Remove Borderlands [suggestion]
Or just give a real GvG arena
It took just about the entire budget allocated for WvW for the HoT expansion to make 1 map (Desert), so where do you expect them to have the money to make 3 new maps ? It also took them about a year all in all from start until release of that single map, so you’re willing to wait for 3 years until they replace them ?
And to be honest, you could accomplish the exact same thing with just running multiple copies of EBG since everyone loves the map so much. :p
Both maps (Alpine/Desert, as well as EotM btw) are simply too big investments for them to just throw them away, or at least to be replaced with something else, especially with how badly received the last two maps has been (Desert/EotM) by the player base.
So if you where on the Economy department of ANet, would you have allowed that ?
That said, I agree that the 1 RBG and 3 BL’s is pretty silly considering the popularity of the maps. Most likely 2 EBG, 1 ABL, 1 DBL would work much better with the over all population. But ANet has designed themselves into a trap with the “home map system”, so they need to have own specific “Borderland maps” in 3/4 maps.
Said it before, remove the Home map system, and slightly change the Alpine/Desert maps to work a bit more like full 3 ways maps. Then you can adjust maps as needed/wanted.
“Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.”
“The objective is to win. The goal is to have fun.”
Guild Wars = Zerg Wars in the end this is what going on on WvW …..and if you are Outnumbered all the time on all the border having only one ore more will not change.
Get happy about this system until the game die since this system have only one direction and seems in last time is on the rush down to vale.
Or delete WvW and tell players to go to PvP.
Or delete WvW and tell players to go to PvP.
PvP would be a nice alternative if fighting would decide the outcome, not capping and running away. Teams of 15-30 each side, a single “castle” or some area to hold in middle, no place to run and hide or jump and fall down.
terrible idea. You’d have only a big blob zerg map. The only good thing in wvw is roaming …. running behind a commander hitting 1 all the time and gates figthing is completely pointless. In zerging the huge difference is made by the blob with higher numbers …. when you fight 2 vs 3 or 4 vs 3 it is completely another story ….
while it would be nice to see them investing as much in wvw, I doubt that people would really like it. Also while I do like EBG, it is good to have something different as well. If we had 4 ebgs, 3 of them would still be empty. I think the best arenanet can do is replace one of the alpine maps with another map of similar size that has new mechanics. I personally would love to see a map where we could glide and maybe even fight in the air (flying zergs fighting each other would be so cool), but since fighting in the air would require so many changes it isn’t realistic. I don’t think we need even more map currencies and stuff like that. Gold is fine to buy ascended.
I can see something like that for small tier servers instead of using them to fill ranks for larger servers. Reduce the map for lower tiers but keep it the same for higher tiers. I’ve suggested this before.
They can rework the maps to have three borderlands with some EB (so EB becomes third border) character and remove EB… Would be the same without a total new Map to be designed.
This sounds like an excellent 20 year future plan for wvw.
North Keep: One of the village residents will now flee if their home is destroyed.
“Game over man, Game Over!” – RIP Bill
Then there would be no room for small ops, sneaky havoc, or solo roaming then, of which there is a large player base for.
I play borders, and they’re tactically important for misdirects to maintain PPT. In addition, EB is queued 20 hours a day. I want the desert EOTM-spillover taint gone, and possibly my krait lakes back.