Guild Wars 2

As discussed in this episode of Tales of Tyria at the 40:36 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnpqzt44Pag&list=ELuHTiNdxCjFQ&index=10&feature=plpp_video

I agree that removing the orange swords would help solve this zerg issue. The actual rewards and ease of difficulty is way in the favor of forming huge groups rather than having small ones.

As said in the show, the swords right now act as a point on the map for zergs to ping pong between. Removing them will force communication across the map as well as the need for people to split their force into defense groups.

What do you think?

This would help the zerg as well. They can split into 5 teams and sneak attack everything.

or they will just stay in a zerg and sneak attack everything

Hit and run small forces know not to hang out too long, one way or another you need to move out.

The swords help reduce endless wandering around, and benefit small groups to maneuver.

Objectives are fairly well spread out, and decoy teams can effectively flag areas/objectives to reduce clusters, or misdirect them.

If its an organized zerg guild, they often are on vent so removing swords actually hurts only the smaller forces

Swords are not an issue a smart zerg/server will have scouts at towers/keeps to prevent any attack on those structures including stealth attacks which do not put up swords. (yes there are ways to prevent swords from coming up wile you siege down walls and gates)

What really gets you is people who depend on swords to see the enemy team. If you have a good zerg thats all on a voice program and they know not to put up swords you can sneak a 40 man zerg into a tower or keep unnoticed. The swords are fine.

Well seems everyone doesn’t like this idea. I just think SOMETHING needs to change. Right now there is no motivation to defend something you capped.

You spend all this gold and supply on upgrading a camp or a tower and all it takes is a group of 50 people to mow you down like it is nothing. it is very discouraging and doesn’t feel epic at all.

I think more emphasis needs to be placed on siege weapons then. Maybe make npc guards more useful. I’m anxious to see what changes are brought to WvW as it is my favorite part of GW2.

Magni.2835:

or they will just stay in a zerg and sneak attack everything

5 man attack teams are actually what most people want to promote, by zerg we mean a huge group of 100 people running around capping something then moving on to the next target without any thought or strategy behind it.

TheBob.9863:

Magni.2835:

or they will just stay in a zerg and sneak attack everything

5 man attack teams are actually what most people want to promote, by zerg we mean a huge group of 100 people running around capping something then moving on to the next target without any thought or strategy behind it.

Exactly! And the thing is people do this BECAUSE it is encouraged by how everything works. Using that number of people will demolish anything in its path. Siege weapons on that large of force doesn’t do anything since AOE is maxed at hitting 5 people.

Freelancer has interesting points, but he’s forgetting something when he talks about orange swords. – PvDoor much? I like his ideas, but ultimately there has to be something ELSE to fix this.

Cloud.7613:

Freelancer has interesting points, but he’s forgetting something when he talks about orange swords. – PvDoor much? I like his ideas, but ultimately there has to be something ELSE to fix this.

That’s why the idea of making siege weapons more important is interesting to me. Especially if you make it so a zerg of players beating on doors will do nothing. I have a lot of blueprints in my inventory, but I never use them.

They will just get destroyed so quickly and like I said earlier, it is frustrating to put all this effort in setting up a defense only to get wiped out. And not wiped out by a smart group of people, but wiped out by people just because of their numbers.

Freelancer is worthless, and so is this idea.

Removing orange swords would just make it easier for zergs to attack objectives unnoticed. As it stands now if you attack something with more than 5 people then the other team is alerted, remove that and there is no advantage to having a 5 man group stealth capping, you may as well roll with a zerg because you are both now equally stealthed.

Would you remove the swords that go through objectives to show you they are under siege? As long as you see those swords you would still see objectives being attacked.

I think taking the cap off aoe and lowering the overall damage would be the way to go.

I agree with Michael on this one.

I don’t see how removing the crossing swords would solve the zerg issue, people would just communicate where to go, and the other team if they notice the other type of crossing swords (white one) on the map would go there and defend.

It will still be zerg vs zerg? O_o

I’d imagine there would be more communication but zergs will still be there…

Having said that, you may see less zergs vs zergs roaming around on the map, but there will be more at camps, towers, keeps where the white crossing swords will still show up.

What if you where in a big zerg of 50 people then your enemys would see the orange swords if that zerg attacked anything. Small groups of 5 or 10 would not get the orange sword for attacking anything.

I know some people will say that goes against ANETs theme of people working and grouping together and people will shout out leave the zerg we only need 49 people. So it does need something else like a random number based on the amount of people on each server.

Server 1 has 500 people …server 2 has 200 people …. server 3 has 100 people. Server one will get the orange server if 20 or more people group up within a 100ft radius..server 2 will get orange sword if 40 people group up.. and server 3 will get the sword if 50 people group up…

Zergs are still needed for some areas but this might make it more appealing for smaller groups to break off.

What zerg issue?

Does he mean large scale pvp? Y’know the entire point of this game……

tagnut.8621:

What zerg issue?

Does he mean large scale pvp? Y’know the entire point of this game……

Was about to ask same thing, guess this is one of those things “internetz say its bad so it must be”. When you put hundreds of strangers in same are to do pvp zerg is inevitable, its not bad thing its just one of the most basic forms of tactics, if you want something more thats what organized guilds are for or organize group by yourself not like its hard to counter zergs anyways. If you cant think beyond zerg you belong in it.

Swords work just fine as it is, small groups don’t trigger one and usually know to avoid them, removing will aid the zerg. My ideea would be to make tower/keeps, etc much harder to upgrade ( say caravan only carries only 2 supplies sort of hard ) but the upgrades should worth it, there were examples in history when very few people hold a castle against unbelievable odds .

ALSO, i don’t think the height of the walls count for missiles, someone standing 10m up shooting DOWN should be able to do so much further ( or for much damage ) then the other way around, unless we’re talking Legolas. As it is now numbers > fortifications, that’s why the zergs form, it’s the game mechanics that need to be changed, not the people.

Have fun

why did this need a new thread?

this suggestion by a podcast/youtuber chan that has a poor record in wvw/pvp which is entirely self serving is silly.

if they were as good as they pretended to be, they wouldn’t be suggesting things that anet can change to help them do better, they’d be finding ways with in the current confines of the game to improve their ability.

in the last thread i noted a number of ways competent groups of 5-20 can utilize the swords/etc to their advantage to out wit and out play enemies who stick to large zergs. as well, i noted several reasons why you still need scouts with the swords.

more proof that these guys are not of the caliber of players they present themselves as, and that their opinions and suggestions should be discarded as they are with out merit.

if their show was of the level of quality there woul dbe absolutely zero suggestions of this nature, and instead the show would be a cournacopia of tips on how to improve strats and tactics in yoru group/guild/server and as a player in order to overcome obstacles.

instead, they simply ask devs to hold their hands and make changes to the game to give them what they percieve will improve their chances of winning. this alone destroys all theri credibility in teh role they have presented themselves in, even if not for their track record on teh field.

also to note, wvw falls into what is traditonally classified as “mass pvp” that means zergs are a valid part of it.

if there were no zergs, how would one and his guild obtain the glory of taking down zergs?

and no, one does not need the crutches in certain other games that do not exist out side of those games to take down zergs with smaller numbers.

you just have to be creative, willing to risk stuff, have the spirit of a klingon, and a solid guild that are team players at your back. it also helps to not simply assume you are a good player- in fact it’s best to assume you are bad and the enemy is stronger than you.

Cloud.7613:

Freelancer has interesting points, but he’s forgetting something when he talks about orange swords. – PvDoor much? I like his ideas, but ultimately there has to be something ELSE to fix this.

This is a good point.
Without UI assistance, avoiding fights will be come even more prevalent.

The secondary factor is, low pop servers can not afford scouts even more then high pop.
forcing a server to spend more people on scouts, will just benefit larger populations.