Guild Wars 2

Hello Anet, now I know this has been brought up to up many times to you before (or at least I have been told it has.). But I would like to have my say. Though I know in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter but hear me out.
I don’t want to sound as if I am being harsh. But I need to inform you of a simple truth. World vs. World vs. World is too shallow, too thin. Now there are several reasons for this, some I am sure you have guessed. It is my intention just to bring them to light and maybe suggest a way forward.
Please read following posts….

War for the sake of war:
You have given us a superficial battle to fight, one that consist of no ideologies, no underlying purpose. Your NPC’s say something along the lines of ‘Fight in the mist war, defend your world.’ All I have to say is why? Wars have always had a point to them, whether or not people agree with that point is not important. Normally if people disagree, in war, they fight back. The mist war has no point and no amount of scoreboards is going to change that. A score count will keep people invested, not intrigued. Without a sense of intrigue, people get bored and this is why they are craving Guild vs. Guild –more on this later-. They are fighting for their world, in the Mists; which you have never solidly explained. Personally I think it is great that you have left the possibilities for interpretation open. It is truly mind boggling that as the mists is the universe and also fragments from time from worlds throughout the universe; it begs the question: is Tyria even real? This is a brilliant premise. But without any sort of explanation as to why people should care, other than a scoreboard. People will always cry for something more.

Battle fields for the sake of war:
Tangibility is something that, if forgotten about, can be game breaking. Another huge problem, though this one is more understandable. Is that the world is designed for WvW, now before you say “That’s a paradox.” Think about it. The world is literally a waste land with forts in it. You have filled it with ‘wild’ life and the likes of the lesser races but they are only ever a means to an end and they are never affected by this war. This leaves room for only two types of tactics, tower defence/assault and open war. Understandably this is what the game mode is about. But the lack of variation stunts any positive growth for example the mass use of in game skills to ‘cheat the system’ cough, splutter Mesmers. The lack of any urban war fair is the main issue. Firstly because it stops this idea of tangibility; this war affects no one. No damage is done; there is no consequence for the action of war. There is no evidence that you are fighting for anyone, even in the borderlands! Making the fight seem all the more pointless. Furthermore if you were to have half destroyed villages, this would open up an entire avenue for fighting tactics. An example of this could be found in the PvP map The Battle of Khylo, though I would use this loosely as the map it’s self is rather small but the point still stands. You could make hollowed out towns a new kind of resource or a mini fort. These could easily break up the main game play tactics and make for a fun diversion to the more monotonous breaking of fortified doors. It would be very fun to hide out in a house waiting to ambush an enemy. Open war in the large empty spaces and fort defence is awesome, you have that down. But you’re leaving nothing open for the smaller groups other than supply camps, but victory over those are far too short lived. And the larger the unorganized groups get the more disorganized they become and then no one has a truly fun experience.

Alienation through armour:
This is a lot simpler and has little to do with you; still kind of your fault though. You have your casual players and you have your ‘hard core’ players. I am a casual gamer, as my life is filled with things that prevent me from being able to play the game. A hard core gamer by my definition has more time on their hands and is efficient at earning a lot of in game currency that will benefit them with in the game. Whether that is accurate or not is irrelevant. My point is: Hard core gamers will achieve better gear faster and become better at the game faster. The harder you make it to get the better gear, the more likely the hard core gamers will have it and the casual gamers will make do with what they have. This along with your armour repair money sink makes it very hard for any casual player want to join in with WvW. I’m not saying you should equalize the armour like in PvP but maybe equalize the chance of getting the better armours. Laurels do not fix this, so long as there is only a chance of getting level 80 armour, it isn’t fair. Also making Daily’s a chore was a huge step back for your no grind policy. I understand you can’t just give armour away but there has to be a better solution… And you cannot always complete the monthly if you chose not to craft or salvage. From the start this game has been about freedom of choice, you can’t do that if you want the best gear and to have any sort of equal footing in WvW, you need the best gear.
On to my next point: the guilds. When a world has good guilds, other worlds will result to desperate measures and for up team so large that they become untouchable. Though this is unavoidable it could be fixed by the urban battle field.

Guild vs. Guild:
If you do ever include the game type I warn you, it must strictly be for fun and that there should be no need for investment. No scoreboards or chart or tournaments, you already have those. If you give them to GvG, WvW will in turn die out, due to the aforementioned problems. Guild vs. Guild is a very good way of making a battle personal as you would be fighting for the name of your guild. That’s intrigue enough to make it something people will do, the only investment is to prove yourself, once that is done you can go back to WvW knowing that you’re Guild is awesome or in need of some team work exercises. Though unlike PvP you give the players some back story instead of the map. The way to do that is to bring back guild halls. But make them like the home instance. For example the human home Salama District; the owners of the hall might play as Seraph agents and the invaders, bandits. A simple context that shows the players what is at stake. The houses, veteran hospital, orphanage can act as objectives or capture points, giving players buffs or new routes around the map. And instead of a guild lord, let’s actually give the bandits a reason for invading, inside the tavern, on the top floor or in the basement. There is the elite guard, guarding a bandit leader. Once the bandits get that far it becomes an escort event, get the bandit leader out of there! But he shouldn’t be able to be taken down so easily that it becomes impossible to save him which means resurrecting him should be made easier too. Or you have the choice save him or kill him to stop him from spilling secrets, if you save him you get 20 influance, for completing the event . All the seraph has to do is defend. It would be like a very much improved Fort Aspenwood. But I suppose the possibilities are endless.
If GvG never happens… then can I suggest you at least try to make new maps for WvW and circulate them weekly?
Anyway just my thoughts on the subject, if you got this far, thank you for reading.