Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: MarMaster.6241

MarMaster.6241

It it a question of making matches constantly more imbalanced.
Rewarding coverage with more even more power; this taking away of fun or competition is never a good idea.
Leagues in the real world try to promote balance (the teams of course are constantly trying to get around the concept).

Dragonbrand (JQ) [FIRE]bats ~ Trusted member of the Universe
Mar Steadfast G, Silent Intrigue T, Mar Fidget Engi, Mar Fierce W, Silent Awe M
In GW2 since BWE1 ~ ~ ~ Guild leader of Legio Romana [LR], too

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Mooodster.3470

Mooodster.3470

It it a question of making matches constantly more imbalanced.
Rewarding coverage with more even more power; this taking away of fun or competition is never a good idea.
Leagues in the real world try to promote balance (the teams of course are constantly trying to get around the concept).

Devon has said that wvw is not supposed to be balanced so why do you think they want it to be balanced?

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Buzzcrave.6197

Buzzcrave.6197

It is a simple no.

This will only make a server that are blobby to be harder to defeat. Soon the only roamers you’ll see are the one with the buff.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

1x Bloodlust = 100% magic find, 100% gold find
3x Bloodlust = 300% magic find, 300% gold find
Outnumbered – 100Vitality,100toughness, 100 power, +5 supply

This would have 2 effects – Bloodlust would be demanded to have. And it will reduce loot problems in WvW. And it will give outnumbered servers a chance.

You seem to live in some bizarre alternate reality if you think anyone would give two kittens and half a stick for magic or gold find from the orb buffs. Magic find hardly affects more than half of the things you can collect in WvW: loot bags, badges, junk; and 300% of 0.01% of something valuable is still insignificant. Gold find… I don’t even.

If you think +5 supply to Outnumbered isn’t broken, you’re off your rocker.


My answer is: Yes.

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: UrMom.4205

UrMom.4205

NO

I’m fine with stomps counting towards score but i’m not fine with stats buff. I’m on CD and recently we’ve been matched up with FA and TC. If the bloodlust was active during those matchups, those servers would have had the buff and we wouldn’t. So the already underdog CD fighting an ridiculous uphill battle gets even more of a disadvantage…how is that even fair or even any kind of good game design. Instead of these bloodlust changes they need to be working on their matchup system…because it is complete garbage.

Team Raven [TR](Dead)
Wu Táng Financial [Táng] – YB

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Reslinal.2359

Reslinal.2359

YES

Instead of working on changing bloodlust. Something they already put man hours into, spend time working on a option for GvG. Since that is the main issue with the buff yeah?

GvG is not the main issue of the stat increase the buff will provide.

Do you guys really fail to see how this will make the strongest servers even stronger?

That isn’t the point of what I said. Its getting implemented, regardless of this post. This whole system is bring a whole new meta where small man groups can be extremely effective for your server, was that not the complaint last week? Need more for small groups?

I love the map change and the new mechanism as I can’t wait for more small group fights. However I feel the stat buff is really not needed to achieve the goal and is actually dividing the community, not to mention the snow balling effect. It is already hard enough to take back a map with 3 waypointed keeps, we don’t need them to have stat advantage as well:)

Blackgate Engineer

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Buzzcrave.6197

Buzzcrave.6197

YES

I know were in the “sky is falling” phase of the patch notes but honestly this happens every change. Have of us cry a lot the other try to defend it, no one knows how its going to work out in real time yet. Wait and see, it may be awesome.

With the buff being implemented, guess which server will get it all the time? Of course the one with more coverage/blob, thus making a server that are already hard to defeat will be way stronger than ever.

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: UrMom.4205

UrMom.4205

It it a question of making matches constantly more imbalanced.
Rewarding coverage with more even more power; this taking away of fun or competition is never a good idea.
Leagues in the real world try to promote balance (the teams of course are constantly trying to get around the concept).

Devon has said that wvw is not supposed to be balanced so why do you think they want it to be balanced?

Completely understandable, i’m always down for an epic 2:1 or 3:1 defense….but some of these matchups with like 10:1 fights all the time due to the population inbalance are just not fun. What happens when those matchups happen? the heavily outnumbered server loses its morale. People go to PvE, transfer servers (making the problem worse), or what i’ve seen recently quit the game all together. Bloodlust, the leagues, all that is making wvw worse.

Team Raven [TR](Dead)
Wu Táng Financial [Táng] – YB

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: dank.3680

dank.3680

The update is awesome, everything aside from the stat buff is really cool and I look forward to it.

Just say no to stat buff!

#MAGSWAG: All class player. XOXO

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

I love the map change and the new mechanism as I can’t wait for more small group fights. However I feel the stat buff is really not needed to achieve the goal and is actually dividing the community, not to mention the snow balling effect. It is already hard enough to take back a map with 3 waypointed keeps, we don’t need them to have stat advantage as well:)

The stat buff has two values:

  • It is attractive to the zerg because it can make them strong, but to have control of it the zerg must split.
  • Defenders or attackers, if one or the other force is too focused and “zergy” on a target, can capture and use the buff to their advantage.

The zerg will simply and wholesale ignore anything else as anything more than some lucrative side amusement after they’ve capped everything, ie. Magic Find et al. Similarly to how everyone ignored the rather inconsequential quaggans.

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Xsorus.2507

Xsorus.2507

29 people is not a consensus

http://www.youtube.com/user/Xsorus/videos?view=0
Natures Ninja and Pain Inverter – Ranger PvP movies
http://www.twitch.tv/xsorovos

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Istaf.1953

Istaf.1953

Devon has said that wvw is not supposed to be balanced so why do you think they want it to be balanced?

While there’s simply nothing the devs can do about balancing some aspects of WvW, that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to purposely make the balance worse.

[RET] Medicalstaf
Guardian
Fort Aspenwood

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Magnetron.5823

Magnetron.5823

Yes,

The points to taken are in the open battlefield, so groups can make sure they are clean and make themselves usefull in WvW.

Born in the Desolation. Die for Desolation.

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: LadyHorus.8214

LadyHorus.8214

@Vena.8436: Something tells me it wouldn’t be hard for a large population server to round up a few groups of people to go keep some of those capture points. The loss of those people probably wont even matter to the main zerg in the long run because the stat boost will be plenty to make up for some of that loss. Thus the stronger server will be stronger. Like they need any help anyway. :p

I know wvw wasn’t meant to be completely fair, and I don’t mind fighting a larger server, it’s just when we’re being so ridiculously outnumbered already it is just salt in the wound if these servers also have the 150 stat boost on top of it. We’ve seen this already… it was the case with the orbs too. And I suspect the only reason Anet took out orbs was because of people fly hacking at the time. Not because they endorsed equal footing in combat aside from obviously, some groups having superior numbers to another. That isn’t something they can directly control.

But I pretty much gave up on this issue already after coming back to this new “randomized” matchup system. I think that’s more of an insult than anything else.

Rosangela Marie: 80 Mesmer • Rosangela: 80 Elementalist
MAGUUMA
My Artworks! - Lady Horus Gaming

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

@Vena.8436: Something tells me it wouldn’t be hard for a large population server to round up a few groups of people to go keep some of those capture points. The loss of those people probably wont even matter to the main zerg in the long run because the stat boost will be plenty to make up for some of that loss. Thus the stronger server will be stronger. Like they need any help anyway. :p

You’d need something like 5ish people to a node or patrolling the vacinity to really guarantee keeping all three under control (and they decap naturally, and some of them have unfriendly terrain for defense), but that leaves two undefended nodes (to the south and near enemy spawns) and all that an opposing team has to do is cap two and then hard-hit one of yours, and you find your self losing the buff.

But in a scenario where the zerg outnumbers by such a large margin that 15 people are completely inconsequential to it, then the buff or lack-there-of, is completely irrelevant. Hence, in a fairer fight, this adds a layer or depth, in an already lopsided fight it doesn’t do anything.

(+50/150 doesn’t add up to 15 people over the remaining 65, of which a good chunk are probably also scouting, escorting, roaming solo, etc.)

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

(edited by Vena.8436)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Krakah.3582

Krakah.3582

Vote: No

The bloodlust buff doesn’t promote smart play. It rewards Blob game play, which is just lazy. Smarter map buff reward would be some +% to yak supply, +% building speed, +% repair speed, etc…so as not to give lazy advantage to blob field fights.

Another thing is to also make the center holding points reward different buffs depending on what is being controlled. Thus it’s not an all or nothing for the less populated servers.

Edit:
After reading other input, swap variation with outnumbered and bloodlust would be a solid solution. I play on a server winning it’s tier, and it’s no fun when the other servers stop playing by monday.

-KNT- BG

(edited by Krakah.3582)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Drigan.7382

Drigan.7382

hell NO

the cap points and terrain additions look awesome but the stat bonus RUINS it.

Spirit Of Faith [HOPE]
Fort Aspenwood – www.gw2hope.com

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Ensign.2189

Ensign.2189

Absolutely not. At first glance it’s another hard snowball mechanic to put the server with better coverage further ahead.

Stat boosts are toxic. Blood Lust buff stats are toxic, Guard Leech is toxic, Applied Fortitude is toxic. These buffs unbalance the playing field badly, but more problematically they snowball hard. If I win the first fight, my guys have their GL and AF buffs but the other team doesn’t. Now they are further behind and have less of a chance to come back.

The map changes, the capturing of the orbs, that could be good. But they should interact with the rules of the game, not player stats. Points on stomp could be good. Affecting the amount of supply people can carry would also be a good mechanic (taking orbs then running to a camp for a megaboost of supply could strengthen havoc). Buffs vs NPCs that make it faster and easier for groups to take camps; affecting the duration of camp invulnerability; affecting the rate of supply delivery or spawn rate or yaks.

There are a lot of knobs to turn. +150 to all stats is an absolutely enormous boost to power – it’s roughly a 35% increase in raw power over base stats. To everyone. I don’t understand how that won’t simply bury anyone who falls behind, just like the old orbs.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: SafiMoyo.5130

SafiMoyo.5130

I’m in a mid tier server. If my server ends up in silver league, yes. If my server ends up in gold league…….

Overall though, yes, I would like to experience this new type of gameplay the devs have been working on. If it turns out to make the game balance whack, then we’ll have a period of ratings readjustment where some servers will go up and some will go down, or, if it’s really that bad, then the devs will step in and change the buff.

Champion Hunter

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Iavra.8510

Iavra.8510

No
/some random letters..

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Tellerion.8102

Tellerion.8102

YES

Do you guys really fail to see how this will make the strongest servers even stronger?

That isn’t the point of what I said. Its getting implemented, regardless of this post. This whole system is bring a whole new meta where small man groups can be extremely effective for your server, was that not the complaint last week? Need more for small groups?

As far as I’m aware of this discussion is about the bloodlust buff you get from holding these points, not about the actual map changes, who by the way I think will be a great change in order to encourage smaller scaled combat.

Do you really fail to see that the stat increase, the strongest servers are bound to have most of the time, will affect WvW in a negative matter?

~~Ayeres~~

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Steve Whitley.8359

Steve Whitley.8359

Yes: at times whenever server / map populations are close to equal
No: whenever if ever one side has an outmanned buff.

Old Janx // [THG] Jade Quarry / Seafarer’s Rest
secessit viri bellatores

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: covenn.7165

covenn.7165

No. No…. and No.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Pavel.5192

Pavel.5192

no

but nobody from Anet devs will care, they decided, they dont care

4ever roaming

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Magnetron.5823

Magnetron.5823

I like how WvW is now, and I think its fun to fight for nodes to get a nice buff for your world.. If you do not have the ppl to hold these points then maybe your server is not good enough and you can try better next week.

Born in the Desolation. Die for Desolation.

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Haworth.4561

Haworth.4561

Please no more stat bonuses.

WvW used to be an epic story about an epic battle where you fought alongside people from your server.

You could even play and be part of the epic battles and the epic story as a low level who were new to PvP.

But it only works if you are on an even playing ground.

Piken Square – Unofficial EU roleplaying server.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Brando.1374

Brando.1374

“If you do not have the ppl to hold these points then maybe your server is not good enough”

so your saying that if our servers zerg isnt at big as yours we are not good enough….. makes perfect sense.

Xxkakarot [GF] Good Fights
Dark Wizard Incar [GF] Good Fights
http://www.twitch.tv/xxkakarot

(edited by Moderator)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

You could even play and be part of the epic battles and the epic story as a low level who were new to PvP.

But it only works if you are on an even playing ground.

Have you seen an upscaled level 2 with Guild Buffs?

They have more raw stats than you do in max gear, and they barely even have any gear equipped.

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Haworth.4561

Haworth.4561

Have you seen an upscaled level 2 with Guild Buffs?

They have more raw stats than you do in max gear, and they barely even have any gear equipped.

I don’t know if there is something odd min max thing with the guild buff.

I usually let the upscaled run or let them heal up and run, since I kind of feel bad about killing them, since they never had a chance due to gear and stats.

It’s not that my character is particular strong.

Piken Square – Unofficial EU roleplaying server.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Basket of Boxes.1976

Basket of Boxes.1976

I like the mechanic, well at least the sound of it. The buff needs to be reworked or at the very least switched around with the outmanned buff. Bloodlust can keep the points on stomp and outmanned the no armour damage. Being as supporters of the bloodlust buff say +150 to all stats is nothing its the very least they should give you when the enemy has 3 times your numbers.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Az z.2746

Az z.2746

NO

My only problem is that stat bonus, everything else looks very good.

Azz ~
( Sg Az / Rg Az / Wr Az / Gr Az )
http://www.youtube.com/user/azzalan/

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Nikkinella.8254

Nikkinella.8254

NO! Not unless they swap outmanned and bloodlust buff. Outmanned should give the + to all stats and orb buff should be the useless MF and stuff. Giving + stats to the orb just rewards the bandwagon stacked servers even more.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Tsezar.6950

Tsezar.6950

nothing should give +stats.. the kitten with the wxp points and the guard stuff is way over the top already no need that anybody gets a stat buff.. if oyu get steamrolled it wouldnt change anythiung at all .. but dont kitten this game up for small group players or sol oroamers

I PLay Without Hands To Have [Fun]

How many Dzagonurs and Gunnars do you need to kill me? Over 9000!!

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: DrWhom.3105

DrWhom.3105

No to the buff, or more specifically no to a buff that effects combat. Better options are faster dolyaks, faster upgrades, more supply capacity, or any number of other sensible things that have been suggested.

But higher population (i.e. that ability to cover a larger number of capture points) should never reward higher individual combat effectiveness.

MAG

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: UrMom.4205

UrMom.4205

No to the buff, or more specifically no to a buff that effects combat. Better options are faster dolyaks, faster upgrades, more supply capacity, or any number of other sensible things that have been suggested.

But higher population (i.e. that ability to cover a larger number of capture points) should never reward higher individual combat effectiveness.

really like those ideas, faster dolyaks, faster upgrades, more supply capacity, points for stomps. If those were on the orbs i’d say yes.

Team Raven [TR](Dead)
Wu Táng Financial [Táng] – YB

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Tellerion.8102

Tellerion.8102

No to the buff, or more specifically no to a buff that effects combat. Better options are faster dolyaks, faster upgrades, more supply capacity, or any number of other sensible things that have been suggested.

But higher population (i.e. that ability to cover a larger number of capture points) should never reward higher individual combat effectiveness.

I agree entirely with this.

~~Ayeres~~

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Vena.8436

Vena.8436

No to the buff, or more specifically no to a buff that effects combat. Better options are faster dolyaks, faster upgrades, more supply capacity, or any number of other sensible things that have been suggested.

Yes, let’s completely imbalance the core of WvW (supply, yaks, upgrades, supply capacity (are you nuts?)) so that “combat isn’t affected unfairly” in a format where combat was never fair. (To think you’d want to the stronger server to actually WP, fortify, and repair faster, and readily carry more supply than you over +150 stats… is a bit mind boggling if one were to be thinking about it from the point of view of WvW mechanics.)

While we’re at it, let’s also cut down the trees in the south, cull those pesky spiders, and barbecue those hogs, all for the sake of “WvW” and “combat”.

PS: Canceling a servers buff, given your suggestion, wouldn’t undo their reaped benefits (ie. they will have their better supplied, upgraded, whatever-ed keeps and zerg) so there’s almost nothing lost to them aside from efficiency. Moreover, once they are fully fortified and upgraded, they won’t care about the buff anymore and will now simply crush you without having to divvy up resources to controls aid buff.

Whereas canceling a servers buff, when stats are involved, cancels the stats and they simply don’t have them anymore.

Vena/Var – Guardian/Thief
[Eon] – Blackgate

(edited by Vena.8436)

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Savoy.6824

Savoy.6824

Nope, I do not want the stat buff. Kill it with fire.

And we should consider every day lost on which we have not danced at least once – Nietzsche

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Grove.2835

Grove.2835

No, almost anything besides stat boosts would be good. The map changes sure look fun though.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Zephyrus.9680

Zephyrus.9680

No to combat boost.

They already tried it. Larger servers blowout which is fun for no one. Why would the 2nd time be different?

Zefyres – Ele | Maguuma | (ex) top100 solo/teamQ casual | Youtube

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Radioactive.1248

Radioactive.1248

No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No

Star Player
[KEK]

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Ihales.3820

Ihales.3820

stats – no
points on stomp – don’t care

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: natsos.3692

natsos.3692

The buff as it is, probably a no.
Bloodlust to take outmanned’s place and outmmaned to take bloodlust’s place, it is a yes.

Natsos, Necromancer
Officer of Spartians GR[SPGR]
Gandara EU

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Silinsar.6298

Silinsar.6298

No. Really, not at all.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Zephyrus.9680

Zephyrus.9680

The buff as it is, probably a no.
Bloodlust to take outmanned’s place and outmmaned to take bloodlust’s place, it is a yes.

Yes to this.

Zefyres – Ele | Maguuma | (ex) top100 solo/teamQ casual | Youtube

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Le Rooster.8715

Le Rooster.8715

God no, replace the mechanic with other stuff increasing upgrades or giving magic find or whatever please don’t make one server stronger then the other.

Roosters Inc-Team Shatter [TS] Commander
Sea of Sorrows http://www.gw2sos.com/index.php

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Dual.8953

Dual.8953

Yes. I want to see how the control point will change things. I like the idea of a few small groups stealing the advantage of the enemy main force as it battle thier main force. I like the prospect of increased need for server coordination. Stealing the blob’s buff and keeping it away from them by out manuvering it. May the blob see the error of not being able to everywhere at once.

Registered Altaholic
Part-time Kittenposter

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Skyllar.3562

Skyllar.3562

This isnt a simple “yes” or “no” question. Its more complicated by now.
If you mean the actuall buff: no, not really.
If you mean the mechanics around the buff and how you obtain it: yes.

/sign
so that would be a no for me i guess

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: Stonewall.6037

Stonewall.6037

So, anet, drop the buf, keep the mechanics, but give say 10X coin for wvw tasks (like defending points, etc) instead when the server holds the points. Still would make it worth while to cap the areas.

So Long, and Thanks For the Loot Bags.

Simple Solution to The Bloodlust Controversy.

in WvW

Posted by: DrWhom.3105

DrWhom.3105

Yes, let’s completely imbalance the core of WvW (supply, yaks, upgrades, supply capacity (are you nuts?)) so that “combat isn’t affected unfairly” in a format where combat was never fair. (To think you’d want to the stronger server to actually WP, fortify, and repair faster, and readily carry more supply than you over +150 stats… is a bit mind boggling if one were to be thinking about it from the point of view of WvW mechanics.)

While we’re akitten let’s also cut down the trees in the south, cull those pesky spiders, and barbecue those hogs, all for the sake of “WvW” and “combat”.

PS: Canceling a servers buff, given your suggestion, wouldn’t undo their reaped benefits (ie. they will have their better supplied, upgraded, whatever-ed keeps and zerg) so there’s almost nothing lost to them aside from efficiency. Moreover, once they are fully fortified and upgraded, they won’t care about the buff anymore and will now simply crush you without having to divvy up resources to controls aid buff.

Whereas canceling a servers buff, when stats are involved, cancels the stats and they simply don’t have them anymore.

Well, I wasn’t saying the buff should be all those things instead of stats, just that they were more interesting alternatives. I didn’t specify any percentages or specifics, they were just suggestions I’d seen posted elsewhere that sounded better to me. Yes 150% faster yaks would be crazy but 33% would only really be equivalent to having one person giving each yak swiftness. And there would still be reason to hold the buffs after a particular BL is upgraded, as you’d still have the points for stomps part of the mechanic (which is a decent idea). Plus remember the effect is not limited to the current map, so holding 3/5 on home BL would still be worthwhile to help you upgrade other maps.

Also I disagree that siege/upgrading/capture points are the core of WvW. To me PvP, fighting other players, is the core of WvW and the rest are mechanical elements added to enhance it, because a simple kiling field with no objectives wouldn’t be as complex or fun in the long term. After all you might play WvW with the structures, siege and capture points removed for a little while before getting bored, but I can’t see anyone playing the upgrading, yak escorting and siege building metagame at all if there weren’t other players there trying to kill you.

Honestly I’d rather the buff were entirely reward orientated, which wouldn’t step on either side’s toes. +50% XP, MF, WXP. Maybe to make the buff more meaningful, you get twice or three times as many points for stomps. I don’t think that’s enough of a “gamechanger” for Anet though, which is why I made those other suggestions.

MAG

(edited by Moderator)