Guild Wars 2

Reaches all the way from keep to tower. Keep had 0 supplies left after this and all of this was done during prime time.

Sorry anet, but i despise your policy about this subject.

lol… Wall Of Fear! In all seriousness though, I myself am getting tired of Server population issues, hackers, griefers, Super Mobility Warriors, Mesmers’ instant Proximity Anguish 5 – 13 dmg in combat log doing 20k life instantly to 3k armor build Deaths, you know the usual. I’m not saying they need to stop focusing on PvE, but at the very least, throw WvW a freaking bone.

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Straegen.2938:

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Pretty hard if everybody is defending and one or two are running supplies to shore up the walls/gates/build additional siege.

I think this thread will be deleted soon because they don’t like it if you talk about problems here…

Sorry but this made me laugh. 10/10 seige usage.

Let Commanders make siege for tearing down…and recoop a percentage of the supply when doing it. Then no problem.

All they need to do is get volunteer player mods to take care of these griefers. Make it clear that if the mods abuse their position the get perma-banned.

I’m sure a lot of players would volunteer.

Won’t happen, of course.

Sreoom.3690:

Let Commanders make siege for tearing down…and recoop a percentage of the supply when doing it. Then no problem.

1) Create alt account; ~$40.

2) Buy a commander tag; 100 gold.

3) Transfer to enemy server; variable gem cost.

4) Destroy all of an opponent’s siege weapons. Priceless!

Rimmy.9217:

Straegen.2938:

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Pretty hard if everybody is defending and one or two are running supplies to shore up the walls/gates/build additional siege.

There will never be a perfect system to this problem. In this case, a couple people would have to switch roles for a few minutes. To me this limitation is much preferred over the single player draining a keep making it vulnerable to attack. Especially since it takes hours to get supplies to those levels.

This system would also help slow the draining of supply to fix walls that are actively being trebbed. How many of us have seen the “stop repairing SM walls that are being trebbed” message?

Straegen.2938:

Rimmy.9217:

Straegen.2938:

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Pretty hard if everybody is defending and one or two are running supplies to shore up the walls/gates/build additional siege.

There will never be a perfect system to this problem. In this case, a couple people would have to switch roles for a few minutes. To me this limitation is much preferred over the single player draining a keep making it vulnerable to attack. Especially since it takes hours to get supplies to those levels.

This system would also help slow the draining of supply to fix walls that are actively being trebbed. How many of us have seen the “stop repairing SM walls that are being trebbed” message?

All of us I assume. But it certainly would non-censored-term-for-pulling-a-milkshake-through-a-straw if there’s only a few of you (read: less than a party’s worth) trying build siege/hold the gate against opponents until your reinforcements get there, and you bump up against an arbitrary limit on the supplies you can take so you are forced to stop while you have supplies right there.

Happens a lot, down my way.

Rimmy.9217:

Straegen.2938:

Rimmy.9217:

Straegen.2938:

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Pretty hard if everybody is defending and one or two are running supplies to shore up the walls/gates/build additional siege.

There will never be a perfect system to this problem. In this case, a couple people would have to switch roles for a few minutes. To me this limitation is much preferred over the single player draining a keep making it vulnerable to attack. Especially since it takes hours to get supplies to those levels.

This system would also help slow the draining of supply to fix walls that are actively being trebbed. How many of us have seen the “stop repairing SM walls that are being trebbed” message?

All of us I assume. But it certainly would non-censored-term-for-pulling-a-milkshake-through-a-straw if there’s only a few of you (read: less than a party’s worth) trying build siege/hold the gate against opponents until your reinforcements get there, and you bump up against an arbitrary limit on the supplies you can take so you are forced to stop while you have supplies right there.

Happens a lot, down my way.

I get tired of all the abuse of siege…

And the neglect of WvW in general.

dbgfeller.8120:

I think this thread will be deleted soon because they don’t like it if you talk about problems here…

I don’t think so, if you avoid name calling in the screen shoot and post you can talk about this topic.

https://forum-de.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Screenshotprotest-gegen-Griefing-im-WvW

SilverSparky.1053:

Sorry but this made me laugh. 10/10 seige usage.

If you like this you will like the one’s in the thread above as well.

Would be nice if Anet updated ingame reporting to allow for reporting WvW griefers quickly and easily.

Im jelly, your trolls are better than ours.

I mean this is funny, our trolls do it out of spite. They (2ppl) feel they have been somehow wronged by the server and spend hours doing stupid things day after day.

And they’re on their way to getting the Master of Disaster achievement!

The only way this can be prevented is if we have real time GMs watching WvW, ready to ban offenders.

Zaxares.5419:

The only way this can be prevented is if we have real time GMs watching WvW, ready to ban offenders.

The only way are guild/alliance wars where the guild/alliance leader kick them from their match.

What if the GL doesn’t care that one of their members is a troll? And if the offender is in their own personal guild? What then?

And no, you can’t give guilds the ability to kick other guilds from WvW. Too much potential for abuse.

If your G/AL supports that you have to think about the question: “Am I really in the right guild/alliance?”

Guilds can kick member, so whats the difference? Is it abused? How long does a guild exist, if it does so? Project that to an alliance, a WvW-alliance is only successful if it manages to unite several thousand people, abuse is watched by the people and to much abuse let an alliance collapse faster than a server today.

This is the first time I’m seeing people get mad over something that was clearly done as a joke/for fun.

Honestly, it is funny the first, second and maybe the third time. However, after the 6th+ week of constant random siege throughout the map it gets annoying. If you have someone come onto the map during reset 7 weeks straight and siege caps your keep with useless siege I think you would start getting kittened as well. It happens on servers all the time but nothing is done about it, it ruins the game in my opinion. Sadly, they are playing the game the way they wish to play it so we all have to deal with it.

So here is how to handle it:

Mail screenshoots/videos to the support:
https://help.guildwars2.com/anonymous_requests/new
A side has many people, the more people send reports the likelier is it that something happen. If you do things in the forum, be very careful to not violate the rules, i.e. especially avoid name calling. It took a while for the case I linked above from the german forum, but finally it stopped, I guess ANet talked to these people, and made them clear, if they continue they will be banned.

Dayra.7405:

If your G/AL supports that you have to think about the question: “Am I really in the right guild/alliance?”

Guilds can kick member, so whats the difference? Is it abused? How long does a guild exist, if it does so? Project that to an alliance, a WvW-alliance is only successful if it manages to unite several thousand people, abuse is watched by the people and to much abuse let an alliance collapse faster than a server today.

Just pointing out that I am not in a guild that condones these sorts of activities. But I’m sure there are troll guilds out there that, if presented with evidence of their members’ mischief, would simply laugh at you and tell you to report it to ANet if it bothers you.

As to why I don’t think guilds should be allowed to kick other guilds or individuals from WvW, it’s because you could end up in a situation where the “pro” WvW guilds simply decide that WvW is for themselves only. GvG? Kicked. Dueling? Kicked. Just there to map for world completion? Kicked. Season 3 Tournament achievement hunting? Kicked. Just a “filthy casual”? Kicked.

I’d still prefer such power to be held only by authorised GMs who can at least verify any griefing or trolling in person, and who are held to account by virtue of internal CS review.

So what? Make your own alliance!

In any case, if there will be alliance, there should be random-wvw as well, for all those that are to lazy to find or found an alliance for their needs.

Hmm, so you propose two different copies of Borderlands/EBG for dedicated WvW players and “randoms”? I’m not opposed to the idea, but I’m not sure if ANet wants to split the player base like that. (Besides, it could be argued that EotM is already there for those who want “random” WvW.)

2 copies? Fragmentation?

Here is a possible proposal how to do AvAvA: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Collaborative-Development-Edge-of-the-Mists/3695388

But in the meantime I think that gw2 hasn’t enough player anymore for 24/7 matches. And I would prefer https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Proposal-combine-the-best-of-WvW-and-EotM/4181942

And concerning pure random teams: it already exist namely EotM, just add EB and BL maps as choices. And replace the server-color team assignment there by a method that makes teams more balanced in size. In EU currently green as always more player than red and blue together which makes fights rather boring.

I heard there was a.. Traffic ram.

Another day and the troll strikes again.

Solo J on Crystal Desert is using all supply on siege Pacific time days (now 2-3pm Pacific).

He uses our supply to keep us from getting to a waypoint.

He uses our supply so we are attacked and lose, no way to build any other siege.

He is choosing incorrect paths from the Quartermaster, taking the longest way around a waypoint possible.

Anet, he’s a spy or just a horrid person who hates everyone on his own server.

When are you doing to do something about this person who has been identified and has tickets and reports galore on him?

Deli.1302:

This is the first time I’m seeing people get mad over something that was clearly done as a joke/for fun.

How can you say taking all supply to stop a waypoint or being able to defend is “fun” or a “joke”?

Straegen.2938:

Rimmy.9217:

Straegen.2938:

Players should be limited on how much supply they can pull from a keep in a time period. It shouldn’t be too restrictive but enough so that one or two players cannot empty the supply quickly.

Pretty hard if everybody is defending and one or two are running supplies to shore up the walls/gates/build additional siege.

There will never be a perfect system to this problem. In this case, a couple people would have to switch roles for a few minutes. To me this limitation is much preferred over the single player draining a keep making it vulnerable to attack. Especially since it takes hours to get supplies to those levels.

This system would also help slow the draining of supply to fix walls that are actively being trebbed. How many of us have seen the “stop repairing SM walls that are being trebbed” message?

Our troll or trolls on Crystal Desert are taking our supply to make us vulnerable to attack – that impacts the score on both sides and is a violation of the game – even if it’s not in the terms of agreement verbatim.

Why does anet want their game to be trolled by hateful people who don’t want to work with anyone else?

I cant see nothing funny in these sort of things. Its strictly ruining the fun in WvW, especialy when you have seen trolling such as this quite often.

Yea it would be nice if anet would supspend and ip ban accounts for this kinda thing, totally unnecessary.

Takes some patience, but the game already has mechanics for waiting out a troll like that: the annoying 60 min time out on siege. Trolls never have a lot of patience, either. They are easy to wait out.

I think it would be great to have like a vote with a timer on siege and do away with decay timers. Lets say your commander leads a group to siege they want to remove. The siege removal feature requires 20 people to click on siege to vote destroy within 5 minutes. Who really likes going around to refresh siege timers and some people siege up well then log off for several hours come back and its gone.

Dont worry. Someone on another server will stop by and take out all that siege for you from the other side of the wall.

There’s really nothing you can do unless you record them in the act. But even then it’s a slim chance that it’ll stop.