Guild Wars 2

Recently (a month ago roughly) I got a new computer capable of supporting recording software so I’ve been playing around with it a bit.

While our Bay was being attacked today, I managed to capture a good example of what standing on a wall in WvW is like while it’s being attacked.

The video should speak for itself if you’ve ever worked defense against a large number of players. Basically, if you try to stop the attackers you’ll be obliterated by AOE’s and CC’s.

Link to YouTube video here

EDIT: Okay since people seem to be confused… I was just giving an example of why the design of tower/keep walls are flawed in WvW. I have seen people discuss this various times in the past so I thought I would give a visual idea of how bad it can be at times by provoking the attackers to drop a bunch of AOE’s.

It wasn’t meant for anything other than an example, I apologize for not being clear about that.

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

Protip: use OBS, Nvidia Shadowplay or AMD Gaming Evolved instead of Bandicam.

Walls are not defense. Players are defense. Walls are there to delay the enemy players so that friendly players can come and fight them.

Dawdler.8521:

Walls are not defense. Players are defense. Walls are there to delay the enemy players so that friendly players can come and fight them.

Walls are most definitely a key part of defense.

Walls should be higher. 1500 would be enough.

This situation has always been an annoyance to me. In defending any structure, the most dangerous place to be is actually on the wall where you can defend. Meteor shower overlaps the walkway side to side, many other AoEs are just about as wide, and the only way to cast most of your own skills down is to stand on the lip where you are susceptible to being pulled right off into the group below you. I’m certainly no fan of total immunity on the walltop, but this situation has always been utterly ridiculous.

Belenwyn.8674:

Walls should be higher. 1500 would be enough.

Or larger…

You can’t even place counter siege on top of a wall without having it AoE’ed unto nothing by Meteor Shower… Sure there are a few spots where you can do that, but certainly in that wall on the video and in multiple others you can’t.

Walls, as well as whatever siege is on them, are deadly traps. If you want to attack below, you need to stand on the very edge, and become exceedingly vulnerable.

There truly should be a revamp of the projectile and view system that’d :

• Allow defendres to aim attackers below, and remove the “out of sight” issue ;
• Prevent attackers’ AOE from covering too much space on walls, especially in places where defenders can hide ;
• Set the height of walls to 1500 minimum ;
• Provide defenders a higher range, thanks to the higher spot they’re standing on.

Hey, I totally understand how frustrating it can be to defend— the walls are far more conducive to providing attackers angles for ground targeted skills while limiting the view of defenders. As a player that defends home BLs a lot as well, I can totally relate to this video.

Also, Strength of the Pack→Signet of the Wild→Signet of Stone→Siege Disabler with a good chance to get back to the door is the best you can do there. Like a poster above said, slow them down and hope for defenders arrive.

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

Brutal Augus.5917:

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

… And they’d call that “The Obsidian Sanctum’s Courtyard”.

ThomasC.1056:

Brutal Augus.5917:

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

… And they’d call that “The Obsidian Sanctum’s Courtyard”.

Not the same thing man, you’re restricted to fighting guilds in your matchup. Fighting the same people gets boring.

I don’t think defending should be made any easier right now. There are tools out there for you to defend with. If it was made any easier, it would dissuade people from fighting for objectives again. Many of the defensive tactivators and improvements (hardened gates, hardened siege, chilling fog, airship defense etc.) have been nerfed to improve this.

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Recently (a month ago roughly) I got a new computer capable of supporting recording software so I’ve been playing around with it a bit.

While our Bay was being attacked today, I managed to capture a good example of what standing on a wall in WvW is like while it’s being attacked.

The video should speak for itself if you’ve ever worked defense against a large number of players. Basically, if you try to stop the attackers you’ll be obliterated by AOE’s and CC’s.

Link to YouTube video here

EDIT: Video may still be working on processing so forgive the quality. I literally just made the YouTube account as well as uploading it so it might be a little fuzzy.

EDIT 2: Okay since people seem to be confused… I was just giving an example of why the design of tower/keep walls are flawed in WvW. I have seen people discuss this various times in the past so I thought I would give a visual idea of how bad it can be at times by provoking the attackers to drop a bunch of AOE’s.

It wasn’t meant for anything other than an example, I apologize for not being clear about that.

I noticed that you just escaped that pull there around the 10 minute mark.

There are very few places to effectively place siege to counter that volume of players.

The know it too, hence all the marks and aoe.

Unfortunately the lip of the wall do nothing to protect the people on it, but don’t prevent being pulled off either.

Half of the range skills we have are obstructed because of it.

This has to be by design. Anet must believe that allowing the attackers to have such an advantage encourages tower flipping and combat. I can’t think or any other rational answer as to why they would allow the walls to remain a death trap for so many years otherwise.

Reverence.6915:

I don’t think defending should be made any easier right now. There are tools out there for you to defend with. If it was made any easier, it would dissuade people from fighting for objectives again. Many of the defensive tactivators and improvements (hardened gates, hardened siege, chilling fog, airship defense etc.) have been nerfed to improve this.

I’d trade all those tactivator kittens for walls where i can place siege that won’t be AoE’d down by meteor shower.

Reverence.6915:

I don’t think defending should be made any easier right now. There are tools out there for you to defend with. If it was made any easier, it would dissuade people from fighting for objectives again. Many of the defensive tactivators and improvements (hardened gates, hardened siege, chilling fog, airship defense etc.) have been nerfed to improve this.

I mostly agree.

Again, the video was strictly meant as an example. I wasn’t making complaints, only showing why many players in the past, including myself, have stated that the design of keep/tower walls is flawed.

While properly placed siege can entirely prevent an attack, said siege needs to be manned before it’s attacked.

If there were 10 arrowcarts on the wall for example and every one of them manned, that zerg wouldn’t have been able to get near. But if they’re not manned before the structure is attacked, they’ll be destroyed within seconds and anyone who tries to get on them will be killed before they can fire.

There are various ways that these catapults in the video could have been countered but when the structure you’re defending has 0 supplies and all of your siege has been killed, there’s little else you can do than to watch the wall crumble.

I’m not asking for defense to be easier but I am showing Anet how higher/thicker walls would be a good plan for future development. Or, perhaps something that makes it less dangerous to be any where on a wall without granting immunity to defenders. There needs to be a balance but expecting all siege to be manned before something is attacked is an unreasonable expectation.

Jeknar.6184:

Reverence.6915:

I don’t think defending should be made any easier right now. There are tools out there for you to defend with. If it was made any easier, it would dissuade people from fighting for objectives again. Many of the defensive tactivators and improvements (hardened gates, hardened siege, chilling fog, airship defense etc.) have been nerfed to improve this.

I’d trade all those tactivator kittens for walls where i can place siege that won’t be AoE’d down by meteor shower.

We have them and they’re here to stay, so we must keep that in mind when asking for more defensive options. Imagine a map queue hiding behind wall humping their 20 acs and not coming out to fight until we left the map so they can karma train. We had to deal with that on the DBL. I hope never to deal with that ever again. Barely played GW2 those days because it was so boring.

Maybe it would help if hardened siege would provide damage reduction (50 or 75%) to the operators of siege weapons too. I would even test a break bar connected to the improvement.

Belenwyn.8674:

Maybe it would help if hardened siege would provide damage reduction (50 or 75%) to the operators of siege weapons too. I would even test a break bar connected to the improvement.

It was nerfed to improve the situation. People need to get off siege and fight if possible. If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure, so as to allow PPT affect the glicko ratings and move your server up/down as a result. People always complain about being outnumbered, but never think to allow their server to drop some glicko to get a better matchup (unless they’re already in the lowest tier. RIP T4 NA). Wouldn’t you have a better time in a lower tier/less populated matchup rather than asking for more defensive options and still remaining outnumbered?

Reverence.6915:

If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure

Why? Smart play should be rewarded over mindless blobbing… If a zerg that big don’t know how to counter siege, they shouldn’t be rewarded with the structure.

The problem is: the blob don’t need to play smart counter siege since they can just AoE everything on top of wall making impossible for the defense to do anything unless you have enough people to fight head on. And this only promote more mindless blobbing. Why bother defending while outnumbered if the zerg can just roll over anything and everything? With the reward tracks now in place WvW is getting closer to EotM with each passing day.

chefdiablo.6791:

This has to be by design. Anet must believe that allowing the attackers to have such an advantage encourages tower flipping and combat. I can’t think or any other rational answer as to why they would allow the walls to remain a death trap for so many years otherwise.

Not sure about this one. Didn’t they speak about how they wish objectives to be kept ? They want higher tiers of objectives to be more rewarding in tick and in flip : this goes against the fast flipping.

Reverence.6915:

It was nerfed to improve the situation. People need to get off siege and fight if possible. If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure (…)

Nonsense. There’s nothing epic in being a blob and taking a tower by the sole power of over-numbered fights. WvW is also supposed to be a tactical and strategic game, and players who are lazy and stupid enough to run a blob to take a structure should be severly punished by siege and defenders.

I actually clicked on the wall in the video to see it’s bar and felt my thumb cooking up a jump/dodge.

Jeknar.6184:

Reverence.6915:

If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure

Why? Smart play should be rewarded over mindless blobbing… If a zerg that big don’t know how to counter siege, they shouldn’t be rewarded with the structure.

The problem is: the blob don’t need to play smart counter siege since they can just AoE everything on top of wall making impossible for the defense to do anything unless you have enough people to fight head on. And this only promote more mindless blobbing. Why bother defending while outnumbered if the zerg can just roll over anything and everything? With the reward tracks now in place WvW is getting closer to EotM with each passing day.

What’s “smart” about placing siege inside a tower?

I don’t even bother defending walls, 50 zerker staff eles and 20 necros, and 1 mighty Coa of Ruin skill through gate…..not worth it.

Game is a mess.

There are already so many other means of defending an objective, between siege, tactivators, siege disablers, guild groups just running into and out the entry portal and even just repairing the walls while they are being destroyed, that I can’t imagine someone is complaining that they aren’t completely assailable while standing atop their iron fortress.

OriOri.8724:

Dawdler.8521:

Walls are not defense. Players are defense. Walls are there to delay the enemy players so that friendly players can come and fight them.

Walls are most definitely a key part of defense.

Hahahaha… If it was a key part in defense then everything else would be secondary. Good luck having a wall defend itself.

GW2 walls is no more “defense” than barbed wire fence. Standing on a wall and firing on people below as opposed to standing on the ground and firing on people above is the exact same thing. The wall itself is only there to delay people. You want actual defense? Players and siege. Hopefully more players than siege, but that depends on the servers you meet.

Jerus.4350:

Jeknar.6184:

Reverence.6915:

If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure

Why? Smart play should be rewarded over mindless blobbing… If a zerg that big don’t know how to counter siege, they shouldn’t be rewarded with the structure.

The problem is: the blob don’t need to play smart counter siege since they can just AoE everything on top of wall making impossible for the defense to do anything unless you have enough people to fight head on. And this only promote more mindless blobbing. Why bother defending while outnumbered if the zerg can just roll over anything and everything? With the reward tracks now in place WvW is getting closer to EotM with each passing day.

What’s “smart” about placing siege inside a tower?

And pressing 1.

Sounds like a Rivercart dude complaining. But anyway; Theres plenty of room and possibilities for defense on walls. You just have to place them correctly. Maybe walls should be 20% higher and 10% thicker so you dont have to place the AC from the ground and throw it up so every player knows how to defend.

Brutal Augus.5917:

ThomasC.1056:

Brutal Augus.5917:

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

… And they’d call that “The Obsidian Sanctum’s Courtyard”.

Not the same thing man, you’re restricted to fighting guilds in your matchup. Fighting the same people gets boring.

There is a guild hall arena, and yep, that’s too small.

A proper large scale GvG PvP map would be an obvious answer, pity Arenanet haven’t bothered making one.

Firestorm didn’t originally cover such a large area, probably needs a bit of a nurf.

morrolan.9608:

Jerus.4350:

Jeknar.6184:

Reverence.6915:

If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure

Why? Smart play should be rewarded over mindless blobbing… If a zerg that big don’t know how to counter siege, they shouldn’t be rewarded with the structure.

The problem is: the blob don’t need to play smart counter siege since they can just AoE everything on top of wall making impossible for the defense to do anything unless you have enough people to fight head on. And this only promote more mindless blobbing. Why bother defending while outnumbered if the zerg can just roll over anything and everything? With the reward tracks now in place WvW is getting closer to EotM with each passing day.

What’s “smart” about placing siege inside a tower?

And pressing 1.

Isn’t that what a zerg do? Run around pressing 1. I guess having to think where I will place siege to not be AoE’d to death is already a step above the mindless 1111111111 spam with 60 people over 5 defenders.

Aury.1367:

Sounds like a Rivercart dude complaining. But anyway; Theres plenty of room and possibilities for defense on walls. You just have to place them correctly. Maybe walls should be 20% higher and 10% thicker so you dont have to place the AC from the ground and throw it up so every player knows how to defend.

Even if you throw it from the ground, unless it’s some of the large corner walls or the ones with a staircase it still on AoE range. The spot that force an actual counter siege (and not just mindless spam of Meteor Shower) are few and most objective have another opening that completely bypass that spot.

Serious.7083:

Brutal Augus.5917:

ThomasC.1056:

Brutal Augus.5917:

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

… And they’d call that “The Obsidian Sanctum’s Courtyard”.

Not the same thing man, you’re restricted to fighting guilds in your matchup. Fighting the same people gets boring.

There is a guild hall arena, and yep, that’s too small.

A proper large scale GvG PvP map would be an obvious answer, pity Arenanet haven’t bothered making one.

Firestorm didn’t originally cover such a large area, probably needs a bit of a nurf.

It’s frustrating how they didn’t gave guild halls an OS sized arena… Well, if actually stop to think, the arena is linked to the pvp upgrades, so it’s clear that it was meant to be more a countyard than a obsidian sanctum (if you know what I mean).

Its all in this video::

Jeknar.6184:

Serious.7083:

Brutal Augus.5917:

ThomasC.1056:

Brutal Augus.5917:

Xeno.4610:

As a fan of fights instead of watching one guy pressing 2 on cata, I have one ultimate solution: remove the walls!

I’m actually all for this. To be completely honest, I’d be okay if they made an entirely seperate game mode. One where instead of putting caps on how many players could be on a map they instead give you the option to que for fights against groups similar to how many players are in your squad when you que. Three teams of 10,15,20 etc….but no objectives with walls or gates or siege, just a big kitten capture ring in the middle of an open field.

… And they’d call that “The Obsidian Sanctum’s Courtyard”.

Not the same thing man, you’re restricted to fighting guilds in your matchup. Fighting the same people gets boring.

There is a guild hall arena, and yep, that’s too small.

A proper large scale GvG PvP map would be an obvious answer, pity Arenanet haven’t bothered making one.

Firestorm didn’t originally cover such a large area, probably needs a bit of a nurf.

It’s frustrating how they didn’t gave guild halls an OS sized arena… Well, if actually stop to think, the arena is linked to the pvp upgrades, so it’s clear that it was meant to be more a countyard than a obsidian sanctum (if you know what I mean).

Obsidian Sanctum wasn’t never really suitable for purpose.

The Guild hall arena was advertised as suitable, but even from the first images it was obvious that it would barely contain enough room for 10.

They could have made it larger. There was room to at least double the diameter. That would have made it much more useful. The author Terry Pratchett created a character called BS Johnson, well known for badly scaled designs, the Arena could have been one of his.

Problem still is would it be used? My PvE guild doesn’t use the arena at all and the WvW one only for rare practice use. I still think Arenanet would have been better off making a couple of large scale PPK PvP maps.

Jeknar.6184:

Reverence.6915:

If you’re outnumbered by a significant amount, you shouldn’t be allowed to keep the structure

Why? Smart play should be rewarded over mindless blobbing… If a zerg that big don’t know how to counter siege, they shouldn’t be rewarded with the structure.

The problem is: the blob don’t need to play smart counter siege since they can just AoE everything on top of wall making impossible for the defense to do anything unless you have enough people to fight head on. And this only promote more mindless blobbing. Why bother defending while outnumbered if the zerg can just roll over anything and everything? With the reward tracks now in place WvW is getting closer to EotM with each passing day.

Well said Jeknar.

how ever, if the wall is too high then there is nothing to counter it. i mean no one below can aoe , what if all it takes is 1 long range seige at outer bay that can not be hit apart from enemy long range siege, that has a window of vale and ruins. ok enemy can treb from briar. seige wars are just boring.

Fat Disgrace.4275:

how ever, if the wall is too high then there is nothing to counter it. i mean no one below can aoe , what if all it takes is 1 long range seige at outer bay that can not be hit apart from enemy long range siege, that has a window of vale and ruins. ok enemy can treb from briar. seige wars are just boring.

They don’t have to be boring…see video in my previous post

One of my best MMO experiences was in DAOC, we Albs took Dun na Nged keep from Hibernia and defended it for 6 hours, and it was fun all the time

Dawdler.8521:

OriOri.8724:

Dawdler.8521:

Walls are not defense. Players are defense. Walls are there to delay the enemy players so that friendly players can come and fight them.

Walls are most definitely a key part of defense.

Hahahaha… If it was a key part in defense then everything else would be secondary. Good luck having a wall defend itself.

GW2 walls is no more “defense” than barbed wire fence. Standing on a wall and firing on people below as opposed to standing on the ground and firing on people above is the exact same thing. The wall itself is only there to delay people. You want actual defense? Players and siege. Hopefully more players than siege, but that depends on the servers you meet.

Thematically walls are one of the most important parts of defense. Just because ANet has implemented them poorly doesn’t change that fact, and it doesn’t give your argument any credence either unless ANet comes in here and says themselves that they intend walls to do nothing but slow people down (not that it matters when there are 75 people attacking a tower). They just need a few updates to truly be effective at being a part of defense. But absolutely the team defending a structure should have some advantages over a team attacking it. And right now the walls are more of a disadvantage because you can’t even stand on them to use defensive siege without being killed within 3 seconds by AOEs

OriOri.8724:

Dawdler.8521:

OriOri.8724:

Dawdler.8521:

Walls are not defense. Players are defense. Walls are there to delay the enemy players so that friendly players can come and fight them.

Walls are most definitely a key part of defense.

Hahahaha… If it was a key part in defense then everything else would be secondary. Good luck having a wall defend itself.

GW2 walls is no more “defense” than barbed wire fence. Standing on a wall and firing on people below as opposed to standing on the ground and firing on people above is the exact same thing. The wall itself is only there to delay people. You want actual defense? Players and siege. Hopefully more players than siege, but that depends on the servers you meet.

Thematically walls are one of the most important parts of defense. Just because ANet has implemented them poorly doesn’t change that fact, and it doesn’t give your argument any credence either unless ANet comes in here and says themselves that they intend walls to do nothing but slow people down (not that it matters when there are 75 people attacking a tower). They just need a few updates to truly be effective at being a part of defense. But absolutely the team defending a structure should have some advantages over a team attacking it. And right now the walls are more of a disadvantage because you can’t even stand on them to use defensive siege without being killed within 3 seconds by AOEs

Indeed…you just have to compare oil on DAOC and GW2 keeps to see the difference between good and bad design

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Recently (a month ago roughly) I got a new computer capable of supporting recording software so I’ve been playing around with it a bit.

While our Bay was being attacked today, I managed to capture a good example of what standing on a wall in WvW is like while it’s being attacked.

The video should speak for itself if you’ve ever worked defense against a large number of players. Basically, if you try to stop the attackers you’ll be obliterated by AOE’s and CC’s.

Link to YouTube video here

EDIT: Okay since people seem to be confused… I was just giving an example of why the design of tower/keep walls are flawed in WvW. I have seen people discuss this various times in the past so I thought I would give a visual idea of how bad it can be at times by provoking the attackers to drop a bunch of AOE’s.

It wasn’t meant for anything other than an example, I apologize for not being clear about that.

I watched the video and it left me wondering: What were you trying to accomplish up there? I mean defense wise. Destroy the catapults with a Barrage?

Congrats on WvW rank 6743.

Korgov.7645:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Recently (a month ago roughly) I got a new computer capable of supporting recording software so I’ve been playing around with it a bit.

While our Bay was being attacked today, I managed to capture a good example of what standing on a wall in WvW is like while it’s being attacked.

The video should speak for itself if you’ve ever worked defense against a large number of players. Basically, if you try to stop the attackers you’ll be obliterated by AOE’s and CC’s.

Link to YouTube video here

EDIT: Okay since people seem to be confused… I was just giving an example of why the design of tower/keep walls are flawed in WvW. I have seen people discuss this various times in the past so I thought I would give a visual idea of how bad it can be at times by provoking the attackers to drop a bunch of AOE’s.

It wasn’t meant for anything other than an example, I apologize for not being clear about that.

I watched the video and it left me wondering: What were you trying to accomplish up there? I mean defense wise. Destroy the catapults with a Barrage?

Congrats on WvW rank 6743.

Nothing. I believe I stated so at least a few times in this thread. I was provoking them to attack me to show how ridiculous the AOE spam on walls can be. Had I tried to stop them by standing on the lip of the wall, I’d have died within seconds and the video would have been very short.

Think of it as someone sticking their hand in a crocodiles mouth to show how quickly it can snap it’s mouth shut. The person isn’t trying to stop the crocodile from biting, they’re just showing how deadly they are because of how lighting quick they are. Same thing here. I’m just showing that walls will be painted red when they’re being attacked and it’s a deadly place to be even though it shouldn’t be.

I understand that some folks don’t see the point of this video but those that do understand know exactly what they’re seeing.

Perhaps the next video I make I’ll be less vague about it’s purpose, lol.

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Korgov.7645:

SpellOfIniquity.1780:

Recently (a month ago roughly) I got a new computer capable of supporting recording software so I’ve been playing around with it a bit.

While our Bay was being attacked today, I managed to capture a good example of what standing on a wall in WvW is like while it’s being attacked.

The video should speak for itself if you’ve ever worked defense against a large number of players. Basically, if you try to stop the attackers you’ll be obliterated by AOE’s and CC’s.

Link to YouTube video here

EDIT: Okay since people seem to be confused… I was just giving an example of why the design of tower/keep walls are flawed in WvW. I have seen people discuss this various times in the past so I thought I would give a visual idea of how bad it can be at times by provoking the attackers to drop a bunch of AOE’s.

It wasn’t meant for anything other than an example, I apologize for not being clear about that.

I watched the video and it left me wondering: What were you trying to accomplish up there? I mean defense wise. Destroy the catapults with a Barrage?

Congrats on WvW rank 6743.

Nothing. I believe I stated so at least a few times in this thread. I was provoking them to attack me to show how ridiculous the AOE spam on walls can be. Had I tried to stop them by standing on the lip of the wall, I’d have died within seconds and the video would have been very short.

Think of it as someone sticking their hand in a crocodiles mouth to show how quickly it can snap it’s mouth shut. The person isn’t trying to stop the crocodile from biting, they’re just showing how deadly they are because of how lighting quick they are. Same thing here. I’m just showing that walls will be painted red when they’re being attacked and it’s a deadly place to be even though it shouldn’t be.

I understand that some folks don’t see the point of this video but those that do understand know exactly what they’re seeing.

Perhaps the next video I make I’ll be less vague about it’s purpose, lol.

OK, OK.

It is just I so often find players doing exactly that when our objectives are under attack. Standing on the wall doing nothing. I thought it could be some ranger trick I didn’t know about.

Had to laugh at the guy spazzing out at :57 on the cata to the right.

Walls do need to be fixed but also not to the point where 20 AC’s deters a zerg from even bothering to try and capture it. Trying to capture a tower or keep is already a pain in the kitten with siege. Not being able to kill it would just make things even worse.

Blackarps.1974:

Had to laugh at the guy spazzing out at :57 on the cata to the right.

Walls do need to be fixed but also not to the point where 20 AC’s deters a zerg from even bothering to try and capture it. Trying to capture a tower or keep is already a pain in the kitten with siege. Not being able to kill it would just make things even worse.

They could be more strict with the siege cap for that matter. Right now you can’t have 5 more than sieges in a 1200 radius. If they reduced that to 3 it would lower how much siege you can stack on a wall.

But before even thinking about that, walls should be changed.

Jeknar.6184:

Blackarps.1974:

Had to laugh at the guy spazzing out at :57 on the cata to the right.

Walls do need to be fixed but also not to the point where 20 AC’s deters a zerg from even bothering to try and capture it. Trying to capture a tower or keep is already a pain in the kitten with siege. Not being able to kill it would just make things even worse.

They could be more strict with the siege cap for that matter. Right now you can’t have 5 more than sieges in a 1200 radius. If they reduced that to 3 it would lower how much siege you can stack on a wall.

But before even thinking about that, walls should be changed.

I don’t know. I think that siege should be the primary factor in taking out a wall. But now its mostly people spamming their AOEs so that the other team can’t use their defensive siege at all. Would be nice if walls and people on top of them could only be targeted by offensive siege, and likewise only defensive siege could be placed up there, and in limited quantities (so no AC! Only mortars, cannons, and burning oil, possibly ballistas). This would actually allow defenders to use their defensive siege on the walls

DAOC also had a strange concept of arrows and siege fired from top of keep having bigger range than that fired from below up top

Nikola.3841:

DAOC also had a strange concept of arrows and siege fired from top of keep having bigger range than that fired from below up top

Not strange. Physically their range is limited by gravity pulling the projectiles to the ground. if you are way up high then it takes longer for gravity to do that, so your range is effectively increased. IDK how balanced it would be in GW2 but it makes perfect sense that they could have bigger range if they are on top of a wall

The easiest fix to wall problem is to nerf meteor shower itself.
Reduce its radius, and maybe even shorten its duration and range.
Just keep this change for wvw only.

Nikola.3841:

DAOC also had a strange concept of arrows and siege fired from top of keep having bigger range than that fired from below up top

That’s how projectiles would work in reality.

Oddly enough, arrows used to work like that in GW1 where high ground gave you a pretty significant range increase on the ranger bows which is really weird given the game’s lack of a real Y axis when it came to game mechanics.

I like jumping up and down on the wall while three friends below perpetually use shield generators on me.

I might even do that AND man an AC and nuke them, while staying safe.

*wink

We need to do as much as possible to discourage siege turtling.

We do not need to buff siege turtles.

In some fights we have found YB or FA (can’t remember) had 10+ arrow carts in one paper tower.

We should NOT encourage this siege mentality by buffing it.

Three players should never be able to stop a map blob, it’s as simple as that.

Walls and siege are there to delay the blob, not stop the blob.

The walls gave your reinforcements more than enough time to arrive and show their PvP skills to the JQ map blob.