Guild Wars 2

Can you guys imagine if this current wvw team was working on wvw for the past 3 years?
Anyways… Time slice scoring! YAY!

Time Slice Scoring.
I’m in favor of this method of scoring to keep it fair for everyone in every time zone. Not sure if maybe 2 hours is a bit short as I was always thinking of maybe 6 hour slices, but the 2 hour window will definitely make everyone’s playing time worthwhile and matter to scoring.

Action Level – Victory Point Multiplier.
I’m not in favor of this and don’t really think it is needed with the time slices scoring in place, which that alone should be able to mitigate runaway overall scores. Not even the NA populations on every server have the same length of prime time so again this might favor servers like BG who have bigger and better coverage than everyone else. If people really feel the need to add this in then I would only look at 2x multiplier during prime hours, and 1x for the rest of the time. But again I don’t feel it’s needed.

Last Stand
I agree with this mechanic to keep matches interesting at the end of the week.

Reduced the Score Tick Timer from 15 minutes to 5 minutes.
I’m in agreement with this, it would help smaller populations and quick strike captures with small teams would be much more meaningful.

Upgraded Objectives Score Higher.
I don’t really agree with this point as higher population servers have a better chance to hold their structures over lower population servers. This could help create runaway scores in a time slice.

Points for Capture.
I agree in giving higher points for capturing an upgraded structure. I know this point and the one above go hand in hand, but my thinking is higher population servers already have the advantage, and there’s no point in handing over bonus points to them every 5 mins. But higher points for something that would normally take 3 hours to upgrade? that would be ok, they would basically only get bonus points once in that time slice for it.

Points for Kill.
I agree with these changes.

Thank you Tyler B and the Wvw team!

Dawdler.8521:

bubbachua.1243:

I am a SEA player. Over the last year especially since GW2 China came out, we have experienced a big drop in numbers playing WvW. Changing scoring to effectively reduce the contributions that we make on scores effectively is telling us that we are not needed in this game. I paid the same dollars as an American player did when I bought this game, I buy as much gems as the average player or maybe even more. I’m not sure if there might even be a case for suing Anet for making a scoring change to effectively favour people in other timezones in a MMO game played globally. I’m pretty sure this is tantamount to biasness towards part of your customer base who have made the loudest criss about “nightcapping”, but for your European, Asian and Australian players on NA servers, you are making it unfair to these customers of yours. So yeah, I hope Tyler you will have some serious considerations about this and refrain from making a decision that undermines a big portion of your customer base.

I do believe that the need to retain the population during times that 98% play the game exceed the need of the 2%. Offtime cappers have undermined a vast majority of the customer base for 4 years.

This scoring change will turn everything topsy turvy and I’m still not sure it will even accomplish what they say it will do.

There is no reason to devalue anyone’s time zone. That is a terrible idea that they should have never even considered as a possibility since players regardless of their time zone often log in at many different hours when they feel like playing and wish to have players to play with and against regardless and this is just preventing that from happening further.

They just need to bite the bullet and remove the passive lazy PPT based scoring and they will solve the issue and still treat all players equally. The PROBLEM is they would consider treating ANY of their player base unequal in the first place in an attempt to solve a problem they created via rewarding lazy game play. Rewarding lazy game play should not take precedent over treating the players who all paid for the game the same equally. If they stop rewarding PVD they can solve the issue easily without further running off players from the game.

The idea they have that the PvE Passive based PvD rewarding system is more valuable than their EU, PST, OCX and Sea players is disturbing. WvW NA players like to be able to enjoy the game when they can’t sleep at night, are on vacation or have a bit of time before they go to work sometimes, and now they are ensuring there will be no one to play with at all during those times since all those players will leave over this to games with developers that actually want their business.

The PST, OCX, SEA and EU players are more important than the PvD Anet, and it is a bit disturbing that anyone would have to tell then that.. they should realize what would happen here. That is not how you treat players, and there is no reason to treat any players unfairly as suggested here,

PPT creates the environment for PPK.

How do you create an area for conflict. You need to have something in that area for someone to control and it needs to have value else why control it. That’s PPT. Why do I want to fight you for it, because if I don’t you win. Therefore I need to take it. We need incentive to want to hold and upgrade these objectives and that’s what the increased PPT for upgraded structures means. This is also what gives yak kills and escorting more meaning, as well as scouting, sieging, scribing and guild upgrades. Those all tie together. If a structure has no value then all of that is moot and a waste of time.

Now PPK should score as well since the point of having something someone wants is to create a reason to fight. PPK needs to be rewarded and probably adjusted for other reasons. Such as fighting on objectives and in cases of being outnumbered. Not having PPK makes fights have less value and favors PvD which is bad. The idea that level 0 structures have very little value also makes sense since you don’t want to favor K-trains.
So fights, attacking and defending at objectives needs to score well for both types of actions and be rewarding to encourage that.

You can’t just have an empty map and expect people to find and engage in the fight, they need to have that sense of ownership and something to fight over. There are people that enjoy the fight for the fight, people that enjoy the capture, people that enjoy the support, people that enjoy the build and defend. Scoring needs to be address all of them and work for the 24 hour clock.

Not everyone can be on at the same time. The fight is interesting since it is 24 hours. So you don’t want to remove that but you can’t let that decide the match. That’s why the slices make sense. Again I am cautious of the action level and would want to see some weeks without that. A compromise might be that PPK should be worth more during times when there is more of a balance of players on all sides to offset empty captures. At the same time if a side can muster people off hours to take and control they shouldn’t be penalized for it either. People need to adapt to the fights. ANet has already said we can not mix EU/OCX/SEA/NA severs but that would have been the best solution here. Maybe there are still options of combing score at least across servers in different server farms. Have server alliances across these server groups that combine score to help offset off times but still allow people to add value in off peak times.

Other aspect is that if a scoring element creates an environment that does not generate “fun”, it needs to be adjusted sooner rather than later if the point of scoring changes is to create an environment that retains players, brings back older ones and creates a desire for new ones to start to WvW.

Question on last stand, assuming that the time zone for this would cross a period on Friday to Saturday that allowed all time zones some “weekend” time game play versus a straight its Friday thru reset. Aka you wouldn’t want to favor a time zone even in the same cluster of servers. So resets would be going back to Saturday night? Or is that a kittenumption.

TheGrimm.5624:

PPT creates the environment for PPK.

How do you create an area for conflict. You need to have something in that area for someone to control and it needs to have value else why control it. That’s PPT. Why do I want to fight you for it, because if I don’t you win. Therefore I need to take it. We need incentive to want to hold and upgrade these objectives and that’s what the increased PPT for upgraded structures means. This is also what gives yak kills and escorting more meaning, as well as scouting, sieging, scribing and guild upgrades. Those all tie together. If a structure has no value then all of that is moot and a waste of time.

Now PPK should score as well since the point of having something someone wants is to create a reason to fight. PPK needs to be rewarded and probably adjusted for other reasons. Such as fighting on objectives and in cases of being outnumbered. Not having PPK makes fights have less value and favors PvD which is bad. The idea that level 0 structures have very little value also makes sense since you don’t want to favor K-trains.
So fights, attacking and defending at objectives needs to score well for both types of actions and be rewarding to encourage that.

You can’t just have an empty map and expect people to find and engage in the fight, they need to have that sense of ownership and something to fight over. There are people that enjoy the fight for the fight, people that enjoy the capture, people that enjoy the support, people that enjoy the build and defend. Scoring needs to be address all of them and work for the 24 hour clock.

Not everyone can be on at the same time. The fight is interesting since it is 24 hours. So you don’t want to remove that but you can’t let that decide the match. That’s why the slices make sense. Again I am cautious of the action level and would want to see some weeks without that. A compromise might be that PPK should be worth more during times when there is more of a balance of players on all sides to offset empty captures. At the same time if a side can muster people off hours to take and control they shouldn’t be penalized for it either. People need to adapt to the fights. ANet has already said we can not mix EU/OCX/SEA/NA severs but that would have been the best solution here. Maybe there are still options of combing score at least across servers in different server farms. Have server alliances across these server groups that combine score to help offset off times but still allow people to add value in off peak times.

Other aspect is that if a scoring element creates an environment that does not generate “fun”, it needs to be adjusted sooner rather than later if the point of scoring changes is to create an environment that retains players, brings back older ones and creates a desire for new ones to start to WvW.

PPT isn’t necessary at all for Objective based PPK.
In objective based PPK:

• Owning the objective ( tower, keep, camp, ect) does not give score by itself, however it gives higher chance of rare LOOT to the individual and increase PPK for fighting over it. This makes the objectives MORE valuable than they currently are so you still want to own them but they do not do anything by themselves to affect the score. Their value is based on players fighting over them instead. Owning them ensures you have the best loot drops in the game mode when you fight over them. You create the conflict over who gets the most loot, and owning the objectives you are fighting over are how you do so. Currently players do not care about the score and there is less conflict due to that and the lack of personal rewards involved. This corrects that.

• You only get loot or PPK from fighting other players without the use of siege over objectives under attack. Defending team gets slightly higher loot and PPK than attacking team. This encourages players to own the objectives because they get the bets loot and pPK for doing so as well as blocking the K train by rewarding those for defending. This encourages players to fight over the objectives rather than run around in the field instead by personally rewarding them for doing so.

• The score is only increased by fighting other players rather than a tower just sitting there doing nothing, ye they will e fighting over the tower instead.

• The score cannot be run up if there is no one to fight.

It is pretty easy to understand and it no longer rewards afk, PvD or siege humping and yet makes the objectives more valuable and will have more players willing to fight over them than the current system. If players only get loot and PPK from killing other players while fighting over objectives, they will fight over the objectives to get the most loot and PPK.

If the population issues are worked out, you will not have empty maps and will always have people available to fight over objectives to be able to score.

Dawdler.8521:

bubbachua.1243:

I am a SEA player. Over the last year especially since GW2 China came out, we have experienced a big drop in numbers playing WvW. Changing scoring to effectively reduce the contributions that we make on scores effectively is telling us that we are not needed in this game. I paid the same dollars as an American player did when I bought this game, I buy as much gems as the average player or maybe even more. I’m not sure if there might even be a case for suing Anet for making a scoring change to effectively favour people in other timezones in a MMO game played globally. I’m pretty sure this is tantamount to biasness towards part of your customer base who have made the loudest criss about “nightcapping”, but for your European, Asian and Australian players on NA servers, you are making it unfair to these customers of yours. So yeah, I hope Tyler you will have some serious considerations about this and refrain from making a decision that undermines a big portion of your customer base.

I do believe that the need to retain the population during times that 98% play the game exceed the need of the 2%. Offtime cappers have undermined a vast majority of the customer base for 4 years.

This scoring change will turn everything topsy turvy and I’m still not sure it will even accomplish what they say it will do.

I like where you stats are coming from. It pretty much invalidate everything you said.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, as most of your are probably aware, Scoring Improvements won over QoL improvements in the last poll. So now it’s time to delve deeper into what that means.

We want to improve scoring for a few big reasons:

• Reduce the need for 24 hour coverage by reducing the effects of off-hours capping (night capping)
  • It’s not okay that the time periods with the smallest number of active players have the largest impact on the score
  • Of course we don’t want to alienate players who play during these period, off-hours coverage will still matter, it just will no longer be the primary factor in determining which world wins any given matchup
• Reduce the number of runaway matches
  • That feeling of hopelessness when your team is down 100,000 points after a single day
• Give players a real opportunity to make a comeback
  • Matches are often decided in the first few days, making playing in the final days feel pointless
• In conjunction with population rebalancing, updating Scoring allows us to decide a winner of a match more fairly, and thus reward players more fairly
  • Currently we can’t give out worthwhile rewards for winning, as most match-ups are already decided before they begin

Next I’ll talk about how we plan to achieve those goals.

Changes to Match Structure:

• We’ll split the week long matches into 2 hour time slices we are calling ‘Skirmishes’
• Warscore is used to determine the winner of a Skirmish
• Skirmishes award varying amounts of Victory Points based on placement
• Victory Points are used to determine Match victor
• When a Skirmish ends, Warscore is reset, but actual map-state remains unchanged

Benefits

• Winning a Skirmish by a small margin, or a large margin, awards the same number of victory points.
• This keeps the winning and losing scores closer together, allowing the losing worlds a fighting chance
• Teams will still want to win as many time slices as possible, off-hours coverage is still important, but less dominant

Potential (controversial) additional change:

• While the above change takes steps to bring the value of off-hours coverage in-line, there’s a good chance it’ll still be overvalued. If that’s the case (and we’ll eventually poll on this), then we have plans for an additional system.
• This is the Action Level – Victory Point Multiplier system
  • This system would multiply the Victory Points awarded by Skirmishes based on map populations and time of day.
  • During prime time hours, the multiplier would always be at it’s maximum of 3.
  • During off hours, the multiplier might stay at 3 or drop to 2 or 1, depending on on activity level.
  • It’s important to include map populations as a factor, to make the system more fair for off hours players and its important to include time-of-day as a factor to prevent a winning team from trying to keep the score muliplier low by exiting WvW

Last Stand

• Last Stand describes the final day of any week long matchup
• During Last Stand, Skirmish placement Victory Points are multiplied
• This is intended to make the last day of the match as exciting as the first, and provide a final comeback mechanic for teams that are behind

Reduced the Score Tick Timer from 15 minutes to 5 minutes

• This will guarantee that every objective is grants at least one score pulse before it can be flipped by another team.
• Objective Score will be reduce by 1/3rd since they’d be ticking 3x as often. This keeps the relative score from all sources the same.
• Reward Track points will also be ticking 3x as often, and likewise be decreased by 1/3rd.

Upgraded Objectives Score Higher

• Each tier of objective upgrade increases the amount of score per tick
• The goal is to incentivize defending your upgraded objectives and assaulting opposing upgraded objectives

Points for Capture

• Capturing an objective awards immediate score.
• If the objective is upgraded it is worth additional score.

Points for Kill

• The amount of score earned from PPK will be increased, so that it contributes more to the overall score.
• As a rough number, PPK may increase to 3-5 points, rather than 1, with diminishing returns on killing players who have been alive for less than 5 minutes.
• Warscore for Caravan Kills, Caravan Delivery and Sentry Capture should increase by at a similar rate as PPK.

UI

• Many of these new systems and changes will also necessitate updates to the UI, to display all this new information.

Rewards

• Once we have these scoring updates in, we can look at adding placement rewards for Skirmishes and Matches.

These are welcome and very long overdue changes, had they been implimented 2-3 years ago we would be with a lot more fully alive servers then we have today.

I would however point out a couple things, since this is a beta so it’s kinda meant for feedback as well.

1. I do not see one very important aspect, that is, outmanned buff should give extra victory points. Lets face it, its rough, really rough often times to accomplish anything while being outnumbered to such a huge degree. The players who do so should be rewarded for their extra effort, tenacity, willingness to continue to fight the good fight against bad odds.

I would also like to see a sort of “local outmanned” buff in place, not just map wide.

2. Instead of timezone slicing, why not just concentrate on active gameplay vs inactive (passive) scoring ? This way, active servers and groups can still contribute on same level but the resulting “unattended” ticking would not have such a huge effect.

There are many ways to achieve this, bumping PPK values is a part of this, and on the otehr side, as many people have mentioned in various places, have a lot less PPT but increase points gained from captures, defending events, escort events, etc.

This will not only level the playing field across timezones, but also across playstyles. Fight oriented guilds, objective oriented guilds, even roamers can contribute via activity, instead of obtaining majority of total score points from dumbed down, semi-afk absentee style game play which IMHO should not award anything at all due to its nature.

I’m wondering how increasing the importance of primetime for PPT is gonna work out… generally speaking during primetime people log on for the fights, not for the PPT. Making the PPT more important in a timeframe where people go to WvW for the fights could lead to some salty mapchats…

lil devils x.6071:

…

• No PPK or LOOT for siege damage on players. Siege can still do more damage on players than their character, but they will have to forego their LOOT and PPK if they even think about touching that AC. This encourages players to learn their characters and fight with characters instead of siege, and make hard choices and discourages zerg siege humping encouraging fun fights instead.
  …

Sorry Lil, I’ve have to shortened the quote, but I fully agree with everything in it. In my my mind penalizing players because they don’t play in the primetime will hurt wvw a much more than anet could imagine. When I started with playing guildwars 2, I was playing in sea, I’ve got on na servers a better lantency than to eu servers. Years later I’ve moved back to europe again, but still playing on na servers because the queues on eu servers were ridiculous high during eu prime. Basically night capping is a bigger eu problem and a lesser na problem, so why do not implemented all the suggestions only for eu servers and do only minor changes for na servers.

I’ve quoted this part, because this should definitely come ingame. +1 from me

I’ve readed the scoring suggestions and I don’t like them, because they are all based of the discriminations for off hours players. If this ideas are coming, I really hope anet gives these players better rewards during the off hours, because they can’t help/contribute to their servers anymore. Tbh, why should they still join wvw with this changes? Anet threaten them not equally, they are less valued costumers.

I was thougt about primezones based on the wvw activity level of the server, but it’s still discrimination for other timezones. Every costumer should be worth in the same way.

vana.5467:

Personally, I think you’re barking up the wrong tree. I’m not specifically against any of the proposed changes, but they don’t address the core of the issue. “Night capping” is a direct result of uneven coverage – why not attempt to fix that instead of the secondary problems it creates?
Off the top of my head, a simple solution using existing features would be to vary linking over the course of a day. We have 4 matchups for NA. Boil that down to 1-2 during off hours, and “night capping” largely goes away. The servers with little to no coverage will be carried by their linking partners, the linking can control population balance fairly well, and (most importantly) it would create a much more active environment for the people playing in these timezones.

The people actively playing in these timezones for months/years obviously dont want a more active environment, or else they wouldnt pvdoor for months/years. If they wanted it they would transfer to other Servers so each Server has an equal amount of Players during night providing “Action”.
But they dont and thus prefer PvDoor.

street.2176:

“Rip Ocx/sea” and similiar comments make me laugh.

There are ways of doing it without making ocx, sea and eu players feel disregarded and devalued many of which have been suggested in this thread.

street.2176:

The people actively playing in these timezones for months/years obviously dont want a more active environment, or else they wouldnt pvdoor for months/years. If they wanted it they would transfer to other Servers so each Server has an equal amount of Players during night providing “Action”.
But they dont and thus prefer PvDoor.

You’re just being needlessly dismissive. OCX players for one have never been players who want to PvD by and large. And most did migrate up the tiers.

lil devils x.6071:

PPT isn’t necessary at all for Objective based PPK.
In objective based PPK:

• Owning the objective ( tower, keep, camp, ect) does not give score by itself, however it gives higher chance of rare LOOT to the individual and increase PPK for fighting over it. This makes the objectives MORE valuable than they currently are so you still want to own them but they do not do anything by themselves to affect the score. Their value is based on players fighting over them instead. Owning them ensures you have the best loot drops in the game mode when you fight over them. You create the conflict over who gets the most loot, and owning the objectives you are fighting over are how you do so. Currently players do not care about the score and there is less conflict due to that and the lack of personal rewards involved. This corrects that.

• You only get loot or PPK from fighting other players without the use of siege over objectives under attack. Defending team gets slightly higher loot and PPK than attacking team. This encourages players to own the objectives because they get the bets loot and pPK for doing so as well as blocking the K train by rewarding those for defending. This encourages players to fight over the objectives rather than run around in the field instead by personally rewarding them for doing so.

• The score is only increased by fighting other players rather than a tower just sitting there doing nothing, ye they will e fighting over the tower instead.

• The score cannot be run up if there is no one to fight.

It is pretty easy to understand and it no longer rewards afk, PvD or siege humping and yet makes the objectives more valuable and will have more players willing to fight over them than the current system. If players only get loot and PPK from killing other players while fighting over objectives, they will fight over the objectives to get the most loot and PPK.

If the population issues are worked out, you will not have empty maps and will always have people available to fight over objectives to be able to score.

Thanks for more details to clarify what you mean.

Question, is this system not easily gamed? This come down to, I have less people then the other side, so don’t fight. Only fight if I can win. What prevents a side that has won the fights on day one to now no longer log on since if the other side takes it while I am offline I still win. It creates an environment to not to fight. We don’t want that.

What’s the point in defending at all in this system if there is no reason to do so? Camps also become meaningless and blocking yaks have no value so you also remove the reason to fight in the open since yaks create a mobile combat objective?

Or are you saying create a passive loot bonus to the side controlling items that are fought over?

This just leaves fight because of fight, which has merits but will not be interesting to everyone else we would all just sPvP in courtyards, which was cycled out becuase of lack of interest.

I appreciate the incentive for loot, but, what does loot do today? Loot pays for upgrades to gear making a player strong and it pays for WvW upgrades, which have less value if taking and holding have less value. Which does in this scenario.

You want people to fight even if outnumbered and I don’t see how this doesn’t favor the side with the most numbers.

street.2176:

The people actively playing in these timezones for months/years obviously dont want a more active environment, or else they wouldnt pvdoor for months/years. If they wanted it they would transfer to other Servers so each Server has an equal amount of Players during night providing “Action”.
But they dont and thus prefer PvDoor.

That’s completely untrue, most OCX/SEA transfer up to the top 6 to get to fight other people. How many OCX/SEA do you think transferred to T8 to PvDoor? None.

The PvD players are all in eotm ever since it came into existence, there is no need at all for them to WvW with the risk of being killed on their karma train.

T1 was the last bastion of WvW for non prime players that had any resemblance to what NA prime players enjoy in multiple tiers. There used to be enough blobs, havoc squads and roamers everywhere so that people could enjoy a variety of game play styles.

Reducing the incentive to play non NA prime just REDUCES activity during these time zones (eg: dungeons) which is exactly why we are complaining.

street.2176:

“Rip Ocx/sea” and similiar comments make me laugh.
WvW is a PPT Game, so the most ppt should be awarded when the most players play wvw. So Look at all NA/EU Servers, look when each Server has the most Players and find the average. Thats exactly what happens, so its a good change.
Theres no reason why Players playing during times with lesser Players should make the same Impact than during prime time.
Having to work during the day and only being able to play during night or living in a different timezone is no excuse. Most Points should and finally will be awarded when most are playing.
Its just fair and Servers with a high Night Cap Population will still have an advantage. If said Servers have a low Prime Time then their Place wasnt in the current Tier anyways and they should and must drop a Tier. Its no fun for 2 other Servers playing vs a weak Server during Prime Time, its pretty boring when theres no enemies or they are only running away. And then still losing to the weak Server because it has 30-40 Players during night ticking away at 500.

If you are losing, then you are “overall” the weakest World in the match. Also, those 30-40 players during the night are not playing for the other 20 hours of the day. That would be more about 150-200 players playing for 4 hours each. So this perception of the “the majority plays when I play.” is flawed.

People need to keep this is mind, the changes will continue to keep WvW score as coverage war. That did not change. What they did is merely reducing the overall victory score down by giving them a “fixed victory score”. So, if you win that time slice, it will add a “victory score” of let say 1000 to the total victory score. This will put all time slice into a equal contribution.

Now the main concern is this “additional change”, will they put a huge off hours population as default multiplier or will they put it as less multiplier. I am certain to say that if they put the huge off hours population as less mutiplier, anet must be prepared to lose your market shares. To begin with, a good number of asia players have already went to play TOS and if anet is willing to lose more market shares, go ahead.

Huge off population should not be punished for being huge if their opponents do not have the equal to fight off. To start with, it is anet’s incapability to prevent stacking that started it all. Players have the tendency to stack and anet should have implemented a dynamic system to prevent it but the years of negligence to WvW allow players to do whatever they want like emptying the bottom servers to stack at the top. Yes, people can blame those who stacked for causing all this but it is really all they can do to make them feel a bit better. Ultimately, the control lies in anet.

street.2176:

The people actively playing in these timezones for months/years obviously dont want a more active environment, or else they wouldnt pvdoor for months/years. If they wanted it they would transfer to other Servers so each Server has an equal amount of Players during night providing “Action”.
But they dont and thus prefer PvDoor.

If I worked a night shift and only could play during the day, why wouldn’t I want to play and fight? Would it be my fault that I didn’t have a 9 to 5 job? Why would I want to join a server that had massive lag because my time zone matched a different timezone that was outside of my part of the globe? No I would aid the server I liked and fought the fights that were there since it is a 24 hour war. System needs to balance these out.

lil devils x.6071:

TheGrimm.5624:

PPT creates the environment for PPK.

How do you create an area for conflict. You need to have something in that area for someone to control and it needs to have value else why control it. That’s PPT. Why do I want to fight you for it, because if I don’t you win. Therefore I need to take it. We need incentive to want to hold and upgrade these objectives and that’s what the increased PPT for upgraded structures means. This is also what gives yak kills and escorting more meaning, as well as scouting, sieging, scribing and guild upgrades. Those all tie together. If a structure has no value then all of that is moot and a waste of time.

Now PPK should score as well since the point of having something someone wants is to create a reason to fight. PPK needs to be rewarded and probably adjusted for other reasons. Such as fighting on objectives and in cases of being outnumbered. Not having PPK makes fights have less value and favors PvD which is bad. The idea that level 0 structures have very little value also makes sense since you don’t want to favor K-trains.
So fights, attacking and defending at objectives needs to score well for both types of actions and be rewarding to encourage that.

You can’t just have an empty map and expect people to find and engage in the fight, they need to have that sense of ownership and something to fight over. There are people that enjoy the fight for the fight, people that enjoy the capture, people that enjoy the support, people that enjoy the build and defend. Scoring needs to be address all of them and work for the 24 hour clock.

Not everyone can be on at the same time. The fight is interesting since it is 24 hours. So you don’t want to remove that but you can’t let that decide the match. That’s why the slices make sense. Again I am cautious of the action level and would want to see some weeks without that. A compromise might be that PPK should be worth more during times when there is more of a balance of players on all sides to offset empty captures. At the same time if a side can muster people off hours to take and control they shouldn’t be penalized for it either. People need to adapt to the fights. ANet has already said we can not mix EU/OCX/SEA/NA severs but that would have been the best solution here. Maybe there are still options of combing score at least across servers in different server farms. Have server alliances across these server groups that combine score to help offset off times but still allow people to add value in off peak times.

Other aspect is that if a scoring element creates an environment that does not generate “fun”, it needs to be adjusted sooner rather than later if the point of scoring changes is to create an environment that retains players, brings back older ones and creates a desire for new ones to start to WvW.

PPT isn’t necessary at all for Objective based PPK.
In objective based PPK:

• Owning the objective ( tower, keep, camp, ect) does not give score by itself, however it gives higher chance of rare LOOT to the individual and increase PPK for fighting over it. This makes the objectives MORE valuable than they currently are so you still want to own them but they do not do anything by themselves to affect the score. Their value is based on players fighting over them instead. Owning them ensures you have the best loot drops in the game mode when you fight over them. You create the conflict over who gets the most loot, and owning the objectives you are fighting over are how you do so. Currently players do not care about the score and there is less conflict due to that and the lack of personal rewards involved. This corrects that.

• You only get loot or PPK from fighting other players without the use of siege over objectives under attack. Defending team gets slightly higher loot and PPK than attacking team. This encourages players to own the objectives because they get the bets loot and pPK for doing so as well as blocking the K train by rewarding those for defending. This encourages players to fight over the objectives rather than run around in the field instead by personally rewarding them for doing so.

• The score is only increased by fighting other players rather than a tower just sitting there doing nothing, ye they will e fighting over the tower instead.

• The score cannot be run up if there is no one to fight.

It is pretty easy to understand and it no longer rewards afk, PvD or siege humping and yet makes the objectives more valuable and will have more players willing to fight over them than the current system. If players only get loot and PPK from killing other players while fighting over objectives, they will fight over the objectives to get the most loot and PPK.

If the population issues are worked out, you will not have empty maps and will always have people available to fight over objectives to be able to score.

Sry but your system based on PPK will be gamed the second it comes out.

Dawdler.8521:

bubbachua.1243:

I am a SEA player. Over the last year especially since GW2 China came out, we have experienced a big drop in numbers playing WvW. Changing scoring to effectively reduce the contributions that we make on scores effectively is telling us that we are not needed in this game. I paid the same dollars as an American player did when I bought this game, I buy as much gems as the average player or maybe even more. I’m not sure if there might even be a case for suing Anet for making a scoring change to effectively favour people in other timezones in a MMO game played globally. I’m pretty sure this is tantamount to biasness towards part of your customer base who have made the loudest criss about “nightcapping”, but for your European, Asian and Australian players on NA servers, you are making it unfair to these customers of yours. So yeah, I hope Tyler you will have some serious considerations about this and refrain from making a decision that undermines a big portion of your customer base.

I do believe that the need to retain the population during times that 98% play the game exceed the need of the 2%. Offtime cappers have undermined a vast majority of the customer base for 4 years.

This scoring change will turn everything topsy turvy and I’m still not sure it will even accomplish what they say it will do.

On T1 NA servers it was more like a 40/60 split, or in the case of JQ and SoS (and even KN and IoJ back in the day before their servers imploded), their OCX and SEA population would vastly outnumber their NA population with many Australian and SEA players transferring up to kitten have something to fight and not stay on low tiers to PVD. Yes, it’s different on EU servers, which is why EU servers need a different solution to NA servers.

SkyShroud.2865:

People need to keep this is mind, the changes will continue to keep WvW score as coverage war. That did not change. What they did is merely reducing the overall victory score down by giving them a “fixed victory score”. So, if you win that time slice, it will add a “victory score” of let say 1000 to the total victory score. This will put all time slice into a equal contribution.

Your points are valid. What we don’t know is if you remove run-away score how does that impact the final score. If the concept is that controlling off time is worth 4 other periods of scoring and now reduces that to 2 is that worth it. Is that recoverable via other means like PPK then it might be balanced.

Aezyr.5304:

lil devils x.6071:

TheGrimm.5624:

PPT creates the environment for PPK.

How do you create an area for conflict. You need to have something in that area for someone to control and it needs to have value else why control it. That’s PPT. Why do I want to fight you for it, because if I don’t you win. Therefore I need to take it. We need incentive to want to hold and upgrade these objectives and that’s what the increased PPT for upgraded structures means. This is also what gives yak kills and escorting more meaning, as well as scouting, sieging, scribing and guild upgrades. Those all tie together. If a structure has no value then all of that is moot and a waste of time.

Now PPK should score as well since the point of having something someone wants is to create a reason to fight. PPK needs to be rewarded and probably adjusted for other reasons. Such as fighting on objectives and in cases of being outnumbered. Not having PPK makes fights have less value and favors PvD which is bad. The idea that level 0 structures have very little value also makes sense since you don’t want to favor K-trains.
So fights, attacking and defending at objectives needs to score well for both types of actions and be rewarding to encourage that.

You can’t just have an empty map and expect people to find and engage in the fight, they need to have that sense of ownership and something to fight over. There are people that enjoy the fight for the fight, people that enjoy the capture, people that enjoy the support, people that enjoy the build and defend. Scoring needs to be address all of them and work for the 24 hour clock.

Not everyone can be on at the same time. The fight is interesting since it is 24 hours. So you don’t want to remove that but you can’t let that decide the match. That’s why the slices make sense. Again I am cautious of the action level and would want to see some weeks without that. A compromise might be that PPK should be worth more during times when there is more of a balance of players on all sides to offset empty captures. At the same time if a side can muster people off hours to take and control they shouldn’t be penalized for it either. People need to adapt to the fights. ANet has already said we can not mix EU/OCX/SEA/NA severs but that would have been the best solution here. Maybe there are still options of combing score at least across servers in different server farms. Have server alliances across these server groups that combine score to help offset off times but still allow people to add value in off peak times.

Other aspect is that if a scoring element creates an environment that does not generate “fun”, it needs to be adjusted sooner rather than later if the point of scoring changes is to create an environment that retains players, brings back older ones and creates a desire for new ones to start to WvW.

PPT isn’t necessary at all for Objective based PPK.
In objective based PPK:

• Owning the objective ( tower, keep, camp, ect) does not give score by itself, however it gives higher chance of rare LOOT to the individual and increase PPK for fighting over it. This makes the objectives MORE valuable than they currently are so you still want to own them but they do not do anything by themselves to affect the score. Their value is based on players fighting over them instead. Owning them ensures you have the best loot drops in the game mode when you fight over them. You create the conflict over who gets the most loot, and owning the objectives you are fighting over are how you do so. Currently players do not care about the score and there is less conflict due to that and the lack of personal rewards involved. This corrects that.

• You only get loot or PPK from fighting other players without the use of siege over objectives under attack. Defending team gets slightly higher loot and PPK than attacking team. This encourages players to own the objectives because they get the bets loot and pPK for doing so as well as blocking the K train by rewarding those for defending. This encourages players to fight over the objectives rather than run around in the field instead by personally rewarding them for doing so.

• The score is only increased by fighting other players rather than a tower just sitting there doing nothing, ye they will e fighting over the tower instead.

• The score cannot be run up if there is no one to fight.

It is pretty easy to understand and it no longer rewards afk, PvD or siege humping and yet makes the objectives more valuable and will have more players willing to fight over them than the current system. If players only get loot and PPK from killing other players while fighting over objectives, they will fight over the objectives to get the most loot and PPK.

If the population issues are worked out, you will not have empty maps and will always have people available to fight over objectives to be able to score.

Sry but your system based on PPK will be gamed the second it comes out.

I think she really wants a PVP match that lasts longer with many more people on bigger maps that use pve gear. That style could even have proper leader board and ladders.

Many probably would enjoy that, but wvw would also lose a lot of people as well ….

Hot diggity kitten these proposed changes sound fantastic, and I have complete faith that even if these don’t work out as originally designed, that the goals are in the right place, and we’ll find the sweet spot.

Crazy excited for all the WvW action to come. Great work!

Josh XT.6053:

I’d like more details on this “skirmishing” idea. As a person who does not play Blob Wars, I roam with a small group and hope to still be effective.

Here is how I understand this system (and, as usualy, I could be completely wrong).

First we will have 2 different scores: Skirmish Score (SS) and Match Score (MS). SS is reset every 2 hours, whoever has earned most SS during those 2 hours will get most MS.

Example time!!! We will use 1 map, just imagine this covering all 4 maps.

Red holds 2 keeps and 2 towers. Blue has 1 keep. Green has 2 towers. Keep ticks 10 points every 5 minutes, tower ticks 3. Within 2 hours we assume nothing changes, no new objectives are captured. So.. 12 ticks per hour, 24 ticks in total.

Red SS = 24 * (2* 10 + 2 * 3) = 624
Blue SS = 24 * 10 = 240
Green SS = 24 * (2 * 3) = 144

This would be plain addition to each server score with current system. However, with new system, Red does not increase MS by 624, they get just 5 MS. Blue gets 3 and Green gets 1.

Now after 2 hours SS is reset. We now assume both Blue and Green get up and capture 1 Red keep. So for next 2 hour timeframe SS is ticking like this:

Red SS = 24 * (2 * 3) = 144
Blue SS = 24 * 2 * 10 = 480
Green SS = 24 * (10 + 2 * 3) = 384

And now we award the MS for each server: Red gets 1, Blue 5 and Green 3.

And total standing of MS after 2 skirmishes (4 hour total): R = 6, B = 8, G = 4.
Compared to matchup score current system would end up with: R = 768, B = 720, G = 528

This change alone (not even considering all the other changes) will have a lot of interesting effects to the matches. Even when you are not able to cover each timezone against more populated server, you can still strike at certain times to catch up much more easily since the score is not ticking constantly for 24*7 hours. Also notice how it does not matter by how much you win each Skirmish, it does not matter if you had 100% of map or just 1 more point, you still get exact same amount of MS.

Consider enemy group at keep 10 minutes before skirmish time is going to end. Just being able to slow them down for few more minutes, just having 1 player in the Lord room to prevent capture may be enough to win the current skirmish. Even more when the upgrade bonuses are included.

I would also think new system really does work well against huge slow map-wide blobs. They are just going to be very inefficient against multiple smaller enemy groups who can capture several objectives same time.

You should share more information about how you determine Skirmish winner and which activities will contribute most to it.

What you should achive with new system is: “Scoring encourages winning fights inside objectives and winning fights outside objectives. Scoring punishes capping undefended objectives and not defending upgraded objectives”.

Last Stand
Be careful about it. Most people are used to play final day as Karma Train. Match is already decided, no one defends anything, blobs run in circles and cap everything for karma. I am not saying this is good, but it is what people are used to and changing it can lead to bad circumstances. Think twice.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

• Reduce the number of runaway matches
  • That feeling of hopelessness when your team is down 100,000 points after a single day
• Give players a real opportunity to make a comeback
  • Matches are often decided in the first few days, making playing in the final days feel pointless

Keep in mind that if you go overboard with those changes you’ll end up in situation when doing anything is pointless because you wont affect final score enough for it to be worth your time before last reset day rush.

There was a point i LoL balancing history (few years ago when i still played it) when rewards for killing anyone were so small and penalties (in form of greater rewards for enemy) for being in kill streak were so big that engaging with an enemy was undesired.

FINALY RISE FROM THE FALL love you arena net and hope i can support you as pos as i can

> Warscore for Caravan Kills, Caravan Delivery and Sentry Capture should increase by at a similar rate as PPK.

With the increase of points awarded per Sentry Capture, the strength of Sentries should be reconsidered. As it stands they are extraordinarily weak – Often unable to kill a lone non-upgraded Dolyak wondering past. They also have negligible life and are often killed as a second thought whilst running past as opposed to being a main focus of a point.

Run some weeks with and without the score multipliers, see what happens. I think capping the number of points for winning a 2-hour slice will be effective enough in limiting the damage caused by population imbalance.

Also, if we’re doing score multipliers, keeping the multiplier high for time periods when all servers have high participation, including what would normally be “off-hours”, is crucial.

There needs to be another solution to “nightcapping” which doesn’t make a big player base feel undermined. I agree with several posters here that what Tyler suggested isn’t really solving the issue but rather creating another problem of server stacking. Let’s try to think constructively how to resolve this and propose solutions

Repost here: there are fights in “off-hours”, at least so far in the servers I was in. I really don’t see the issue at all that warrants this.

There is one easy way to reduce the influence of ‘night capping’ and that is to reduce the amount you tick every 15 (5) minutes just for holding stuff, whilst increasing the amount you get for killing enemies, capping and defending structures. It would also encourage fights and bunkering and make the game a bit more strategic.

Problem solved. No annoying everyone with a multiplier (that will be gamed) that will discourage players who play at hours outside the ‘prime’.

The split into 2 hour slots will be interesting but individual rewards should NOT be based on being involved in a slot from start to finish or the number you participate in, they should continue to be tied to the current reward system.

bubbachua.1243:

There needs to be another solution to “nightcapping” which doesn’t make a big player base feel undermined. I agree with several posters here that what Tyler suggested isn’t really solving the issue but rather creating another problem of server stacking. Let’s try to think constructively how to resolve this and propose solutions

If the player Base was big enough there wouldn’t be a need to equalise their impact.

I’m worried that population relevance may lead to new players being asked/pressured to leave the map.

Seems to me it might be easier to have three 2h prime time skirmishes, one 3h skirmish either side of that block, then three 4h skirmishes covering the off-hours. Then nightcappjng simply counts for at most half of primetime capping, because it scores half as often.

How are you going to decide on the prime time hours ( EU player here ) as I can pretty much log on anytime of day after midday and hit a Queue for WvW, are you going to make it that its basically pointless to play outside of this window, so you either get in at the start or don’t bother because Queue’s will be 100+

If you really and I mean really want to make scoring different, heavily reduce the points per tick, and make it that you can x5 from killing other players, ( a siege kill gives no score ) this will prevent siege boring wars of who can build 50 AC’s faster.

If you want to fix the points per tick to please the ( I don’t play outside prime its not fair I cant tick at 400 all day ) make it that when you first cap an objective it gives no points in the first tick and is so fourth ( change numbers how needed )

Tick 1 = 10 points
Tick 2 = 20 points
Tick 3 = 30 points,

Progressively up to tick 10 where you get 100 points, I know to many servers in T1 and T2 who will happily PvD all day and avoid all battles even during prime time, why should those servers/players get a better reward during prime for doing the exact same thing that nightcappers are doing, which is PvD.

This would mean that if those playing outside the prime time set by Anet, can still get points if they are battling it out on the open field rather than K-Training.

Its taken 3 years to get Anet to look at WvW, don’t let them destroy it by making it that WvW is only relevant for 4-6 hours a day, and if those 4-6 hours aren’t in your timezone it becomes pointless.

( This coming from someone who plays GMT )

TheGrimm.5624:

SkyShroud.2865:

People need to keep this is mind, the changes will continue to keep WvW score as coverage war. That did not change. What they did is merely reducing the overall victory score down by giving them a “fixed victory score”. So, if you win that time slice, it will add a “victory score” of let say 1000 to the total victory score. This will put all time slice into a equal contribution.

Your points are valid. What we don’t know is if you remove run-away score how does that impact the final score. If the concept is that controlling off time is worth 4 other periods of scoring and now reduces that to 2 is that worth it. Is that recoverable via other means like PPK then it might be balanced.

The idea here is to equalize the efforts and not discriminate the efforts. You might be thinking that servers might be winning the off hours time slice through ninja teams and worried that the ninja teams will result in inaccurate score judgement.

Realistically speaking, this victory system might actually result in bad glicko judgement and putting servers with low off population in a tier that has much higher off population.

Theoretically, it sounds really great on paper, but I’m not too optimistic about it in practice.

fishball.7204:

You must be in some wood tier if you can make 20k-40k points in 1 night.

I see it on EU servers with large NA populations fairly often, the most standout being Desolation and Seafarer’s Rest. It just so rarely happens on NA though

TL;DR

Is Anet planning to F up non NA players?

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Prime Time would be universal per datacenter. For example, all worlds in NA would have the same 6 hour period (of highest activity) as their Prime Time hours. All EU woulds would have a different 6 hour range for their Prime Time.

Dev post of the year so far.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Potential (controversial) additional change:

• This is the Action Level – Victory Point Multiplier system
  • It’s important to include map populations as a factor, to make the system more fair for off hours players and its important to include time-of-day as a factor to prevent a winning team from trying to keep the score muliplier low by exiting WvW

Tyler,

As an American who primarily plays between 3AM and 9AM UTC -5, I strongly disagree with your final point there. Time-of-day is only a factor in Action Level if you excessively worry about player agency as a factor in “gaming the system.”

Do not worry about player agency gaming that system. It is exceedingly rare that a home world’s WvW community is capable of that level of agreement and cooperation. There are always significant amounts of dissident opinions and actions in a move like that. We have tried and failed to organize such moves in the past. This is a non-issue.

It is only imagination that leads to that worry. Look at the data.

If you use an otherwise correct scoring system to directly punish the actions of players naturally playing outside of NA prime time hours, then you will be unintentionally damaging their desire to play at all.

The only people who will cheer for that move are either misunderstanding or ignorant of the implication.

Map population should consistently be a factor in Action Level, across any “time of day” relative to server time. That part is correct.

Devaluing that factor based upon the server’s local time is nonsense. You’re operating an international game on the NA servers.

~ Anvu

Reverence.6915:

and even KN

Remember that one time when Kaineng was carried from T8 all the way to T2 primarily on their SEA alone? Then they fell apart when they hit a tier where servers actually had some coverage.

Thanks a lot anet. We are appreciate that the WvW developer finally care about what WvW player wants and their opinion. You are going the right step after 3+years. The WvW reward track, alphia BL, WvW development poll and the most important – get feedbacks from players for the WvW future update.

Lets talk about making score count less because you dont play at the same time everyone else does.

This is the kind of thing i come to expect from areanet. You either dont care what WvW people think or you have no clue. i suspect it is that you dont care enough to have a clue.

Entenkommando.5208:

bubbachua.1243:

There needs to be another solution to “nightcapping” which doesn’t make a big player base feel undermined. I agree with several posters here that what Tyler suggested isn’t really solving the issue but rather creating another problem of server stacking. Let’s try to think constructively how to resolve this and propose solutions

If the player Base was big enough there wouldn’t be a need to equalise their impact.

On JQ/IoJ we can Q two maps in Sea. That’s a substantial amount of players that’s about to get reduced to insignificance. Though players on here are so fed up we probably have only 20-30 on total. They’re not even bothering logging in and staying in BDO instead. Most at the point now of saying “uh huh… fine devs…. sure devs….. whatever devs…”

For a comment above, no it’s not racism. Though this entire design concept is certainly a form of discrimination still.

My thoughts:
Firstly, let me voice a clear no to any scaling based on population levels, as there is no need for such a step. The skirmish system in and of itself should be enough to smooth out the nightcapping issue.
Currently, servers that are dominating the match while being opposed maybe make 50% of the score that is up for grabs, while servers that are dominating while being mostly unopposed will make at least 85% of the points that are up for grabs, with the huge score swing by dolyaks not even being accounted for. It’s probably closer to 95%. This automatically means that time segments, where a server is unopposed will contribute far more. By slicing the matchup into small skirmishes, any single time segment will contribute exactly the same amount of points. So if you beat a server consistently during 12 hours of competition and lose unopposed during 12 hours of lull, you will end up even on points, rather than being behind, as is currently the case.
After all, the main objective of the skirmish system is to normalize the points that are up for grabs for dominating a time frame, so it doesn’t matter, how hard you dominate during a certain time frame and it becomes more important to dominate that time frame in the first place and the only advantage you gain from dominating a time frame really hard is that you begin the next skirmish while being in control of most objectives.

About having upgraded objectives tick for more, I’m not quite sure, this would be a good idea. It mainly brings back the night capping issue. A server could come back to control their third of the objectives, but still be at the scoring disadvantage for a very long time.
There is an argument to be made for having tier 3 objectives award more points, but I’d rather make that exclusive to tier 3 objectives alone. Let’s face it, the biggest challenge isn’t to get an objective to tier 1 or tier 2. The only upgrade tier that’s truly special is tier 3, where some roamers simply can’t solo camps anymore, towers become tough as nails and keeps gain their precious waypoints.
There is one point that could be made: The current system doesn’t give ample reward for a caravan reaching a tier 3 objective, since the objective is already at max upgrade level. The same with tier 3 camps. Maybe that’s the point, where additional points for tier 3 objectives could be inserted. A caravan reaching a tier 3 objective grants extra points and a caravan reaching an objective from a tier 3 camp also grants extra points.
That way, digging in in tier 3 objectives after having gained total control of the map during night capping wouldn’t grant the server any benefit, if they can’t control the surrounding area. It would also give roamers more significance and give more importance to controlling an area, rather than holding an objective. It’s bonus points that are not tied directly to having control of the objective, which encourages a more active play style. Rather than the current situation, where players sometimes just give up on playing on certain borderlands entirely, because they can’t make a meaningful impact, just flipping camps would make a huge difference and maybe even serve to break up the enemy’s zerg.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, as most of your are probably aware, Scoring Improvements won over QoL improvements in the last poll. So now it’s time to delve deeper into what that means.

We want to improve scoring for a few big reasons:

• Reduce the need for 24 hour coverage by reducing the effects of off-hours capping (night capping)
  • It’s not okay that the time periods with the smallest number of active players have the largest impact on the score
  • Of course we don’t want to alienate players who play during these period, off-hours coverage will still matter, it just will no longer be the primary factor in determining which world wins any given matchup
• Reduce the number of runaway matches
  • That feeling of hopelessness when your team is down 100,000 points after a single day
• Give players a real opportunity to make a comeback
  • Matches are often decided in the first few days, making playing in the final days feel pointless
• In conjunction with population rebalancing, updating Scoring allows us to decide a winner of a match more fairly, and thus reward players more fairly
  • Currently we can’t give out worthwhile rewards for winning, as most match-ups are already decided before they begin

Next I’ll talk about how we plan to achieve those goals.

Changes to Match Structure:

• We’ll split the week long matches into 2 hour time slices we are calling ‘Skirmishes’
• Warscore is used to determine the winner of a Skirmish
• Skirmishes award varying amounts of Victory Points based on placement
• Victory Points are used to determine Match victor
• When a Skirmish ends, Warscore is reset, but actual map-state remains unchanged

Benefits

• Winning a Skirmish by a small margin, or a large margin, awards the same number of victory points.
• This keeps the winning and losing scores closer together, allowing the losing worlds a fighting chance
• Teams will still want to win as many time slices as possible, off-hours coverage is still important, but less dominant

Potential (controversial) additional change:

• While the above change takes steps to bring the value of off-hours coverage in-line, there’s a good chance it’ll still be overvalued. If that’s the case (and we’ll eventually poll on this), then we have plans for an additional system.
• This is the Action Level – Victory Point Multiplier system
  • This system would multiply the Victory Points awarded by Skirmishes based on map populations and time of day.
  • During prime time hours, the multiplier would always be at it’s maximum of 3.
  • During off hours, the multiplier might stay at 3 or drop to 2 or 1, depending on on activity level.
  • It’s important to include map populations as a factor, to make the system more fair for off hours players and its important to include time-of-day as a factor to prevent a winning team from trying to keep the score muliplier low by exiting WvW

Last Stand

• Last Stand describes the final day of any week long matchup
• During Last Stand, Skirmish placement Victory Points are multiplied
• This is intended to make the last day of the match as exciting as the first, and provide a final comeback mechanic for teams that are behind

Reduced the Score Tick Timer from 15 minutes to 5 minutes

• This will guarantee that every objective is grants at least one score pulse before it can be flipped by another team.
• Objective Score will be reduce by 1/3rd since they’d be ticking 3x as often. This keeps the relative score from all sources the same.
• Reward Track points will also be ticking 3x as often, and likewise be decreased by 1/3rd.

Upgraded Objectives Score Higher

• Each tier of objective upgrade increases the amount of score per tick
• The goal is to incentivize defending your upgraded objectives and assaulting opposing upgraded objectives

Points for Capture

• Capturing an objective awards immediate score.
• If the objective is upgraded it is worth additional score.

Points for Kill

• The amount of score earned from PPK will be increased, so that it contributes more to the overall score.
• As a rough number, PPK may increase to 3-5 points, rather than 1, with diminishing returns on killing players who have been alive for less than 5 minutes.
• Warscore for Caravan Kills, Caravan Delivery and Sentry Capture should increase by at a similar rate as PPK.

UI

• Many of these new systems and changes will also necessitate updates to the UI, to display all this new information.

Rewards

• Once we have these scoring updates in, we can look at adding placement rewards for Skirmishes and Matches.

go vote guys
http://www.gw2wvw.net/content/what-do-you-think-about-time-slice-scoring

Going to be interesting to see what happens to the BG blob during offpeak times. Will they get frustrated at their steamrolling not contributing to PPT? Time will tell I guess.

I am more than willing to try these changes, I do hope that they keep polling players on what they want before and and more importantly after said change. Also to those wanting pure pvp I personally would not want that at all, there is a game mode for that called spvp. It takes at least a bit of skill to win there. Huge zergs that are truely blobs can just run over smaller groups using little skill most of the time which does not say anything for your personal skill level and more for just brute strenght, so hey if that makes you feel skilled. I have no idea what to say to you. Areanet is trying there best to meet what they believe we want so I will at least try it out then give my thoughts on them.

Just to throw fuel on the flames – some old dev quotes. How times have changed.

Matt Witter.6982:

We feel that everyone should have the ability to contribute no matter what time of the day it is. How we’ve came to this conclusion is that no player’s time is more valuable than another. Everyone has different off peak hours for whatever reason. Players should not be punished or unable to experience and view the same content as everyone else because they play at a different time. They too are paying customers.

Jiminy.8340:

Just to throw fuel on the flames – some old dev quotes. How times have changed.

Matt Witter.6982:

We feel that everyone should have the ability to contribute no matter what time of the day it is. How we’ve came to this conclusion is that no player’s time is more valuable than another. Everyone has different off peak hours for whatever reason. Players should not be punished or unable to experience and view the same content as everyone else because they play at a different time. They too are paying customers.

you are right times have changed, because anet finaly realized this:

“It’s not okay that the time periods with the smallest number of active players have the largest impact on the score”

and this is absolutly kittening right, a small number of players should not be the deciding factor if you server wins a matchup or not, you can STILL contribute to the score at night, but you wont be able to generate 20k-30k points over the night because the other servers are sleeping (looking at you baruch,sfr,deso)

Jiminy.8340:

Just to throw fuel on the flames – some old dev quotes. How times have changed.

Matt Witter.6982:

We feel that everyone should have the ability to contribute no matter what time of the day it is. How we’ve came to this conclusion is that no player’s time is more valuable than another. Everyone has different off peak hours for whatever reason. Players should not be punished or unable to experience and view the same content as everyone else because they play at a different time. They too are paying customers.

+1

Nightcapping and off-time capping are already nerfed with the new mechanic of Skirmishes. Pointing 695 will be as much value as pointing 240 (while other servers do 230 and 225).
Then we have the coefficient of people playing. As at off-times there are less people playing their, their efforts are counted less.

There’s no point to triple nerf it with a minor coefficient based on timezone. This will only disincentive people to play during those timezones, making the situation even worse.
It is also a discrimination over players and labeling them as first, second and third class, depending on where you were born or live or the culture you have.

Let’s never forget WvW is a 24h matchup.