Guild Wars 2

So after playing at least 100 hours of WvW, almost completely leveling my main to 80 off of it and collecting 400 or so badges I am finally starting to see the true colors of WvW ,and for the long haul there are problems I believe that MUST be addressed by Anet.

These are the problems:

Orbs of power – To be honest I am astonished that this game play mechanic even made it past beta. It is a terrible idea and the actual execution is very poor.

First of all, since the orbs even made it into the game at all, who’s idea was it to be able to lock the orbs inside of fortified garrisons? This makes no sense and completely ruins the entire point of the mechanic which is the fact that it is a very important, powerful asset that can be stolen by a relatively small group of players.

But looking into the orbs even deeper than that, what happens 75% of the time in all of the WvW matches so far is that one server clearly dominates…every…single…time. I have yet to be in a “close” server match up, and the dominating server almost always easily obtains all three of the orbs simply adding insult to injury for the struggling competitors.

The solution? Either take the orbs completely out of the game or remove the ability to fortify them in garrison, allowing them to be exposed at an enemy altar even when stolen.

Siege spam – As far as I am concerned siege is simply to easy to access. Arrow carts specifically are far too effective for their price…I remember this being a problem in beta, so why was it not changed appropriately? Arrow carts should be balanced at 24 badges IMO.

I believe that siege equipment needs to be purchasable ONLY by badges of honor, therefore only active and experienced players can purchase and deploy it as well as mitigating the ease of access and spam which comes from it being so easily accessible by gold. Of course the 24 hour match length also ties into the balance and importance of siege equipment.

World Queuing and Server Population – I know this has been discussed and is a known issue, but I don’t think the importance of this issue is apparent enough to Anet. For many players, WvW is the CORE of their game play experience in GW2, and in many ways is basically the endgame. So why is the solution being thrown around that players “need to switch servers”?

I think the real solution that may be too late to change is the three way server system. The reason for this system was so that if one server was too powerful the other two servers could essentially “team up” and bring down the big guy…ahh, that is not happening Anet, and you know why? Because no cross server communication was given to us, so the entire three way server system is pointless.

WvW would be much better off as just that, WvW…a HEAD TO HEAD PvP match up involving only TWO servers. This frees up a whole lot of slots for people to actually play and creates what would be a much more tactical and personal experience between two competitors.

Rewards – WvW simply needs some type of tangible reward for players across the server if your server actually wins the WvW match. Some type of chest would probably work, and it would not even need to be something all that substantial…but some type of reward absolutely needs to be given for the winners.

Conclusion – WvW has so much potential and when everything is going smooth it is a blast to play. The objective/supply system is great, everything else just needs fine tuning and streamlining.

Siege equipment that must be bought with BoH would certainly cut down on people using them.

6S for arguably the most powerful siege weapon is a bargain. They tend to be destroyed quickly however under focused fire.

I’ve also played quite a bit of WvW, but have a different set of “concerns” which focuses more how Anet will pull off competitive Server match- ups.

Currently a 24 hour match rarely is close and usually is dominate by one server. this is a big challenge for GW2, one I’m not convinced will be resolved in the short term.

Estus.1726:

Siege equipment that must be bought with BoH would certainly cut down on people using them.

6S for arguably the most powerful siege weapon is a bargain. They tend to be destroyed quickly however under focused fire.

I’ve also played quite a bit of WvW, but have a different set of “concerns” which focuses more how Anet will pull off competitive Server match- ups.

Currently a 24 hour match rarely is close and usually is dominate by one server. this is a big challenge for GW2, one I’m not convinced will be resolved in the short term.

There is no competition when there is no incentive or rewards for a successful match.

I dont agree with the orbs part i like the way it is. Having them there without protections it will be a ‘’steal the flag’’ of the enemy, a bunch of thieves or mesmers doing portals…no thanks.

A thoughtful post by the OP …. my comments follow.

First, I think that peoples view of problems with WvW will be largely a result of the server they are on. And while the OP focuses on specific game mechanics, I would suspect there are other issues at play.

I play on Stormbluff Isle and here is my take on the issues …

On the Orbs ….

There is no problem with this mechanic. The buff is not overpowering. And, the server that gets three first does not always win. Trust me when I say that Henge is not kicking our butts because they always get 3 orbs within 40 minutes of map start. They did this again this map, but now ET, SBI, and Henge each have one. We are going to have learn how to counter that …. and we will … Henge is winning consistently due to great around the clock coverage, good communication, good coordination, and good play; not because they control ORBS more often than not.

On Siege Spam ….

Siege must remain a key component of WvW. It is where the strategy comes into play and also provides an avenue for Joe Average PvP player to get in there and make a difference. Siege should not be the prerogative of the full time PvP player or the fabulously wealthy only.

Sure arrow carts are powerful and a dime a dozen. They also have seriously limitations and are easily destroyed. Further, like all siege engines, they require supply to setup. If there is a limiting factor on how much siege can be setup, it should be supply … not gold or badges.

I have seen half a dozen ballista, a like number of arrow carts, and a few trebs get totally wiped by a good group using speed, guardian bubbles, and stealth bubbles.

By the same token, I have seen a huge zerg continue to attempt a straight up bridge crossing into the face of a dozen siege engines repeatedly …. over and over … getting wiped every time. Are these the people that think there is too much siege availability?? Is flanking not in their vocabulary?

On World Queuing and Server Population ….

The 3 way match works. If cross server chat was on, it would just be a huge pile of spam crap.

Temporary server alliances, can easily be formed off board and would be driven by the major guilds anyway. It is easy enough for an enterprising guild leader to get in contact with a guild leader(s) on another server to try and form something. I know how to contact the guild leaders on competing servers if I need to and it wasn’t hard to get that information.

Even though there are defiantly around the clock coverage issues and population issues on a number of servers, going to a 1v1 approach is only going to make that worse than it already is. It won’t make the contest any more personal as the OP suggests and would remove the ‘opportunity’ to collaborate with another server. And even though this opportunity is not present in game, it is certainly there outgame for someone that wants to make use of it.

What is wrong with some self balancing? It’s free and it is a simple thing. If you do not like where you are, switch servers.

On Rewards …..

I only have one question ….. do you really think your server is going to fight harder and win more because the winners get an extra 100 badges? I don’t think so.

And, if you think servers that feel they cannot regularly win now are complaining, watch what happens when we attach a big reward for the winner ……

I’m agreeing with what Cosian said and I’m glad he did so I didn’t have to type it

Imho The only valid concern might be server matching but it is still way to early to judge the system as it hasn’t gathered enough metrics. We are just now finishing up the daily rotations and will be starting weekly soon.

I think what scares me the most is that Anet will listen to the vocal minority that sincerely think their suggestions are great for the game while the silent majority wonders why the game changed for the worse and simply stop playing. Hopefully they will keep in mind that we bought their game and their vision and NOT those of forum posters.

Also competition is alive and well in WvWvW (not to mention glaringly obvious) with the current reward system.

I dont see an issue with siege spam. Arrow carts can be countered from a distance with a treb. Increasing their cost is not the problem. The problem is the cost of trebs {too high?} or under use of them to counter siege. The Treb is the best anti siege weapon.

2 sided WvW is bad. WvW with 3 sides is better becasue losers can team up on the winner.

Orb of power is a problem when it can just hide in the Garrison. Orb fights in open field would be a blast. Garrison is too easily defended by respawn rushing. small groups should be able to grab the orb but it should not be able to put into a super safe spot such as the Garrison of a boarderlands.

Retaliation destroys arrow carts so badly that arrow carts are not even worth deploying at the moment in most situations.

3v3 is infinitely better than 2v2. In 2v2 one realm will dominate and the players on the losing side will either quit or transfer to a server which is winning. This ruins pvp.

DAoC does 3v3 and it works without cross realm communication and does it to be honest a lot better than gw2. We need to give the servers time to settle, once the 3 servers in your cluster has an obvious pecking order the other 2 will naturally gang up on them. Only problem I see and its a pretty big one is some servers will have higher populations than others thus being able to WvW more efficiently as it is just a zerg fest. Some servers may have such a big imbalance of numbers that they may equal the other 2 in population. Still to early for me to decide whether WvWvW in gw2 is worth it. At moment it is just zerg fest and very few classes are suited for solo hunting, maybe hunter. I am hoping it will evolve a bit so there are small 1 party teams hunting down each other and avoiding the zerg but i doubt it as GW2 is aimed at a younger audience.

Wow….no, just no.

The only points worth even considering are the availability of siege and the queuing. Orbs of power are meant to be meaningful and part of the overall strategy. They are not meant to be tossed around and change hands every 5 minutes. Form a strategy to take them and hold them. I’m not even going to touch the idiocy of going to the failure that would be a two way fight. You might want to stick to sPvP or switch games as RvR style game play obviously isn’t for you.

I agree with most points of OP.

But :
- there is already possibility to communicate with other server. Just MP the leader of an other server. Local cross server communication is bad as it this would lead people to trash talk. (this is already the case in sPvP since you can see you ennemy name)

- Reward are very dangerous. If a server is always winning, everyone will migrate to this server for free rewards. The only kind of rewards missing in WvW at the moment, is a personal progression. The sPvP progression is great and I don’t see why such “level” was not also implemented in WvW

I agree with everything you say, but I think the biggest problem is just the sheer inabliity for communication and coordination. Too much reward is given for just bigger numbers, and there’s not a lot you can do with a team of 5.

On another note:
I hate how expensive seige weapons are.
Why do they even charge money for them? Why can’t they just make them something that is obtainable only through WvW drops. (It would at least make the PvE aspects of WvW actually not 100% useless)
Orbs of power feel useless.
Too much reward is given to “zergs” and there aren’t good rewards for smaller teams.

I think the real solution that may be too late to change is the three way server system. The reason for this system was so that if one server was too powerful the other two servers could essentially “team up” and bring down the big guy…ahh, that is not happening Anet, and you know why? Because no cross server communication was given to us, so the entire three way server system is pointless.

I could be way off base here, but I had a kinda cool idea of how to help rectify this. When one server (say Red) gained control of say 75% of the map, an icon would pop up for the two servers getting crushed (e.g., Green and Blue) asking to “forge alliance with Server X.”

If 2/3rds of the members from each server opted to do so (through a popup prompt) it would execute that alliance providing each of the weaker servers a damage buff to the Red one, and a reduction in both direct and AOE damage (on a sliding scale relative to the domination of the Red server) to their allied server. The dmg reduction would actually allow members of the two servers to hunt together without fear of nuking one another accidentally through AOE and whatnot.

The alliance would automatically break (with say a 3-5 minute pop-up warning for the allied groups to disperse) when the Red server control is reduced back to 50% of the map. Basically it turns a 3 server match into a 2 server match (voted on by the lesser servers) whenever one of the 3 servers gains an unnatural amount of control over the map.

Obviously the #‘s could be tweaked, and I haven’t thought about long-term consequences of this type of gameplay, but the I thought it a cool idea initially. Let me know if I’m an idiot

I believe that siege equipment needs to be purchasable ONLY by badges of honor, therefore only active and experienced players can purchase and deploy it as well as mitigating the ease of access and spam which comes from it being so easily accessible by gold. Of course the 24 hour match length also ties into the balance and importance of siege equipment.

One of the things I’ve not liked about WvW is the pay2win nature of siege equipment and upgrades (i.e. dollars to gems to gold … or strictly dollars to gold via 3rd party).

A lot of your suggestion sound like it would remove the fun of WvW and make it so only veteran players (and 24/7 people) can play like the disaster of what it was GW1 8vs8 Heroe’s Ascent and the rank system.

Trebloh.2135:

I believe that siege equipment needs to be purchasable ONLY by badges of honor, therefore only active and experienced players can purchase and deploy it as well as mitigating the ease of access and spam which comes from it being so easily accessible by gold. Of course the 24 hour match length also ties into the balance and importance of siege equipment.

One of the things I’ve not liked about WvW is the pay2win nature of siege equipment and upgrades (i.e. dollars to gems to gold … or strictly dollars to gold via 3rd party).

It isnt “Pay2win” at all. You get 3 bits of siege equipment from the jumping puzzle per day. You can do this 3 times in each borderland. Please do not start calling this p2w, as it is anything but. WvWvWing, you make plenty of spare silver for equipment.

This is a terrible, and incorrect mentality to have at this point.

1. The servers that dominate right now are doing so because they have nearly 24/7 coverage. Once WvW matches are grouped by rank, you’ll see less because those servers will begin to be grouped together.

2. Arrowcarts are cheap for a reason, they counter the zerg. They need to be left alone. As does the other siege equipment.

3a. I believe that if Anet were to allow guilds to transfer to other servers with all their policies intact, at least while they’re trying to balance servers, then you’d see server populations balance out quite quickly.

3b. I agree that some cross server communication would be nice. But as Cosian pointed out above, its not too hard to get into contact with a WvW guild on another server right now.

3c. 2 way pvp is awful, and I’ve had my fill of it thanks.

4. Don’t need rewards at all.

I completely disagree on the 1v1 WvW suggestion. 1v1 always leads to trading. Having 3 groups rather then 2 reduces the effectiveness and likeliness of trading happening.
Also when one side is dominating it is possible for the 2 losing teams to “team up” and do something about it. Not as possible 1v1.
People have been complaining about server alliances recently, but now that WvWvW matches are going to be a week long and actually “matter”, alliances are going to be a lot less effective because you are technically helping the enemy. My enemies enemy is my friend, but only until that friend becomes your main enemy, and then you have problems.
WvWvW helps to keep the game interesting and balanced.