Guild Wars 2

Hi guys,

This is a spin off of one of John Carpening´s statements in another thread that they plan to run an event over several weeks in which they change the rules of wvw.
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Adopt-a-Dev-for-the-WvW-Fall-Tournament/page/9#post4513301

In general, i think this is a very good idea because it might be easier to gain good feedback on the changes while testing them live. Some rule changes might be seen differently depending on the match up tier, for example.

What rules changes would you like to see tested for a match up and why?

I start with 2 suggestions:

1) Enable Enviromental Weapons

I know there are good reasons why these are disabled in general in WvW because many of them give you quite powerful skills (invisibility, knockbacks, 1500 range projectiles).

But how about 1 week of mayhem to change up the meta a wee bit? I guess we all agree that wvw got a bit stale and this could help mix things up for a week. Whenever i joined a community raid with special requirements (class specific raids for example) it was great fun and this would give countless possibilities for small groups up to big raids to change their tactics for any situation.

2) EoTM Tournament

Unfortunately we dont see EoTM played for PPT, which is a shame. First I was considering to substitute EB with the EoTM map for a week and see how its been played differently but for that, the layout is still too unbalanced in favour of the green corner. So why not organize a EoTM Tournament over several weeks?
Teams should be made by signing up, so guilds have the chance to play together, with a team cap of 80 players.
3 teams will be matched up against each other and will fight each other 3 times, so everybody gets each color once. The team that accumulated the highest war score over three matches, wins.
This way, Anet can get some good feedback on rebalancing the map and maybe they can give out some nice rewards for the winners.
Apart from that, at least for me, it would also be a welcome change of scenery for a couple of hours each week from regular wvw.

Thanks for any feedback or new suggestions.

+1 for the EotM tourney idea. Love that map, disappointed that it is just for k-trains.

Wanze.8410:

What rules changes would you like to see tested for a match up and why?

1. Eliminate rallying off of kills in WvW. To eliminate the liability of uplevels and beginners.
2. Eliminate reviving someone who is fully dead in WvW while in combat. To reduce the advantage of zerging and improve the ability of zerg-busters to zerg-bust.
3. Assuming we get white swords back, have white swords pop with no delay if the defender is outnumbered. Could be point based, instead (any server more than N% behind the top server), to avoid gaming it with numbers. To give outnumbered defenders or losing servers a better chance to defend.
4. Give a defense event and reward for players who damage creatures or players who do damage to a dolyak (no points for just walking the dolyak — you have to fight). To reward the walking of dolyaks to make sure supplies get through.
5. Give players a rebate for the gold they spend on an upgrade equal to half the cost of the upgrade if the upgrade successfully completes. To give players a vested interest in making sure the upgrades they start are completed.
6. Give some sort of reward to players who refresh arrow carts, ballistas, trebuchets, and catapults inside of an objective with 15 or less minutes left on their timer. To encourage the refreshing of defensive siege weapons so they don’t expire.
7. Dial the orange sword limit back down to 5-10 combatants. To make it easier for those looking for a fight to find them. Not sure this is a good idea, but I’d like to see it in practice.
8. Add diminishing returns to the scoring system to reduce the point gap between competitors. This would require no new extensive code if it’s based solely on existing score and/or points-per-tick. See, for example, my proposal in the scoring discussion as one way to do it. To reduce the runaway score problem and keep the scores withing a more competitive distance of each other throughout the match-up.

I’d like to see the first one tested without the second one. Only the 4th suggestion should be in any way difficult to implement.

SneakyLemon.8461:

+1 for the EotM tourney idea. Love that map, disappointed that it is just for k-trains.

The map would need balancing first. Red has a big disadvantage.

style.6173:

SneakyLemon.8461:

+1 for the EotM tourney idea. Love that map, disappointed that it is just for k-trains.

The map would need balancing first. Red has a big disadvantage.

One of the reasons to do that tourney was to gather feedback on balance. As each team will play as each color and all scores will be added in the end, it doesnt matter that red has a disadvantage. Propably every team will come 3rd, when red but it depends on how big you lose.

style.6173:

SneakyLemon.8461:

+1 for the EotM tourney idea. Love that map, disappointed that it is just for k-trains.

The map would need balancing first. Red has a big disadvantage.

Depend on how you treat it… The biggest problem for red is their keep. But Badlands can bum-rush any keep right at start and take it unless the oposing team is on the keep waiting for it (A zerg of devourers melt any gate/wall in seconds), and they will have a keep at the expense of their own… Then they can even camp the enemy keep while taking back theirs (since red keep is kitten to defend) giving them a huge advantage on ppt.