Guild Wars 2

Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?

Yes.

World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?

Every year.

Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?

Yes.

Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?

Yes.

Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

Yes please. I always wanted to repair siege golems.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, below is a list of upcoming polls you are likely to see, in roughly the order you are likely to see them.

• 1*Mixed Borderlands* – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?
• 2*World Linking Schedule* – How often should we relink worlds?
• 3*Deployable Mortars* – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
• 4*Deployable Cannons* – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
• 5*Repair Hammer* – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

Special Mention

• WvW Priorities – What do you want the WvW team to prioritize next?
  • We’ll run this poll after completing major milestones with whatever feature last won the Prioritization vote. So in this case: Scoring Improvements.

1 – It wont be good, players want easy karma trains, and your game dont offer much besides swarm spam wars., until desert BL isnt a free easy to take players wont consider it.
Most gw2 players dont want effort reason many wanted to old Alpine BL, still empty, tower wars trebs, short running faster karma train, less effort at the end.

2 – world relink does not look that a bright idea, looks a temporary placebo solution, sice the main issue it not fixed nor solutions presented.

3&4 – playesr only want to play Anet lame aoe spam wars, siege is most of time considered to be antigameplay.
Still some siege should stay structure base, like mortars and cannons.

EDIt: U guys already have mortars on engie, if game does not allow them to use a skill due skill being useless or incompatible with the game concept it means it is a game design fault, and at my eyes Engie is not alone.

5- That would be very interesting, and would make siege more valuable since it can be fixed, it is a nice thing to test.

Can we have a poll – Do you want Desert BL’s back? Because we don’t want to see them ever again, not even mixed.
And whose idea are the deployable mortars and cannons? And the repair hammers?
So we can make defending even harder than it is now? So I will shoot the cata/rams with AC and the whole blob will just repair it. No thanks. Maybe you should fix the current cannons and oil so they are not death trap. They should be destroyable only by ballistas or projectile attacks.

Mixed Borderlands NO to desert borderlands… Or at least in it’s current state. wvw is a “realm vs realm” kind of game, desert borderlands is just not good for that in it’s current state. It needs some major rework, because it’s lacking some major strategic options. For example: northern towers are of no strategic value (you can’t attack any other building from there). Also keep in mind that (in wvw) the players are supposed to be the actual content. If something isn’t helping players fight other players (in a fair way) or isn’t giving a reason to fight over a piece of land (like strategic value of the location, containing resource to upgrade building in other zones, etc…) then it doesn’t belong in there (a.k.a. no more pve events, especially not if they try to be a main attraction of the map). The desert border is also way too big for it’s own good (partly because it’s way to vertical. Vertical space doesn’t allow for any combat and fearing people off edges with my necro isn’t any fun as there is no real skill in that). But if you insist on bringing back to the desert borderlands back then let the pvp-team rework it (a.k.a. remove most pve events, make northern towers strategically important, open up the place for big fights (without both pve events and pve enemy interupting the fights), remove a bunch of the vertical space etc…). I suggest this desert borderlands to be in rotation with EoTM, and create a real “realm vs realm” map for the wvw.

World Linking Schedule don’t know… Monthly or maybe every 2 weeks? This way it gives a bit more variety to the match-ups.

Deployable Mortars / Deployable Cannons – NO. I mean at this point, how will they be different from setting up other siege? What purpose will these even serve? Siege is sometimes already overly present and too strong against players.
I suggest updates to current siege already in the game. Like enemies can use your siege too (it’s the same treb standing there as the one you use all the time, so why not? Would make you think twice if placing that ac there is really a good idea as you may need to remember to use that new ‘destroy this siege’ skill on the siege), maybe make siege less effective against players groups, etc… Also, as already said the current ones (Mortars, cannons and oil) are hardly being used as they make it easy for the enemy to kill you… fast… maybe ‘fix’ that first?

Repair Hammer Yes, but only if it’s limited to 1 or 2 repairs. You don’t want neverending fights ’cause everyone keeps repairing their siege. Some fights are already stupid enough as is with the siege….

WvW Priorities Fixing skill and serverlag. Sometimes you can tell where the enemy zerg is on the borders without seeing them (especially true when all 3 borders have full zergs running around). All you need to do is move the camera around, when your fps drops massively you know where their zerg is. Or when engaged in a fight with 2 other zergs and half of the skills don’t feel like working. I think that would be the biggest thing.

About the polls: Most of these questions cannot be answered in a decent way with just a “yes” or “no” options.

OriOri.8724:

Aezyr.5304:

TallBarr.2184:

Aezyr.5304:

- Mixed Borderlands – no thank you. DBL needs further tweaks (position of towers, shrine buffs, lords).

- World Linking Schedule – 3 month is too long. Linked servers need to be locked at least half into the scheduled time.

- Deployable Mortars – no thank you.

- Deployable Cannos – no thank you.

- Repair Hammer – no thank you.

Position of lords and shrines?

But you are fine with invurnerable trebs pressuring north towers in alpine from keep making them irrelevant?

Locked worlds less than 3 months “looks at signature” Piken oh nvm.

You think it is healthy that via linking we have now a even more cheap way to stack on a specific server? The bandwagoners we got a cupple month ago are now on Vabbi and Deso (your server I assume) got influx from SFR too (again via Vabbi). This bandwagon train will choo choo again when the links getting shuffled.

Lords: Don’t have a problem with the position of those lords but their “special” abilities. We have realy good fights in keeps/garri now again but on DBL the attacking team is on a disadvantage.

Towers: That goes both ways. You can preassure garrision from those towers too. If you were talking about trebs in invulnerable positions in citadel then I agree those need to get removed. It’s imho an exploit.

Your sig: EotM much?

That’s kind of the point, no? The attacking team should be at a disadvantage when trying to take a tower or keep. The whole point of having an upgraded tower/keep is that as defenders you don’t need a zerg the size of the attacking force or larger to successfully defend. You should be able to defend with a smaller force if your players are any good.

In this thread the only real complaints I have seen against DBL is that it actually forces people to play differently. It doesn’t let you hide your trebs in a keep and attack other towers safely or vice versa, its less conducive to giant zergs (which not all WvW players enjoy) and its harder to just faceroll a Lord to take a structure. Its just complaints from people that don’t want to have to adjust their style of play.

Thats why you have walls and gates but I don’t realy like to fight an enemy zerg inside lords room while our entire attacking group is getting feared constantly into lava.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, below is a list of upcoming polls you are likely to see, in roughly the order you are likely to see them.

• Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?
• World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?
• Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
• Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
• Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

Special Mention

• WvW Priorities – What do you want the WvW team to prioritize next?
  • We’ll run this poll after completing major milestones with whatever feature last won the Prioritization vote. So in this case: Scoring Improvements.

Mixed Maps: No

Make the Desert Map a second EotM Map that you can join always which also has a Castle to claim, because currently theres only EBG which has a castle and when this map is queued, then you havel itterally the butt card and can’t make any progress on the Castle Achievements, until finally the queses stop and you can get on the EBG Map.

Then would people get an alternative over EotM and everyone would be happy, those that like Desert would be able to get onto that map whenever they want and those that like alpine can have their main battles that count towards the server points on alpine and people which want to work on the castle achieveents would have another place too, while EBG might be queued, the castle in destert could then be placed in the middle where earlier that laser event was as a new central point of the map
——

World Linking Schedule: Every 2 or 4 matches

Deployable Mortars/Canons YES, but make them cost intensive, so that they dont’t get abused too much

And make Cannons/Mortars undestroyable siege in Towers/keeps, that are always there once they have been upgraded to have them and players that use them should receive no damage and be immune to CC to make it finally possible to efficiently DEFEND something.

Reduce finally the range of AoE skills by 50% if you try to target somethign that is HIGHEE THAN YOU and increase the range of ranged weapons by 50% if you attack something that is on a lower position than you.
That are gameplay mechanics, whioch already existed in GW1!!! Bring them finallly please back. Defenders should have a clear significant HOME ADVANTAGE, that becomes also significantly stronger, so more the own place is upgraded.
————-

Repairable Siege Weapons through Repair Hammers: YES but not with supply, but instead with Badges of Honor/Memories of War!!! because when it costs supply, then its pointles,s because with supply you can use the supply also better directly to build up a compolete new siege weapon which comes already with full health!!!

WvW Priorities: Combat System BALANCING.

Add finally a CC protection for the whole game, like for example making Break Bars for everyone a integrated function where Stunbreakers refill the Break Bars, peopel need to break the bars to CC us. When being CC’ed, or defense is strongly reduced, but we can at least fight still back and dont lose our ability to use skills like currently, whioch is honestly the most stupid sting about all this permastunlock CC spamfest that GW2’s combat system has changed to lately.

Rebalance the Conditions, merge Boons and Conmditions to reduce the total amount of them, that would doo the overall game very good, if Boons and Conditions woudl get reduced, while they get at the same time more important through the merges.
Rebalance the Attribute System, add some defensive Attributes, like Courage, that could help us in reducing the chance to receive critcal hits, and Agility that should help is in increasign our Endurance Regeneration, merge Vitality with Healing Power and fix please finalyl Toughness, so that it becomes significantly more effektive in reducing direct damage, so that havign really high toughness and defense from armor together should make us resistant to direct damage like fightign a Mordrem Husk, which receives only serious damage from condition,s because they IGNORE DEFENSE.

Rebalance the damage from Burning, Confusion and Torment!! They are all three totalyl out of control, especialyl Confusion!!!

I’ve seen two days ago the most craziest overpowered Confusion build on a thief that I have ever seen in my whole liefe, that conmsist just out of spamming skill 4 all the time with Pistol and causing alone with this constantly so much confusion with the usage of 1 single overpowered Rune Set, that you die in seconds just from all the confusion that you receive, if you haven’t condi cleans with you or a right counter build to send all the confusion back to the origin.

In general are Conditions in WvW totally out of control since the patch of 23rd june of 2015!!!
WvW priority about this needs to be also, that WvW receives finally seperate skill/trait/rune balancing, so that some changes for PvP/PvE don’t constantly ruin tons of things for WvW players and vice versa.
Buff items need to disappear finalyl out of WvW, they should be PvE only items, just like buff items were in GW1 PvE only items!! This would help DRASTICALLY alone to balance WvW better, because alot of WvW builds are just so overpowered due to the help of the buffs from potions and food!!!

Theres already guild buffs from claims and shrines (blood lust), thats ENOUGH of buffs to get a little advantage over other enemies.

So much my WvW priorities, for me its brief said clearly just game balance, because there is just still so much about WVW balance, that is absolutely out of control right now that needs to get put back to sanity

Aezyr.5304:

OriOri.8724:

Aezyr.5304:

TallBarr.2184:

Aezyr.5304:

- Mixed Borderlands – no thank you. DBL needs further tweaks (position of towers, shrine buffs, lords).

- World Linking Schedule – 3 month is too long. Linked servers need to be locked at least half into the scheduled time.

- Deployable Mortars – no thank you.

- Deployable Cannos – no thank you.

- Repair Hammer – no thank you.

Position of lords and shrines?

But you are fine with invurnerable trebs pressuring north towers in alpine from keep making them irrelevant?

Locked worlds less than 3 months “looks at signature” Piken oh nvm.

You think it is healthy that via linking we have now a even more cheap way to stack on a specific server? The bandwagoners we got a cupple month ago are now on Vabbi and Deso (your server I assume) got influx from SFR too (again via Vabbi). This bandwagon train will choo choo again when the links getting shuffled.

Lords: Don’t have a problem with the position of those lords but their “special” abilities. We have realy good fights in keeps/garri now again but on DBL the attacking team is on a disadvantage.

Towers: That goes both ways. You can preassure garrision from those towers too. If you were talking about trebs in invulnerable positions in citadel then I agree those need to get removed. It’s imho an exploit.

Your sig: EotM much?

That’s kind of the point, no? The attacking team should be at a disadvantage when trying to take a tower or keep. The whole point of having an upgraded tower/keep is that as defenders you don’t need a zerg the size of the attacking force or larger to successfully defend. You should be able to defend with a smaller force if your players are any good.

In this thread the only real complaints I have seen against DBL is that it actually forces people to play differently. It doesn’t let you hide your trebs in a keep and attack other towers safely or vice versa, its less conducive to giant zergs (which not all WvW players enjoy) and its harder to just faceroll a Lord to take a structure. Its just complaints from people that don’t want to have to adjust their style of play.

Thats why you have walls and gates but I don’t realy like to fight an enemy zerg inside lords room while our entire attacking group is getting feared constantly into lava.

lolol… you got feared into the lava more than once? It wasn’t hard to figure out how to not be feared into that lava… but I digress… this isn’t about the lava… it’s about a poll that HASN’T HAPPENED YET… lol!

The mix BL may cause some balancing problems as in desered bl are much harder to take objective and much easier to def where the old bls are easier to take then to def i am not sure how fair that would be.

Linking can be 2 ways the lower worlds can be more like merc groups that move to the weeker worlds to help them make up for lose or you can keep 2 worlds grouped over the long run giving a chase to build a comunitly.

Morders would not be too bad just make them weaker then the stuck in places ones. (the thing about morders is that they are good counter sieges better then blista so i think morders would be great to have to brake ppl def on keeps etc..)
Canons may be too powerful to put where you want them so they would have to be a much weaker version.

Only if it cost supply to keep them fixed.

Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps? No, Only Desert Borderlands.

World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds? Every 1 week. First with the latter so on.

Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars? yes
Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons? yes
Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege? yes

WvW Priorities – What do you want the WvW team to prioritize next?
more people at the same time in the WVW. If today the limit is 100 put 150.

• Mixed Borderlands – yes sure but with a third map in (each server have its own home BL)
• World Linking Schedule – word linking sure keep that up
• Deployable Mortars – yes but with less impact on player and more on siege
• Deployable Cannons – i think canons can would be too powerful
• Repair Hammer – sure but only out of combat

• WvW Priorities –
  more battle based events. like an area popping up around fighting groups setting up an event with numbers shown on the top right corner eg. 14/14 vs 20/20. This could give an outnumbered buff (magic find). This events should be open field fight only. In case there is an event up it should be secured, so there is no interference with siege. In cases of guild groups you can make a guild scoring system….

• Mixed Borderlands: No. Delete Desert.
• World Linking: Would prefer no more linking but if it’s going to stay, keep it permanent.
• Deployable Mortars/Cannons: Yes. Don’t know why this wasn’t a thing from the start.
• Repair Hammer: Absolutely.
• Priorities: Finish the scoring changes we voted for, then give us QoL.

I would like to see Mortars be a counter to siege weapons behind the walls. Don’t let them be effective against walls or players.

Tyler may have posted these so we could know what was coming up and talk about it before actually voting.

And I see a lot of people saying yes to the Repair Hammer and repairing siege. We need to discuss this one in depth so we can come up with ideas about how this may actually be used in practice and what the result of it could be. Because something can seem like a good idea on paper but when players get ahold of it they it turns out nothing like it looked on paper.

It could be interesting but it could also be disastrous. Some negatives I can think of off the top of my head:

• One more thing that makes the strong stronger. The stronger server will be able to control more supply. Plus strength = numbers in WvW.

• One more thing that helps the blob. The more people you have, the more siege you can repair and the faster you can repair it. Instead of “flash build” you’re going to have “flash repair this before it dies”.

If your going to mix the desert and alpine borderlands then please do it as a third map and do map rotations. I like the alpine and desert borderlands unique traits and please use the spring update version of desert. We should dub that map as the “Spring Desert Borderland”.

As for more deploy able siege, NO. Less siege wars, MORE Fighting.

• I’d prefer alpine, although I do enjoy the design of the desert but it’s too big for it’s own good. It would be cool to divide this areas content and recycle it for other purposes like a FA style pvp mode focused around the lava dungeon keep.
• As frequently as possible
• Yes
• No not if mortars get this
• Depending on the seige and limiting it’s capability yes. I don’t want to see a zerg around a battering ram mashing “F” and the enemy unable to kill it because of that.

• For WvW priorities, I would like to see less zerging and a higher emphasis on guerilla warfare. This could be done by limiting defensive abilities and unlimiting certain dps options. It’s tiresome that the hit cap promotes stacking, and I wish there was an emphasis on strategy on map-wide strategy. So even if a server has a low population, a smart-coordinated server could potentially take out a well populated but simple tactic server. Of course numbers will still matter, just no longer paramount.

It’ll be interesting to see how the mixed BL poll goes. I’d rather that the desert BL get deleted and forgotten – but we’ll see how it goes when it comes up.

I enjoy the desert map, but I suspect that all the desert-haters make the results of that poll a foregone conclusion.

I’d like to see desert reworked into a balanced three way map rather than removed entirely. I’d go there instead of EB 90% of the time.

How about instead of voting your opinion on these future polls yet to be published, people make suggestions on how to better word those polls to actually get answers that will help ANET better please the player base?

For instance, the mixed borderland poll really needs to make it clear what the options are. Many people in this thread are saying “no, never Desert” but I am not sure if that is even a choice or if it should be (seriously? why limit yourself for the future purely out of spite?) If it was made more clear that it would either be a rotation with sometimes all Alpine and sometimes all Desert then for most of us I think the mixed option sounds a lot better. But if it is just a boring yes/no poll again your are going see illogical results that upset more people in the long term.

Kind of like how there is a still a bunch of kittened off players about the reset time back to Fridays thread when they didn’t really take the time to understand their choices. Granted that wasn’t done as an official poll either but I can only imagine if it had been a simple yes/no to Friday reset day poll people would still be just as bitter about the time change which most did not feel they were voting on.

I also think the consequences of more frequent world linkings should be made more clear to poll voters, maybe with some discussion about how often WvW tournaments may be possible under each set of options. I still think world linking is a huge mistake but obviously I am in the minority there according to that most recent poll but given how varied the discussions are surrounding the world linking topic it certainly doesn’t feel like that big of a landslide so I get the feeling a lot players voted yes to keep it just because something was better than nothing. Would have more interesting to see a poll voting on that whole list of options ANET had besides world linking like mergers, blow it all up and start over instead.

PariahX.6970:

How about instead of voting your opinion on these future polls yet to be published, people make suggestions on how to better word those polls to actually get answers that will help ANET better please the player base?

I was going to say something similar, a lot of yes/no answers … but isn’t the thread about polls that are upcoming, therefore any answers provided in this thread are irrelevant?

Glad to see more polls coming, will be sure to vote down the mixed BL. The rest is of little interest.

To clarify from what I have read from some posts, the devs aren’t asking which borderland you want. They will rotate between Alpine and Desert every 4 months. Players have been asking for a middle ground so don’t need to wait all that time to play on the border they like.

Remember when you vote to the pool of mixed borderlands you are voting for:
Yes – 1 Desert Border, 2 Alpines + EBG
No – Alpine for 3 months -> Desert for 3 months and repeat

Mixed Borderlands – Yes, two bad maps are at least more interesting than 1 bad map
World Linking Schedule – Weekly. Try and keep ahead of the transfer warriors screwing up the intention
Deployable Mortars – No, Siege is already too influential
Deployable Cannons – See above
Repair Hammer – See above
Special Mention

WvW Priorities – I would like to see the following brought into WvW

1. Air Strike Grenades from EotM to WvW, maybe make them not affect players, just siege and NPC’s.

2. Stealth is broken. Anyone noticed that yet?

3. More useful things for badges and/or karma, like being able to buy food, or badge donations to buy banners, that sort of thing.

4. Love the dungeon reward tracks for WvW, but I would still like to see some cool WvW specific gear with really nice skins. Maybe different sets taht require a certain WvW rank to purchase, and cost a lot of badges.

5 Would like to see something useful to do with Karma in WvW. I’ve got millions in Karma, and don’t really feel like spending hours at the Mystic Toilet to do something with it.

“Special Mention

• WvW Priorities: What do you want the WvW team to prioritize next?"

Reskin the alpine maps.

Mixed BLs: I’d like to see all three borderlands as different. So for example red BL is desert, blue BL is alpine, and green could be ‘forest’ (a new one, use desert or EOTM for now).

Then all BLs would be unique and, since ppl tend to gravitate towards their own BL, if you are a different each week then everyone would be encouraged to try all three.

fix the stacking issue

the rest is fluff

Thanks for the updates! Look forward to the polls.

Ahratan.1098:

Mixed BLs: I’d like to see all three borderlands as different. So for example red BL is desert, blue BL is alpine, and green could be ‘forest’ (a new one, use desert or EOTM for now).

Then all BLs would be unique and, since ppl tend to gravitate towards their own BL, if you are a different each week then everyone would be encouraged to try all three.

Agree here, but advocating mixed borderlands as well so if a map is not liked by some they can still play other maps while ANet is getting feedback. They could even then have a copy of a map in dev while we play an older version like ABL. Prefer that over rotation and prefer a variety of maps over both.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, below is a list of upcoming polls you are likely to see, in roughly the order you are likely to see them.

• Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?
• World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?
• Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
• Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
• Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

Can we add:

Do you want to buy harvesting tools from your portable provisioner? LOL then it would sell something I might actually buy other than the blue shield generators.

Mixed boderlands-No please stick with Alpine
World link-merge servers and make it permanant
Deployable mortars and cannons-NO
Siege repair-NO

Two things that are my priority for wvw, please reduce lag and please fix the immob bug asap

BTW, is there somewhere to find the poll link regularly, or do we just have to hope we see it? Is there even one up right now?

No one reads, everyone just blasts out responses to a
‘hey guys, how you doing, heads up on these upcoming things, just want to keep you in the loop’

The general populus responds with:
“ummm, umm a – no, b-no maybe, c I don’t care, d – hodor”

At this point, I would just give the populus a picture of a door and tell them to hold it up. See if that’s achievable.

Hexinx.1872:

No one reads, everyone just blasts out responses to a
‘hey guys, how you doing, heads up on these upcoming things, just want to keep you in the loop’

The general populus responds with:
“ummm, umm a – no, b-no maybe, c I don’t care, d – hodor”

At this point, I would just give the populus a picture of a door and tell them to hold it up. See if that’s achievable.

or we respond and see others responses and reasonings which may sway our vote when the actual vote comes up…..

Sheeple meet choice, choice meet sheeple. They like to pretend they are borg, but really it takes 100 of them, and when 2-3 say this, the rest just follow.

Seems legit.

Whatever dude – I was in the no vote last time so I clearly didn’t lemming with others…..

I’d just like more information on the actual items. For example, ‘would you actually like to spend supply to repair siege?’ That already occurs when building so I would gather that isn’t much work on Anets part to expand that option from pre-built siege to deployed seige.

Mixed borderlands – the one comment I found interesting (was thinking similar) was from

Mixed BLs: I’d like to see all three borderlands as different. So for example red BL is desert, blue BL is alpine, and green could be ‘forest’ (a new one, use desert or EOTM for now).

Then all BLs would be unique and, since ppl tend to gravitate towards their own BL, if you are a different each week then everyone would be encouraged to try all three.

They should have come out with a jungle borderland for HoT(they had a jungle guild hall from gw they could have used as a starting point – its just too small for gw2) … but given the initial player reaction to desert wasn’t great… I doubt resources will go to developing another BL anytime soon.

Also , make it mandatory that each week, you are a new color. Don’t base it on green = top.

Just be sure to fill in the survey’s when they are live. I think they even email them to your account when they are on.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Hey guys, below is a list of upcoming polls you are likely to see, in roughly the order you are likely to see them.

• Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?
• World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?
• Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
• Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
• Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

Special Mention

• WvW Priorities – What do you want the WvW team to prioritize next?
  • We’ll run this poll after completing major milestones with whatever feature last won the Prioritization vote. So in this case: Scoring Improvements.

BL’s: No. My guild came back to GW2 because alpine returned, and has stated they will leave when desert comes back. If we keep alpine, I keep my friends.

Link Schedule: I’ve said from the beginning this needs some kind of AI running the matchups to mix servers by various population, participation, timezone, etc. metrics to make balanced and fun matchups. The more often, the better, as this also fixes mass transfers and server stacking.

Deployable Mortars: You’d need to do some serious terrain reworks first, as this would give huge advantages to certain keeps/towers in respects to clearing siege. So absolutely not for now, and even then, it’s not a priority in the slightest.

Deployable Cannons: NO. NO. JUST NO. Siege-humping is awful and is a huge part of why WvW has lost a lot of excitement for many, especially with buffed defenses (looking at the desert BL’s inherently favoring defenders, shield bubbles being OP, etc.). No. This absolutely shouldn’t happen and would massively trivialize fighting even more than it already has. Nerf passive projectile reflection in the classes that have way too much of it (Tempest/Scrapper) and maybe raged play will see increased use in zergs. Siege is not the answer here.

Repair Hammer: Ehhhh… could be alright, but would need a lot of testing. This is one of those things that could totally break either offenses, defenses, or both. I can see this going both ways, ankitten ot sure if it’d either work out very well to help solve siege-humping issues or impossible-to-take objectives from too much turtling, or if it would just make defended structures even more impossibly immortal by letting defenders keep their siege and keep it safe.

As far as what’s next: Busting blobs and cutting queues. This can be done to some extent to get servers together to account for staggered coverage instead of sheer population, but I’d really like to suggest adding incentives for playing in small groups if not punishing or slowing down the momentum of an 80-man map queue. It’s unfun to fight because of the lag, unfun to fight because there’s very little skilled play often going on (it just turns into comp wars as fights get bigger), and really just emphasizes the importance of population, especially if we’re moving to a time-zone-based approach to scoring.

DeceiverX.8361:

BL’s: No. My guild came back to GW2 because alpine returned, and has stated they will leave when desert comes back. If we keep alpine, I keep my friends.

So you would rather your friends quit, because the Desert Border will be rotated, for a quarter than simply ignore one map and play on the other 3?

I’d urge the dev who creates the pool to give as much information as possible about the topic to avoid mistakes.

For those who don’t know what mixed border means, it came from the idea from the thread How Long Will Alpines Last:

“The current plan is to rotate the borderlands maps each quarterly update. That said, now that we are actively polling the community, perhaps we can start exploring other options.
For instance, nothing is really stopping us from having a combination of ABL and DBL maps running simultaneously. 2 of one and 1 of the other. If we polled that, and players approved it, then there’d be no need for the rotation, and players on both sides of the issue could play on their preferred map. The downside of course, would be any perception of imbalance that may arise from one map being considered the stronger “Home” map, but we could always give the more defensible map to Red/Blue and leave the less defensible map to Green.”

Tyler Bearce
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/How-long-will-Alpines-last/first#post6161872

I’m really very happy you take the time to talk with us and give us so many insights of your work. I also see you’re trying to take into account what the playerbase wants, with numerous polls.

Though polling seems a seducing approach, it has to be used carefully. The questions have to be precisely chosen, and sometimes explanations should be given , so that what people answer to the poll reflects what they really think/want. Otherwise, you may end up with making decisions which are not what people expect.

For example, some french people voted Yes to the world linking poll because they thought it could lead to world merge. Had they known that, with world linking they’ll never see world merge, they would have voted No.

The same problem happened with the Priorities poll. The items listed were not self explanatory enough , and people who hadn’t read your explanations on what was planned for each choice, could not make a proper decision (once again, based on what I read on the french forum).

For instance, with the upcoming poll regarding Mixed Borderlands, you need to be clear with what will happen if both cases, Yes or No. Or even better, give the following choices :

• Yes I want a mix of the 2 maps every week
• No, I prefer a rotation of the 2 maps (probably every quarter)
• No, I don’t want to see the Desert Borderland again

If the third option is out of the table, it must be clearly stated, so that the people who would have chosen it decide what to chose. If the question is “Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?” and the possible answers are just Yes or No, with no explanation, the people not wanting to see DBl again will chose No, not knowing it would mean having the DBl during a full quarter.

So making a good and useful poll may be not as simple as it would seem at first sight. I don’t know how is ArenaNet organized, but maybe the Marketing team could take a look at the polls before they go out, just to make sure the results you’ll get reflect what you want to know ?

Tyler Bearce.3427:

BTW, is there somewhere to find the poll link regularly, or do we just have to hope we see it? Is there even one up right now?

Any currently active poll is available at: https://feedback.guildwars2.com/

The last poll just ended, a new poll will start early next week.

tks for the link :|

added to favourites.

@Tyler Bearce.3427, if possible to answer this question, would be possible to make a 3 way faction with several maps or this would be complicated to reproduce due european servers being a bit different?

like:
-EB central map with big castle/city to take
-Sorrounding maps, as big and much more plain desert, alpine, tundra, savanah, dense florest.
-and then add the BL maps.

*note, maps would have different population cap, due its size, desig,. number of towers.
Asking this because make servers rotation, as in linked now to A and then to B, i think that removes alot from what WvW should be, it takes out some importance of WvW, makes the gamemode even weaker and uninterested.

• Mixed Borderlands – Not if Desert, but YES if shrunken and flattened Desert.
• World Linking Schedule – 6 weeks, enough so that voice chat maintenance is reasonable.
• Deployable Mortars – Sure why not.
• Deployable Cannons – No, impacts open field combat too much. Maybe a toned down cannon.
• Repair Hammer – No, too messy and complicated to manage, some things are better simplified rather than over-complicated.
• WvW Priorities – Address population imbalance at a time-zone (region) basis. Goal is even fights 24/7. Also, a new, improved borderland map to cycle in.

Bandini.6185:

For instance, with the upcoming poll regarding Mixed Borderlands, you need to be clear with what will happen if both cases, Yes or No. Or even better, give the following choices :

• Yes I want a mix of the 2 maps every week
• No, I prefer a rotation of the 2 maps (probably every quarter)
• No, I don’t want to see the Desert Borderland again

Even that is too diffuse.

Unless you specify the exact combination, you will set up people for disappointment.

Let’s say you vote yes and assumes by far the most pleasurable and obvious choice that probably 90%+ of us would choose – 2 Alpine and 1 Desert – yet when we get it… Anet gives us 2 Desert and 1 Alpine.

Riots in the streets and 50 man queues to one border.

I would prefer the polls to be focusing on the more important matters, particularly, population balancing. I hope that the dev team has a plan or steps or whatever to achieve this within acceptable period before wvw become unhealthy once again.

To me, everything else are not important.

I would suggest a poll to determine the importance of things in term of ranks, instead of a poll of your selected choice.

Please, devs.. consider the percentage of the wvw player base that is made up of these angry anti-desert, erase the desert people. They are just a very vocal, comment-section-angry minority. Just like Sheldon on the Big Bang, they can’t handle change or new things. They want everything to be easy and familiar. Don’t dumb the game down any more than you already have.

SkyShroud.2865:

I would prefer the polls to be focusing on the more important matters, particularly, population balancing. I hope that the dev team has a plan or steps or whatever to achieve this within acceptable period before wvw become unhealthy once again.

To me, everything else are not important.

I would suggest a poll to determine the importance of things in term of ranks, instead of a poll of your selected choice.

Population is a to volatile and unstable variable to work arround, and rank only means more cover nothing more.

Aeolus.3615:

SkyShroud.2865:

I would prefer the polls to be focusing on the more important matters, particularly, population balancing. I hope that the dev team has a plan or steps or whatever to achieve this within acceptable period before wvw become unhealthy once again.

To me, everything else are not important.

I would suggest a poll to determine the importance of things in term of ranks, instead of a poll of your selected choice.

Population is a to volatile and unstable variable to work arround, and rank only means more cover nothing more.

So you suggesting to give up population balancing then?

To rank something is to list something from the most important to the least important. This will create a clear guideline on what is important to the community as a whole and what is not.

azyume.6321:

I’d urge the dev who creates the pool to give as much information as possible about the topic to avoid mistakes.

This is a very valid point. It would be great when the new polls go up if there is a section or even a thread that outlines details about what the idea is and in some cases what a no or yes vote might mean.

Example, I can see some people indicating no to mixed borderlands since DBL might come around. A no response wouldn’t mean DBL wouldn’t be back but means that when the maps cycle there is only 1 type of map and the other is out. Be that ABL or DBL or any newly designed map.

Mixed Borderlands – get rid of desert borderlands they are unfixable, too large and too complicated to navigate vertically.
World Linking Schedule – Get rid of world linking and merge if possible otherwise link every week.
Deployable Mortars – No
Deployable Cannons – No
Repair Hammer – No

meanwhile get rid of all the banners and perks that make siege only take 25% damage.

1. Since the desert map is so large, the world(s) with the largest population (or the one presumed to win) could be in control of that map for the week, and the other two world(s) own the smaller alpine BL’s (If this is possible).

2. Every 1 or 2 weeks is good.

3. No

4. Yes, but only on desert BLs. The terrain would make this very fun, and traversing the map more deadly.

5. Yes, would add another level of complexity to combat.

A) Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands map
- No preference as long as these are not empty maps with no players

B) World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?
- After the final results of a season

C) Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
- YES! But maybe we should only be able to deploy them from inside a keep in a trial version.

D) Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
- YES! But maybe we should only be able to deploy them from inside a keep in a trial version.
E) Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?
- YES! But only if they didnt receive any damage for at least 1 minute.

• Mixed Borderlands – Do you want a mix of Alpine/Desert Borderlands maps?
  No, please just no to that Desert map. WvW has been reinvigorated from having Alpine back. Don’t harm WvW again with that desert map.

• World Linking Schedule – How often should we relink worlds?
  How often depends on how well the balancing. Right now there’s too many flaws with the current linking and it needs to be adjusted much sooner. Maybe every 6-8 weeks would be better than 12.

• Deployable Mortars – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Mortars?
• Deployable Cannons – Do you want to be able to buy and deploy Cannons?
• Repair Hammer – Do you want to be able to spend supply to repair siege?

That is something you could test for a “fun” weekend event. Not a whole week, just a two day thing.