Guild Wars 2

I think the overall and uniform nature of map sizes in WvW is a problem. One issue that comes with having such a large map is that you need a large number of people on it for it feel populated (let alone all 4). A side effect of this is that once you start getting all these people into one area, it turns into a lag fest, because there is no system out there that can handle all that no matter how well you optimize things. I think we’ve all seen how a portal bomb or a three way fight in SM can feel less like a fight, and more a desperate struggle to press 1 and whoever happens to lag the least wins.

Another issue with the large maps, and one that I think is key to the spirit of the game mode, is that its too big to defend things properly. Most of the time you will either have too few people (maybe they are on the other side of the map), not enough time/supply, or get slaughtered before you can make it inside. And that’s assuming anyone is even trying to get to a defensive position. Due to this, the game turns into the karma train, where its more about PvD, and just capping towers and keeps after the owner leaves. Which doesn’t lead to satisfying gameplay for either side. The map size is so large and epic in scope, it oddly seems to detract from the game having actual epic fights for keeps and towers.

I’m not necessarily saying throw away all large maps. Having one or two can fit. I just think the mode could benefit from different sized maps, maps that could have specific focuses. There could be a keep siege/defend map, where its one keep, one team is defending it, and other teams are trying to take it. Once another team takes it, the objectives are now reversed. Have a capture point map maybe, more prone to open field combat. Have a three tower map, where all three teams are there, within relatively close proximity. They can easily get to attack and defend positions based on the maps need. I think something along these lines could address a few of the issues with WvW. I’m not saying make them into SPvP size, just something not as big. Cut out some of the wasted space (needed to spread out the bandwidth needs for large populations), and get into some actual strategic fighting situations instead of PvD.

Shoot, I was thinking the maps were to small……

sPvP size is good for sPvP – the WvW maps should be large. You should feel like your in another world.

But i like your ideas, they are more closely tied to the mechanics the hall of heroes offered. Various levels and types of maps you progressed through , including a capture the flag, and 4 way battle, a king of the hill … and the normal deathmacth

Was about to ask for a discussion on this topic….

…

Basically, you’ve got the T1/T2 guys telling us T4-7 guys that our Closer matchups don’t matter b/c half the time, someone’s BL is always 1 solid color …. while their BL’s tend to usually be mixed colors with real defense buildups unless there’s a really uneven matchup. They get constant action and therefore get to claim that their group reaction time & composition matters more than ours does.

And we’re looking at them … going “Well that just means your wins are always decided by who has the fastest Computers/Fiber” … b/c really, there’s no room for actual Tactics when you don’t have to shift your resources around on the fly to cover all that negative space. They’re basically playing Big Game Hunters. They have an unlimited Crystal field and 10K vespene to fuel their Zergs.

.

I think it’s a really important discussion and for once, I’d like to see Anet’s devs actually get involved in it b/c when they add Claustrophobic stuff like the the Bloodlust CONQUEST sPvP esport arena in the middle ….. I honestly have no idea what they’re thinking. Is it really adding more “choice” to the game??? Funneling people into the same confined space together might create more action…. But does it really create more replayability?

Maybe it does for Jade Quarry b/c they’re into that stuff. But it lost SBI everything… and they’re only now starting to bounce (wagon is more like it) back

The maps are to small, if they were bigger, the zergs would be inefficient. The same goes for the waypoint in keeps – it just benefits the zergs. The tradeoff for zerging should be the slow movement. imo you should only be able to port, if you are dead and there should be no waypoints in keeps.

Larger maps = broken up zergs
Defense points more spread out = zergs have to defend siege = broken up zergs
Forced Way pointing after stomp = broken up zergs
broken up zergs = more small man

Larger maps would fix a lot of the problems with wvw, and a few minor changes with mechanics. I was thinking adding ‘5 man aoe cap’ to the list to summon #devoncarver, but I don’t have any livestock to sacrifice to complete the summoning =*(

drazzar.3042:

The maps are to small, if they were bigger, the zergs would be inefficient. The same goes for the way point in keeps – it just benefits the zergs. The trade-off for zerging should be the slow movement. imo you should only be able to port, if you are dead and there should be no way points in keeps.

And the maps should be larger, making more space for players to move whether 1, 5, or hell the guild group or zerg. But it would make zerg groups less likely to exist. You would likely have more people tucking away in keeps to play some defence too, because they don’t want to run back.

And roamers would love it. You could actually feel like roaming, hunting.

I think making the maps larger only compound the issue without addressing the problem, not to mention game resources (I think there is a reason why the game engine seems to allow a map so big). If you want roaming (I personally don’t care for roaming much), why not have a map that focuses on it? It doesn’t need to be larger than EB to aim for your goal. Perhaps that map could be a complete supply map (that is tied together to the supply that other maps get perhaps). Some number of camps, different paths for the yaks, and be relatively large in size compared to the number of people allowed on it. That way, it wouldn’t encourage zerging, and would allow the roamers to battle it out for roaming supremacy.

I personally like the idea of siege/defense maps. I really really hate how rarely it comes to pass in the game mode that I think should be ideal for it. I find no satisfaction in taking a keep that wasn’t defended, and I find no satisfaction in trying to be the lone person in a keep trying in vain to defend my keep from a zerg of 50. And it happens way too often in this game. I think if they designed some maps with specific focuses in mind that actually were made to be attacked from multiple spots, it could be quite satisfying as a team to slowly wear down a keep strategically against an actual defense, and vice versa, and I just think the chances of that happening are better on maps half the size they currently are.

I feel WvW borderland maps feel small because there is all that PvE in the NE and NW corners with a whole area that is just wasted for citadel. When you get to garrison and ruins, it feels cramped and small because the majority of the stuff is down in this area.