Guild Wars 2

Everyone knows WvW is only about zergs. And yes, this is one more thread about how it could be fixed. I didn’t find any post regarding the same suggestion, so here it goes.

Anet can still hide it a bit with some updates (like this last one in Arrow Carts), but servers still zerg and they will continue to do it.

Why do people zerg? Because they get points faster and with no challenge and because they have more supply with them to build any siege weapon.

What if all the points – Keeps, Towers and Camps – would scale in difficulty with the number of attackers, like we see in PVE?
The more people there are attacking a Tower, the harder it gets – NPC’s get stronger with more skills, there are more NPC’s spawning, the Gate and Walls get more Life.
I don’t know if they are already doing this, but I guess they aren’t because it would be the best way to counter zergs with balancing a bit.

I think with this idea well balanced, a Keep or a Tower would be so hard to take down when there’s a zerg of 40+ people in front of it that it wouldn’t be fast enough. Players would think about the time wasted in only one point and would try to separate in teams to take/defend other objectives in the map at the same time.

i got an idea…..

say desolation has 5 people on eb in wvw…….then viz can only have 5 people…and sfr only have 5 people…….this is balance.

all players who cannot get into the bl……have to either try another bl, pve……or transfer.

:-)

scaling is prob good too lol

Good suggestion. Might as well change the name of the mode to Guild vs Guild then as pugs will become obsolete.

Zerging is part of WvW, deal with it. Also I’ve seen multiple guilds (RiOT, FIRE, etc) win battles when they were outnumbered 5:1. So yes, it’s possible to beat a zerg with a small group if it’s well coordinated.

Remove AoE 5 ppl capped then you wont see zerg anymore

KuroNeko.7138:

Remove AoE 5 ppl capped then you wont see zerg anymore

hahaha awesome, anet shoul dtry this atleast

This is what i don’t get.
I’ve read reports of Vizunah having huge queues.
So how can the blob be jumping from borderland to borderland at will?
Do people already in wvw have precedence over the people in the queue?

@Liquid Storm, why do you say Guild vs Guild? what about a small groups of pugs protecting some points the best they can with a chance to make it possible? what about small guilds that know what to do but can’t do nothing against zergs?
WvW is for everyone! Big WvW Guilds, small WvW Guilds, WvW Pugs and all the other players of the server (yes, PVE and sPVP) that want to join in and be important to the server, but don’t want to be ordered around by a Commander of (another) Guild and following him like sheeps to the shepperd.

I know zerg is a part of WvW. It will always be in terms of massive PVP. But right now it’s the most eficient way of doing it and it shouldn’t be. There’s no strategy and no way to defend against it unless you are in a zerg or in a big WvW Guild (funny isn’t it?). Most of the time you know you don’t wanna upgrade anything because you’re gonna lose it really fast, so why do you waste gold? after the prime time of your server ends, all of it will be lost because there are not enough people.

Without taking credit from the guilds you mentioned, I know them very well, they ended up leaving the server from T1 because they weren’t having fun playing against VZ zergs.
Before the free transfers week, the SFR WvW was only about their WvW Guilds and they were winning, even though they were playing in zergs too, more organized and with better players, but still zergs.
With the free transfers, many players (new pugs, new guilds and low lvl players) came to this server. Since SFR Guilds couldn’t make most of the new players to follow them around as they pleased (as in zergs), everything started to fail and they blamed ArenaNet till this very day.

@KuroNeko, I agree with you too. But ArenaNet decided to put them for some reason (I can come up of some, but don’t know if they are beneficial or not), so I doubt they will take it back.

Because if Anet starts focusing on making it hard for larger groups to play and favourizing smaller, well organized ones, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what will happen to WvW. Guilds will enter WvW and dismiss anyone who’s not in their guild (pugs and random players who are not in an organized guild).

Edit: although I do think they should add a GvG mode to the game, that way everyone wins.

Liquid Storm.8097:

Because if Anet starts focusing on making it hard for larger groups to play and favourizing smaller, well organized ones, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what will happen to WvW. Guilds will enter WvW and dismiss anyone who’s not in their guild (pugs and random players who are not in an organized guild).

Edit: although I do think they should add a GvG mode to the game, that way everyone wins.

That’s already happening. They are alienating everyone who doesn’t follow their own zerg.
I think in my suggestion, it gives at least the choice for 5/10/15 organized people to be as important as any guild, and the zerg part will be less important. It will also give some motivation to upgrade and defend the points to those small groups, while giving guilds the motivation to keep attacking bigger groups / other guilds.

I algo agree with you in having a GvG mode. But what would happen to Representing then? they would have to put restrictions on it.

No one cares about points or badges. Zergers by now have entire banks full of the things. WXP has no real functional use to the game either. These things aren’t the driving force behind zerging. Zergs are here because the game doesn’t have anything to disuade against them. The entire buffing and healing part of the game forces zerg gameplay. The capture and forget method to siege warfare rewards zerg gameplay.

This game simply has nothing to do other than zerg. And no, removing the AE cap won’t resolve anything. People will simply be killed quicker via retaliation and confusion and certain classes like Necromancers and Eles will completely overshadow every other class in the game to the point no one would ever play anything but ranged casters again.

The only way to fix zergs is to design the game to not encourage their use.

Make it so you can’t take enemy structures in their own side of the map (Eternal Borderlands) unless you have all of your structures. This way the enemy zerg will need to defend their own area. The defending zerg will be encouraged to split up to take the unprotected enemy towers so their structure can’t be captured (it can still be sieged and all walls destroyed, just the flag can’t be raised).

This alone would solve most of the problems aside for when you’re outmanned. Solution to that? Outmanned now gives an unremovable protection boon. If 33% less damage + the new arrow carts aren’t enough to defend yourselves then server transfers should be open.

KuroNeko.7138:

Remove AoE 5 ppl capped then you wont see zerg anymore

This would be the worst thing that could possibly happen to WvW.

Liquid Storm.8097:

Because if Anet starts focusing on making it hard for larger groups to play and favourizing smaller, well organized ones, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what will happen to WvW. Guilds will enter WvW and dismiss anyone who’s not in their guild (pugs and random players who are not in an organized guild).

Edit: although I do think they should add a GvG mode to the game, that way everyone wins.

If Anet is intending to favor organized small groups, there is no doubt they will lose a lot of player base. It’s like saying yo PUGs WvW is not for you, so get in a dedicated guild or gtfo.

How can you fix something that’s not broken?

Ok lets take a step back and think on what games offer large open warfare like planet side , battlefield, etc. The point is that Anet needs to rethink about the blue Doritos, squads and commander UI. what i mean is give the commander more tools and rewards to give for defending or attacking objectives IE. com john can sent 3 party’s to a tower and if the party’s can complete the task that was given they will receive bonus gold,w/exp, karma and maybe BoH.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcfMTiNQiHA (BF example)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gvXlHyApxY (PS guide 02:55 for the example)

They zerg because “there is no other way in game to group more than 5 people except with the commander and squad system.”

If we actually had an option in game to create medium size forces with some control over the size and makeup… perhaps we wouldn’t have so many people flocking to a commander pin.

They need to allow commanders to hide the pin AND still retain all the functions of a squad…. that would reduce zergs.

aldwid.7548:

If Anet is intending to favor organized small groups, there is no doubt they will lose a lot of player base. It’s like saying yo PUGs WvW is not for you, so get in a dedicated guild or gtfo.

I disagree. PUGs can play in small organized groups. They will be less effective than an experienced guild group but they already are less effective than organized guilds and still – and rightly so – are in WvW and seem to enjoy it.

Let’s talk about Dungeons for a moment. Dungeons favor small organized groups (it’s the only way to play them) and yet – provided they find enough people – PUGs can enjoy them as well. Once you have a pick-up group and go into a Dungeon, some degree of organization ensues all by itself. The issue with the Dungeons is that people cannot play unless they find 4 others who share the exact same objective.

In WvW, however, you can join and play without a group and people naturally group up in WvW if they want to play in a group. Once the PUGs have flocked to the commander, why could he not say to his squad: “Ok, there’s a lot of us here. Half of you come with me, someone with siege take the other half to insert tower name here.” ?
I have seen this done already on our BL and it worked surprisingly well. Instead of just mindlessly following the commander from camp to tower to camp to tower, PUGs split up into small groups and organized themselves with some guidance from the commander. There you go, a couple of small, organized PUGs.

No need to remove aoe cap, may can rise cap base on curren map population or base on current all maps population

It’s stupid to be in a empty borderland, capturing forts back, then suddenly, out of no where, we get the outmaned debuff, get runover by a truck, and lose all the forts again in 5 minutes.

Then we lose the outmaned buff and start retaking the forts, and 15 mins later, outmanned again and the story repeats.

Come on, make it so people changing borderlands end up in the end of the queue.
Then the if they want to blob in one server, the other servers still have 3 other border lands to play in. Otherwise they will have to spread among the 4 borderlands instead of blobbing.

The simplest way to discourage the zerg is to remove the ability to revive dead players. When you face a massive zerg with your guild group, you can only kill so many in one push. The problem is the rest of the zerg can ress everyone up within seconds.

Just make dead players stay dead and everything should be fine.

Mizu.9387:

The simplest way to discourage the zerg is to remove the ability to revive dead players. When you face a massive zerg with your guild group, you can only kill so many in one push. The problem is the rest of the zerg can ress everyone up within seconds.

Just make dead players stay dead and everything should be fine.

Only dead, not downed, that’s actually a fairly good idea, however, what if your zerg is pushing say SM Castle, and there are 1/5 of your zerg defending but they siege you down to nothing, by the time you get back across the map you would have to start all over again, I don’t see this working well, espically in some of the boarderland battles, good idea though.

Have the downed state ONLY if your outmanned.
To be honest WvW is very broken (either by the way anet designed and implemented it – or the player base)
The game has been released for 9 months, there have been plenty of regular temporary content but sooooo much is STILL broken.
Once you realise that anet only care about NEW players you will realise that wvw will NEVER become what the COMMUNITY wants.
Sure i’ve had fun in the last 9 months (few thousand game hours) but when something stops becoming fun – then its time to move on.

Or maybe zergs don’t need fixing. Some of us actually like fighting large scale battles. If you want small scale, try PvP.

Zergs dont need fixing. Playing with 50-80 men and women is a good feeling.

and if it is 60 + in the fort to defend the walls are destroyed automatically because we are too much into it?!

Malediktus.9250:

Zergs dont need fixing. Playing with 50-80 men and women is a good feeling.

That’s great if you enjoy that. But what about the players who prefer smaller coordinated forces for specific tasks. Stealth capping, havoc force behind lines under 25 players or guilds who wish to do private WvW together. They need to have the tools to allow flexible squad sizes or private for events.

If you have over 5 people you are expected to zerg it using the in game systems of GW2. There is simply no in game support for anything else. At the very least they need to allow commanders to hide the pin AND still retain the functions of a squad. This would allow players to form squads of any size or makeup. It would also remove the “bad commanders” who are not leading, but simply trying to coordinate a couple grps together.

If we actually had the tools to form something OTHER than a zerg…. perhaps that would help.

Really, we’re still QQing about Zergs? Don’t run with your server’s Zerg, run away from other server’s Zergs. Problem solved.

They need to add more objectives worth points. The 2 upper corners of the BL maps are empty of players.

Swiftness could use a WvW nerf as 2 mesmers and 2 guardians can keep 60 people moving non-stop.

Samis.1750:

They need to add more objectives worth points. The 2 upper corners of the BL maps are empty of players.

Swiftness could use a WvW nerf as 2 mesmers and 2 guardians can keep 60 people moving non-stop.

agree. very good point. zerg is not the problem. but its the incredible mobility. they would smash any small havoc group and that forces ppl joining zergs.

Liquid Storm.8097:

Good suggestion. Might as well change the name of the mode to Guild vs Guild then as pugs will become obsolete.

Zerging is part of WvW, deal with it. Also I’ve seen multiple guilds (RiOT, FIRE, etc) win battles when they were outnumbered 5:1. So yes, it’s possible to beat a zerg with a small group if it’s well coordinated.

I guess a thankyou from me is appropriate

thiagoperne.7340:

Fix zergs? What’s wrong with them? They are the heart of wvw, the reason we have guild wars, large scale battles making it epic fights. I don’t understand.

Wanna smaller fights? Ignore the zergs, go roaming, go havoc.
Wanna even smaller? Try spvp.

The game has everything for you. All you gotta do is play where better suits your playstyle.

How about arenanet giving us tools so we can actually group for smaller fights? Running together with separate multiple groups and having to use 3rd party voice as the only means of communication between the multiple groups is garbage. In this day of MMO’s not having a system to group more than 5 people (that is not a zerg) is ridiculous. There is simply no grouping support for players that don’t enjoy zerging.

They need to have a grouping system that is as flexible as the playstyles of their customers.

well it happens that zergs are built on a battlefield where 3 worlds are fighting each other… can’t see anything wrong when a zerg is organized… if players prefer to act in smaller groups it is up to them to organize that…. feel free and do so.
And if players roam for 1vs1 within W3 battles this is also compliant and can be organized…. so I do not get the point where a zerg should be a general evil thingy…

I believe that everyone should try to play that way it fits the best… but why should a concept like it was setup be limited just to meet some players opinions how W3 should look like?

Like it is set up currently all players are able to organize the gameplay within that content as they like – so why do you want to decrease that flexibilities and “fix” zergs to get rid of them, if others prefer actually to organize zergs rather than roaming in smaller groups? Imo that would be unfair to those, no?

As Ahmrill mentions in his latest post it is maybe time to get a kind of private grouping tool or the ability to group more than 5 players together…
(refering to other thread for mentioned topic)

Samis.1750:

They need to add more objectives worth points. The 2 upper corners of the BL maps are empty of players.

Swiftness could use a WvW nerf as 2 mesmers and 2 guardians can keep 60 people moving non-stop.

They increased individual availability of swiftness, except for mesmers – so unless they nerf it to a degree that pretty much means remove it, they’d only really hit mesmers which already have the worst access to swiftness.

Buffing some NPCs is not the right way to discourage zerging. There are enough NPCs in wvw as it is without adding more. They need a way to split up the huge groups by having multiple objectives that need to be held at the same time.

I think the best way to do this is to increase the amount of points the easier to take objectives are worth but have them be worth more if you hold more of them. Plus they should adds points per minute instead of every 15 minutes to encourage people to stay there and defend instead of zerging the camps within 2-3 minutes of the tick. Supply camps should be worth 5 points but each one you hold should increase the amount they are worth. So if you hold 2 camps then they would each be worth 10 PPTfor 20 PPT total instead of 10…and have it keep scaling for each additional camp held by the server. They would need to get rid of the supervisor invul buff for this to work. The sentry points could also have this same scaling but slightly smaller.

If they don’t want to use the camps this way they could just add 4-5 spots on the map that would work like the spvp nodes. And have their PPT worth scale based on how many of the points a server controls.

This would force the zerg to split up because they would have to defend multiple points at the same time since losing even 1 point would devalue the worth of all the other points. Small groups would be ideal to hold these points while the bigger zerg focuses on taking the big stuff like keeps. So people could still zerg if they want but the smaller groups would still have a meaningful contribution to the server score. Plus it would likely make the main zergs smaller which would mean less skill lag when the zergs collide.

Seriously?
Not one of you sees a problem with a type of gameplay that only consists of mass jumping from borderland to borderland capturing forts, where there is zero effort made to defend a captured point?

“Well, no problem, we’ll come back in 5 minutes to capture it again!”

Gothir.3604:

Buffing some NPCs is not the right way to discourage zerging. There are enough NPCs in wvw as it is without adding more. They need a way to split up the huge groups by having multiple objectives that need to be held at the same time.

This I believe rather forces people to start playing in bigger coordinated zergs than getting rid of zergs…

You assumed just that there might be only 1 big zerg humbling around… well I will be then 2 zergs maybe?

Aioros.4862:

Seriously?
Not one of you sees a problem with a type of gameplay that only consists of mass jumping from borderland to borderland capturing forts, where there is zero effort made to defend a captured point?

“Well, no problem, we’ll come back in 5 minutes to capture it again!”

I really don’t see a problem for now – especially whit the latest AC model called “zerg killer” – and a zerg of 50 players hopping to another BL might be already a problem due to the fact that they have to wait most likely…

so I still can’t see the problem of zergs on a map… tell us more details about the probs which a zerg creates iyo, please

Lara Croft.5807:

… and a zerg of 50 players hopping to another BL might be already a problem due to the fact that they have to wait most likely…

As far as i have observed, they don’t have to wait, or else they’d be in queue for 2 hours or more, and they are not.
Aparently, and i may be wrong so please correct me if i am, people already in wvw seem to have queue priority even when moving to another borderland.

the queue priority is for switching between the maps compared to the ones which want to get into W3 at all … as I understood.

I don’t know your server but to move a 50 player zerg can already be a challenge… mustn’t be – that is true

But coming back to the core question, what kind of problems a zerg is causing really (beside the known & discussed lags which all players face in big zergs)

I thought everyone is free to join a zerg or not… so why should zerging become obsolete in this content at all?

And sorry, I even don’t get my head around the argument that a tool for building smaller groups (6-25 players) is necessary for organizing this really…You can build groups of any size you want using TS and let severeal teams of 5 players play together… it is possible, not optimum I know but it works… btw is this still not an argument against bigger zergs running with a commander. It is just sth which we all want to happen aside these monsterzergs imo.

(I also would prefer to have a kind of private grouping tool embedded or at least the current player limit for a group to be increased substantially)

Lara Croft.5807:

the queue priority is for switching between the maps compared to the ones which want to get into W3 at all … as I understood.

Then in my opinion it shouldn’t be this way, want to leave the borderland, get to the back of the queue. If it is the way above, it promotes leaving the captured points undefended because you can easily come back in 10 minute time when you finished steamrolling the other borderland.

Lara Croft.5807:

I don’t know your server but to move a 50 player zerg can already be a challenge… mustn’t be – that is true

It’s as easy as saying in /Map “zerg switching to X borderland now”

Lara Croft.5807:

But coming back to the core question, what kind of problems a zerg is causing really (beside the known & discussed lags which all players face in big zergs)

I thought everyone is free to join a zerg or not… so why should zerging become obsolete in this content at all?

Well, with a little help from ANet, it already destroyed at least 2 servers, Seafarers and Desolation, so there is that for a start.

Guys, in case you haven’t noticed, my idea it’s not about removing zergs, nor about trashing them. I’ts about giving a consequence to them as a strategy used in exageration. That’s why I said “fixing”.

Right now, it’s like this:
- the bigger the zerg, the less-to-none chance enemies have against them, no matter how confusing and unskilled players it has.
- rolfstomping everything is faster, gets more rewards and with less effort than capturing at least half of the same things in smaller groups.
- the roflstomping zerg of 60+ probably wiped out most of the smaller groups (15~20 players) along the way.
- most of the times it’s not even worth upgrading things outside the prime-time of a server, since the enemy zerg can just roflstomp many keeps and towers faster than anyone else when we don’t have an allied zerg around – which gives too much advantage to servers that have zergs 24/7.
- people talk about AC’s beeing anti-zerg right now. Well, if zergs can’t handle the damage, then smaller groups can even less.

My ideia just gives one consequence to zerg: the more people it has, the harder it gets to capture a point. It gives a sense of balancing difficulty based on the number of players participating in the event.
What’s so bad about it? Do you still want to zerg up, use skill 1, no intelligence and no skill, killing everyone while roflstomping maps easily? With no challenge at all? and still call it fun?
That’s not massive scale PVP, that’s “carebear” PVP (I’m using this expression the same way many PVP players like to use it for PVE players because “PVE is easy”)

This idea also gives a chance to smaller groups to be more effective in many ways.
In the end, if a zerg can’t take out a Keep / Tower because it was too difficult and just a small group there could wipe them, then you can say they weren’t good or organized enough and they suffered the consequence of that decision – they lost so much time while they were at it that the enemy servers captured a lot of points from them.
BUT the consequence itself gets smaller if the attacking zerg is very organized and has very few useless actions, because they know what to do as an organized group of X people.
It’s like Dungeons: if you know what to do, you can do it in 15 mins. If you don’t, you could take hours.

Aztex.4895:

Guys, in case you haven’t noticed, my idea it’s not about removing zergs, nor about trashing them. I’ts about giving a consequence to them as a strategy used in exageration. That’s why I said “fixing”.

Right now, it’s like this:
- the bigger the zerg, the less-to-none chance enemies have against them, no matter how confusing and unskilled players it has.
- rolfstomping everything is faster, gets more rewards and with less effort than capturing at least half of the same things in smaller groups.
- the roflstomping zerg of 60+ probably wiped out most of the smaller groups (15~20 players) along the way.
- most of the times it’s not even worth upgrading things outside the prime-time of a server, since the enemy zerg can just roflstomp many keeps and towers faster than anyone else when we don’t have an allied zerg around – which gives too much advantage to servers that have zergs 24/7.
- people talk about AC’s beeing anti-zerg right now. Well, if zergs can’t handle the damage, then smaller groups can even less.

My ideia just gives one consequence to zerg: the more people it has, the harder it gets to capture a point. It gives a sense of balancing difficulty based on the number of players participating in the event.
What’s so bad about it? Do you still want to zerg up, use skill 1, no intelligence and no skill, killing everyone while roflstomping maps easily? With no challenge at all? and still call it fun?
That’s not massive scale PVP, that’s “carebear” PVP (I’m using this expression the same way many PVP players like to use it for PVE players because “PVE is easy”)

This idea also gives a chance to smaller groups to be more effective in many ways.
In the end, if a zerg can’t take out a Keep / Tower because it was too difficult and just a small group there could wipe them, then you can say they weren’t good or organized enough and they suffered the consequence of that decision – they lost so much time while they were at it that the enemy servers captured a lot of points from them.
BUT the consequence itself gets smaller if the attacking zerg is very organized and has very few useless actions, because they know what to do as an organized group of X people.
It’s like Dungeons: if you know what to do, you can do it in 15 mins. If you don’t, you could take hours.

ArenaNet have made the entire game to a noobfest. Nothing is really hard in this game, and they’ve dumbed down every single aspect of it. They want new players to just jump in to wvw and actually accomplish something instead of learning before accomplishing.

One thing that would force zergs to become more organized would be to remove the AoE cap…

Zergs are a part of the game. They are fun. They add a great deal of enjoyment to great numbers of players.

They do not need to be “fixed” or “stopped” or whatever. Implementing any kind of game-breaking change such as removing the AoE cap would cause players to leave GW2 and WvW in droves. The reason zerging is so popular is because MOST PEOPLE ENJOY IT.

If you want objective based combat on a SMALL scale…you’re in the wrong game, or at least in the wrong part of GW2. You can do your 8v8 combat in the HotM and leave my WvW alone, tyvm.

If you don’t want to be a part of a zerg, look for a havok team, or a guild that specializes in havok play.

style.6173:

Or maybe zergs don’t need fixing. Some of us actually like fighting large scale battles. If you want small scale, try PvP.

By large scale you mean running around pressing “1”? Because that’s what almost every single zerg I’ve ever met have done. Wohoo! I’m getting free tokens for pressing “1” and following this blue icon.

Remove the AoE cap, that would force zergs to think more and spread out to avoid damage. Pushing zergs into choke points would actually matter. There is no skill what so ever in running with a zerg. ANet wanted this game to have a fluid combat system, and for that to happen they would need to remove the AoE cap. Zergs would have to actually think a bit more instead of just standing there pressing “1”, they would actually have to dodge, move out of the AoE circle and start to think PvP.

If you ask me you need other ways to discourage 1 blob zerg,

First the maps needs to be 3 times as big as they currently are.

Secondly they need to add new objectives, like an outpost, that functions like a camp, with no gate but a surrounding wooden wall with several entrances, it doesn’t give points but give the holder a small stat boost on the map like 25+ in all stats (something like orbs, but only for the map, there could also be 1-3 outposts on the map aswell).

If the maps are bigger and have a few more objectives, 1 ball can’t protect it all and thus must split, small man groups will have something other than just camps to fight for. And if zergs wants to cap these stat points they will loose a lot of their time (either by the remote location of the outposts or a long capping time or even both)

These are but a few ideas i’ve been thinking about.

Geiir.7603:

Remove the AoE cap, that would force zergs to think more and spread out to avoid damage. Pushing zergs into choke points would actually matter. There is no skill what so ever in running with a zerg. ANet wanted this game to have a fluid combat system, and for that to happen they would need to remove the AoE cap. Zergs would have to actually think a bit more instead of just standing there pressing “1”, they would actually have to dodge, move out of the AoE circle and start to think PvP.

No it wouldn’t. It would make AE totally OP against unaware opponents compared to targeted damage while good players would get really close more than ever and run with perma retaliation and other boons which would make them almost unstoppable.

Sylosis.7125:

i got an idea…..

say desolation has 5 people on eb in wvw…….then viz can only have 5 people…and sfr only have 5 people…….this is balance.

then if it’s currently 5-5-5, nobody could ever enter

Why is zerging considered a problem? It isn’t a problem and it never is.

If you want to run small group. Do so! You greatly contribute by taking camps.

Just a reminder, there are a great amount of people enjoying being with a zerg. If fact, if you nerf zerg too much, you could lose players.

Simple quick fix for Anet. Make WvW HC mode and WvW SC mode. The game is exactly the same except there are 2 modes now. HC is for cordinated guilds who treat server ranking seriously. SC is for casual players who enjoy karma/xp train while zerging with a pug commander. :P

Aztex.4895:

I think with this idea well balanced, a Keep or a Tower would be so hard to take down when there’s a zerg of 40+ people in front of it that it wouldn’t be fast enough. Players would think about the time wasted in only one point and would try to separate in teams to take/defend other objectives in the map at the same time.

Arenanet have stated that they have to be careful about producing gameplay that makes people tell others to go away. This is a social game and is about inclusivity. If the game were changed to have scaling difficulty, there would be incentive to send other players away in order to reduce this difficulty. Thus scaling difficulty in WvW would be very very bad indeed.

As an alternative, Isiah Cartwright stated that they want small groups to do things such as attacking zergs, splitting up and initiating attacks (somehow -probably some simultaneous capping thing).

Svarty.8019:

As an alternative, Isiah Cartwright stated that they want small groups to do things such as attacking zergs, splitting up and initiating attacks (somehow -probably some simultaneous capping thing).

This is also what I consider the correct approach. Don’t force people to do something, give them an incentive to do so.