Guild Wars 2

Don’t hold your breath for getting the ABL back any time soon. At least after they destroy them with HoT upgrades.
You’ll also be able to tell how well they interpted the wants tomorrow. In either case, don’t expect much.

OP

Viable defense for a tower or keep needs to account for a small number of players defending against a zerg…because this is what happens the vast majority of the time. Because joining a giant blob and karma training around the maps is so heavily encouraged and incentivized by the game design (most rewards, easiest play, safest play), very few people defend. In order for defense to be viable, the defender needs to be able to hit the enemy without being hit themselves. Very basic…but it’s the central design of all defenses since tribes started building huts thousands of years ago. I have to be able to hit you without you hitting me.

Now I know it might seem on the surface that it wouldn’t be “fair”, but again, remember how the game is played. The vast majority of the time, a huge blob is running up and bashing down the door of the tower and one or two guys are frantically trying to stop them. The blob doesn’t need any more help, for heaven’s sake. Help the two defenders so defense might be a little fun and worthwhile and then more people might do it and fights for objectives might require a bit more than just getting in a blob and running over everything.

If a large attacking group and a large defensive group show up at an objective, the defenders should have the advantage. It’s a tower or keep, is it not? Attacking forces should be trying to draw enemies out of defensive positions, rather than just beating the door down and having all fights in the lord’s room. Defenders shouldn’t have to sacrifice their wall or door just to create a choke point and actually fight to defend.

I don’t agree with it all, but I think this part is well worth a read. OP contradicts it earlier when he says it should all be about fights and only fights, but somehow I think he got it right here.

I know people don’t like listening to me but maybe you’ll listen to this guy…who’s saying the same thing…

My understanding of that bit was that defenders should be given better balanced tools. IMO walls being death traps starts a snowball effect of terrible gameplay. With walls being relatively safe from player weapon attacks, the siege cap can be lowered, meaning attackers can be pushed off and then they can counter seige knowing they won’t face 20 ACs tucked behind a choke if they breach. It won’t be fun killing siege spam defense or ktrain PvD offense like we have now. That’s just my opinion. I could bug him and perhaps get him to clarify :P

A clarification on his part would be nice, though the ‘hit you without you hitting me’ bit sounds like a ringing endorsement of being able to use ACs without LoS. Perhaps, as others have suggested, with a new firing mechanism akin to catas/trebs/etc so that their overall damage is reduced if they’re firing at mid-to-long ranges.

Then again, I think that sounds like a better balanced tool, so maybe we’re not too far apart?

Walls being deathtraps definitely isn’t healthy. I would add proxy catas to any list of unhealthy mechanics too, though they would be far less so if walls were safe. Still, since I don’t want walls to be totally safe from everything, I’d rather change ACs still.

Yes small group (3-5) should be able to delay ennemy blob and push back small ennemy group (<10) if they don’t know what they are doing (the ennemy group).
Attacker will always have the long time advantage (killing doly, building siege at different spot, forcing defenders to use supply to repair / build siege).
If small group can not delay the ennemy zerg, then this will just be a KTrain on all the map.

I remember some fight at hills where the ennemy need 2/3 hours to take the keep !
This was intense fight… Ennemy building siege, defender need to repair, ally commander go to kill the ennemy, etc…

This was interesting, and this was very good for the scout who had “build” the keep all the day to be able to have the T3 with WP.

Those fight happen because we had the WP to come back to defend, because the ennemy want to take down our T3 because they know it was hard to build.

Moving back to the old WP style is the first thing to do in WvW…. It’s very very important !

And about the siege cap I’m for this ! Defender AND attacker should not be able to build tons of siege at the same spot ! 3 is a good number for me. This mean no more that 3 rams on gate or cata on the wall. And if you want to build shield gen this will reduce your fire power.

For the AC’s safe spot I’m fine with elem and meteor shower, because they have low life. But actually there is too much damage output for everyone. This need to be changed. And AC have small range, then I think we don’t need to change anything with AC. Just limit the number of siege at the same spot.
If we had more fight before it was because people don’t die so fast and because melee players where able to run in the ennemy without being killed half way.

We really need separate balance from pve / pvp and wvw… We need back a good stab, less damage output. Player need to have a chance to fight, not to be killed in 1s because they are perma CC.

Thanks everyone for keeping the discussion going, but I think it’s clear (and has been for some time) that Anet is a million miles away from the player base when it comes to game design, especially in terms of WvW. I think we’re all wasting our breath.

I’m sorry to say I left the game about four months ago, and it’s highly unlikely that I’ll be back. I haven’t thought about the game in all that time, and I really wouldn’t have anything valid to add to the discussion at this point.

To those still playing, I wish you luck.

Fozzik.1742:

Thanks everyone for keeping the discussion going, but I think it’s clear (and has been for some time) that Anet is a million miles away from the player base when it comes to game design, especially in terms of WvW. I think we’re all wasting our breath.

I’m sorry to say I left the game about four months ago, and it’s highly unlikely that I’ll be back. I haven’t thought about the game in all that time, and I really wouldn’t have anything valid to add to the discussion at this point.

To those still playing, I wish you luck.

same here.
i’ve build a new pc and currently installing the OS.. and i’m not sure if i will install guildwars2 again. maybe in some weeks, or maybe not. WvW has always been the reason for me to log in, but after HoT – 75% of guilds and players i know quitted. there are so many reasons.. pve players have better gear and stats as pure wvw players but wvw is based on pve – in every situation (build, stats, gear ect.) – bring wvw back to the old time + based on pvp armor/weapons/build – system. every update forces wvw players to play more pve – even in wvw.

my 2 cents, everyone who is still doing wvw and believes in Anet, good luck.

gennyt.3428:

My understanding of that bit was that defenders should be given better balanced tools. IMO walls being death traps starts a snowball effect of terrible gameplay. With walls being relatively safe from player weapon attacks, the siege cap can be lowered, meaning attackers can be pushed off and then they can counter seige knowing they won’t face 20 ACs tucked behind a choke if they breach. It won’t be fun killing siege spam defense or ktrain PvD offense like we have now. That’s just my opinion. I could bug him and perhaps get him to clarify :P

^this

Walls should be safer, and should get even safer when upgraded

If a defending force is better / larger than the attacking force, they aren’t going to use a wall, they are going to go out and wipe them. The walls are for outnumbered / outmatched defenders to gain a defensive advantage. Right now it kind of works opposite to that. Walls are death traps for smaller forces, and an attacking force of any size can destroy siege and enemy players easily when the defensive players / siege are up on a wall.