Guild Wars 2

The removal of white swords allows a small team of 5 to cap objectives using Catapults, and get their map completion points.

I highly approve, and I recommend ArenaNet keep this system. It is far superior a system, and much kinder to smaller groups who feel like they can make a difference.

I’m actually really dreading the white swords to come back….

Well if they decide to keep the change it will only mean that they want to turn regular WvW into EotM mk2. Since having players scout is the most unrewarding activity in the game (thanks bots) upgrades ares kinda pointless. As it sits even after a week even t1 is just one big karma train.

Honestly though I could care less if they keep it as I am usually one of those traveling with my guild and love running into small flipping parties.

Kain Francois.4328:

The removal of white swords allows a small team of 5 to cap objectives using Catapults, and get their map completion points.

As I thought: the only argument that you can put up here is that you can more easily get your map completion.. WvW wise I see nothing good with the removal of these swords..

Agree with the post above: No white swords = EOTM v2

No it’s not better unless all you care for is doing EoTM style of play (Getting free stuff while making circles). Yes, it is now easier to take objectives but also harder to keep them which mean many people don’t care to defend and upgrade at all.

The “positive” is that I did see a rise in population but it was probably the fairweathers who wanted to do the EoTM gimmick in a new map… which is frankly horrible to think WvW could turn into that.

The name of the game is Guild Wars 2. Not Blob wars 2. This update allows small guilds to run together effectively. If things become too K-train-ish I’m sure the devs can alter upgrades, add new things like those siege disables, and altogether just adapt the change for the best.

This change is a step in the right direction. We haven’t arrived at our destination yet, but it’s one step among many that will get us there. Keeping white swords would be a step backwards.

MightyMicah.7451:

The name of the game is Guild Wars 2. Not Blob wars 2. This update allows small guilds to run together effectively. If things become too K-train-ish I’m sure the devs can alter upgrades, add new things like those siege disables, and altogether just adapt the change for the best.

Well, we’re playing Karma-Train Wars 2 atm…

The Removal of White Swords has not made the game better in my opinion. I’ve seen a lot of people stop playing as much as they used to. Game = To Much Ktrain, not enough war.

If they could find a way to make scouting as rewarding as blobbing, I would be fine with the removal of white swords. At least the keep waypoints still show up contested.

It really comes down to this:

if you want offense with little thought to defense, no white swords is a good idea.

If you want a balance of offense and defense, white swords is a must.

Kain Francois.4328:

I highly approve, and I recommend ArenaNet keep this system. It is far superior a system, and much kinder to smaller groups who feel like they can make a difference.

If you like PvD this change is awesome. Sure havoc groups have more PvE in their WvW experience but is that really what we are striving for? More objectives flipped with no defense?

Jeknar.6184:

MightyMicah.7451:

The name of the game is Guild Wars 2. Not Blob wars 2. This update allows small guilds to run together effectively. If things become too K-train-ish I’m sure the devs can alter upgrades, add new things like those siege disables, and altogether just adapt the change for the best.

Well, we’re playing Karma-Train Wars 2 atm…

If that is all your doing your feeding points to the other side. Your more of a blight to your world then a boon. Because one wipe will be on the lines of holding a tower for 2 ticks and the timely re-flips for the tick would be a joke and make all your work mean NOTHING.

style.6173:

It really comes down to this:

if you want offense with little thought to defense, no white swords is a good idea.

If you want a balance of offense and defense, white swords is a must.

No not at all. If you want stagnate matches you keep the white sword because small groups CANT take upgraded towers they cant even touch T2 keeps. White swords means you keep EVERYTHING all the time and you cant take any thing.

No white swords means you NEED to def things and not let the game def things for you. It keeps the week from becoming a passive match.

Can you honestly tell me that you with a group of 4 or less has taken a T3 tower NE or NW from that teams bl? If so it must of been off time where there simply was no one on.

THAT is how you need to look at the white swords. DO YOU want a wvw where you can hold something forever yet your not able to take any thing OR do you want be able to take something but at the prices of being able to lose something?

Jski.6180:

No white swords means you NEED to def things and not let the game def things for you.

except that the reality of the situation is the exact opposite.

white swords are the only thing that allow lower pop servers to defend, without them there are no defense… just a whole lot of PvD.

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

So your dishonestly claiming that absolutely no one at all, benefits by being capable of ninja taking keeps now unless they are against under populated servers?

GrandmaFunk.3052:

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

It is absolutely a step in the right direction as I see it.

coglin.1867:

GrandmaFunk.3052:

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

So your dishonestly claiming that absolutely no one at all, benefits by being capable of ninja taking keeps now unless they are against under populated servers?

GrandmaFunk.3052:

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

It is absolutely a step in the right direction as I see it.

“a step in the right direction” is forcing players to take turns (assuming people even do rotations,others being spread so thin don’t get this luxury) of sitting in a tower getting no rewards/enjoyment out of the game they bought
wasting boosters/food buffs/free time to play
k

coglin.1867:

GrandmaFunk.3052:

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

So your dishonestly claiming that absolutely no one at all, benefits by being capable of ninja taking keeps now unless they are against under populated servers?

GrandmaFunk.3052:

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

It is absolutely a step in the right direction as I see it.

Seriously. What server are you on? You must be on a relatively large pop server.

We are up against DB this week, and this hasn’t helped us at all. They can afford to have scouts/defenders and keeps. We don’t. We don’t have the population. Sure, we can ninja a keep. We did so. Tra la la. It’s gone in 5-6 mins (after RI is over). Just like EOTM. Half the time, while trying to ninja a keep with 5 or 6, we get steamrolled by a DB zerg of 20 or 30. After the 10th time, I’ve given up.

Really, the ONLY way we can get the attention of Anet on this is to not show up for a week. Especially if we get DB for a 4th week in a row (we’ve faced them 3 weeks in a row already). But that isn’t likely to happen.

coglin.1867:

GrandmaFunk.3052:

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

So your dishonestly claiming that absolutely no one at all, benefits by being capable of ninja taking keeps now unless they are against under populated servers?

GrandmaFunk.3052:

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

It is absolutely a step in the right direction as I see it.

What is the matter with you people? I keep reading posts like this saying it’ll encourage small group play. But it also encourges EOTM karma training. It discourages upgrades. The point is, with 1 large group flash-taking T1 undefended buildings as fast as possible (60 seconds on the paper door, 30 seconds on lord, 2 minutes between targets), WHO. NEEDS. YOU. You, the ninja teams. The havoc squads. You’re not needed any more. So what if it makes ninja’ing a keep easier? The blob is still better at it than you. The blob meta wins.

Not only that, but you’re going to start getting abuse from the k-trainers on your team for denying them loot.

Your small squad meta is going to die out. It’s going to die out because you get tired of abuse from your own server. Or because every time you go to a BL you see everything your color because the blob took it. Or because you’ve realized that PPT is even more pointless now that servers are trading buildings for karma instead of holding for points.

What’s blowing my mind about this is that, for whatever reason, at least one of the servers that does have enough population to post scouts and escort dolyaks isn’t bothering. “If things become too K-train-ish …”? I spent all day yesterday watching a couple of 20 to 70 man zergs swarm from objective to objective: flip a paper keep or paper tower, strip it of supply to build more siege, run to the next one. Enough numbers that they’re unstoppable, but no interest in digging in and defending any of the things they take. The only thing that distracts them from PvE is that if, in the process of their PvE experience, they see a smaller group that tries to interrupt their PvE in any way they stomp those people to death so they go away and leave the big-server PvE groups alone.

No white swords is reminding me of really old school MMOs, where the “winning” condition was to be in one of the two largest clans on the server, so you had enough people online to camp the bosses that give good loot 24×7 and grief anybody who wasn’t from your guild who wanted loot. So far, this has been the opposite of good for small servers or small groups … if, that is to say, they actually want any PvP in their PvP. It’s denying them any kind of dug-in spots to defend, forcing them to do all their fighting either out in the open or in paper keeps.

misterman.1530:

coglin.1867:

GrandmaFunk.3052:

the only ones who benefit from “no white swords” are ppl trying to ninja objectives against under-populated servers.

So your dishonestly claiming that absolutely no one at all, benefits by being capable of ninja taking keeps now unless they are against under populated servers?

GrandmaFunk.3052:

It’s not a step in the right direction, it’s the exact opposite: it encourages all the wrong types of gameplay.

It is absolutely a step in the right direction as I see it.

Seriously. What server are you on? You must be on a relatively large pop server.

We are up against DB this week, and this hasn’t helped us at all. They can afford to have scouts/defenders and keeps. We don’t. We don’t have the population. Sure, we can ninja a keep. We did so. Tra la la. It’s gone in 5-6 mins (after RI is over). Just like EOTM. Half the time, while trying to ninja a keep with 5 or 6, we get steamrolled by a DB zerg of 20 or 30. After the 10th time, I’ve given up.

Really, the ONLY way we can get the attention of Anet on this is to not show up for a week. Especially if we get DB for a 4th week in a row (we’ve faced them 3 weeks in a row already). But that isn’t likely to happen.

I’m right there with you misterman, even if our servers, (red and blue) were united against our larger opponent we would still struggle. over the course of the day, there are possibly 5-10 guilds that rally people on each of our servers, compared to the 14-16 guilds that are rallying against us on DB.

coglin.1867:

So your dishonestly claiming …

I am honestly and sincerely stating my opinion and analysis of the facts as I see them.

there’s no need to imply that I’m being dishonest just because you don’t agree.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

coglin.1867:

So your dishonestly claiming …

I am honestly and sincerely stating my opinion and analysis of the facts as I see them.

there’s no need to imply that I’m being dishonest just because you don’t agree.

No, your making broad general statements and claiming they apply to everyone. Simply because something works a certain way for you, does not mean it applies to everyone. When you post in a manner in which you claim it does, it is completely reasonable for someone to call you on it.

Why is it that your feel it is okay for you to imply how the situation effects other players, but not okay for them to imply that your claiming implication is dishonest?

Seems a bit hypocritical don’t you think?

I like this idea; however, I do not feel it should be a permanent thing….

I would rather see anet create other gambits for WvW and do 1 gambit every other week.

Like:
Week 1- No White Swords
Week 2- Normal WvW
Week 3- Capture time is halved
Week 4- Normal WvW
Week 5- Brutal Weather (like sand storm in drytop just different kinds like hail/rain)
Week 6- Normal WvW
Week 7- Keep/Tower/Castle Lords apply Agony = fotm lvl 10
Week 8 – Normal WvW

Gambits would not be applied during wvw tournaments

Oooh, I like the brutal weather idea. That could be hilarious.

Ahh the weather, I remember Quaggans in the middle of borderlands, and capping those would cause storms which would hit siege/players of the opposing servers to the ones which capped quaggans, dealing damage to the players/siege.

And now it’s gone.

I love it.Thou have to say i liked to pull zergs to me,after taging something,just for the sick feeling of it :-).

I can see why most WvW population dont like it.Most of em are zerg meat “no offense,just facts” and zergs dont like to split,they dont like to loose their t3 towers while they aa some paper tower gate.They want to keep it rolling.Which is ok,their playtime,their funn.

Anyway,its a very refreshing thing in WvW.Hope more,even if temporary stuff is coming to WvW.

I’ve always been in support of dynamic weather, stuff like the blizzard in Frostreach, the sandstorm in Dry Top, and maybe add in some brutal rain and fog that limits view distance at times.

So many neat things they could do to make the maps more dynamic and interesting. Everything right now is just so… static.

Ahh, weather effects. The most commonly known, single, fastest way, to increase lag exponentially, in every game out their. Sure, who doesn’t want more of that?

coglin.1867:

Ahh, weather effects. The most commonly known, single, fastest way, to increase lag exponentially, in every game out their. Sure, who doesn’t want more of that?

Touché.

MightyMicah.7451:

The name of the game is Guild Wars 2. Not Blob wars 2. This update allows small guilds to run together effectively. If things become too K-train-ish I’m sure the devs can alter upgrades, add new things like those siege disables, and altogether just adapt the change for the best.

Yes, because they have done soo much for wvw in the last two years.

coglin.1867:

Ahh, weather effects. The most commonly known, single, fastest way, to increase lag exponentially, in every game out their. Sure, who doesn’t want more of that?

Sure, because the snow that already drifts in northern borderlands causes so much lag. And the rain in EBG. The sandstorms are a bit laggy, I admit, but they could tone it down to a fog distance limit and simply add a post process layer instead of the craziness they have in Dry Top. Wanna know how I know this? I’m a friggin graphics programmer. It can be done with almost zero performance impact.

In fact, using fogging to limit view distance would increase performance thanks to the innate culling effect.

Ark Bladesteele.2943:

coglin.1867:

Ahh, weather effects. The most commonly known, single, fastest way, to increase lag exponentially, in every game out their. Sure, who doesn’t want more of that?

Sure, because the snow that already drifts in northern borderlands causes so much lag. And the rain in EBG. The sandstorms are a bit laggy, I admit, but they could tone it down to a fog distance limit and simply add a post process layer instead of the craziness they have in Dry Top. Wanna know how I know this? I’m a friggin graphics programmer. It can be done with almost zero performance impact.

In fact, using fogging to limit view distance would increase performance thanks to the innate culling effect.

This is getting a bit off topic now. I’m not a graphics programmer. But I am a GW2 player. Due to a video card failure, I’ve played both with a video card and without, and I can say that GW2 does not need high end video hardware EXCEPT where there are atomospheric or particle effect. Which makes the game unplayable. The real sin is that these effects, that render the game unplayable, were (pre- drytop) entirely for aesthetics.

Timed jumping puzzles require a minimum FPS. In 2012 I could do Clocktower and WW on demand. In 2013, I did neither not even once (both because of fog effects). In Drytop, I had to be ported to the top because of the fire effect at the top. I did the whole JP just fine until the end because of something added to be pretty, that didn’t have any gameplay role at all. I got a new video card, and did clocktower and WW multiple times this year.

The point is, even though it is possible to do this with zero performance impact, GW2 certainly doesn’t do so. And it would be wrong to have to boost the minimum specs for something that that’s purely for looks and should be toggle-able in the video settings.

On topic, I already despise the almost omni-present blizzard that prevents me from trebbing the SE tower from hills keep.

Brow.9425:

Ark Bladesteele.2943:

coglin.1867:

Ahh, weather effects. The most commonly known, single, fastest way, to increase lag exponentially, in every game out their. Sure, who doesn’t want more of that?

Sure, because the snow that already drifts in northern borderlands causes so much lag. And the rain in EBG. The sandstorms are a bit laggy, I admit, but they could tone it down to a fog distance limit and simply add a post process layer instead of the craziness they have in Dry Top. Wanna know how I know this? I’m a friggin graphics programmer. It can be done with almost zero performance impact.

In fact, using fogging to limit view distance would increase performance thanks to the innate culling effect.

This is getting a bit off topic now. I’m not a graphics programmer. But I am a GW2 player. Due to a video card failure, I’ve played both with a video card and without, and I can say that GW2 does not need high end video hardware EXCEPT where there are atomospheric or particle effect. Which makes the game unplayable. The real sin is that these effects, that render the game unplayable, were (pre- drytop) entirely for aesthetics.

Timed jumping puzzles require a minimum FPS. In 2012 I could do Clocktower and WW on demand. In 2013, I did neither not even once (both because of fog effects). In Drytop, I had to be ported to the top because of the fire effect at the top. I did the whole JP just fine until the end because of something added to be pretty, that didn’t have any gameplay role at all. I got a new video card, and did clocktower and WW multiple times this year.

The point is, even though it is possible to do this with zero performance impact, GW2 certainly doesn’t do so. And it would be wrong to have to boost the minimum specs for something that that’s purely for looks and should be toggle-able in the video settings.

On topic, I already despise the almost omni-present blizzard that prevents me from trebbing the SE tower from hills keep.

You’re right in that the programmers in GW2 do not seem not implement it this way. I was simply pointing out that it could be done. I’ve also seen how performance has degraded in the game immensely despite not seeing any real graphical improvements, and I would not endorse increasing the minimum system specs for the game at all.

I just think it’s a neat idea. Don’t you think that the borderlands have a bit of a static feel to them? I mean, first of all, they’re all the same map. All identical. I wouldn’t mind popping from my BL over to an enemy BL and suddenly there’s a thunderstorm or something else going on. It makes the world more interesting.

It’s unfortunate that the GW2 programmers most likely wouldn’t be able to make this happen without degrading performance drastically. I’ve seen what the sandstorm does to the framerate on my high-end GPU. It’s not pretty.

Anyway, I’ll let this get back on topic. This is probably better off in the “new experiments” thread instead.

What i do not like on the removal of white swords is that (uncoordinated) participation in a camp-flip becomes more difficult. I am running now quite often to a camp just to see it flipped before I reach it. This was better with white swords.

I think its nort a good idea. I see lots of people saying its ok for small groups, which I agree, but many servers have new incomers that will not know what to do unless they see a tag and follow it, making big groups always exist, small groups also of course, but I don’t think its a good change just as it is now.

There should not be a complete removal of swords, in any circunstances or any possible context. The delay on swords would be nice depending on the current population of the WvW (at the moment of the attack), so for example servers with less than X people in WvW would have less time till orange swords appear when other attack them that other servers, and so on. This way what is making is that you have so sacrifice people fun for like 30min-1 hour if you want to upgrade or maitain things(because scouting is not rewarding at all, just sitting in a tower for 30 mins checking gates, walls… etc). That of course is on any server, but again, those that say it’s ok for small servers, well, check the fact that with waypoint you still will have easy to see if they attacking or not, and big servers have the advantage there.

Again, the problem in WvW is not the swords, it’s the scoring system, PPK will make even a bigger difference on bigger servers, 1 blob vs blob fight on big servers will make much more points than a 5vs5 in a camp with roaming groups, taking in consideration that the time to face again the blob or the other 5 man group is almost the same. Merging some servers I think it’s a good idea, making some major changes in WvW (new maps, new sieges maybe, put some more population cap in the maps or make same as now but on more) and both combined I think it’s the way to go.

Has no sense to be in a server that is outnumbered 80% time by others, that server should be merged with other so it get a “good” population, also make a population cap in servers (more strict than it is now) since people are just overpopulating servers and making the no populated ones harder to play in

To be fair, now that our server is fighting out manned it’s way easier to recap after the blob visited. but actually keeping a tower takes lots of dedication and constant guarding of the objective.

Though defending still has a lack of gameplay, (repair and upgrade events?)
Siege use is increasing drastically and gold and badges spending too.

When you are the one with a bigger population (or equal pop) the change can go unnoticed if there is server communication.
If you are the lower populated one the benefit is that you can recap, but forget about winning at PPT or upgrading.

The change has its positive and negative sides, it does demand a lot more dedication from the players.

The initial expectations people had are confirmed, but the experience offensive roamers have did become better.

now, to work on the keep defense players and roamers.