Guild Wars 2

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-November-21-2016

Upgraded objectives now reward more war score per tick and when captured.
Points per Tick/Capture:
Objective Base Points Secured Reinforced Fortified
Camp 2 3 4 5
Castle 12 18 24 30
Keep 8 12 16 20
Tower 4 6 8 10
Sentries and shrines now grant 2 war score on capture.

Does anybody here see the logic in this?
I don’t see how this improves WvW at all. How, for example, does this tweak make weaker sides more competitive (in PPT terms, ofc)?

Svarty.8019:

Does anybody here see the logic in this?
I don’t see how this improves WvW at all. How, for example, does this tweak make weaker sides more competitive (in PPT terms, ofc)?

It doesn’t it makes strong sides stronger and weaker sides relatively weaker. What they should have done is reward servers that capture T2 and T3 keeps more points purely for capture but keep the PPT the same.

Its another change that shows they don’t truly think all the implications through.

Rip PPK focused gameplay and roaming, time to sit on an AC for the rest of my wvw days and embrace the PPT life!

I thought originally they were just going to increase the points per capture, not the ppt as well. Although if you don’t increase the ppt what’s the point of upgrading a structure when it only gets more valuable to the enemy.

But they could have also gone the way of just increasing points per capture and per upgrade level, and left the ppt alone at the base.

In the end… who really cares anymore, a couple extra points is not going to motivate people to take t3 structures, it comes back down to whether or not you have enough people on at the time to take it, there’s a reason it got to t3 in the first place.

Pretty shocked by this as well. Clearly not the right move.

I understand they want to reward defending, but this is not the way to go about it.

In the end, most of the time highest population wins like in the EU: http://mos.millenium.org/matchups/skirmish/3679

DeceiverX.8361:

Pretty shocked by this as well. Clearly not the right move.

I understand they want to reward defending, but this is not the way to go about it.

If this change is about rewarding defenders then its nonsensical. A reward for defending has to be direct like a drop.

I was enjoying the greater roll of PPK in wins. This change pretty much washed it away.

morrolan.9608:

It doesn’t it makes strong sides stronger and weaker sides relatively weaker. What they should have done is reward servers that capture T2 and T3 keeps more points purely for capture but keep the PPT the same.

Its another change that shows they don’t truly think all the implications through.

Ya that’s a fairly smart conclusion. I would like them to consider this after 2 weeks of the present changes……supposing they do have the effect you outlined.

Consider this kind of logic though:
We should approach ideas from the scenario that we have relatively balanced teams to begin with. From that kind of approach…..I understand what anet is doing here and im curious to see what it achieves.

I mean you can’t get a good change if you are always compromising every component of the change to meet existing demands….can we agree with the logic on that? Hopefully we can agree at least from a theoretical perspective.

DeceiverX.8361:

Pretty shocked by this as well. Clearly not the right move.

I understand they want to reward defending, but this is not the way to go about it.

I also highly highly doubt the intent of this change was to reward defending lol. That thought honestly did not cross my mind at all when reading through the notes, nor does it cross my mind now. Sure it makes defending better, but it also makes attacking better…. and that kind of analysis doesn’t lead anywhere.

Cerby.1069:

morrolan.9608:

It doesn’t it makes strong sides stronger and weaker sides relatively weaker. What they should have done is reward servers that capture T2 and T3 keeps more points purely for capture but keep the PPT the same.

Its another change that shows they don’t truly think all the implications through.

Ya that’s a fairly smart conclusion. I would like them to consider this after 2 weeks of the present changes……supposing they do have the effect you outlined.

Consider this kind of logic though:
We should approach ideas from the scenario that we have relatively balanced teams to begin with. From that kind of approach…..I understand what anet is doing here and im curious to see what it achieves.

I mean you can’t get a good change if you are always compromising every component of the change to meet existing demands….can we agree with the logic on that? Hopefully we can agree at least from a theoretical perspective.

Sure I can agree on that but they should make changes to even up the teams first before changes like this.

It can’t work, bad idea. We argued against this back in the CDI 3+ years ago and explained how it just made the winning server stronger.

What they should have done is give more PPK, capture and tick points to the losing servers, in proportion to the gap between their score and the top score.

The winning server doesn’t need a bonus at all.

Svarty.8019:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-November-21-2016

Upgraded objectives now reward more war score per tick and when captured.
Points per Tick/Capture:
Objective Base Points Secured Reinforced Fortified
Camp 2 3 4 5
Castle 12 18 24 30
Keep 8 12 16 20
Tower 4 6 8 10
Sentries and shrines now grant 2 war score on capture.

Does anybody here see the logic in this?
I don’t see how this improves WvW at all. How, for example, does this tweak make weaker sides more competitive (in PPT terms, ofc)?

Nothing we say that should go straight to the Devs is getting through to anyone who cares about WvW.

More illogical changes not really explained to any of us.

morrolan.9608:

It doesn’t it makes strong sides stronger and weaker sides relatively weaker. What they should have done is reward servers that capture T2 and T3 keeps more points purely for capture but keep the PPT the same.

Its another change that shows they don’t truly think all the implications through.

This would discourage upgrading keeps. The inverse of this(more points for holding upgraded stuff, same for capture) seems better(and overall the best) in my opinion. At first sight the obvious problem with this is that it somewhat discourages taking upgraded stuff(this is what happening right now in wvw, karma train T1 towers/keeps), but it’s not entirely true, since taking upgraded stuff would deny more ppt from the other server.

PPK rewards the bigger groups too. Making ppk more important wouldn’t be a good choice.

shagwell.1349:

PPK rewards the bigger groups too. Making ppk more important wouldn’t be a good choice.

If only PPK were awarded for solo kills rather than third-server tagged assists…. Watch the salt flow.

here is the new scoring changes we experienced last night while greatly out numbered and getting faced rolled. Staff claimed a camp…I have no issue with staff playing but when that admin tag shows it usually goes along with admin powers and that is not acceptable in competitive play. I’m more than a little upset over this having worked on emulators with better ethics…after taking the screenshot I just logged off vowing to never spend another dime on this game.

This is completely in line with their vision they have with skirmishing, where the underdog servers have a chance to catch up!

Oh wait a minute it does completely the opposite.

Anet logic, do NOT try to understand it.

I don’t get it. How can you promote this kind of gameplay? I regularly see people sitting in towers for hours. I know this is useful and players want to be rewarded for that. Fair enough.

But honestly this is one of the worst things in WvW. My actual job is more fun. It’s a game and you should not encourage people to do this.

As people in this thread mentioned – there are more fun alternatives.

My biggest wish right now is, that they add some profession balance before changing anything in WvW. I don’t expect too much, but at least balance dire/TB-gear and streamline food options. And some pvp-only-changes would also fit into WvW. Whats with all the mobs and PvE events?

Rigt now they are working on skirmishing rewards, but these won’t improve WvW in general. It could lead to higher population, but it will probably die out again.

This type of scoring rewards night capping, something we were trying to avoid. Now some servers will wake up with fully upgraded keeps on their home BL with a larger disparity in score.

I think it to be a great change and an incitive to defend, since it makes defending a t3 way more important than flipping t0 or t1, since it is worth more than 2x of what base is.

This promots zergging instead of roaming and smallscale. f… fail.

Here are my thoughts on scoring changes from about 6 months ago.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/PPT-less-Scoring-model-Fights-and-Dolyaks

The goal was to eliminate PPT and replace with dolyak scoring, capture scoring, upgrade scoring and PPK.

I believe that capture activity should be encouraged, but PPT needs to go as it leads to a simple capture race.

this update will only decrease the interaction betwen players. Promote more siege bunkering

If their objective is to help losing servers catch up then they have completely missed the mark and have done just the opposite. It’s a complete failure.

They need a scoring system that modulates according to the positions of the servers, in order to keep the matches as close as possible until the end of the week.

PPK:
Winning server: 1 PPK
Middle server: 2 PPK
Losing server: 3PPK

Capture:
Main server: Normal points
Middle server: 25% bonus
Losing server: 50% bonus

PPT:
Main server: Normal points
Middle server: 20% bonus
Losing server: 33% bonus

As the scores get closer together these percentage decrease proportionally.

This can work as a fallback system in situations where servers are seriously outnumbered, until Anet actually balance the game.

The change will encourage players to take more care about upgrades. It is now more important to have control over camps and kill hostile Dolyaks.

You have to take care about your Dolyaks and camps and have to guard them. Smaller groups and roamers become more important since blobs cannot be everywhere at the same time.

Only problem with all these changes ANet is doing is that score is totaly irelevant, otherwise they are ok, these have also been promised half a year back.

Next week in Backwards world, Anet cuts your health by 50% if you have the outmanned buff, stay tuned!

Nuzt.7894:

Next week in Backwards world, Anet cuts your health by 50% if you have the outmanned buff, stay tuned!

And BG is re-opened.

PPK impact has tremendously weakened.

morrolan.9608:

DeceiverX.8361:

Pretty shocked by this as well. Clearly not the right move.

I understand they want to reward defending, but this is not the way to go about it.

If this change is about rewarding defenders then its nonsensical. A reward for defending has to be direct like a drop.

I meant in terms of PPT. As it is, it currently makes less sense to attack/defend upgraded structures in a lot of cases and instead just keep going for T1 ones and fight.

I do not understand this change at all. First they introduce skirmishes to reduce the effect of nightcapping, and then they do the exact opposite by letting upgraded objectives tick higher. Another week, another totally random update…

One thing that I find interesting is that this drastically drops the relative impact that solo roamers can have by flipping camps, with such a reduced portion of the server’s overall score being granted from yaks. PPK seems like it’d be impacted similarly.

If you ever seen YB just flipping the same t1 towers for hours on end, you see the problem with the old system. These new changes I think will promote a more dynamic and strategic wvw gameplay, you can’t just be ninja flipping t1 towers for much points anymore, you’ll also have to be more effective at reducing the enemies point income.

hugeboss.5432:

you’ll also have to be more effective at reducing the enemies point income.

Meaning, dominate the enemy with superior numbers.

Hm. That somehow sounds familiar.

bigFM.8642:

I do not understand this change at all. First they introduce skirmishes to reduce the effect of nightcapping, and then they do the exact opposite by letting upgraded objectives tick higher. Another week, another totally random update…

Its 1 sign they don’t have an overriding vision for the mode and devs who understand how to develop for it.