Guild Wars 2

Gudradain.3892:

Make waypoint available only when the keep is contested. If the keep is not contested then the waypoint is not available

Am I the only one to see wisdom in that suggestion?

Do not change system of waypoints until defending will have same rewards as attacking. Bacause now it is hard to find defenders in lower tiers.

Hule.8794:

Do not change system of waypoints until defending will have same rewards as attacking. Bacause now it is hard to find defenders in lower tiers.

so much this!!!!!!!

Blockhead Magee.3092:

With all the lag issues and queue issues, why the heck would time and energy be spent tinkering with way points? I get that different teams can work on different things – so eliminate some from one and bolster the other.

Because the two issues are interdependent. Breaking up zergs and eliminating huge 80v80v80 blob fights also has a positive effect on reducing skill lag.

Queue issues are easily solved by not stacking 3 particular servers.

I’m not sure how people can’t see WPs as a gamebreaking feature right now. As an attacker, it’s impossible to scout, react or try and intercept a zerg that can instantly appear at any time and completely steamroll your attacking party by teleporting into the most secure portion of their keep with absolutely zero risk.

Yes, defending should offer much higher rewards, I don’t think anyone would argue that. But the WP issue itself buys the defenders incredible latitude in waiting till the last possible moment to defend a keep (i.e. even when the attacking group is attacking the lord itself, defenders can teleport on top of them spontaneously with no warning and wipe the attacking group). Not to mention WPs allow you to quickly steamroll nearby towers to the WP keep with practically no warning to the enemy.

Right now defense of keeps aren’t a meaningful fight. It’s mostly a commander continuously asking a single scout how close they are to breaking inner and timing a massive 80 man zerg to spontaneously appear out of thin air to defend it at the last possible moment, and then after wiping said zerg TP out to some other WP to PvD some more.

WPs offer way too much mobility and flexability to huge zergs that would otherwise have to run large distances to inefficiently stop smaller groups from taking objectives. Eliminating WPs would make smaller, decentralized attack and defending groups much more effective in actually controlling objectives around the map. Spreading out distances between objectives would further accomplish this goal, and subsequently have a positive impact on eliminating huge skill/FPS lag that occurs mostly as a result of these huge blob fights.

deathTouch.9706

Queue issues are easily solved by not stacking 3 particular servers.

That won’t fix the queue problem. It is broken.

Some maps, EB, will still get a queue even if the server isn’t stacked.

DAoC had a good system in new frontiers for porting into keeps. Each keep had 3 (or 4?) towers surrounding it, and if any one of those towers got taken, you couldn’t port into the keep.

WPs should become contested when the outer wall is breached and stay that way until it repaired. This change should come with beefed up gates/walls since siege mastery and cheap superior siege has made breaches happen in seconds.

deathTouch.9706

Eliminating WPs would make smaller, decentralized attack and defending groups much more effective in actually controlling objectives around the map. Spreading out distances between objectives would further accomplish this goal, and subsequently have a positive impact on eliminating huge skill/FPS lag that occurs mostly as a result of these huge blob fights.

That is pure speculation.

Zergs abound on all boarder lands regardless of way points. I’ve seen enemy zerg after zerg on our boarder land and they only have their entry way point.

Zerging and blobbing is not a byproduct of waypoints, or lack of rewards for defense.

Blockhead Magee.3092:

deathTouch.9706

Eliminating WPs would make smaller, decentralized attack and defending groups much more effective in actually controlling objectives around the map. Spreading out distances between objectives would further accomplish this goal, and subsequently have a positive impact on eliminating huge skill/FPS lag that occurs mostly as a result of these huge blob fights.

That is pure speculation.

Zergs abound on all boarder lands regardless of way points. I’ve seen enemy zerg after zerg on our boarder land and they only have their entry way point.

Zerging and blobbing is not a byproduct of waypoints, or lack of rewards for defense.

It’s a deduced conclusion. Take for example an extreme situation where there are no waypoints and the 10 objectives on the map take a minimum of 20 minutes to run to between each other. Do you think an 80 man blob would be able to hold more or less points than 10 eight-man teams?

The distance you separate objectives is inversely correlated with the optimal avg. group size needed to hold the maximum possible number of objectives, assuming equal skill between opponents.

deathTouch.9706:

Blockhead Magee.3092:

deathTouch.9706

Eliminating WPs would make smaller, decentralized attack and defending groups much more effective in actually controlling objectives around the map. Spreading out distances between objectives would further accomplish this goal, and subsequently have a positive impact on eliminating huge skill/FPS lag that occurs mostly as a result of these huge blob fights.

That is pure speculation.

Zergs abound on all boarder lands regardless of way points. I’ve seen enemy zerg after zerg on our boarder land and they only have their entry way point.

Zerging and blobbing is not a byproduct of waypoints, or lack of rewards for defense.

It’s a deduced conclusion. Take for example an extreme situation where there are no waypoints and the 10 objectives on the map take a minimum of 20 minutes to run to between each other. Do you think an 80 man blob would be able to hold more or less points than 10 eight-man teams?

You’re making an assumption that the 80 man zerg would be willing to break itself up into those smaller squads. I’m postulating that it won’t.

Don’t get me wrong, I would like to see something like that happen. But I just don’t see it happening.

Blockhead Magee.3092:

deathTouch.9706:

Blockhead Magee.3092:

deathTouch.9706

Eliminating WPs would make smaller, decentralized attack and defending groups much more effective in actually controlling objectives around the map. Spreading out distances between objectives would further accomplish this goal, and subsequently have a positive impact on eliminating huge skill/FPS lag that occurs mostly as a result of these huge blob fights.

That is pure speculation.

Zergs abound on all boarder lands regardless of way points. I’ve seen enemy zerg after zerg on our boarder land and they only have their entry way point.

Zerging and blobbing is not a byproduct of waypoints, or lack of rewards for defense.

It’s a deduced conclusion. Take for example an extreme situation where there are no waypoints and the 10 objectives on the map take a minimum of 20 minutes to run to between each other. Do you think an 80 man blob would be able to hold more or less points than 10 eight-man teams?

You’re making an assumption that the 80 man zerg would be willing to break itself up into those smaller squads. I’m postulating that it won’t.

Don’t get me wrong, I would like to see something like that happen. But I just don’t see it happening.

If it didn’t, the 10 eight-man teams would cap the 9 other objectives, conceding the one objective that the zerg captures.

As long as that one objective the zerg captures isn’t worth more than 9 times the value of the objectives the small group holds, the small group server would have more PPT than the large group server.

WPs are just basically a tool used to “condense” objectives together. It doesn’t matter whether you are 5 feet or an entire BL away from the keep you need to get to, as long as there is a WP there the amount of time to get to said keep is equal: instantaneously. This also applies to camps and towers close to the WPed keep.

People assume that if we spread the map out and got rid of waypoints, it would make blobs spread out to defend. I disagree. I think the blobbers would just give up on defending all together. “The keep is contested? Well, R.I.P. Hills!”

People always say, “Buff Defense rewards!”, but how? I also don’t think it is really feasible to make defensive rewards anywhere near on par with karma training.

We can all point fingers at Anet and god knows they deserve most of the kitten that is talked on this forum, but at some point, responsibility falls on the player base for being dumb mindless zerglings.

What about putting a throttle on way point use?

Similar to chat, “Your Way point use request has been denied due to excessive spamming.”

It can never be contested, but you are limited to, say, 5 uses every 10-seconds, or 20 every 30 seconds. Whatever on the numbers, others will be better at balancing that than I.

This would allow defenders to enter as needed, limit the zergs (overall), and still allow for reinforcements during sieges.