Guild Wars 2

Greetings all;

Tossing this up for discussion, regarding how PPT is gathered.

Right now, if you hold a location, you get points at the tic.

What if…

(1) you score a multiple of the tick value on taking a camp, tower or keep. For example, make taking a tower give the team seizing it an immediate 50 points. Don’t restrict how many times a given team can take a location – that’s going to be naturally limited by Righteous Indignation anyway – best case, any given fortification or camp can only change hands 3 times during a tick anyway.

-or-

(2) you degrade the points you get for holding a location over time – reducing it by 1 point per tick, minimum 1.

-also-

(3) Reward a team which actively and successfully defends a tower, camp or keep by resetting the Tick to full value. If the value is full, give them a scalable bonus at the tick above the normal reward. (edit: this could also take the form of scoring one point for each person getting a reward for defending a tower, camp or keep. Add that to resetting the tick value up to full point value.)

-or-

(4) a combination of all three. For example, 50pts for taking a tower. 10pts on the tick. 9 on the second tick, etc., eventually dropping down to 1 per tick.

The goal is, reward teams that are active in WvW. Reduce the award for simply holding fortifications and camps when no one is there. Increase the effective reward for holding a location. I think any of my suggestions would tend to encourage more activity on servers where there isn’t full 7×24 coverage, as they would no longer be punished for simply not having the right population.

In addition, do retain the bounty for player spikes. I might even double that if the side doing the spiking is outnumbered. (edit: 2 points for a spike, 1 point for just taking down an opposing player. Hard to spike someone when you nail them with a ballista…)

You’d have to defend a structure for 65 minutes to get the same amount of points as just capping an enemy structure, assuming it was attacked and defended successfully at least once per tick.

However, since objectives in WvW are a zero sum game, capping them and recapping them will lead to the points-per-cap largely cancelling out. If you wipe an enemy BL, they regain all the points as soon as they retake it. That means that the only way to get ahead is if you cap something, server 2 caps it, then you cap it again before the third server gets to it. In other words, the quickest way to victory would be to never attack something that’s defended but instead to K-train one BL with the server you’re not trying to beat as hard. Whoever is left out of the train gets virtually no points since their PPT decays and they have naught to cap.

I put this on another topic, figured it works here as well.

STIHL.2489:

4: Balance PPT/PPK. Or more Accurately put, dealing with Capping during gaps in Coverage, and being Outmanned.

This would require a massive overhaul in how PPT worked, but I think it would do wonders for the game.

4-A Borderland PPT. Each Team, on their own Borderland, would get 5 PPT for any Camp They Controlled, 10 for Towers, 20 for Keeps.

On an Enemy’s Borderland, they would get 1PPT per Camp for each Active Defender on that Borderland. , 2 for a Tower, and 3 for a Keep. (Note: You can only be a Defender on your OWN borderland) up to a max of 20 Defenders Counted (IE: Max Gain for a Camp would be 20 PPT, if there were 20 Active Defenders On the Borderland) this number would be Divided by the Number of Invaders on that Borderland that Controlled said Camp/Tower/Keep.

IE: (Point Value* Defenders (max 20)) * (Defenders / Controlling Invader)

Note, every Borderland would have by Default 1 Active Player counted at all times. So, no one could get Zero Points. IE: If no one was on the Borderland, it would sill count as if there was 1 Active Player from all Sides.

To explain that: If Red owned one of Greens Keeps, they would get 3PPT per Active Green Player on Greens Borderland, Divided by the Number of Active Red players on Greens Borderland.

IE: Red Owns Greens Keep, Green has Default 1 Active Player, on the Borderland (No one), but Red, has 4 Active Invaders on the map. 3*(1/4) is what they would get for the keep, put another way, 3*.25 = 0.75 PPT.

Using another Example.

Red owns a Camp on Greens BL. There are 10 Active Green Defenders, and 2 Active Red Invaders. That camp is worth 10 (1PPT per Defender) *(10/2) = 50. Now that camp is worth 50 PPT to the Red Team, but they are also 2 people defending against 10 Defenders, it stands to reason that camp is not going to last long.

One more analogy to understand the Math a Bit More.

Green Owns Red’s Camp. There are 5 Red Defenders, and 1 Green Invader
Blue Owns Red’s Keep. There are the same 5 Red Defenders, but there are 12 Blue Invaders.

Camp = 1 PPT / Per Defender, Total Base 5
Keep = 3PPT/Per Defender, Total Base 15

Green gets 5*(5/1) = 25. So that Camp is worth 25 PPT to the Green Team
Blue gets 15*(5/12) = 6.25. So that Tower is worth 6.25 PPT to the Blue Team.

That means that the Camp to Green is worth 4 times what the Keep is worth to Blue. This means the game changes from sheer capped points to playing a game of strategic capping.

This would eliminate the whole problem of winning through coverage gaps, or winning by sheer volume of players. Which is really the main problem with PPT, is how it can be exploited, and doing this would close that loophole in the PPT problem we have right now, especially with the low and mid population server, that simply don’t have the coverage.

4-B Eternal Battlegrounds.

The Battle grounds are divided up by 3 sections and Stone Mist castle. This creates a very special situation.

To do this, Each Team would have Declared “Home Lands” that would provide them a Flat PPT if they Control it, exactly like their own Borderland. This would include their 20 for their, Keep, 10 for their 4 Towers, and 5 for their 2 Camps.

If they took another Teams Homeland, it would function as if they entered their Borderland. IE: (Value) * (Defender/Controlling Invader).

IE: If Green took Blues Keep. They would get (Keep*Active) * (Defenders/Controlling Invader) in this, Red’s active players do not come into play.

So, the Same Keep could be worth a lot More to one team over another.

For Example, if there are 20 Red, 27 Blue, and 7 Green.

Blues Keep is Worth 81 PPT to Red but worth 231 PPT to Green.

The Keep is only worth so much, because of the 27 Active Blue Players on the map, giving the Keep a value of 3PPT* Active Blue, Max 20. So only 20 of the 27 Players are counted, but the Keep is still worth 60PPT Base.

In Contrast, Geens’s Points are not Worth as Much, since there are only 7 active players, their Keeps base is a Paltry 21 PPT.

And Since they are vastly outnumbered, Greens Keep is only worth 7.3 PPT to Red, and 5.4 PPT to Blue.

It works pretty much the same as if you tied to take a Borderland, just in a smaller scale, but we can see how smart play, over simply brute force and capping can win the day with this kind of system.

Moving on.

The Mack Daddy – Stone Mist!

Stonemist, would and should be a prize. As Such Stonemist would Net a flat 100 PPT * (Both Active Teams/Controller)

IE: If there were 20 Blue Players, 35 Red Players, 40 Green players, and Green owned Stonemist.

100 * ((20+35)/40) = 137 PPT.

Now Imagine, if Blue Flips it.

100 * ((35+40)/20) = 375 PPT.

This idea would remove the sting of Night Capping, or Coverage Gaps, as well as the whole issue of getting rolled by a larger servers. It would reward smart play vs what we have now.

Now, Notice I have said Active Players this needs to be a way to distinguish between active and just on the map. Which happens, IE: What about the people there for crafting or banking, or whatever.

Any player with the “invulnerable” buff you get for being in the “Safe Area” would NOT be counted as Active.

I believe that PPK should be 1PPK, unless the outmanned buff is up, and then it’s 0 PPK to kill an Outmanned Opponent, but they get 2PPK for killing someone with an Outmanned buff on.

Simple enough with that.

Not that I think current system is very good, but I strongly believe scoring should be as simple as possible. If the possible points from any event require some lengthy calculation, not many players bother with it in the end. Points depending on which map you in, how long something has been owned, what time it is, how many enemies are around, all these basically just make the scoring more confusing.