Guild Wars 2

WvW is having issues with the damage creep.

Even tier3 doors and walls can’t prevent a determined group from standing in a safe-spot and using weapon skills to destroy a door.

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There are many ways this issue can be solved. One solution might be to redesign every objective so that it is much easier to hit people using siege without the siege being killed by Meteor Shower.

The solution I propose is to have only siege damage the doors and walls. This way we can play the siege/countersiege game instead of having to endure balling up target-cap exploits.

Is this a balanced population scenario or a skewed one?

No counterplay? You know you have your own weapon skills and whatnot, right? Also, Hardened Gates?

Finally, if they’re beating down your door with weapon skills, you have some time to call in help or figure out a solution to your problem… it’s not that hard. If it’s that they outnumber you by a lot, well, that’s a pretty good reason for them to win the fight, isn’t it?

1 supply repairs 1.75k damage. That means 1 Yak into a keep brings enough supply to repair 70k damage. On average, Yak routes are about 3 minutes. That means the Yak effectively repairs ~375 damage per second.

Meanwhile, players deal far more damage than that. A zerg will absolutely dwarf it and, if they’re smart, will send a few folks to slap the yak.

So, yes, this is a potential issue. It’s less about whether an overwhelming force should win a battle and more about how they win it.

An outnumbered force must play a supply game to be effective. They reduce the supply that the enemies have to build siege, try to destroy any siege that still gets built and cut off routes to re-supply. If they play very well and the enemy zerg is as mindless as usual, they can work miracles. However, if the overwhelming force also plays well, they will win with a relatively minor loss in speed. The important thing is that every player is able to influence some outcome in the scenario regardless of the inevitable conclusion.

Thus, rewarding the most mindless of the mindless play is probably not a good idea.

Choppy.4183:

No counterplay? You know you have your own weapon skills and whatnot, right? Also, Hardened Gates?

Finally, if they’re beating down your door with weapon skills, you have some time to call in help or figure out a solution to your problem… it’s not that hard. If it’s that they outnumber you by a lot, well, that’s a pretty good reason for them to win the fight, isn’t it?

Hardened gates used to be complete immunity, it’s something I thing they should go back to. Seen too much PvD as a “last resort” to take something they already heavily out man the defenders on and with the amount of healing revs and eles do they’re immune essentially to all damage except 3-4 super ACs which are rapidly destroyed now they can’t be put out of LoS.

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Sviel.7493:

So, yes, this is a potential issue.

No its really not. Beating down T3 manually take ages compared to siege. Its just barely usable against T0 for a 50 man. In all scenarios you would also pop swords, ie you cant exactly stealth your way in.

zinkz.7045:

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Doesn’t work when it’s 5 people and 10 headless chickens defending vs a group of 30-40 fully supplied with those gawd aweful necros plaguing WvW atm.

I mean I’d happily fight them all 1 by 1 if they’d form a nice orderly queue….

Just tell your scouts to leader snipe… that’s all you did anyways.

apharma.3741:

zinkz.7045:

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Doesn’t work when it’s 5 people and 10 headless chickens defending vs a group of 30-40 fully supplied with those gawd aweful necros plaguing WvW atm.

I mean I’d happily fight them all 1 by 1 if they’d form a nice orderly queue….

That isn’t a problem as such, if I am 5 vs 40, then I am meant to lose in that situation, that isn’t an issue with players being able to damage doors, that is a problem caused by the fundamentally bad design of server vs server vs server when it comes to creating even vaguely balanced populations / situations and Anet’s failure to address that.

Hardened gates upgrade used to be 100% anti PvD. Don’t know why they changed that to 50%.

In short.

ANET should balance for balanced situations. Not cater to the 5 in a 5v40 because it screws over the 30v30.

Chinchilla.1785:

In short.

ANET should balance for balanced situations. Not cater to the 5 in a 5v40 because it screws over the 30v30.

No, they should balance for the reality of the mode, outside of prime time in a very few select matchups you don’t get that 30v30 it’s more like 30v30 at your hills while the other server is hitting your bay leaving you 5v40 at bay.

While I will accept it is a population balance issue this has been going on for years which means they should be balancing the game mode for these outnumbered situations.

apharma.3741:

Chinchilla.1785:

In short.

ANET should balance for balanced situations. Not cater to the 5 in a 5v40 because it screws over the 30v30.

No, they should balance for the reality of the mode, outside of prime time in a very few select matchups you don’t get that 30v30 it’s more like 30v30 at your hills while the other server is hitting your bay leaving you 5v40 at bay.

While I will accept it is a population balance issue this has been going on for years which means they should be balancing the game mode for these outnumbered situations.

If ANET makes structures harder in order to compensate for the 5v40 it would slow down the overall map movement leading to more staleness (e.g. fighting in front of the same objective portals for 1-2 hours in balanced scenarios).

Yes, 5v40 means they’re going to ktrain your map if those 5 aren’t competent with door trebs and shield gens. I hate ktrains too. I get it. Population imbalance sucks. I am saying the OP isn’t the way to resolve it.

Removing PvD isn’t going to make it much harder to cap structures. There are few cases where it would matter and they are overwhelmingly in the 5v40 scenario. If it’s 30v30, PvD isn’t an option for a prolonged period.

Thus, they could make the change without causing any damage to the balance of even match-ups.

Svarty.8019:

WvW is having issues with the damage creep.

Even tier3 doors and walls can’t prevent a determined group from standing in a safe-spot and using weapon skills to destroy a door.

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

…

Yeah there is… determined group to defend a tower is the counter to a determined group who wanna cap it

Ovalkvadratcylinder.9365:

Svarty.8019:

WvW is having issues with the damage creep.

Even tier3 doors and walls can’t prevent a determined group from standing in a safe-spot and using weapon skills to destroy a door.

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

…

Yeah there is… determined group to defend a tower is the counter to a determined group who wanna cap it

I guess my original post was really just a vent about the persistent WvW problem of uneven sides, where a small (otherwise they wouldn’t bother being inside the objective) group of defenders has to try to beat away a larger group.

In this scenario, I think there should at the very least be a way to repair the door without being killed by the massive amount of weapon skills striking through it.

Svarty.8019:

WvW is having issues with the damage creep.

Even tier3 doors and walls can’t prevent a determined group from standing in a safe-spot and using weapon skills to destroy a door.

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There are many ways this issue can be solved. One solution might be to redesign every objective so that it is much easier to hit people using siege without the siege being killed by Meteor Shower.

The solution I propose is to have only siege damage the doors and walls. This way we can play the siege/countersiege game instead of having to endure balling up target-cap exploits.

Just a thought. You could use a catapult or treb if the are at the door???

zinkz.7045:

apharma.3741:

zinkz.7045:

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Doesn’t work when it’s 5 people and 10 headless chickens defending vs a group of 30-40 fully supplied with those gawd aweful necros plaguing WvW atm.

I mean I’d happily fight them all 1 by 1 if they’d form a nice orderly queue….

That isn’t a problem as such, if I am 5 vs 40, then I am meant to lose in that situation, that isn’t an issue with players being able to damage doors, that is a problem caused by the fundamentally bad design of server vs server vs server when it comes to creating even vaguely balanced populations / situations and Anet’s failure to address that.

Your answer cannot be quoted enough. The issue is population balance, or, more appropriately, the lack of population balance across servers/time zones. These vast disparities cause the 5vs40 with not reserves to call upon.

apharma.3741:

zinkz.7045:

Svarty.8019:

This is a problem because THERE IS NO COUNTERPLAY.

There is no problem, because the counterplay is to stop hugging siege in your tower, go out and fight them, you know, what you are supposed to do in a PvP game mode…

Doesn’t work when it’s 5 people and 10 headless chickens defending vs a group of 30-40 fully supplied with those gawd aweful necros plaguing WvW atm.

I mean I’d happily fight them all 1 by 1 if they’d form a nice orderly queue….

If that’s the case, you should lose it. Defensive upgrades and siege already make it possible for that many people, or even less, to hold an objective from a group quadruple their size.

It sucks to be outnumbered but objectives will fall whether you like it or not. It doesn’t matter if you outnumber your enemy or they outnumber you and it doesn’t matter how much siege is in it. If you’re caught off guard or if your enemy is determined/organized enough, nothing is immune to being captured. That’s a part of WvW and there have been plenty enough defensive changes over the course of it’s life time.

Being able to stand on the walls would be a nice change but besides that, I think there’s more than enough ways to scare off outside groups far, far larger than those inside. I mean I’ve pushed zergs off Veloka by myself many times because it has so few spots that are out of siege range coupled with fortified walls and all that other hoo ha.

EDIT: Side note after reading through more comments here. As far as I’m concerned, though I could very well be wrong, siege and fortifications were only made to stall the enemy zergs, not to stop them. These things are there to buy you time before your own zerg can show up to help. But because of lop-sided matches, that’s not something everyone has the luxury of. In which case, you can’t keep asking for more defensive options or servers that do have enough players to fight back, but that prefer to sit inside and not fight, will do that. We have enough siege wars as it is. If you’re on an under populated server, I’m sorry but you don’t need bigger guns so the bigger servers can use them better than you.

So many people missing the point here~

The problem isn’t that the gate eventually falls, but that there’s no player interaction in it falling. All defense is just stalling—that is enshrined in the mechanic of supply. A well-played defense will always lose when it doesn’t have the supply to keep going. It can lose even faster if the offense manages to break something open before the defense can adequately respond. In the case of 5v40, the strength of the offense is such that they will very likely break something before the defense runs out of supply. Unless they’re dumb.

That’s all fine.

The problem is when the defense is present, aware of the attack and unable to do anything meaningful about it. By meaningful, I mean there should be some avenue, provided they have enough time, to repel the assault. That doesn’t mean that they need to succeed at repelling every assault—that would be ludicrous and boring. It just means that for every offensive assault, there must be a defensive action which can theoretically repel that assault.

The issue with PvD is that the only defensive action is attempting to repair the gate. Even that fails when the attacks coming through it are too much to get close. Thus, there’s nothing for the defense to even attempt to do. They’re helpless to watch as they lose the keep.

If the enemies had thrown down 8 rams and 3 shield generators, the gate would still have fallen and much quicker…but the defender’s objective would then be to destroy the siege. It would be very difficult, but it gives them something to work towards.

Sviel.7493:

The issue with PvD is that the only defensive action is attempting to repair the gate. Even that fails when the attacks coming through it are too much to get close. Thus, there’s nothing for the defense to even attempt to do. They’re helpless to watch as they lose the keep.

Door trebs. If the situation is as the OP describe where it is purely PvD, the ‘counterplay’ is door trebs for the melee, and shield gens for the range projectiles.

What is the counter play for door trebs? Shield gens. Of course that implies they could make rams too.

Problem is. The siege game play in WvW on its own is mediocre, and slow (and has been slowed down since launch). The fighting game play on its own is mediocre, and filled with clutter mainly due to the balance team not keeping up. Both together somewhat help to alleviate the other, but also exacerbate the other.

The caveat here is the counter plays would be so stupid looking and non-intuitive to new comers. I mean really…door siege on your own door? Immersive.

bring back bannering the lord & way points that uncontest between defence events.

Defenders got too many advantages with HoT, it’s moved the fights out of the breached tower / keep and onto the walls where like 90% of the attacking group has to wait idle because they have no way to hit the defenders. Waiting idle isn’t fun.

Walls fights should only last long enough for the defenders to have a shot at arriving in time to defend the lord, not a half hour of trying to breach a keep while everything gets shielded & the defenders have like 1000 supply they didn’t even need to consider spending on upgrades.

Drinks.2361:

bring back bannering the lord & way points that uncontest between defence events.

Defenders got too many advantages with HoT, it’s moved the fights out of the breached tower / keep and onto the walls where like 90% of the attacking group has to wait idle because they have no way to hit the defenders. Waiting idle isn’t fun.

Walls fights should only last long enough for the defenders to have a shot at arriving in time to defend the lord, not a half hour of trying to breach a keep while everything gets shielded & the defenders have like 1000 supply they didn’t even need to consider spending on upgrades.

Well that will obviously only make defending far, far easier without fixing anything you consider a problem.

You would also have to remove shield gens, nerf claims to the ground, nerf the autoupgrade timings, nerf supply availability and preferably also lower T2/T3 stats considerably. Hell if you kill the tier based PPT we might even fix scoring while we are at it.

instead of nerfing autoupgrade timing I’d just make Dolyaks only be useful for upgrades, not carry supply to keeps or towers at all.

I don’t care how long the defending actually goes on for once there is a breach. Everyone can be in on that fight. If it takes hours so what? It is way more fun than cata / shield wars.

Skirmish scoring isn’t terrible as long as we are stuck with PPT, way better than _ server ticking 600 for 8h while the bulk of the player base is asleep.

Chinchilla.1785:

Door trebs. If the situation is as the OP describe where it is purely PvD, the ‘counterplay’ is door trebs for the melee, and shield gens for the range projectiles.

What is the counter play for door trebs? Shield gens. Of course that implies they could make rams too.

Problem is. The siege game play in WvW on its own is mediocre, and slow (and has been slowed down since launch). The fighting game play on its own is mediocre, and filled with clutter mainly due to the balance team not keeping up. Both together somewhat help to alleviate the other, but also exacerbate the other.

The caveat here is the counter plays would be so stupid looking and non-intuitive to new comers. I mean really…door siege on your own door? Immersive.

Assuming you have a 3+ trebs and 3 shield generators and enough luck to always knock the enemies back before they land a melee attack then, yes, you’re now able to sit and spam a skill off CD for eternity.

Technically, it’s counterplay, but are we really setting the bar that low?

Not to mention, shield gens don’t block AoE.

Sviel.7493:

Chinchilla.1785:

Door trebs. If the situation is as the OP describe where it is purely PvD, the ‘counterplay’ is door trebs for the melee, and shield gens for the range projectiles.

What is the counter play for door trebs? Shield gens. Of course that implies they could make rams too.

Problem is. The siege game play in WvW on its own is mediocre, and slow (and has been slowed down since launch). The fighting game play on its own is mediocre, and filled with clutter mainly due to the balance team not keeping up. Both together somewhat help to alleviate the other, but also exacerbate the other.

The caveat here is the counter plays would be so stupid looking and non-intuitive to new comers. I mean really…door siege on your own door? Immersive.

Assuming you have a 3+ trebs and 3 shield generators and enough luck to always knock the enemies back before they land a melee attack then, yes, you’re now able to sit and spam a skill off CD for eternity.

Technically, it’s counterplay, but are we really setting the bar that low?

Not to mention, shield gens don’t block AoE.

Ignoring that you can drastically slow them down with 1 treb, and 1 shield gen and not 3…your point is correct.

The bar really is that low when it comes to counter play in regards to PvD. Siege in general isn’t very reactionary, I find it’s determined by who builds/mans siege first, then we think about supply. Especially considering the effectiveness of door trebs when deterring rams, and pvd behavior (which is why they nerfed door catapults so long ago). A newbie isn’t going to consider throwing down a door treb let alone using one.

The easy answer has always been above everyone heads: the oil. Unfortunately, it’s implementation is poor. Intuitively a new player would like to use that against PvD people. Those here probably know how that ends for them.

OP’s intention was to increase counter play in regards to siege game play, by increasing damage reduction on gates. This doesn’t actually add game play elements as for his/her intention. Revising the way oil is handled would actually add something to consider…

Sviel.7493:

So many people missing the point here~

The problem isn’t that the gate eventually falls, but that there’s no player interaction in it falling. All defense is just stalling—that is enshrined in the mechanic of supply. A well-played defense will always lose when it doesn’t have the supply to keep going. It can lose even faster if the offense manages to break something open before the defense can adequately respond. In the case of 5v40, the strength of the offense is such that they will very likely break something before the defense runs out of supply. Unless they’re dumb.

That’s all fine.

The problem is when the defense is present, aware of the attack and unable to do anything meaningful about it. By meaningful, I mean there should be some avenue, provided they have enough time, to repel the assault. That doesn’t mean that they need to succeed at repelling every assault—that would be ludicrous and boring. It just means that for every offensive assault, there must be a defensive action which can theoretically repel that assault.

The issue with PvD is that the only defensive action is attempting to repair the gate. Even that fails when the attacks coming through it are too much to get close. Thus, there’s nothing for the defense to even attempt to do. They’re helpless to watch as they lose the keep.

If the enemies had thrown down 8 rams and 3 shield generators, the gate would still have fallen and much quicker…but the defender’s objective would then be to destroy the siege. It would be very difficult, but it gives them something to work towards.

I literally said a lot of what you said in the first part of your comment.

I wouldn’t be against the idea of gates not taking damage from players but that is the only defensive buff I would be in support of. If you prepare properly, PvD isn’t an issue. I’ve been a part of a lot of keep assaults and 9 times out of 10, it requires at least 3 or 4 attempts before getting through inner even when it’s only half a dozen people defending. If the enemy is determined, they’ll get through eventually no matter what. People need to let go of the idea that they should be able to hold objectives from forces triple their size. It sucks to be in that situation and I’ve been there many times myself, but if nobody can win, everyone loses.

@Chinchilla

You’re right that PvD is rarely employed. I wouldn’t categorize this as a pressing issue. I also agree that oil/cannons are a more gainful fix. However, removing PvD is a full positive change. It’s less about adding counterplay and more about shifting gameplay to the areas where counterplay already exists. Since it’s an easy change, I support it.

@SpellOfIniquity

I’m not sure who these people are that think they should be able to defend indefinitely against a group triple their size. They’re obviously silly.

However, there’s no need to assume that anyone that talks about defensive changes is in that crowd. There was nothing like that in the OP and others who chimed in went out of their way to avoid sounding as such. No one said anything of the sort until you brought it up to condemn it.

Unless I missed something?

well players damage to gate should do arround 1 – 30

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Sviel.7493:

So many people missing the point here~

The problem isn’t that the gate eventually falls, but that there’s no player interaction in it falling. All defense is just stalling—that is enshrined in the mechanic of supply. A well-played defense will always lose when it doesn’t have the supply to keep going. It can lose even faster if the offense manages to break something open before the defense can adequately respond. In the case of 5v40, the strength of the offense is such that they will very likely break something before the defense runs out of supply. Unless they’re dumb.

That’s all fine.

The problem is when the defense is present, aware of the attack and unable to do anything meaningful about it. By meaningful, I mean there should be some avenue, provided they have enough time, to repel the assault. That doesn’t mean that they need to succeed at repelling every assault—that would be ludicrous and boring. It just means that for every offensive assault, there must be a defensive action which can theoretically repel that assault.

The issue with PvD is that the only defensive action is attempting to repair the gate. Even that fails when the attacks coming through it are too much to get close. Thus, there’s nothing for the defense to even attempt to do. They’re helpless to watch as they lose the keep.

If the enemies had thrown down 8 rams and 3 shield generators, the gate would still have fallen and much quicker…but the defender’s objective would then be to destroy the siege. It would be very difficult, but it gives them something to work towards.

I literally said a lot of what you said in the first part of your comment.

I wouldn’t be against the idea of gates not taking damage from players but that is the only defensive buff I would be in support of. If you prepare properly, PvD isn’t an issue. I’ve been a part of a lot of keep assaults and 9 times out of 10, it requires at least 3 or 4 attempts before getting through inner even when it’s only half a dozen people defending. If the enemy is determined, they’ll get through eventually no matter what. People need to let go of the idea that they should be able to hold objectives from forces triple their size. It sucks to be in that situation and I’ve been there many times myself, but if nobody can win, everyone loses.

Sviel is 100% correct.

I disagree with you, Spell, when you say,

• “they’ll get through eventually no matter what”, and,
• “People need to let go of the idea that they should be able to hold objectives from forces triple their size”

Bringing us back on topic, these situations are perfectly defensible if there is no skill-damage on gate.

It simply comes down to a supply mitigation game. Remember the tower in question was tier 3. This means that the defenders should be able to build (as well as the pre-prepared siege already built and refreshed) more siege than the attackers can.

My point is that the game in this instance isn’t 60vs20. It’s 1 piece of siege vs 1 piece of siege. It’s the siege and countersiege game. That’s what’s evening this situation up. That’s why it should be theoretically feasible for these defenders to be able to counter this particular outnumbering force.

And that HOPE is what gives defenders motivation to persist. If you take away that hope, as you propose, you take away defenders, pride, rewards and fun – and without those, you have no game.

Svarty.8019:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Sviel.7493:

So many people missing the point here~

The problem isn’t that the gate eventually falls, but that there’s no player interaction in it falling. All defense is just stalling—that is enshrined in the mechanic of supply. A well-played defense will always lose when it doesn’t have the supply to keep going. It can lose even faster if the offense manages to break something open before the defense can adequately respond. In the case of 5v40, the strength of the offense is such that they will very likely break something before the defense runs out of supply. Unless they’re dumb.

That’s all fine.

The problem is when the defense is present, aware of the attack and unable to do anything meaningful about it. By meaningful, I mean there should be some avenue, provided they have enough time, to repel the assault. That doesn’t mean that they need to succeed at repelling every assault—that would be ludicrous and boring. It just means that for every offensive assault, there must be a defensive action which can theoretically repel that assault.

The issue with PvD is that the only defensive action is attempting to repair the gate. Even that fails when the attacks coming through it are too much to get close. Thus, there’s nothing for the defense to even attempt to do. They’re helpless to watch as they lose the keep.

If the enemies had thrown down 8 rams and 3 shield generators, the gate would still have fallen and much quicker…but the defender’s objective would then be to destroy the siege. It would be very difficult, but it gives them something to work towards.

I literally said a lot of what you said in the first part of your comment.

I wouldn’t be against the idea of gates not taking damage from players but that is the only defensive buff I would be in support of. If you prepare properly, PvD isn’t an issue. I’ve been a part of a lot of keep assaults and 9 times out of 10, it requires at least 3 or 4 attempts before getting through inner even when it’s only half a dozen people defending. If the enemy is determined, they’ll get through eventually no matter what. People need to let go of the idea that they should be able to hold objectives from forces triple their size. It sucks to be in that situation and I’ve been there many times myself, but if nobody can win, everyone loses.

Sviel is 100% correct.

I disagree with you, Spell, when you say,

• “they’ll get through eventually no matter what”, and,
• “People need to let go of the idea that they should be able to hold objectives from forces triple their size”

Bringing us back on topic, these situations are perfectly defensible if there is no skill-damage on gate.

It simply comes down to a supply mitigation game. Remember the tower in question was tier 3. This means that the defenders should be able to build (as well as the pre-prepared siege already built and refreshed) more siege than the attackers can.

My point is that the game in this instance isn’t 60vs20. It’s 1 piece of siege vs 1 piece of siege. It’s the siege and countersiege game. That’s what’s evening this situation up. That’s why it should be theoretically feasible for these defenders to be able to counter this particular outnumbering force.

And that HOPE is what gives defenders motivation to persist. If you take away that hope, as you propose, you take away defenders, pride, rewards and fun – and without those, you have no game.

And my point is that if defence is made to be too effective, you’ll have servers that will never leave their objectives even when they have equal or greater numbers. Why risk getting killed when you can sit inside perfectly safe.

Again I’m not saying I’d be against the idea of making it so that only siege can damage gates. I was just pointing out that defences are already plenty strong, especially if you have players who know how to properly build siege to repel attacks. Just consider that something as small as disallowing PvD could make a bigger impact than you might think. As far as I’m concerned, most people don’t enjoy being showered with a million arrow carts, mortars and other siege while they try to get in to an objective. It’s certainly not going to make new players want to stay and in the state that WvW is in, we need all the new people we can get.

I was off topic yes, but I wanted to remind you guys how strong defences already are compared to how they used to be.

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

And my point is that if defence is made to be too effective, you’ll have servers that will never leave their objectives even when they have equal or greater numbers. Why risk getting killed when you can sit inside perfectly safe.

The counter to this (assuming we are talking about roughly equal numbers) is to send 5 guys to go cap something they don’t have defenders at while they sit in the tower. This forces the enemy to either attack you to wipe you and move on, split up allowing you to kill the ones that split or lose an objective.

If the numbers aren’t even then someone is already making a massive mistake. If defenders group is bigger then the aggressor side either has an easier time elsewhere or if outnumbered has the advantage locking them there stopping them karma training. If the aggressor group is bigger then they are misplaying by blobbing and should be punished harshly for it. Removing PvD means that if the aggressor wants it in the latter scenario they cannot simply brute force their way in when they misplay.

Most of the informed opinions here seem to concur (to varying degrees) that using weapon skills to take down doors is unsatisfying for all involved participants and viewed as somewhat cheap and borderline exploiting.

Svarty.8019:

Most of the informed opinions here seem to concur (to varying degrees) that using weapon skills to take down doors is unsatisfying for all involved participants and viewed as somewhat cheap and borderline exploiting.

Mmm. I don’t have an issue with PvD (that takes a while on it’s own in the t3 scenario as OP mentions). It is a strategy whether people like the tactic or not isn’t why I’m against the OP. Just as omni blobbing down 20 people is a tactic. Because the bar is so low as previously mentioned, you could argue PvD has more sustained player interaction than cataing a wall (or ramming gates). Specifically, 3-5 people on catas/rams while the other 80% watch and wait. Maybe the ele players actually are able to do something…

My issue is that people want to outright delete said tactics instead of adding opportunities to “outplay” those that employ the above. Because it’s easy to nerf, I guess? Adding stuff means it comes down to map design, and balance. Something that I hardly trust a divided community to agree on the details. Which means ANET, whose current track record is about 50/50 hit or miss, takes responsibility for a game mode that lacks focus anyway.

Chinchilla.1785:

My issue is that people want to outright delete said tactics instead of adding opportunities to “outplay” those that employ the above. Because it’s easy to nerf, I guess? Adding stuff means it comes down to map design, and balance. Something that I hardly trust a divided community to agree on the details.

Do you have any ideas for outplaying a stacked up blob with a few people?

I’ve already commended the idea of a powerful Lord who can even up a fight (like we have at Air and Fire keeps atm). Perhaps a shorter tether so the room can be bombed more effectively, too.

If we’re judging whether anything will change … well, I guess it’s easier to do nothing – and that is exactly what everybody has come to expect.

Svarty.8019:

Chinchilla.1785:

My issue is that people want to outright delete said tactics instead of adding opportunities to “outplay” those that employ the above. Because it’s easy to nerf, I guess? Adding stuff means it comes down to map design, and balance. Something that I hardly trust a divided community to agree on the details.

Do you have any ideas for outplaying a stacked up blob with a few people?

I’ve already commended the idea of a powerful Lord who can even up a fight (like we have at Air and Fire keeps atm). Perhaps a shorter tether so the room can be bombed more effectively, too.

If we’re judging whether anything will change … well, I guess it’s easier to do nothing – and that is exactly what everybody has come to expect.

I think the lord room design of garrison and green keep in EB was the best for helping a smaller but smarter group keep or delay it. You could build 3 super ACs on top of the lord’s room and cause a blob to die if they don’t notice as well as having only 1 way up (bonus points for having a ram to fear them off on the chokes) so you can force them into disadvantageous fights. Garri also has the 2nd level of walkway around the lord’s room allowing ranged classes to fire in a location less vulnerable to melee and roaming classes with teleports more freedom of movement.

To be honest I think garrison is one of if not the best designed keep in the game, very vulnerable if no-one is there but if properly sieged with a few defenders who aren’t morons might as well be called doom fortress 1337.

Svarty.8019:

Chinchilla.1785:

My issue is that people want to outright delete said tactics instead of adding opportunities to “outplay” those that employ the above. Because it’s easy to nerf, I guess? Adding stuff means it comes down to map design, and balance. Something that I hardly trust a divided community to agree on the details.

Do you have any ideas for outplaying a stacked up blob with a few people?

I’ve already commended the idea of a powerful Lord who can even up a fight (like we have at Air and Fire keeps atm). Perhaps a shorter tether so the room can be bombed more effectively, too.

If we’re judging whether anything will change … well, I guess it’s easier to do nothing – and that is exactly what everybody has come to expect.

Keeping to the OP of raising damage reduction to remove PvD game play.

I already suggested to making the oil more effective. Going into details it can pulse stability on the user, and increase oil damage. ANET can even going as far as raising damage reduction on the user.

Idc about increasing lord effectiveness. I think the best lord design is DBL’s Garrison since it makes use of the jump mechanic that is a pinnacle of Guild Wars 2. However, it is better that a situation gets balanced by more players…not a plethora of CCs spewed out of npcs like Air and Lava keep lords from DBL.

In response to raising damage reduction on gates yes. I am suggesting no change take place, and ANET do nothing in that regard. PvDing a T3 is painfully long without siege. I already mentioned door trebs, and shield gens to drag it out even longer. Repairing isn’t the only way. If you don’t have the population to counter then the real solution involves dealing with coverage not fiddling with gates. Coverage, of course, is out of scope for this topic.

You might not know this, but the whole point of game mode is being able to take things even if there is siege inside, that’s why there is counter siege. What difference would it make if they would stack with a blob to pvd or have an 3 omegas there with them.

Supply is a resource, its not unlimited and shouldnt be wasted. Attackers are supposed to have a chance for healthy gameplay. These are things you need to keep in mind.

Now lets say theres 80 people pvding your gate thats at 80% if you managed to man your double trebs and triple acs for the gate in time. Drained their supply with supply traps and cows. Ok so they facerub the gate for next 40 minutes. What can you do in this time with 20 people?

1) you can get 5 scrappers and use double elixir s to repair gates while invuln. or just blink away from gate after starting to repair to finish it with pretty much any class. focus + mistform eles work too, mesmer portals etc.
2) you can try to attack something t3 of theirs to bring them away, doesnt work always but sometimes.
3) you can fight them and be stronger than them, you already have claim buff (and prolly presence of the keep) and acs, so you’re on supersayian mode where you can easily win double the numbers.

Now, none of these are very hard to do. it just requires you to be fast about killing their actual siege/draining supply.

Also if they cap the keep, they’re having fun, you’re not, so it balances itself out.

The issue is how WvW works… servers need to end, we need more maps, towers and castles need to offer more gameplay besides search what is T1 or is empty.

lack of mechanics, is what makes the current awfull gameplay, Anet dont even put servers against server with same population at same time… they choosed a model where one ktrain after the other, wich is why we have alot of pdv wvw pro guilds.