before on these forums.

Secondly, I doubt we can all agree on your premise. I think many people consider battles between large armies to be nothing more than zergfests. The quality of a battle is not determined solely by how many you people you have. A 100v100v100 fight can be just as engaging as 500v500v500.

The only problem with this idea I can see is that it has the potential to be abused, by servers logging out en mass to deny the opposition chance to gain points to make a come back. Therfore artifically affecting the normal playtimes of that server for thier own benifit.

However with a slight change to this idea it could work – the percentage points of the ticks were based upon server activity to date (i.e no one can now affect this) it could work.

Same sort of percentages as above, but already predetermined based upon past activity – if a server that historically has had little night presence then a ‘night capping’ server can only gain limited points of them, but when playing against other servers with a history of 24hr representation then normal points resume.

Though the above is still liable to manipulation..

waeren.9743:

No, it’s a pretty horrible idea.

All you’re doing is reducing the overall impact of the points during the off peak. This ain’t fair for the people playing then and it does not change the fact that the map can be easily capped by the realm with an higher population.

So no.

Sounds like you just want to PvE your way to victory.

So yes.

And no, it doesn’t make it more difficult to cap. It just limits the score significance during inactive hours. I still don’t see how this is supposed to be bad.

Scuzzy.2713:

The only problem with this idea I can see is that it has the potential to be abused, by servers logging out en mass to deny the opposition chance to gain points to make a come back. Therfore artifically affecting the normal playtimes of that server for thier own benifit.

However with a slight change to this idea it could work – the percentage points of the ticks were based upon server activity to date (i.e no one can now affect this) it could work.

Same sort of percentages as above, but already predetermined based upon past activity – if a server that historically has had little night presence then a ‘night capping’ server can only gain limited points of them, but when playing against other servers with a history of 24hr representation then normal points resume.

Though the above is still liable to manipulation..

Oh come on, that’s such a far fetched idea it won’t ever happen.

By abandoning a fight, a server effectively surrenders their entire possessions to the enemy. That alone would more than compensate for the lower score coefficient.

Scuzzy.2713:

The only problem with this idea I can see is that it has the potential to be abused, by servers logging out en mass to deny the opposition chance to gain points to make a come back. Therfore artifically affecting the normal playtimes of that server for thier own benifit.

However with a slight change to this idea it could work – the percentage points of the ticks were based upon server activity to date (i.e no one can now affect this) it could work.

Same sort of percentages as above, but already predetermined based upon past activity – if a server that historically has had little night presence then a ‘night capping’ server can only gain limited points of them, but when playing against other servers with a history of 24hr representation then normal points resume.

Though the above is still liable to manipulation..

Oh come on, that’s such a far fetched idea it won’t ever happen.

By abandoning a fight, a server effectively surrenders their entire possessions to the enemy. That alone would more than compensate for the lower score coefficient.

Dee Jay.2460:

And no, it doesn’t make it more difficult to cap. It just limits the score significance during inactive hours. I still don’t see how this is supposed to be bad.

And you probably never will because you don’t play in off peak times so your suggestions have no impact on you.

Dee Jay.2460:

waeren.9743:

No, it’s a pretty horrible idea.

All you’re doing is reducing the overall impact of the points during the off peak. This ain’t fair for the people playing then and it does not change the fact that the map can be easily capped by the realm with an higher population.

So no.

Sounds like you just want to PvE your way to victory.

So yes.

And no, it doesn’t make it more difficult to cap. It just limits the score significance during inactive hours. I still don’t see how this is supposed to be bad.

Ok, I’ll try to explain this as simple as possible, try to keep up.

0 * whatever % is still 0. Them having 100% of the map is still them having 100% of the map and you having to cap everything back when you log on. You do not address this problem in any way.

People who do not play during your time want to enjoy the game just like you. Yes they currently affect the score more then they should but this is not the way to solve the issue as they are just playing like you are.

Hope it’s a bit more clear now.

FYI: I play mainly during EU “prime” only and I think my server is currently loosing to yours so cut out the blanket pve comments that you seem to be posting everywhere. Thanks

It is good idea, something like that will help and on same time players who play in off time still contribute but not as much as now.

I don’t think it’s unfair to reduce point gain for lower activity. Currently, offpeak has to potential to disproportionately affect point gain compared to amount of players utilized.

I would recommend not using a linear scale for the scoring rate though. This would limit the effect of a server logging out en masse to grief dominating side. Something like if all maps full for all 3 servers = 100%, but if all maps full for only 1 server (and other 2 empty) = 66%.