Guild Wars 2

SomeoneElse.3685:

We don’t have evidence about how the orb is gonna work, so all we can do Is say what we do not want it to be

So make our voices heard now (before the changes)and tell the devs what we don’t want. I enjoy world versus world for it’s open world pvp, and I don’t want it to die. It is the only reason I even log into this game.

Az z.2746:

Please don’t do stats-buff again, they only take away from the merit of fighting and crushing your enemy. From the moment you start winning because you have x% more stats, and not because you are out-playing the enemy, the game becomes so much duller.

Make the buff be a strategic advantage such as:
-All sieges on the map do x% more damage against doors and gates.
-Supply capacity increase.
-Ability to build a special type of siege.

Agree with this. Stat bonuses suck but increased siege damage for holding an objective? That’s an idea I can get behind!

Please listen to your players Anet. Stat bonuses are terrible!!

shadowraith.9124:

kitten .2746:

Please don’t do stats-buff again, they only take away from the merit of fighting and crushing your enemy. From the moment you start winning because you have x% more stats, and not because you are out-playing the enemy, the game becomes so much duller.

Make the buff be a strategic advantage such as:
-All sieges on the map do x% more damage against doors and gates.
-Supply capacity increase.
-Ability to build a special type of siege.

Agree with this. Stat bonuses suck but increased siege damage for holding an objective? That’s an idea I can get behind!

Please listen to your players Anet. Stat bonuses are terrible!!

Almost the entire WXP system is geared towards siege bonuses. This, in the words of the dev, to prevent power creep.

Yet, the Orb bonus that will affect everyone in WvW, has — wait for it — a stat buff.

Once again, Anet is trying to hold onto an idea that was great in theory (about a year ago), but that has very long been bypassed in actual game play. No one wants an orb buff.

If this goes through, along with the AC buff and randomized matchups, it will probably be the last nail in the coffin for actual competition in WvW. The casuals will have won.

But, it is the dedicated WvW’ers who actually lead the zergs and provide the fun for the casuals. Once they go then, WvW will die.

Well those orbs were so powerfull, as i remember once we had 30k health per man while enemy had mb max 18k – it was start of gw2 so lot of ppl were skalling. So i think they don’t give them back BUT replace, also i found info at wiki about changes that come in this year and there is few ars about Orbs: " Orbs are not coming back as they were they are working on a replacment for the best part of orbs" i think they give some mf for example, cos servers that have weak eemy will be able to farm some stuff at WVW.

Stat bonuses mean:

Solo Roaming is dead
Small group roaming is dead
GvG is dead
Actually fun and competitive ZvZ is dead

I (and probably many others) will instantly quit the game.

That’s not an overreaction either. Stat bonuses would ruin everything that’s good about WvW. Thee only bonuses that orbs should provide are non-combat bonuses.

Vena.8436:

mjharrison.3209:

DAOC’s Darkness Falls was a masterstroke on multiple levels.

GW1 had the same concept and, to put it lightly, it was a terrible idea and was shelved.

PvE’rs don’t want to have to wait/deal with PvP to do PvE.
PvP’rs don’t want PvE’rs clogging up queues to “get the leet dungeon!”.

If you put anything of worth inside of said dungeon, you exasperate the problem (OS is bad enough with all the tears and q.q it produces over simple things like kites). Considering that GW1 is years younger than DAoC and existed amongst the modern generation of gamers… well, you get my point.

I would love it to have pve and pvp mixed up a bit. Even though is true as you say that pvers now are a mass of crybabies that are not used anymore to have to deal with pvpers.
Anyway i’d be 100% pro to some kind of darkness fall, pvers already have all the safety they want in the living world, so if they really can’t deal with that they can just leave that one dungeon alone, while i’m sure many other players will still get into it.

I think that if well done it could actually work and provide quite a good revamp to the static situation we have now. Ofc it should be well thought maybe with some kind of strategic relevance and not just like a jp with mobs in it

btw since we’re talking about stat bonuses when are they going to take away that bullkitten 250 vitality bonus from the guard defence mastery

shadowraith.9124:

Stat bonuses mean:

Solo Roaming is dead
Small group roaming is dead
GvG is dead
Actually fun and competitive ZvZ is dead

I (and probably many others) will instantly quit the game.

That’s not an overreaction either. Stat bonuses would ruin everything that’s good about WvW. Thee only bonuses that orbs should provide are non-combat bonuses.

Considering how you’re already talking about leaving the game without even knowing how anything is going to work.. Wouldn’t it be best if you just packed your bags and left immediately? I’m sure there’s plenty of people who’d love to give the new orbs a spin without being in a long queue first =)

Even if the orbs return with a stat boost, who’s to say that the boost will be a permanent one? Maybe Arenanet actually learned their lesson after tons of thieves and mesmers were sky surfing into keeps to steal the orbs. (I mean let’s be realistic here.. I doubt they’d be stupid enough to retry that one)

All I’m saying is.. Wait before you judge. Quit being such a downer and ride along on the wave of positivity =)

I don’t think you understand. Allow me to spell it out for you.

If anyone in WvW has a stat bonus from orbs then they have a real and tangible advantage over other players. This diminishes the importance of skill and coordination in a game mode which is already a 1 spamming zerg fest for the most part.

When you play, do you really get any satisfaction from stomping an up leveled? No not really. Now imagine that because you have the orb everyone is effectively up leveled to you. You can’t get an evenly matched, exciting battle of skill to save you life. Overnight the game becomes duller and more boring.

That is why stat bonuses are bad. Very, very bad.

There are plenty of other bonuses that Anet could provide that would give strategic advantages to help the underdog servers such as siege bonuses, supply bonuses, NPC killing bonuses, waypoints, extra friendly mercenaries, trap immunity, whatever. Just not combat bonuses

I’m sure the devs are reading our comments and will learn from this forum, I think they already know that they shouldnt put stat buffs in like they did before from all the people that said it xD

Also guys, on the note of gvg, there is this petition you might wanna sign: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/official-gvg-setup-in-gw2/

SomeoneElse.3685:

I’m sure the devs are reading our comments and will learn from this forum, I think they already know that they shouldnt put stat buffs in like they did before from all the people that said it xD

I hope so….I don’t mind stat bonuses… (Hell I think giving a stat bonus to the weakest server will help balancing), but those stat bonuses simply CANNOT be tied to an objective that needs to be taken and held by a server….that will inherently give the strongest server the biggest advantage in owning it….and it’s stupid and will make things worse…

Gamadorn.2659:

I hope so….I don’t mind stat bonuses… (Hell I think giving a stat bonus to the weakest server will help balancing), but those stat bonuses simply CANNOT be tied to an objective that needs to be taken and held by a server….that will inherently give the strongest server the biggest advantage in owning it….and it’s stupid and will make things worse…

How does one define “weakest server”. Who is the “weakest server” in NA T1?

If, for example, the orb were three open-field capture points that need to be held concurrently, how does any server, no matter how big or small, have an inherent advantage? Three points of focus means 80/3 at best means, 80/3 is all it takes from any one server to take said point of focus. There are three servers to a map.

Even if you own diddly-squat on a map, you can still fight to deny the orb bonus even if you can’t capture it (unlike in the past where the orb was a physical object and singular, and hidden behind 80 people and steel walls). Whereas at current, a borderland that is all one color or locked down, is almost always abandoned for focusing on less unfavorable fields of war because it servers no purpose but being ppt fodder.

DevonCarver.5370:

Are the orbs coming back? No. Are we bringing back the buff? Yes, although the way you get it and hold it is going to be drastically different. Are you going to see a major map change in concert with this? Yes. Is it coming soon? Most definitely.

By soon, do you mean July 2018, when your done adding those extremely useful and game-improving masteries?

Vena.8436:

Gamadorn.2659:

I hope so….I don’t mind stat bonuses… (Hell I think giving a stat bonus to the weakest server will help balancing), but those stat bonuses simply CANNOT be tied to an objective that needs to be taken and held by a server….that will inherently give the strongest server the biggest advantage in owning it….and it’s stupid and will make things worse…

How does one define “weakest server”. Who is the “weakest server” in NA T1?

If, for example, the orb were three open-field capture points that need to be held concurrently, how does any server, no matter how big or small, have an inherent advantage? Three points of focus means 80/3 at best means, 80/3 is all it takes from any one server to take said point of focus. There are three servers to a map.

Even if you own diddly-squat on a map, you can still fight to deny the orb bonus even if you can’t capture it (unlike in the past where the orb was a physical object and singular, and hidden behind 80 people and steel walls). Whereas at current, a borderland that is all one color or locked down, is almost always abandoned for focusing on less unfavorable fields of war because it servers no purpose but being ppt fodder.

It is very easy to define the weakest server…the one with the least points in the weakest server….you do understand game mechanics right?

The “Strongest” server… means they have the most coverage and the most people in WvW throughout the day on average….NA T1 is actually fairly close on coverage OVERALL, now I know JQ, BG and SOR have coverage overlaps where one’s SEA is stronger then the others etc…but OVERALL they have relatively even coverage….

TC for example has better overall coverage then my server DB and Maguuma…they would have a distinct advantage at holding the objective on all maps because they simply have more people to spare.

You logic is flawed in saying 80/3….the point is that the server that can field 250 people on all their maps….say TC can have 100 people in eternal, 100 people in DB BL and 50 people in TC BL vs DB who only have 100 people in eternal and 50 ppl in DB BL…cannot afford to fight for the orb as well as the higher population server..that means MOST OF THE TIME…the HIGHER population or “Stronger” server will hold it throughout the day….giving them a buff…im not saying that a smaller server couldn’t take it…i’m just saying OVERALL ON AVERAGE throughout the day….the stronger server will more than likely hold it longer than the other two servers…making it more lopsided…

Going to bump so this keeps getting attention. Please don’t add anything that buffs player stats match wide, or even map wide.

Hey Vena.8436, Gamadorn.2659 I really enjoyed your dialogue here. It didn’t need to be so combative though. Thank you both for contributing.

DevonCarver.5370:

Are the orbs coming back? No. Are we bringing back the buff? Yes – snip

Just one question: Why?

Aside the various hack/exploits that made orbs extremely easy to flip, the main reason to take out orbs was that the buff of 50 to 150 to all stats was plain OP, and favouring the most numerous/winning/zergish server, for a horrible snowballing effect.

Orbs mechanic itself wasn’t that bad. Ofc, it has been easier to take them away rather than fix all the holes in keeps and exploits to flip them, but whatever.

Now you’re telling us that orb will not come back (as said, don’t mind if a less exploitable mechanic take place) but the OP buff that led you to take them out for all this time will?

Again: Why?

AndrewSX.3794:

Again: Why?

Because then they would have to come up with some buff that is relevant, original and balanced from scratch, when the present focus is on the orb-replacement mechanic itself. They can always do other buffs, it’s just a few lines of code, but creating a whole new way how you acquire that buff is a lot more intense. Stat boni are simply the most basic, proven method, coming up with other buffs is much harder. What would you add as the orb-replacement buff? That’s what this thread is for, to brainstorm what the bonus should be.

I actually don’t even think that the buff is gonna turn out to be that bad, because unlike popular beliefs, Arena Net knows what they are doing and they aren’t stupid…

SomeoneElse.3685:

I actually don’t even think that the buff is gonna turn out to be that bad, because unlike popular beliefs, Arena Net knows what they are doing and they aren’t stupid…

Do they know what they are doing? That is fantastic bro. Link me something that supports your claim. Where is the Developer that has mastered WvW gameplay? Show me the recordings.

Just say no to giving stat rewards to the strongest server.

Are there any Anet devs that actually play WvW?

I don’t mean finding a commander icon and just PUGing it up. I mean actual organized gameplay.

I think the answer is clearly no if they think this is good idea.

SomeoneElse.3685:

I actually don’t even think that the buff is gonna turn out to be that bad, because unlike popular beliefs, Arena Net knows what they are doing and they aren’t stupid…

They may not be stupid, but the evidence is overwhelming that they sure as hell don’t know what they’re doing when it comes to WvW.

If it had to give any buff, just make it grant WXP buff. Everyone wins, Pvdoor players will like the extra WXP and PvPers will enjoy fair fights

shagworth.5017:

Are there any Anet devs that actually play WvW?

I don’t mean finding a commander icon and just PUGing it up. I mean actual organized gameplay.

I think the answer is clearly no if they think this is good idea.

Did you watch the live stream of small squad play that ANET did a few months back? A keyboard turning clicker showed us all how to run around in a poorly built group, die a lot and point out siege placement locations.

So no, they do not play much other than pug it up.

Niim.9260:

shagworth.5017:

Are there any Anet devs that actually play WvW?

I don’t mean finding a commander icon and just PUGing it up. I mean actual organized gameplay.

I think the answer is clearly no if they think this is good idea.

Did you watch the live stream of small squad play that ANET did a few months back? A keyboard turning clicker showed us all how to run around in a poorly built group, die a lot and point out siege placement locations.

So no, they do not play much other than pug it up.

I LOL’d at keyboard turning clicker…..

but seriously….I don’t think so either….

I like that idea up there that Orbs are a bonus to siege damage or supply capacity. A king of the hill objective that provides that kind of buff would break up zergs. Whoever owns the buff becomes a serious threat on the map. To defend it the zerg would have to leave behind x number of players to outnumber anyone trying to Ninja the orb shrine.

Apologies, I was busy with work.

Gamadorn.2659:

It is very easy to define the weakest server…the one with the least points in the weakest server….you do understand game mechanics right?

So you’re saying that Blackgate is the weakest server? I think both SoR and JQ would take issue with that claim and giving them (us) a considerable stat bonus. In some tiers its pretty easy to define, in others? Not so much. (Its easy in the TC/DB/MG case because TC is a limbo-T1 server.)

Its Friday morning, NA, and three servers are neck and neck, but one server let’s its PPT dip for a moment to gain the buff and then flip EVERYTHING to paper before the point totals equilibrate to remove the buff again.

Its not easy, and anything that is simply “given” asks to be abused. And while we’re at it, why not just give the “weakest” server Determined lords on their keeps? People dislike owning nothing but camps just as much as they dislike orbs.

Gamadorn.2659:

You logic is flawed in saying 80/3….the point is that the server that can field 250 people on all their maps….say TC can have 100 people in eternal, 100 people in DB BL and 50 people in TC BL vs DB who only have 100 people in eternal and 50 ppl in DB BL…cannot afford to fight for the orb as well as the higher population server..that means MOST OF THE TIME…the HIGHER population or “Stronger” server will hold it throughout the day….giving them a buff…im not saying that a smaller server couldn’t take it…i’m just saying OVERALL ON AVERAGE throughout the day….the stronger server will more than likely hold it longer than the other two servers…making it more lopsided…

If DB can afford to have 50 people in their BL, and the orb requires the control of three individual control points, for example, all in the open field. How exactly is TC’s 80/3 going to stop your 50 from simply wiping out one of the orb nodes and nullifying the bonus? Are they going to camp all 80 people on one node? Then who’s scouting their towers or keeps? Who’s on the other nodes? Why isn’t MG doing the same on their BL? Or if its just one KotH node, and they just park 80 people on top of it, who’s scouting their keeps and towers? Why aren’t your havoc groups doing something?

And still, this comparison remains utterly flawed because TC is not a T2 server. It cannot be helped that there are four T1~ish servers for three slots of T1. But I doubt a bit more flavor to the day would be bad for T1/4/5/6 who consistently have decent matches.

The whole idea behind the orb was to inspire the three worlds dynamic to actually be about three worlds, not “I have my share of the pie, now I will leave this map because it serves no other purpose”. Right now, the Borderlands are pointless.

http://mos.millenium.org/eu

Take a look at the Elona/Gandara/FSP matchup, and the Drakkar/RoS/Blacktide matchup.

Now honestly tell me that an objective-held stat-bonus will do anything other than turn these blow-outs into full on genocide.

If the game was so perfectly balanced that ppt was always exactly equal, then I would agree that adding a little imbalance to shake things up would be good. But we already have more than enough imbalance, tyvm.

EU doesn’t count though, right? Everything outside America is a lie made up by communists.

Vena.8436:

Apologies, I was busy with work.

Gamadorn.2659:

It is very easy to define the weakest server…the one with the least points in the weakest server….you do understand game mechanics right?

So you’re saying that Blackgate is the weakest server? I think both SoR and JQ would take issue with that claim and giving them (us) a considerable stat bonus. In some tiers its pretty easy to define, in others? Not so much. (Its easy in the TC/DB/MG case because TC is a limbo-T1 server.)

Its Friday morning, NA, and three servers are neck and neck, but one server let’s its PPT dip for a moment to gain the buff and then flip EVERYTHING to paper before the point totals equilibrate to remove the buff again.

Its not easy, and anything that is simply “given” asks to be abused. And while we’re at it, why not just give the “weakest” server Determined lords on their keeps? People dislike owning nothing but camps just as much as they dislike orbs.

Gamadorn.2659:

You logic is flawed in saying 80/3….the point is that the server that can field 250 people on all their maps….say TC can have 100 people in eternal, 100 people in DB BL and 50 people in TC BL vs DB who only have 100 people in eternal and 50 ppl in DB BL…cannot afford to fight for the orb as well as the higher population server..that means MOST OF THE TIME…the HIGHER population or “Stronger” server will hold it throughout the day….giving them a buff…im not saying that a smaller server couldn’t take it…i’m just saying OVERALL ON AVERAGE throughout the day….the stronger server will more than likely hold it longer than the other two servers…making it more lopsided…

If DB can afford to have 50 people in their BL, and the orb requires the control of three individual control points, for example, all in the open field. How exactly is TC’s 80/3 going to stop your 50 from simply wiping out one of the orb nodes and nullifying the bonus? Are they going to camp all 80 people on one node? Then who’s scouting their towers or keeps? Who’s on the other nodes? Why isn’t MG doing the same on their BL? Or if its just one KotH node, and they just park 80 people on top of it, who’s scouting their keeps and towers? Why aren’t your havoc groups doing something?

And still, this comparison remains utterly flawed because TC is not a T2 server. It cannot be helped that there are four T1~ish servers for three slots of T1. But I doubt a bit more flavor to the day would be bad for T1/4/5/6 who consistently have decent matches.

The whole idea behind the orb was to inspire the three worlds dynamic to actually be about three worlds, not “I have my share of the pie, now I will leave this map because it serves no other purpose”. Right now, the Borderlands are pointless.

It’s really a simply concept I don’t understand what you fail to understand about it…

even in the T1 example…yes at the time if BG is the lowest point total they are the weakest server at that point in time…. it’s not saying overall EVER bg is the weakest of the 3, but at this moment in time for whatever reason they are.

Once again… if their is a specific objective to be held on ANY map (if there is sufficient reason to hold it), on average throughout the day more often than not the larger server (strongest whatever, the one with the most points) is more likely to hold that objective longer than the other servers… that’s it…

I was just saying buff the lowest server and then remove it when they are not the lowest server anymore…in fact I will make MARIO KART example to illustrate my point..

Whoever in last place ALWAYS will get a speed buff to drive faster to catch up to the pack…that way he can almost never fall so far behind he can’t get back to the pack to stay in the race…. this is the example I am saying for the lowest server… to prevent it from falling SO FAR BEHIND that it doesn’t matter what they do…buff them until they get back to the pack and if they pass the 2nd place server… they lose it…right?

Gamadorn.2659:

Vena.8436:

Apologies, I was busy with work.

Gamadorn.2659:

It is very easy to define the weakest server…the one with the least points in the weakest server….you do understand game mechanics right?

So you’re saying that Blackgate is the weakest server? I think both SoR and JQ would take issue with that claim and giving them (us) a considerable stat bonus. In some tiers its pretty easy to define, in others? Not so much. (Its easy in the TC/DB/MG case because TC is a limbo-T1 server.)

Its Friday morning, NA, and three servers are neck and neck, but one server let’s its PPT dip for a moment to gain the buff and then flip EVERYTHING to paper before the point totals equilibrate to remove the buff again.

Its not easy, and anything that is simply “given” asks to be abused. And while we’re at it, why not just give the “weakest” server Determined lords on their keeps? People dislike owning nothing but camps just as much as they dislike orbs.

Gamadorn.2659:

You logic is flawed in saying 80/3….the point is that the server that can field 250 people on all their maps….say TC can have 100 people in eternal, 100 people in DB BL and 50 people in TC BL vs DB who only have 100 people in eternal and 50 ppl in DB BL…cannot afford to fight for the orb as well as the higher population server..that means MOST OF THE TIME…the HIGHER population or “Stronger” server will hold it throughout the day….giving them a buff…im not saying that a smaller server couldn’t take it…i’m just saying OVERALL ON AVERAGE throughout the day….the stronger server will more than likely hold it longer than the other two servers…making it more lopsided…

If DB can afford to have 50 people in their BL, and the orb requires the control of three individual control points, for example, all in the open field. How exactly is TC’s 80/3 going to stop your 50 from simply wiping out one of the orb nodes and nullifying the bonus? Are they going to camp all 80 people on one node? Then who’s scouting their towers or keeps? Who’s on the other nodes? Why isn’t MG doing the same on their BL? Or if its just one KotH node, and they just park 80 people on top of it, who’s scouting their keeps and towers? Why aren’t your havoc groups doing something?

And still, this comparison remains utterly flawed because TC is not a T2 server. It cannot be helped that there are four T1~ish servers for three slots of T1. But I doubt a bit more flavor to the day would be bad for T1/4/5/6 who consistently have decent matches.

The whole idea behind the orb was to inspire the three worlds dynamic to actually be about three worlds, not “I have my share of the pie, now I will leave this map because it serves no other purpose”. Right now, the Borderlands are pointless.

It’s really a simply concept I don’t understand what you fail to understand about it…

even in the T1 example…yes at the time if BG is the lowest point total they are the weakest server at that point in time…. it’s not saying overall EVER bg is the weakest of the 3, but at this moment in time for whatever reason they are.

Once again… if their is a specific objective to be held on ANY map (if there is sufficient reason to hold it), on average throughout the day more often than not the larger server (strongest whatever, the one with the most points) is more likely to hold that objective longer than the other servers… that’s it…

I was just saying buff the lowest server and then remove it when they are not the lowest server anymore…in fact I will make MARIO KART example to illustrate my point..

Whoever in last place ALWAYS will get a speed buff to drive faster to catch up to the pack…that way he can almost never fall so far behind he can’t get back to the pack to stay in the race…. this is the example I am saying for the lowest server… to prevent it from falling SO FAR BEHIND that it doesn’t matter what they do…buff them until they get back to the pack and if they pass the 2nd place server… they lose it…right?

This kind of thinking is terrible for any competitive environment. Basically what you are saying is, instead of figuring out how to make a comeback or finding out where a strategy went wrong, just buff the server that is losing.

Terrible. Simply terrible.

Gamadorn.2659:

It’s really a simply concept I don’t understand what you fail to understand about it…

even in the T1 example…yes at the time if BG is the lowest point total they are the weakest server at that point in time…. it’s not saying overall EVER bg is the weakest of the 3, but at this moment in time for whatever reason they are.

It is not simple, there is no flaw in my comprehension.

BG doesn’t simply “deserve” anything nor do we want to be handed a crutch just as much as we wouldn’t want to be randomly handed pity keeps.

Imagine, now, its Friday reset: SoR is in third (as was the case this week on reset) and the game decides that they are the “weakest” server. Now SoR for, however many PPT tics till things equilibrate, effectively has 10% more man power. But, now, imagine that they don’t spend that time raising their PPT but simply spend that time getting their things to T3 first and foremost. BG and JQ won’t touch them because of the buff and they cannot do anything about said buff. A few hours later, you have SoR, buffed, T3-Waypointed Keeps on every BL.

Do you know what happens next? They attack everything because they have several hours worth of PPT to make up, T3-Waypointed keeps, and are buffed. I hope you find that scenario fun because that is what will happen every single reset night.

This same thing will happen in every single close match-up.

Gamadorn.2659:

Once again… if their is a specific objective to be held on ANY map (if there is sufficient reason to hold it), on average throughout the day more often than not the larger server (strongest whatever, the one with the most points) is more likely to hold that objective longer than the other servers… that’s it…

Like: Garrison, Hills, Bay, and any tower? Maybe we should remove all objectives from all of the maps because at any given time, on average, the strongest server will hold them.

Tell me, would you rather load into a map with all three T3-Waypointed keeps and nothing else, or a map with the said keeps but also an open-field point of contest? At least you can do something about the open field nodes because that allows you to outplay your opponent in the open field. What is TC going to do? Chase you all around the map with 80 people? Who’s going to defend the node(s) then? More, they can’t have every node be camped by 50+ people, with proper scouts, you will find out which node can be crushed and you will crush it.

Why not take Briar (say you’re on that side) and start trebbing Bay? That takes all of one person to maintain (let’s say two, you park one guy on a defensive arrow cart to protect the treb/gate), and then TC has to either stop your treb or chase your main force around the map over nodes. Whereas before all TC had to do was retake Briar with its mega-zerg and call it a day.

One of the big reasons, currently, that zerging is so easy is because objectives are easy to reach and defend because walls/doors buy you a lot of time. When you break the game up into objectives that cannot be time-gated with walls and doors, you cannot just “zerg to the rescue” it will be gone by the time you get there. Sure you can “zerg it back” but you’re not going to hold it…

Gamadorn.2659:

Whoever in last place ALWAYS will get a speed buff to drive faster to catch up to the pack…that way he can almost never fall so far behind he can’t get back to the pack to stay in the race…. this is the example I am saying for the lowest server… to prevent it from falling SO FAR BEHIND that it doesn’t matter what they do…buff them until they get back to the pack and if they pass the 2nd place server… they lose it…right?

Mario Kart is a terrible example because it is a great example of how people game the system by purposefully starting the race off behind to gain said explosive power-ups. This is pretty much standard practice when you play with people who want to win and are cutthroat about it (my friends).

I personally love seeing the triple mushroom, Bullet Bill first place entries.

You’re right Vena, its much better if the server in first place can sit with T3 keeps and a stat buff. And golden mushrooms.

Why do you assume Gamadorn is talking about point-total, and not PPT, for determining who is “weakest” ?

Ragnar.4257:

Why do you assume Gamadorn is talking about point-total, and not PPT, for determining who is “weakest” ?

Really? PPT is even easier to manipulate and if you base it on PPT, then you’re going to have moments where the strongest server has the buff.

SoR being in third on reset is because they had the lowest PPT, they didn’t magically just get put there with equal PPT.

Oi…

They’re just going to implement it as poorly as they do everything else, !#$% everyone off in the process, play a mild amount of damage control, and mostly leave the community to degenerate further.

Think of a poor way to implement the orb buffs…now think about the best way to implement orb buffs…yeah neither is going to happen. It’s going to be an almost good system just like everything else they’ve done, and the problems with it will either get ignored for seven months, or they’ll pull it out and tray again in seven months. Either way, this thing is going to happen, and it’s not going to be pretty.

Vena.8436:

Ragnar.4257:

Why do you assume Gamadorn is talking about point-total, and not PPT, for determining who is “weakest” ?

Really? PPT is even easier to manipulate and if you base it on PPT, then you’re going to have moments where the strongest server has the buff.

SoR being in third on reset is because they had the lowest PPT, they didn’t magically just get put there with equal PPT.

Ok first of all, I only brought up the balancing buff as semi-troll attempt and saying buffing the losing side is better than putting the orb buff back on the map. I wasn’t actually saying it was a good idea…I was just saying it would be better then putting an objective that someone can hold and receive a buff similar to the orb for that server is stupid.

There are better ways then buffing the third server, but the fact of the matter is the way the maps are setup with the amounts of people and the disparity in population between servers means SOMETHING needs to be done to balance things out. Adding the orb buff back in, tied to holding a location (which is basically the same as holding the orb it’s just a permanent spot to fight over) is going to do the exact same thing that they did before…..strengthen the server that has more people and more coverage. They are basically saying….we are bringing back orbs, but removing the picking up of the orb which was moving target, instead…fight over this spot to get the buff. We already saw what happened with the orbs…the bigger servers own them longer and make them stronger….you don’t have to believe me…if you played when the orbs were around you know what i’m talking about…it’s been done…proven…already happened…the only thing that’s changing is the location that you need to obtain the buff…

Gamadorn.2659:

There are better ways then buffing the third server, but the fact of the matter is the way the maps are setup with the amounts of people and the disparity in population between servers means SOMETHING needs to be done to balance things out.

There’s not much you can do. One side will always have more people than another unless you make it instanced Alterac Valley… but then what’s the point?

Aion? Abyss had population issues.
WAR? Hahahaha.
WoW? Wintergrasp comes to mind for non-instanced.

Gamadorn.2659:

Adding the orb buff back in, tied to a holding a location (which is basically the same as holding the orb it’s just a permanent spot) is going to do the exact same thing that they did before…..strengthen the server that has more people and more coverage.

There is an immensely distinct difference between then and now. Then, the orb was behind walls and gates + 80 people. Now its just behind people. One was an impossible battle the other can be won with knowing how to work a map and the open field. Sort of like how north camp used to be when it housed the orb.

Gamadorn.2659:

They are basically saying….we are bringing back orbs, but removing the picking up of the orb and making it a moving target, instead…fight over this spot to get the buff. We already saw what happened with the orbs…the bigger servers own them longer and make them stronger….you don’t have to believe me…if you played when the orbs were around you know what i’m talking about…it’s been done…proven…already happened…the only thing that’s changing is the location that you need to obtain the buff…

I’ve played since inception, you needn’t worry.

I also remember that the orb runs, under fire and the constant attempts at cut-offs and ganks, were some of the most fun people had on Borderlands. I also recall, back in that day when BG wasn’t anywhere near the dominance it now shares with SoR/JQ, that orb didn’t make us throw in the towel when we didn’t hold it. We went out and tried to get the kitten thing, everyone did even the third server.

That was the whole point of it. It would sit in a keep and shout at the other two servers: “Look! Look at me, bring it!” It was the source of the 2v1.

There’s not much you can do. One side will always have more people than another unless you make it instanced Alterac Valley… but then what’s the point?

Aion? Abyss had population issues.
WAR? Hahahaha.
WoW? Wintergrasp comes to mind for non-instanced.

I actually believe there is a way to make it at least MORE balanced…lower the queue number to like 50 people and open free transfers., but that’s a different conversation.

There is an immensely distinct difference between then and now. Then, the orb was behind walls and gates + 80 people. Now its just behind people. One was an impossible battle the other can be won with knowing how to work a map and the open field. Sort of like how north camp used to be when it housed the orb.

I agree there is a big difference, and I agree with the fact it was behind walls gates and then the north camp guards etc., but you’re saying its a good thing thakittens in the open field i’m saying i’m not sure, at least if you got the orb and your server had a smaller population in WvW you could defend using siege….now you don’t have that option.

I’ve played since inception, you needn’t worry.

I also remember that the orb runs, under fire and the constant attempts at cut-offs and ganks, were some of the most fun people had on Borderlands. I also recall, back in that day when BG wasn’t anywhere near the dominance it now shares with SoR/JQ, that orb didn’t make us throw in the towel when we didn’t hold it. We went out and tried to get the kitten thing, everyone did even the third server.

That was the whole point of it. It would sit in a keep and shout at the other two servers: “Look! Look at me, bring it!” It was the source of the 2v1.

I’m glad that you played back then at least then references don’t fall on deaf ears lol.

I think a lot of the fact that people back then didn’t throw in the towel was because the game was still new and fun. Now it’s matured and gotten stale…I think you will see people throwing the in the towel sooner. Which will exacerbate the problem instead of help….

Gamadorn.2659:

There’s not much you can do. One side will always have more people than another unless you make it instanced Alterac Valley… but then what’s the point?

Aion? Abyss had population issues.
WAR? Hahahaha.
WoW? Wintergrasp comes to mind for non-instanced.

I actually believe there is a way to make it at least MORE balanced…lower the queue number to like 50 people and open free transfers., but that’s a different conversation.

There is an immensely distinct difference between then and now. Then, the orb was behind walls and gates + 80 people. Now its just behind people. One was an impossible battle the other can be won with knowing how to work a map and the open field. Sort of like how north camp used to be when it housed the orb.

I agree there is a big difference, and I agree with the fact it was behind walls gates and then the north camp guards etc., but you’re saying its a good thing thakittens in the open field i’m saying i’m not sure, at least if you got the orb and your server had a smaller population in WvW you could defend using siege….now you don’t have that option.

I’ve played since inception, you needn’t worry.

I also remember that the orb runs, under fire and the constant attempts at cut-offs and ganks, were some of the most fun people had on Borderlands. I also recall, back in that day when BG wasn’t anywhere near the dominance it now shares with SoR/JQ, that orb didn’t make us throw in the towel when we didn’t hold it. We went out and tried to get the kitten thing, everyone did even the third server.

That was the whole point of it. It would sit in a keep and shout at the other two servers: “Look! Look at me, bring it!” It was the source of the 2v1.

I’m glad that you played back then at least then references don’t fall on deaf ears lol.

I think a lot of the fact that people back then didn’t throw in the towel was because the game was still new and fun. Now it’s matured and gotten stale…I think you will see people throwing the in the towel sooner. Which will exacerbate the problem instead of help….

Vena, Gamadorn,

Wow guys great stuff. Looks like you talked this topic to death. We’ll have to wait and see what happens with implementation…

Vena I think your view is colored by JQ/SoR/BG battles. Nothing should be judged by how it would affect just that match. Tier 1 NA is its own animal. No other match is like it – EU or NA. Most matches there is an obivious weaker server(s).

Now I’m against stat bonuses. But if they must be done, then only giving them to the weaker server(s) is the only way to do it. Perhaps the bonus should be only if the server is behind by a lot. Like the outmanned buff – it doesn’t start just because you have a couple less people.

Johje Holan.4607:

Vena I think your view is colored by JQ/SoR/BG battles. Nothing should be judged by how it would affect just that match. Tier 1 NA is its own animal. No other match is like it – EU or NA. Most matches there is an obivious weaker server(s).

I would likely extend my opinion to T4/5/6 who have regularly had end-of-week close matches. (Out of bias, I’d also say that T1 NA (+TC) holds a majority share in all of WvW population figures on the NA side of the pond.)

Either way, if the stats are the same as before, the server with the most population will be able to hold all three orbs and ,with that added bonus, take the map much easier.

As for the GvG’s, all i see is Mag and truthfully, unless the gvg is above 15+ each side, it can be done in the heart of the mist.

As for this orb, all it will do is stack the higher servers. Just picture SoS or Mag, Heck even FA or DB. All these servers already lose by enough to NA tier 1+ TC. Add on those bonus and despair could engulf a whole server.

If handed poorly, whole WvW centered guilds could either transfer to Tier 1 or just leave the game. Creating an even larger gap of a already huge difference between NA tier 1 and the rest.

I would rather it did not happen.

I really wish a developer would say something on this post so we knew that we aren’t just talking to thin air

Don’t you understand that developers are busy?

Busy working on “Golem mastery” that is!

Rank1: Golem “Spin to Win” cast time reduced to 1/2 second.
Rank2: Golem “Blue Bubbles” last 5 seconds up from 3!
Rank3: Golem PUNCH ability now 10% stronger!
Rank4 Golems gain a 15s run speed ability – 60s CD
Rank5 Golems gain the ability to /dance

DevonCarver.5370:

SomeoneElse.3685:

I really wish a developer would say something on this post so we knew that we aren’t just talking to thin air

You aren’t talking to thin air. However, keep in mind that the more you all speculate about something with essentially 0 information, the less inclined we are to constantly pop in and correct you. We will release more info about the changes coming when we are ready to do so. I’m teasing some stuff and trying to be clear about some things, but I can’t tell you all everything for a variety of reasons. Suffice to say, rampant speculation is very unlikely to see many, if any, dev responses.

All I saw was “major map change.” I’m officially a happy camper. Thanks for dropping in.

DevonCarver.5370:

SomeoneElse.3685:

I really wish a developer would say something on this post so we knew that we aren’t just talking to thin air

You aren’t talking to thin air. However, keep in mind that the more you all speculate about something with essentially 0 information, the less inclined we are to constantly pop in and correct you. We will release more info about the changes coming when we are ready to do so. I’m teasing some stuff and trying to be clear about some things, but I can’t tell you all everything for a variety of reasons. Suffice to say, rampant speculation is very unlikely to see many, if any, dev responses.

DevonCarver.5370:

Are the orbs coming back? No. Are we bringing back the buff? Yes – snip

You say here that you are bringing back the buff. The use of the definitive article “the” would imply that a specific buff would be brought back to the game; one that previously existed, but was removed. In context, that would obviously mean the Orb of Power buff. We all know that buff to give servers holding the individual buffs a 5% increase in damage and +50 to all stats for each stack of the buff.

Where is the “rampant speculation” coming from, exactly? I think it’s very obvious you want to bring back stat discrepancies.

DevonCarver.5370:

Here’s the thing to remember, it may buff the better servers for a time, but if it is relatively easy to take from a better server, it isn’t going to cause nearly the same problems that the original buff did. I will say that when this goes back into the game, we’ll continue to monitor the effects and make changes as necessary.

I believe this statement entirely, as do possibly most people, but maybe you missed what we were actually trying to say.

I have no doubt that reclaiming the buff will not require invading a tier 3 keep, but rather something much more accessible.
I have no doubt that the level of hacking and exploiting of the new system will not nearly be what it was when the Orbs of Power were in play.
I have no doubt that you will monitor the effects and make changes as necessary.

All that said, I don’t care about any of that.

What matters to me? The fact that this will kill GvG and open-field combat, which have taken the stage on most WvW servers. Maybe it won’t kill roaming groups, since this could be another part of roaming, which is like the intention, but the GvG scene will be dead, and open-field will forever feel uncompetitive.
Like it or not, not many guilds care about PPT anymore. You can’t brag about having the best PPT play. You can, however, prove yourself in open-field and GvG.
(Well, you can brag about PPT play, but you can’t back it up and usually just make a fool out of yourself)

So, in regards to GvG and openfield, I don’t see a lot of “rampant speculation” going on. If nothing else, you chose your words poorly. The complaints about this new system potentially killing the GvG scene is entirely grounded.

DevonCarver.5370:

Equinox.4195:

So, in regards to GvG and openfield, I don’t see a lot of “rampant speculation” going on. If nothing else, you chose your words poorly. The complaints about this new system potentially killing the GvG scene is entirely grounded.

This forum and this topic in particular are about WvW. WvW is about sieging and controlling objectives and about open field combat. All our changes are with that totality in mind and will continue to be.

Except everything you do is about siege and controlling objectives, the totality of including open field combat in WvW has largely been kicked into the dark hole in the basement patch after patch as you continually lower the competitive bar so that everyone can just stumble across it.