Guild Wars 2

For example:
EVERY keep in EVERY map would be vulnerable to cap at 9:00 am. You have 45 min to cap it. Then and only then. After that time, you can’t cap it and you have to wait another 3 hours for a chance.

Same for towers but they would be available to cap every hour.

No time for supply camp. You need to defend them and escort doly if you want to survive in contested keep.

Postives?
No zerg. You have to split because everything is vulnerable to cap at the same time.

What do you think?

What the motivation behind this proposal.

its probably when he gets up in the morning and he would like to get up, cap a keep and then get breakfast….

selan.8354:

its probably when he gets up in the morning and he would like to get up, cap a keep and then get breakfast….

Gotta get those keep capturer dailies before work!

I bet the motivation is to make capping more meaningful. When people know when something is going to happen, you are more likely to get defenders and attackers, resulting in PvP. Also, if you guarantee ownership of an objective for X hours, that’s big for PPT, too, instead of just trading.

When things can happen any time 5 minutes after a keep/tower is taken, why defend because who cares?

It’s actually a very valid suggestion, imo. I do think there’d have to be some system where between siege openings, you could starve the keep by killing yaks/taking camps so it was weaker when it was next available. Defenders could escort yaks/ensure camps deliver so their objective is stronger.

I wouldn’t rule it out.

Cogbyrn.7283:

I bet the motivation is to make capping more meaningful. When people know when something is going to happen, you are more likely to get defenders and attackers, resulting in PvP. Also, if you guarantee ownership of an objective for X hours, that’s big for PPT, too, instead of just trading.

I wouldn’t rule it out.

The problem is that many of the servers run at different time zones so they could set this to happen at 9am but 2/3 of the servers could be mostly offline during that time.

It wouldn’t particularly matter which time you made it, whichever server is most active during that time for whatever reason will have a distinct advantage in the matchup.

Besides, people don’t seem to like the PvE event at mid that does this in a similar fashion right now, but at least you can defend your keeps and towers by beating the other servers in the event.

This is almost the exact same thing as the skysplitter event which is already in all of the desert borderlands map.

Radian.2478:

This is almost the exact same thing as the skysplitter event which is already in all of the desert borderlands map.

But according to many, the Skysplitter event is PvE. If you simply enable an objective to be captured, that’s PvP isn’kitten

psizone.8437:

Cogbyrn.7283:

I bet the motivation is to make capping more meaningful. When people know when something is going to happen, you are more likely to get defenders and attackers, resulting in PvP. Also, if you guarantee ownership of an objective for X hours, that’s big for PPT, too, instead of just trading.

I wouldn’t rule it out.

The problem is that many of the servers run at different time zones so they could set this to happen at 9am but 2/3 of the servers could be mostly offline during that time.

It wouldn’t particularly matter which time you made it, whichever server is most active during that time for whatever reason will have a distinct advantage in the matchup.

Besides, people don’t seem to like the PvE event at mid that does this in a similar fashion right now, but at least you can defend your keeps and towers by beating the other servers in the event.

Timing would definitely be a potential issue. Scheduled sieges aren’t perfect (see: Age of Conan, and people choosing middle of the night hours for their vulnerability period), but it seems like people need something to rally around, and I don’t think this idea should just be discarded without examining it.

As far as a server having an advantage because they are more active at a particular time, that’s kind of how it already is anyway. If one server has way more off-peak coverage than another, it has an enormous advantage, because they’ll tick during off-peak and potentially be fully fortified during peak.

Cogbyrn.7283:

I don’t think this idea should just be discarded without examining it.

As far as a server having an advantage because they are more active at a particular time, that’s kind of how it already is anyway. If one server has way more off-peak coverage than another, it has an enormous advantage, because they’ll tick during off-peak and potentially be fully fortified during peak.

I still think that it’ll be a case of whomever has the higher numbers during whichever time the gates and walls drop will take a huge advantage in the matchup.

Without gates and walls no small number of defenders can hold a zerg back, even with siege.

I’m not saying the idea should be dismissed, but my opinion is that it wouldn’t work well and wouldn’t be received well. I don’t think we need more AI controlled events in WvW that take the job of flipping T3 borderlands.

krzysiek.9061:

EDIT: Isn’t like you can take a border in night too? I don’t see a difference.

To flip a border overnight you need to use siege (outside the terrible event at mid) and put the effort in to take keeps and towers, in which the opposing side can defend against it.

As I said in a comment a moment ago, without gates and walls a small defending force has no way to hold back a larger enemy force, even with siege.

psizone.8437:

krzysiek.9061:

EDIT: Isn’t like you can take a border in night too? I don’t see a difference.

To flip a border overnight you need to use siege (outside the terrible event at mid) and put the effort in to take keeps and towers, in which the opposing side can defend against it.

As I said in a comment a moment ago, without gates and walls a small defending force has no way to hold back a larger enemy force, even with siege.

Wait, I don’t think he’s saying that they remove the gates/walls from a Keep at a certain time. They just make it so siege is able to take down gates/walls for a particular period of time during the day. Players have to bring siege, players can still defend walls, and players ultimately have to take the tower/keep. No NPC armies would be involved.

At least that’s how I understood it. It still may not work, and may not be received well, that’s very true. But hey, if you make a peak capture last for a certain duration into the night, it reduces the effect of nightcapping, doesn’kitten And that’s something people have been clamoring about for a while. They would just need to balance the “siegeable” times so that players in other timezones can do something valuable (though a small population manage camps/yaks could be designed to be valuable while the keep is invulnerable, as well. Those off-hours folks just wouldn’t be able tot ake large objectives with a tiny group).

But wouldn’t that prevent people from playing the game how they want. For example if someone is working night shift and only wakes up after noon. He might have missed the time to cap a keep. There simply is no certain time slot where you would enable most amount of people to play the game the way the want to thus the current system imo is the best. But night capping atm is kind of the problem but same argument works for that too. Like why would the people who only have time to play at nights cause of different time zone (people from Canadia or ’Murica) be punished because they can only play at EU night time.

It might work better, if we still want to go for the idea that you had but with a twist, if the capping availability would occur after certain time span. Like 4 hours or similar. But imo the current system with capping is good. Only thing that needs a balance is night capping.

That is if we think that PPT is valid and working system that we want to keep. Imo it could use a fix a bit. Like if people would play pure PPT and ppt only. It would mean to go for the objectives near the tick and avoiding fights at all costs. Fights should be encouraged too I think. Like at that one season or was it test period they had mechanism that stomps gave 1 point each. Don’t know if that was implemented or not but I think that should be included again.

Cogbyrn.7283:

Wait, I don’t think he’s saying that they remove the gates/walls from a Keep at a certain time. They just make it so siege is able to take down gates/walls for a particular period of time during the day. Players have to bring siege, players can still defend walls, and players ultimately have to take the tower/keep. No NPC armies would be involved.

At least that’s how I understood it. It still may not work, and may not be received well, that’s very true. But hey, if you make a peak capture last for a certain duration into the night, it reduces the effect of nightcapping, doesn’kitten And that’s something people have been clamoring about for a while. They would just need to balance the “siegeable” times so that players in other timezones can do something valuable (though a small population manage camps/yaks could be designed to be valuable while the keep is invulnerable, as well. Those off-hours folks just wouldn’t be able tot ake large objectives with a tiny group).

Ah, I see. I went the other way in thinking, that he meant an added vulnerability rather than the only way is to cap during set times. If that is the case, ignore my other posts and blame poor reading skills.

I feel like that would mean a huge overhaul of the current WvW system and potentially losing a portion of the playerbase that couldn’t cap keeps and towers as and when they could get on to play.

It could definitely get rid of zerging a little, but the risk of players losing interest could be too much.

Thank you again, Cogbyrn. It looks like we think the same

Nothing new with keeps or towers. You still have to use siege weapon, you still have to destroy gate/wall, and you still have to kill keep lord. Even you claimed keep/tower it isn’t over. You have to protect that point for the remaining time.

@Weil
“But wouldn’t that prevent people from playing the game how they want. For example if someone is working night shift and only wakes up after noon. He might have missed the time to cap a keep.”

I don’t want to sounds rude now but is there any mass pvp at 4:00 o’clock? Even if it is, you still can cap Towers. They would be vulnerable every 1.5h to avoid, “ok, nothing to do here”. You still can play as a roamer and you still have to defend camps.

@psizone
Maybe it’s different in tier 1 but in lower tier I don’t feel any PvP. It’s just: go to point A > flip > go to point B > flip > go to point C > flip > go back to point A to defend > return to flipping.
I don’t feel that mass PvP like in Lineage 2 or Aion.

And it won’t get rid of zerging for a little. If you want to win, you have to split. Can you imagine 5 commanders icon at once? That would be amazing.

People didn’t like zerg tactic in PvE. Now we have Dragon’s Stand and it’s amazing because zerg had to split.

Doesn’t sound like it would be too hard to implement either. Just make separate RI for each objective type, and have the RI give a buff to walls/gates to make then invulnerable while RI is up. Then set separate timers for each, or have them behave to specific timers.

I’m a bit for and against the whole "timed openings" aspect, and have a gut feeling that I’d like it better to simply have longer RI periods. Even though I expect them to end up working pretty similar. Something about that feeling "Yes we got the tower, now its safe for one hour before someone can take it back!".

On the positive side, I think the "Timed Openings" would work well with the new upgrade system (with some time tweaks). So that you could see over each defense that the tower or keep upgraded and get easier to defend etc. This *might* return some of the perceived reward in defending.

Interesting idea, looking forward to more discussion.