Guild Wars 2

If you can’t tell by going to http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA none of the matchups are exactly going too well, from a fun/competitive perspective. My two main issues with this are as follows:

1.) Orbs
2.) Conquering entire maps doesn’t spread your forces, it in fact concentrates them.

As for the first issue, it’s been said time and time again, so I’ll just discuss it briefly. The total difference between having three orbs, and your enemy having three orbs, is 30% health and 300 to each stat. What I mean by that is this…

+150 stats, +15% health compared to enemy (you own 3 orbs)

+0 stats, +0% health compared to enemy (you each own one/no orbs)

-150 stats, -15% health compared to enemy (enemy owns 3 orbs)

So while it may in essence only be a 150 stat and 15% health discrepency (still huge) between your enemy, the difference between having three orbs and an enemy realm having three orbs totals DOUBLE that. Also, unlike DAOC, the guards don’t get weaker as you own more of the map. There’s more, but that’s probably enough to touch on orbs for now. Basically, they simply aren’t the relics of DAOC, and that’s okay, but they’re hurting WvW.

2.) What I mean by the second issue, is that when you actually sweep and conquer the entire map, you end up fighting at spawns and defending the one or two areas that are being attacked. It is much easier to respond to any sieges on a keep/tower/garrison, since as soon as everyone sees it’s being attacked the winning server swarms in. If you decide to split your forces and push behind enemy lines, the problem that arises is a.) you get murdered by numbers and b.) you take a tower or such behind enemy lines, and have NO way to defend it once it’s taken. You have no supply, etc, so taking a tower in an enemy stronghold really doesn’t benefit your realm for very long.

What theoretically should hapkitten that when you conquer more land, you’re forced to spread your forces thin and defend all of the points, but it really just doesn’t work like that when spread over four maps with two enemy spawn points. Plus, with the one week matches, servers simply won’t put in the effort to team up vs the stronger opponent like they did in DAOC. In DAOC you knew if you didn’t work with the other weak enemy things would NEVER get better for your realm. Here, people just wait a week and it’s a fresh slate.

TL;DR: If you really care, read the entire thing. Basically, orbs are a +30% health and +300 stat difference in total, and way to strong. Already known. The other problem is that taking the entire map concentrates your forces where the enemy is trying to fight back, and makes it hard to come back from a sweep. If you try to spread your forces to take multiple points, the zerg rolls your squads taking towers/garrisons and even if you take a garrison behind enemy lines, you have no supply or way to defend it. It really doesn’t do much. Obviously there are many other problems, like server xfers and morale issues due to weekly resets, but that’s just what I wanted to throw out there.

And of course the sad thing is that the Outmanned buff is completely useless. Why do I need a bonus to karma, xp and magic find when I’m outnumbered 10 – 1? I’d trade that for a 10% boost to vitality, toughness and healing power any day of the week. It’d probably make fights a lot more enjoyable for both sides if they would fix these bonuses.

i’d trade it for speed for running away. but i’m yellow inside. it’s the ele in me.

There is no inherent disadvantage of not owning all three orbs your math is wrong.
If I have 2000 in one of my stats and my enemy has 2000 + 150 it’s still a difference of 150.

Other than that, yes the snowballing is pretty obvious.
To make things worse most losing teams stop entering WvW after 24 Hours of any given Matchup while the winning team has people queing up for hours.

What if they made it so the third place world was able to carry 20 supplies….

^ I don’t think you understand what I mean. The difference in stats between the enemy owning three orbs, and you owning three orbs, is 30% health and 300 stats. What I mean by this, is that when you’re playing vs an enemy with 3 orbs, you are basically at -15% health and -150 stats. Obviously, your character isn’t, but that’s what the handicap is against you. When you have 3 orbs you are up 15% health and up 150% stats. While the difference between the stats of the enemy character and your own will never be less than 15% health and 150 stats, the total difference between owning three orbs and the enemy owning three orbs amounts to 30% health and 300 stats.

No, i’ll have to repeat myself but
“There is no inherent disadvantage of not owning all three orbs”

If im playing against an enemy with all three orbs im at 100% of my health and stats.
Im not weaker, im just not stronger than normal.

What you did was:

interpreting zero orbs as default strength
(ok so far)
“+0 stats, +0% health compared to enemy”

interpreting three orbs as improved strength
(still ok)
“+150 stats, +15% health compared to enemy”

interpreting three orbs as default strength
not having three orbs as weaker than default strength
(conflicts with your first two statements)
“-150 stats, -15% health compared to enemy”

Rengaru.4730:

No, i’ll have to repeat myself but
“There is no inherent disadvantage of not owning all three orbs”

If im playing against an enemy with all three orbs im at 100% of my health and stats.
Im not weaker, im just not stronger than normal.

What you did was:

interpreting zero orbs as default strength
(ok so far)
“+0 stats, +0% health compared to enemy”

interpreting three orbs as improved strength
(still ok)
“+150 stats, +15% health compared to enemy”

interpreting three orbs as default strength
not having three orbs as weaker than default strength
(conflicts with your first two statements)
“-150 stats, -15% health compared to enemy”

Let me explain this. You have three orbs.

+150 stats compared to enemy, +15% health compared to enemy.

Enemy has three orbs.

-150 stats compared to enemy, -15% health compared to enemy

+150 stats +15% health
-(-150 stats – 15% health)
300 stats 30% health difference total

That is not to say that compared to the enemy at ANY GIVEN TIME you are at more than a 15% health and 150 stat disadvantage or advantage. That is saying that COMPARATIVELY, the difference between you owning three orbs and the enemy owning three orbs (note that BOTH cannot happen at the same time) is 30% health and 300 stats. I don’t understand how else to explain this to you.

Yes, the maximum stat difference at any given moment is 15% health and 150 stats. Yet, from the maximum possible stat difference from you owning three orbs to the enemy owning three orbs is 30% health and 300 stats.

You’re both right. The total stat difference between owning three orbs and the enemy owning three orbs is 30% health and 300 stats. The maximum difference at any given moment is 15% health and 150% stats. However, it is true that the orbs can swing stats by what is essentially 30% health and 300 stats when all three transfer hands from one realm to another.

The orbs stat bonuses aren’t a problem at all. The problem lies with people not defending their orbs. If the orbs gave no real bonuses what would be the point in fighting over them? That would just make all of WvW into Eternal Battlegrounds.

The only problem I see with orbs is the fact that people have found exploits to get into fully upgraded keeps without damaging the walls/gates and they manage to either destroy the alter and take the orb. This shouldn’t be possible and it needs to be fixed.

I don’t know if the orbs is a problem. People giving up is a problem.

I see the orbs as a problem because as the OP says they encourage those that are ahead to stay ahead. And this is not only because it provides a statistical advantage to the team in the lead. The fact that the orbs provide a statistical advantage to the leading team also undermines one of WvW’s inherent balancing systems, the fact that it’s a three way fight. In a perfect world, the two servers without the orbs would temporarily team up to fight the one with all the orbs, ensuring that they lose some of the orbs. This doesn’t really happen in practice because the orbs make it easier to attack the other team that has the same stats as you. This pits the two bottom teams against each other while the top team can crush both at their leisure.

The way I see it, the stat bonus per orb needs to go. However, we can’t make the orbs worthless because then that undermines the purpose of the borderlands map. To this end, I propose they make the orbs worth 10 points each. Why 10 points? Because that makes a keep with the orb inside it be worth the same as Stonemist Castle in the Eternal Battleground. Since the orbs no longer provide a statistical advantage there would no longer be an inherent disadvantage to going after the team with the orbs. On the contrary, it becomes the obvious choice because they have the most points to steal.

TLDR: orb stat bonus encourages teams without orbs to fight among each other instead of going after leader. This undermines the basic balancing factor of 3 way PvP. To counter this, the orbs should be worth 10 points each per score tick and not provide any stat bonuses. This would make it so there is no disadvantage to attacking the leading team.

I get what you’re trying to say with the double thing but that can’t be properly used here.

Being without orbs is not -150 15%, it’s 0.

simplified version
everyone starts at 0
each side gets their own orb = everyone +1(we’ll call it)
one side gains all three orbs = one side +3 two sides +0
the difference between +3 and +0 is 3, not 6.

Even if the +3 orb server A loses all three orbs to server B, it’s still only a difference of 3. I think what you’re wanting to do is say that server A is going from +3 to 0 against server B which went from 0 to +3 thus there is now a difference of 6. That is incorrect logic for the topic of orbs in WvW.

There is only a max possible 150 15% difference.

[Edit] P.S. – I do agree that there are snowballing and orb issues in WvW, however.

I understand what you’re saying. I agree with it, and you’re correct. The maximum possible stat difference at any time is 150 with a 15% difference. I’m just saying that when you look at it relative to the enemy, the difference between owning 3 orbs and them owning three orbs is 300 stats and 30% health.

Basically, we’re arguing about the same concept but on seperate premises. I’m comparing having 3 orbs to the enemy having 3 orbs, which technically isn’t possible at any given time, but it does reveal the magnitude of the orbs stat bonuses.

Regardless, what I’m trying to say is that I loved relics in DAOC, but orbs just didnt’ mimic it well. There were many factors in DAOC that aren’t in play in WvW. I could care less about whether a server is winning or losing, I just want good large scale PvP. It doesn’t have to balanced, but it has to exist. And as things currently stand, judging by the rankings, there is no happy medium. There are no matchups that even remotely resemble fun, large scale pvp.

I think there’s quite a few issues with current WVW:

The stacking effect of orbs is too great versus the ease of getting an orb (bad map design)
In DAOC, it was a difficult affair to get an enemy relic, often taking a week of sustained effort whittling down enemy keeps to open relic gates, and system-wide messages were issues when a relic was taken — in WVW it’s far too easy, and most of the time, other players don’t even know it’s happening.

Outmanned
The outmanned “buff” is widely taken by losing teams as time to go PVE farming and/or quit, the complete opposite of its intended effect. Just get rid of it, or change it to be some kind of “Determined” buff that makes NPCs for the outmanned side far tougher.

Supply denial
Once a side loses all its keeps/towers, the losing side has no chance of coming back due to current supply mechanics and the relative ease with which the winning side can protecting the supply camps flanking the losing side’s main keep. The already dominating side has such a massive supply advantage over the losing side(s) that a comeback is just not realistically possible. This is because…

Supply scales linearly with empire size
in the real world, the biggest limitation of empire size was essentially logistics – the difficulty of supplying the front-lines with food, weapons, replacement troops. In WVW, there is no downside to owning the majority of the map as long as you keep your adjoining supply camps capped. A better system would to increase the supply cost of upgrades/siege weapons as a function of distance from your server’s spawn point. Supply dolyaks should also drop a small amount of supply when killed.

Supply exploiting
Every week i see people from other servers cross-realming to use up the supply of their opponent by building siege in completely useless locations just metres from the supply depot in SMC and other difficult-to-take keeps. IOJ did it to CD this week, and ET did it the week before.

Just wanted to point out that supply dolyaks do have a chance to drop 5 supply when killed. It doesn’t happen all the time, but it does happen.

there are 3 teams not 2

its a 1:1:1

orbs work fine and cause no issues at all

they promote the weaker 2 teams to attack the stronger team

Daish.6139:

there are 3 teams not 2

its a 1:1:1

orbs work fine and cause no issues at all

they promote the weaker 2 teams to attack the stronger team

Please tell me this is some form of sarcasm. Can you show me an NA matchup where this is actually working as intented? The only one that I could possibly think of is Kaineng and (possibly) the NSP matchup. Sadly, transfers have screwed these matchups up so badly that it’s hard to even tell.

I completely agree with your points, especially #2 which has been bothering me. It should be extremely hard to hold everything, but this game makes it easy to maintain control. I still am having lots of fun in wvw, but it would be nice if there was a bigger downside to owning the whole map so other servers could start to fight back.

@ Daish:

No, that is the opposite of what happens. When one team owns all the orbs the two teams without them are encouraged to fight each other more than they are to fight the team with 3 orbs. Why? Because it is easier ti fight the team that does not have +150 to all stats and +15% health each. The stats on the orbs only encourage infighting between the losing factions, which is one of the reasons the tactic you talk about is so rare in WvW.

There should be no PvP bonus for owning orbs. The whole point is to be competitive, how does given a team that is already facerolling more facerolling ability making it competitive?

Its not.

Also the more territory you have the harder it should be to hold. That isn’t happening right now, because the more territory you have now makes you stronger, it doesn’t spread then your forces, it does spread thin your supply line, or the number of guards you have.

Controlling all the map should be hard. Not impossible, but it should be hard, even if you vastly outnumber the players on the other teams. Make it mean something, and not easy like it is now. Now once a side gets momentum, it is pretty much inevitable.

Real competitive WvW players should want it to be competitive and a challenge.

It was described that a few players could make it hard for a much larger force to take a keep, yet that isn’t happening either.

WvW is pretty much broken to what it was described as.

MrPicklez.6473:

Daish.6139:

there are 3 teams not 2

its a 1:1:1

orbs work fine and cause no issues at all

they promote the weaker 2 teams to attack the stronger team

Please tell me this is some form of sarcasm. Can you show me an NA matchup where this is actually working as intented? The only one that I could possibly think of is Kaineng and (possibly) the NSP matchup. Sadly, transfers have screwed these matchups up so badly that it’s hard to even tell.

you have played on every server have you? wow your pro

it working as intended on every server who dose not have idiots as Commanders

if you go for the stronger server on your matchup and ignore the weaker sever they are almost never going to even attempt to attack you

the stronger server is going to be the 1 with the orb

Enenion.8127:

@ Daish:

No, that is the opposite of what happens. When one team owns all the orbs the two teams without them are encouraged to fight each other more than they are to fight the team with 3 orbs. Why? Because it is easier ti fight the team that does not have +150 to all stats and +15% health each. The stats on the orbs only encourage infighting between the losing factions, which is one of the reasons the tactic you talk about is so rare in WvW.

you have some horrible commanders then

lets all turn around and put our backs to the stronger server and fight this other guy

anal kitten comenceing in 3…2…1….

of your into that sort of thing thats fine but thats not the way you get more points and become a stronger server

Daish.6139:

MrPicklez.6473:

Daish.6139:

there are 3 teams not 2

its a 1:1:1

orbs work fine and cause no issues at all

they promote the weaker 2 teams to attack the stronger team

Please tell me this is some form of sarcasm. Can you show me an NA matchup where this is actually working as intented? The only one that I could possibly think of is Kaineng and (possibly) the NSP matchup. Sadly, transfers have screwed these matchups up so badly that it’s hard to even tell.

you have played on every server have you? wow your pro

it working as intended on every server who dose not have idiots as Commanders

if you go for the stronger server on your matchup and ignore the weaker sever they are almost never going to even attempt to attack you

the stronger server is going to be the 1 with the orb

No, I haven’t actually played on every server. I’m not really sure if I should even bother responding to this. While what you’re saying sounds great in theory, it’s much less cut and dry in practice. One of the reasons for this is because organizing two servers to compete against the winning side is quite difficult. It’s actually easier to take towers and supply camps from the other server that is already “down.”

Additionally, the week matchups and scoring system really make it difficult to form alliances to take on the stronger server. The matches are dynamic, and what do you do if one of the two “underdog” servers gets on top? Do you instantly call off the truce and slaughter each other? In DAOC, you knew who the strongest server was. If you didn’t work to change things, you were stuck in your matchup for eternity. Things were enver going to change unless you did ti yourself. In WvW, if you simply wait a week, the change will be made for you. Simply put, it isn’t worth the effort for a lot of people in WvW to form these alliances, especially with the free server transfers. Is this a people problem? Perhaps, but what do you think is easier to change, the free transfer and orb snowballing systems, or changing the mindset of every player that logs in to play a video game?

MrPicklez.6473:

Daish.6139:

MrPicklez.6473:

Daish.6139:

there are 3 teams not 2

its a 1:1:1

orbs work fine and cause no issues at all

they promote the weaker 2 teams to attack the stronger team

Please tell me this is some form of sarcasm. Can you show me an NA matchup where this is actually working as intented? The only one that I could possibly think of is Kaineng and (possibly) the NSP matchup. Sadly, transfers have screwed these matchups up so badly that it’s hard to even tell.

you have played on every server have you? wow your pro

it working as intended on every server who dose not have idiots as Commanders

if you go for the stronger server on your matchup and ignore the weaker sever they are almost never going to even attempt to attack you

the stronger server is going to be the 1 with the orb

No, I haven’t actually played on every server. I’m not really sure if I should even bother responding to this. While what you’re saying sounds great in theory, it’s much less cut and dry in practice. One of the reasons for this is because organizing two servers to compete against the winning side is quite difficult. It’s actually easier to take towers and supply camps from the other server that is already “down.”

Additionally, the week matchups and scoring system really make it difficult to form alliances to take on the stronger server. The matches are dynamic, and what do you do if one of the two “underdog” servers gets on top? Do you instantly call off the truce and slaughter each other? In DAOC, you knew who the strongest server was. If you didn’t work to change things, you were stuck in your matchup for eternity. Things were enver going to change unless you did ti yourself. In WvW, if you simply wait a week, the change will be made for you. Simply put, it isn’t worth the effort for a lot of people in WvW to form these alliances, especially with the free server transfers. Is this a people problem? Perhaps, but what do you think is easier to change, the free transfer and orb snowballing systems, or changing the mindset of every player that logs in to play a video game?

it works all the time on Sea of Sorrows when im Commanding

its not a Alliance you cant take their part of the map

you need to sacrafice whatever their part of the map is

say its a boarderlands their part of the map is tower/keep or towerx2/garrison

your Commanders are jokes if they cant maniupulate the other servers into helping destory the stronger 1

if you end up taking the stronger team out then you take out the weaker server that just helped you by being a distraction and you capture the whole map

The problem with the orbs is that it just isn’t fun fighting against 3 orb enemies.

When it stops being fun, people stop playing. It’s a vicious cycle, the less people play, the less fun everyone has, and the less people play.

Daish.6139:

Enenion.8127:

@ Daish:

No, that is the opposite of what happens. When one team owns all the orbs the two teams without them are encouraged to fight each other more than they are to fight the team with 3 orbs. Why? Because it is easier ti fight the team that does not have +150 to all stats and +15% health each. The stats on the orbs only encourage infighting between the losing factions, which is one of the reasons the tactic you talk about is so rare in WvW.

you have some horrible commanders then

lets all turn around and put our backs to the stronger server and fight this other guy

anal kitten comenceing in 3…2…1….

of your into that sort of thing thats fine but thats not the way you get more points and become a stronger server

What the commanders say or do is irrelevant. Which is easier, taking the tower of the guys with the same stats or the tower of the guys who have +150 in all stats and +15% extra hp each? The answer should be obvious. The game, through the orb system, makes it easier to attack the other losing side instead of the side that is winning. This creates an incentive to attack the weaker side, making alliances between the weaker servers tougher and undermining the 2v1 scenario that is supposed to balance three faction PvP.

I feel like the problem with orb stacking is the the morale impact it has on the enemy teams. I think people that transfer for wins don’t feel compelled to fight against 3 orbs.

if your not listening to what the Commanders are saying and are provokeing the other weaker team to attack you and start a fight that opens a window for the stronger team to capture 100% of the map

well i guess your the problem your the reason the stronget team wipes you out

your the snowballing issue that needs to be destoryed

…………. What?

MrPicklez.6473:

http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA none of the matchups are exactly going too well, from a fun/competitive perspective.

I would respectively disagree with you. I moved this week to a server that is losing its match up.

Yesterday we were hard pressed during the period I play in.

We also had a lot of fun. Our enemies stepped up their game and we had to to. This lead to many lively fights.

The scores can give a false indication of whats going on. I think others on the Blacktide-Desolation-Augury Rock match up will agree with me.

Some of the main issues I have encountered for WvW

1. Outmanned buff is worthless – nothing more than an insult added on top of the fact you wont be able to acheive much in the map. I said it before I rely hope the person who thought that one up was instantly fired and taken out and shot for his/their utter stupidity.

2. The server transfer issue widely complained about and a blatent open refusal to address or even acknowledge the problem. Yes it is killing both servers and populations and is forcing people out of the game.

3. WvW maps are WAY too small each map for each realm/server should the size of the current 4 maps together. This reduces the effectiveness of zergs and even if you are out manned you can still actually do something. Currently you are screwed.

4. Way too easy to get behind the lines and interupt supply. The side castles should have to be taken before you can move up the map. Garrison should be moved and placed at the current ORB start locations and orb should start in the garrison.

5. Single players able to take out escorted supply – should never have been allowed- escorted supply should need a base of 10 people to even stand a chance to take it out. Less than that the guards should just 1 shot you. Un escorted supply should need at least 3 people before you can even damage the Dolly.

6. Claiming castles offer no real benefit -yea u can drop a few flags but that is all. Why does it not feed intel to the guild that claimed it ? there are about 10 people attacking “x” tower ? Why can the guild that claimed the tower/castle not block the plunder of supply inside ? should be able to set it to -A) everyone can plunder or complete upgrade before it can be plundered.

7. Anets seems to think that sPvP is where the game is at …… wrong, very wrong. I would estimate maby 10-15% of the population partakes in this. When waiting for their mates to log in what are they doing ? Most use to head out to WvW now what I have noticed is they sit in Lions Arch or goto the 70-80 zones and do an event or 2, then log if their mates don’t get on. Most of these people will proberbly head on back to their old games shortly as the WvW is lacking so bad due to the imbalance it is not worth trying.

8. The 3 month grace most players offer a game to address the most complained about issues is basically up. I can assure Anet that very shortly a lot of people will start to leave the game. I can almost with 100% confidence say that any poll taken on their exit would be “the free server x-fer ruined the game for me”

It is a bit of a pity actually as this game does have huge potential to rely dominate the MORG market. Anet missed the mark some by no feedback to the most complained about aspect of the game and just expected that it would solve its self. Come on most the older gerneration will not server hop but the game has thousands of youngsters that thing the only way to get ahead is to bomb a server and then destroy the other 2. Yea it is getting old now and I guarentee will lead to the death of GW2.

Orbs should give buffs that don’t affect combat because currently they give a ridiculous buff to HP. +30% HP might not seem like a big deal but consider even with equal sized armies that the whole enemy force has 30% more HP than yours. Two armies meet in the open field and one has hundreds of thousands more HP, who do you think will win? It only gets worse when a defender has that extra wall of HP. This in my opinion is the biggest snowball problem next to free server transfers.

main character.5460:

Orbs should give buffs that don’t affect combat because currently they give a ridiculous buff to HP. +30% HP might not seem like a big deal but consider even with equal sized armies that the whole enemy force has 30% more HP than yours. Two armies meet in the open field and one has hundreds of thousands more HP, who do you think will win? It only gets worse when a defender has that extra wall of HP. This in my opinion is the biggest snowball problem next to free server transfers.

3 teams

100vs100vs100

1 team is stronger and has orbs on more then 1 server

the 2 weaker teams are more likely to attack the stronger team (team with the orbs)

end

its not a 1v1

Actually, Daish, the weaker servers more often than not seem to fight for second place, especially given the current imbalances.

mjharrison.3209:

Supply exploiting
Every week i see people from other servers cross-realming to use up the supply of their opponent by building siege in completely useless locations just metres from the supply depot in SMC and other difficult-to-take keeps. IOJ did it to CD this week, and ET did it the week before.

Maybe drop the accusations from this. pointing fingers weakens your argument, even though i agree with most everything you’ve said. It’s this last part i don’t agree with, mainly because i’ve never seen it happen, and i’m on IoJ.

Nevron.9413:

Actually, Daish, the weaker servers more often than not seem to fight for second place, especially given the current imbalances.

This has been my experience. When Team A is completely dominating the match and there’s no chance of catching up, Team B and Team C will simply fight each other for second place.

Saw it a few weeks ago when JQ wouldn’t touch HoD and only went after SBI holdings, and then when SBI dropped to tier 2, after the match-up was clearly decided for SBI Blackgate and Janthir only seemed to engage with each other.

I haven’t stepped into WvW this week, the imbalance is absolutely ridiculous at this point.

One simple thing that could improve WvWvW is just switching the outmanned buff with the 3 orb buff. This would still make the orbs valuable in the form of more xp/karma/mf but would keep the playing field equal between individuals so that if the two losing servers do gang up they can greatly push back the leading server.

My other thought is that having WvWvW be a single instance combining the current populations of the 4 as they are currently would allow for more balance. If the winning team controls the whole world and is spawn camping EB pick a borderlands and overload it. Force them to pass between them via the portals still which means if you need more help on a specific map call in people from one of the others. Just like moving soldier counts around to different fronts in medieval combat. An orb holding garrison will not last long if a server devotes 80% of its population to taking it down and would force commanders to decide whether it will last long enough to call for reinforcements or if they should instruct groups on other maps to push hard.

Daish, I’m on DB and we are fighting you and Maguuma right now. SoS is streamrolling both of us and more often than not we end up fighting Maguuma as they attack us and we attack them. So, no, it’s not the case of the 2 bottom servers attacking the 1 winner on your current match up right now. Same thing happened last week for us against CD and TC.

First off talking about 30% and 300 stat isn’t relevant in any circumstance because it will never happen in any course of time that anyone would even realize it

2nd I’m pretty much with Daish (now keep in mind I firmly believe the orb “value” must change and I think it should be swapped with the outmanned buff)
Anyway I personally do not care at all if the 2 losing servers don’t get it through their head that they need to attack the 1st sever and take control of the orbs.
That is a player/server/commander issue on said servers.
As the orbs are right now until when/if they get changed that is the target of any and all servers. If you people don’t understand that maybe the orbs really don’t need to change, the playstyle of the people do.
Whenever we lose an orb, that becomes #1 priority period. To place anyway else, with the orbs the way they are is ridiculous
In addition you also know that whatever server has 3 orbs they took them from 2 other servers, which is another thing that is the problem of those servers and players and not really of the orbs themselves
If people aren’t crazy about playing against a server with 3 orbs, don’t ever let anyone have 3 orbs.
I know there is night capping and pop issues at certain times, but I have defended an orb with 11 people vs 40 or so

Like I said I don’t care what server 2 and server 3 are doing, but if they are fighting for 2nd place, that is their own issue and a bigger one then the orbs themselves

mangarrage.1062:

First off talking about 30% and 300 stat isn’t relevant in any circumstance because it will never happen in any course of time that anyone would even realize it

Anyway I personally do not care at all if the 2 losing servers don’t get it through their head that they need to attack the 1st sever and take control of the orbs.
That is a player/server/commander issue on said servers.

I’ve seen the first point happen numerous times. You hold all three orbs, or the enemy holds all three orbs, and then an off-peak team manages to take all three in the course of twelve hours. Sure, it’s technically the players’ faults for not defending the orbs, but sometimes it just isn’t feasible. I could care less about off-peak stuff, I’m just saying that such stat fluctuations shouldn’t occur at all, let alone over the course of twelve hours.

Also, you’re right, that is at the root, a player issue. Unfortunately, it’s much harder to change the player base than to change the game. The problem is that these issues make it unfun for EVERYONE involved in these landslide victories.

You’re never going to convince the player base to log in and fight when they’re down by 100k points and it’s +600/x/x in favor of a winning team with three orbs. Is it easy to say “well just log in and try, that’ll fix it,” sure, it is. But in practice, that will NEVER happen. So do you want to be stuck in a game with perpetual landslide victories where there is no PvP, or do you want to give the losing team some more incentive to come out and play, so that everyone can get some more PvP?

What it boils down to is this: Do you really feel so strongly about not giving boosts and incentives to the losing teams, in a gamemode that is inherently unbalanced due to population discrepencies, that you’re willing to let WvW devolve into one-sided, uncompetitive spawn camping matches? Because personally, I just want to get some good open-field PvP in. I could care less if I’m on the winning or losing side, but the way it is there is a lack of good PvP in these landslide matches, and to say otherwise is deceitful.

Do you really feel so strongly about not giving boosts and incentives to the losing teams, in a gamemode that is inherently unbalanced due to population discrepencies, that you’re willing to let WvW devolve into one-sided, uncompetitive spawn camping matches? —from Pick yea quote is not available again

I honestly can’t look at that at this moment. First and #1 is transfers. Fixing transfers over a very short amount of time will fix matches so there isn’t total blowouts. I made a whole post on this.
Look at the Kaineng matchup right now. They were getting completely doored and boom 2 off peak guilds go there and now they have close like a 50k gap in like 2 days time. That is the stuff that has to stop. That isn’t even the perfect example really.
Look at the servers who are in the blowouts
JQ we all know #1 gets transfers makes the match alot worse for the people facing them
SoS-the strong oceanic guild is now alot stronger due to at least 7 NA guilds xfering over from DB and JQ
IoJ-mass transfers to them over the course of 2 weeks brought them from t3 to t1 in 2 weeks
BG-people again from their BG-FA-DB matchup with they wound up dominating after getting hammered Fri-mon got xfers and keep getting them

Now the other server on the transfer off side of things get gutted completely

I think close transfers, allow the servers rank to stabilize and then see if the orbs are really a huge issue.
I still think they should swap the orb with outmanned anyway and make the orb a point trickle but really the xfers are the bigger fish to fry and really could make the orbs alot less of an issue if all servers are on alot better footing in their tiers

The orb bonuses need to be changed. They are the #1 thing demotivating people from participating in wuvwuv on the losing servers.

People don’t like knowing they are going in at a huge disadvantage on a per person basis.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Sanctum-of-Rall-vs-Northern-Shiverpeaks-vs-Yak-s-Bend-WvWvW-10-5-12/first

This is a prime example to look at. This was the closest matchup so far. Just glance at the SS and who has what orbs and how many in each one.
The orbs made no difference in this match whatsoever
And it made no difference because the ranking system worked this week for these 3 servers.
Cant get matchups right across the board with transfers

Again I’m not against some change to the orbs but we are looking at mass changes to servers strength week by week. Almost having a FoTM servers, right now its 5 servers who knows next week it could be a new 5 and the matchup will be lopsided again

mangarrage.1062:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Sanctum-of-Rall-vs-Northern-Shiverpeaks-vs-Yak-s-Bend-WvWvW-10-5-12/first

This is a prime example to look at. This was the closest matchup so far. Just glance at the SS and who has what orbs and how many in each one.
The orbs made no difference in this match whatsoever
And it made no difference because the ranking system worked this week for these 3 servers.
Cant get matchups right across the board with transfers

Again I’m not against some change to the orbs but we are looking at mass changes to servers strength week by week. Almost having a FoTM servers, right now its 5 servers who knows next week it could be a new 5 and the matchup will be lopsided again

I agree with you on this. I was actually playing in that matchup, it was the most fun I’ve had in this game to date. Part of what made it fun was that it was so even – every server was great at retaking their borderlands and maintaining orb control. The populations were pretty even, and all around it was just a complete blast. You’re totally right, brackets really need balancing and we won’t see that until the transfers are addressed.

However, one of the things you need to notice about that matchup is that none of the servers ever held a commanding lead. No one ever really swept all of the maps and held all three orbs. No server was every demoralized or fighting against horrid odds. That is part of what made this matchup so incredible. I’m not saying getting rid of the orbs or switching it with the outmanned buff or anything well really fix the problem, at least not with the transfers still in place. I’m just saying, it’s a start, and really needs to be addressed.

If there was a way to play that match over and over and over for the rest of the life of GW2, I’d do it in a heartbeat. Sadly, when you look at the matchups now, they’re back to transfers and snowballing. While that was a great match, it was the one gem in a pile of kitten crap. When you have to pick through a pile of bad matchups to find the one good one, you know it’s a problem.

mangarrage.1062:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Sanctum-of-Rall-vs-Northern-Shiverpeaks-vs-Yak-s-Bend-WvWvW-10-5-12/first

This is a prime example to look at. This was the closest matchup so far. Just glance at the SS and who has what orbs and how many in each one.
The orbs made no difference in this match whatsoever
And it made no difference because the ranking system worked this week for these 3 servers.
Cant get matchups right across the board with transfers

Again I’m not against some change to the orbs but we are looking at mass changes to servers strength week by week. Almost having a FoTM servers, right now its 5 servers who knows next week it could be a new 5 and the matchup will be lopsided again

From that thread: https://dviw3bl0enbyw.cloudfront.net/uploads/forum_attachment/file/12548/WvW_1650.jpg

This is one of the sexiest screenshots I’ve seen for WvW. I can only imagine how phenomenally awesome that match-up was and I regret not being a part of it.

Hopefully Anet will be able to get all this under control and sooner rather than later(before it’s too late) so that we all can start experiencing the true potential of fun that WvW has to offer!

I believe there should be something that you get for winning, cuz otherwise the “smart” strategy would be to take objectives and let them go right away so you can at least get some karma and coin from retaking.

Now whether the orb buff is the best choice, I agree there’s some legit complaints.

I was alt-tabbed when an enemy thief came upon me (and I don’t even have full exotic gear yet) and still was unable to kill me 1v1, ended up stealth fleeing. That made me think the buff might be too much.

How bout 2 orbs make you get 2 x Badges of Honor and 3 orbs make you get triple per drop? That wouldn’t affect the gameplay, but would encourage people to keep trying for orbs.

buzzkapow.8465:

mjharrison.3209:

Supply exploiting
Every week i see people from other servers cross-realming to use up the supply of their opponent by building siege in completely useless locations just metres from the supply depot in SMC and other difficult-to-take keeps. IOJ did it to CD this week, and ET did it the week before.

Maybe drop the accusations from this. pointing fingers weakens your argument, even though i agree with most everything you’ve said. It’s this last part i don’t agree with, mainly because i’ve never seen it happen, and i’m on IoJ.

How would you expect to see it happen if your server is the one doing it? What happens is one guy transfers over to CD with stockpiled siege blueprints from jumping puzzle mesmer farming, ports to SMC/orb keep (which CD owns), guy then keeps building siege in the most useless spot possible right next to the supply depot until the keep’s supply depot is empty.

I have multiple screenshots of these mass siege buildups.

Oh and it’s not restricted to IOJ, it’s rampant. I don’t have the link atm but a guy from IOJ on these forums admitted doing it. It’s obvious IOJ is doing it though as it was done to both SMC and main CD keep this week as they were both taken by IOJ the following morning after witnessing the supply depot draining.

we saw it happen a few times this week. “Spires” building rams on our own garrison supply camp and walls as a hacked/sploit crew ports into a garrison thats been held for 3 days straight rips through one side of the seige equipment…

We were on top of it quickly and got it all rebuilt in minutes but it was obvious.

maybe xfers should have a 48 hour restriction on supply use .. idk brainstorming.

Free transfers should have a 9 day ban from WvW.

9 instead of 7 to cover more bases.