Guild Wars 2

I have read, and heard many conversations on what features are lacking, and what players cannot stand in WvW.

What do you as a player wish would be added, improved, or removed?

The gaming community is very vocal and unfortunately when we post in forums it is typically frustrated typing. By the end of the day everyone wants the game to be successful so lets put together some good ideas.

I will start with a simple few:

Commander raids – 24 man raids in WvW
Commander in game voice – Commander can talk to their players in their raid, or alliance with another commander so they can cross raid chat to their players.

Multiple color or otherwise distinguishable commander tags

Reducing the map cap on borderlands is the main thing I want in the game right now. Ill be fine if they keep EB at the same for those who want massive fights, but Id rather see the BLs reduced by 10-20.

Second would probably be more features integrated for commanders. Don’t really need to explain that one too much I don’t think.

Third, I think they are making a big mistake with the new GvG integration. If I understand correctly, the players doing the GvG will still be part of the map cap. Thus the same problem where those who lose important objectives because we don’t have the numbers is going to be a major issue. GvG should be a separate instance. Im glad GvG is being catered for, but not at the expense of WvW.

Give incentives for people to move down tiers and spread the population out.

sostronk.8167:

Reducing the map cap on borderlands is the main thing I want in the game right now. Ill be fine if they keep EB at the same for those who want massive fights, but Id rather see the BLs reduced by 10-20.

Second would probably be more features integrated for commanders. Don’t really need to explain that one too much I don’t think.

Third, I think they are making a big mistake with the new GvG integration. If I understand correctly, the players doing the GvG will still be part of the map cap. Thus the same problem where those who lose important objectives because we don’t have the numbers is going to be a major issue. GvG should be a separate instance. Im glad GvG is being catered for, but not at the expense of WvW.

GvG integration will need a lot of thought put into it for sure. Last night about 50 of us had a conversation about the dueling at windmill is fine but there are so many spectators that it effects the population cap. This means that a borderland is Queued but there are not enough players attending WvW events.

GvG may need to be on a separate instanced cluster but I am not a developer so I am not sure of their technology advancements and limitations.

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

Multiple color or otherwise distinguishable commander tags

Without question a warm welcoming feature that hopefully would not take much development effort.

styx.7294:

Give incentives for people to move down tiers and spread the population out.

Just so I am clear do you mean allow players to transfer with a bonus? If so I agree with you but only after the tournament has ended.

andomon.8314:

styx.7294:

Give incentives for people to move down tiers and spread the population out.

Just so I am clear do you mean allow players to transfer with a bonus? If so I agree with you but only after the tournament has ended.

It’s blunt but I’d be okay with that. People in higher tiers get more kills so they end up richer anyway (more ranks, more chests with ranks, more loot bags, more achievement points, etc).

From my experience i would do:

-Making fort and castle walls all destructible.
-Removing weapons ability to deal damage to gates/walls
-Revamp maps to make them bigger

This 3 things imo would improve quality of wvw warfare by making siege be totaly dependant on war machines not zerg bashing on gate, afterall no castle ever fell because attackers were hitting gates with swords…also, making all infrastructure destructible would expand possible ways and directions from which you could siege keeps.
Longer siege times and bigger maps would, i beleve, help spreading out population over map. How? For start, one blob wouldnt be able to break 3 sieges in span of 7 minutes due to longer travel time, and it also wouldnt be able to take down keep in 2 minutes either.
My ideas probably needs tuning but it could be good direction to take it.

• Boost tactics: make auto-attacks less powerful and prevent anymore than 50 players on one map per server.
• Make more maps or bigger ones
• Delete bloodlust
• Make upscaled characters have the same strength as max-level
• Add various capture points in key locations for every tower and keep that need to be fought for and held.

Remember the question is how would you improve wvw. GvG should get its own game type altogether that has all the facilities GvG players need, from spectators leaderboards to rewards etc… Focus on WvW for this thread.

That in mind I would really love to see more incentives for defending, more thought out reward systems for people who invest time and gold into upgrading and maintaining wvw structures.

I would also love for the squad and commander systems to be overhauled to allow for party management and more ways to assign targets. Simple raid systems would go a long way as being able to see the health/boon/condition status of your entire squad would make it a lot easier to tell your guys what to focus on. It would allow for commanders to make more informed decisions on when to break combat to regroup or press the attack.

Make defending things give more rewards than capping.
Make a separate Map for GvG’s - JP is a good bandaid for now
Get rid of Bloodlust stat increase
debuff to zergs of 40+ players - increase skill CD by 33%/Decrease movement speed by 33%.
Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

kRiza krimos.1637:

-Removing weapons ability to deal damage to gates/walls

After some thought I agree that removing the weapon damage would make it feel much more like a siege.

I feel 2 siege should flag the keep/tower too.

Sirendor.1394:

prevent anymore than 50 players on one map per server.

• Make more maps or bigger ones

I have seen a few requests for less players on a map but I feel as if that would make the maps feel empty personally. If the maps were larger it would feel even more empty. Why do you feel the maps need less players what would the advantage be?

bradderzh.2378:

Remember the question is how would you improve wvw. GvG should get its own game type altogether that has all the facilities GvG players need, from spectators leaderboards to rewards etc… Focus on WvW for this thread.

That in mind I would really love to see more incentives for defending, more thought out reward systems for people who invest time and gold into upgrading and maintaining wvw structures.

I would also love for the squad and commander systems to be overhauled to allow for party management and more ways to assign targets. Simple raid systems would go a long way as being able to see the health/boon/condition status of your entire squad would make it a lot easier to tell your guys what to focus on. It would allow for commanders to make more informed decisions on when to break combat to regroup or press the attack.

I could not agree more. I too feel the reward system needs a revamp the incentive for defending a yak is just not there. On reset nights you see groups defending but during the week the defense of yaks goes way down.

Brando.1374:

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

What would be the incentive of volunteering to be on a ballista or arrow cart then?

Brando.1374:

Make defending things give more rewards than capping.

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

Under Mutually Exclusive the definition is explained as……

andomon.8314:

Brando.1374:

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

What would be the incentive of volunteering to be on a ballista or arrow cart then?

None thats the point

Chris.3290:

Brando.1374:

Make defending things give more rewards than capping.

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

Under Mutually Exclusive the definition is explained as……

get more rewards for defending, get none for manning siege.
I want to promote more actual fighting not spamming ac everywhere.

• Remove Superior Siege from the game
• Remove Mastry lines
• Remove Bloodlust stat buff
• Better Commander/Raid/Guild organization system
• Better defense reward mechanism
• System to encourage 2v1 against the stronger server
• Make it so I can move the junk at the top center of the screen somewhere else

Brando.1374:

Chris.3290:

Brando.1374:

Make defending things give more rewards than capping.

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

Under Mutually Exclusive the definition is explained as……

get more rewards for defending, get none for manning siege.
I want to promote more actual fighting not spamming ac everywhere.

Ok lets say I am at a tower with a 5 man group then a zerg of 20 attacks the tower wall. If I man siege we could possibly hold them off until I call for reinforcements. I should not gain experience for doing so?

Johje Holan.4607:

• System to encourage 2v1 against the stronger server

I think with the tournament rewards the weaker servers will focus more on attacking the stronger server to even out the points. I know the server I am on already focuses on this without the reward. If they keep encouraging rewards for winning you will only see this tactic increase which is the true excitement of WvWvW.

1. Server balance
2. Server balance
3. Server balance
4. Server balance
….
49. Server balance

50. I’d like to see defensive rewards, but that would probably mean tagging someone that qualified for an offensive reward, or tagging someone while you are within keep/tower/camp boundary.

51. I’d like to be able to shoot farther and better when on top of a wall. No more having my toes see you before I can hit you on the ground, or being pulled over a part of a wall I can’t walk/run over.

52. Better Commander UI and a Squad UI

53. I’d like to be able to ninja an objective without white swords popping up 30 seconds after I start.

54. I think the outmanned players should never be able to pop swords, white or orange. Maybe just remove white and orange swords altogether. If you don’t know where the enemy is you should lose the objective.

55. Find a change in the calculations to allow for an increase in the AoE cap, or at a minimum, increase the AoE cap for certain skills.

56. Fill in some of the “dead” map space, Skritt, Centaur, Speldon…

57. Add the option to tunnel under walls.

58. Airships

59. Fix the bugs/exploits that have been known for a long time.

Significantly adjust WXP to reward smaller groups or roamers more. In fact completely change the WXP system to something different. Reward players immediately upon kill with everything they obtain from a kill. Add a more regular WvW currency that drops from every kill. The amount acquired from a kill is directly affected by home many players there were. For instance:

-More than 40 you get 5 units of this currency
-In a 40 zerg you’d get 10 units of this currency
-20 you get 20
-5 you get 40
-1 you get100

Could adjust it for sack of balance and varying contributions. Killing the same players over and over again in a period of time would give diminishing returns. The point would be to encourage less zerging and players fighting players. Give a percentage bonus for killing players while defending your points.

Reward players more for constant participation in WvW throughout the week instead of some end of match reward. Maybe reward servers every hour to the server that had the highest ppt or number of player kills in that hour. However, only reward player that spent at least half an hour of that hour out there or whatever amount of time seems reasonable.

They need to reward players for continued participation and to encourage players actually killing players.

I have some ways ANET could improve WvW
My first one agrees with the commander colors. Having commanders with different color tags would help us distinguish forces on the map. On a related note to commanders making the /supplyinfo command 1200 range would go a long way to improving the tag.

Secondly in relation to that, have all allied forces on a map show up on the minimap. If this is too taxing on the servers to have for everyone then only do it for commanders. When I’m commanding I want to prevent an over-commit of resources. I’ve come across several guilds who are simply un willing to pop commander tags. I thus have no idea where they are and I could end up running into them with my guild/zerg. There were even several times I see orange swords and I prep to attack them only to find that it was guild [zzz] running tagless. If that were real war you guys woulda been vaporized by my artillery.

If I know where my friends are I can plan my strategy to synergize with theirs and gain a tactical advantage on the enemy server. If guilds [xxx] and [yyy] want to push the north gate of stonemist i can bring my force to the southwest gate to block green’s reinforcements. If they’re about to crash the enemy zerg from the left I can take my guild to the right and pincer them. I can’t do any of this without seeing them.

Third: Make the maps bigger. Double their size and use Double floating point instead of single floating point if that’s the technical issue. (make your meshes simpler otherwise) It is too easy for a zerg to cross a map to defend something. I’ve had points facing TC this week where they just finish hills and im on inner bay killin the lord. They somehow manage to cross the lake in the center in 1:30 and wipe me.

Fourth: Better/more traps
First on this one: increase the number of active traps a person can have to 2 of each type. Then add more trap types:

- Rockslide: Causes an AoE knockdown effect like the effect cave trolls use. Gains 50% damage and KD duration when placed near ground walls (not keep walls).

- Flame trap: Causes AOE burning and damage ticks over 10 seconds (like the mortar shot). This trap is 50% larger when placed on grass or in forested areas and cannot be evaded or blocked.

- Spike trap: Like the ranger trap with the same name. Does AOE cripple and bleed (durations based on trap owner) for 10 ticks over 10 seconds. Trap’s conditons ignore condition duration reduction effects if the trap was placed in grass.

- Ice Trap: Like the ranger frost trap: causes aoe Chill and damage over it’s effect area for 10 ticks at 1 second intervals. The trap’s chill effect ignores condition duration reduction effects when placed on snow or ice and is unavoidable.

- Bridge charges: Blow up a bridge with proximity triggered charges. Can only be placed on a bridge. Once blown the bridge requires 100 supply to repair and it cannot be damaged while being repaired.
- Wall charges: Trap is actually a timed explosive which can be disarmed. If not disarmed within 30 seconds it causes high siege damage (50% of the HP of a wood wall) and knocks back all allies and enemies near it. All players and NPCs within 600 units of it are killed instantly. Can only be placed on a wall. Takes 5 seconds to place and taking damage while placing it may result in a pre-mature detonation that only damages players and NPCs.

Fifth: Make field artillery batteries: A new immobile cannon/ballista type siege weapon that while operated its user is invulnerable and is designed to do damage to players. It would have a minimum range of 600 units. It should also cost 50 supply and cannot be moved past by an enemy (blocks movement). It’s placement is restricted to outside of keeps and towers.

4 and 5 would make WvW more interesting with more strategic avenues to explore.

andomon.8314:

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

Multiple color or otherwise distinguishable commander tags

Without question a warm welcoming feature that hopefully would not take much development effort.

Andomon, I’m thinking it would enable multiple commanders on the field, focusing and coordinating different aspects of the battles. It would introduce creative new strategies and reduce the size of the zergs.

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

andomon.8314:

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

Multiple color or otherwise distinguishable commander tags

Without question a warm welcoming feature that hopefully would not take much development effort.

Andomon, I’m thinking it would enable multiple commanders on the field, focusing and coordinating different aspects of the battles. It would introduce creative new strategies and reduce the size of the zergs.

I’m actually already leading wvw raids in this manner. You wouldn’t believe what you can do when you get more than 1 tag on a map working together. Especially if each tag has a guild followin it.

Even if it was as basic as this roughly drawn example it would be better than what we have…

When you join a squad you are removed from a party if you are in one and given the option to select a slot in a squad party. Information such as name, profession, and even perhaps a quick overview of the players trait allocation could allow players to make an informed decision about the players in the squad party they wish to join while allowing commanders quickly scan through the resources they have at hand.

The commander himself should have the option to drag and drop players from one squad party to another to organize his force in the most productive way he or she sees fit. Player requests to kick squad party members would be verified by the commander in a separate party modifications tab which would keep track of each request as well as each player who joins/leaves the squad in a similar text fashion as the guild influence page shows (text based primarily).

Each squad should be able to be minimized/maximized should a squad party not be required onscreen (such as if they are tasked with assaulting a camp or harassing supply lines) and color selections for each squad party should be customisable and reflected on the minimap.

The commander can assign targets for the entire squad by simple clicking the Squad title at the top left and then Ctrl+T, or individually for each party by selecting each squadparty title and then Ctrl+T. The target icons designated by commanders could be different from normal party target icons to allow the party to distinguish between the two.

Commanders should also get the ability to use the /announce text tag which allows specific instructions to be announced in a similar fashion to the scarlet invasion announcements for maximum viability for his entire squad. (character limit could be applied). Obviously this wont really be needed by squads using TS but its nice to add some functionality for those who use the squads in a pickup group way too.
If I think of more I will add it.

Swamurabi.7890:

50. I’d like to see defensive rewards, but that would probably mean tagging someone that qualified for an offensive reward, or tagging someone while you are within keep/tower/camp boundary.

56. Fill in some of the “dead” map space, Skritt, Centaur, Speldon…

57. Add the option to tunnel under walls.

58. Airships

59. Fix the bugs/exploits that have been known for a long time.

These are all great features I hope to see a few in the future. If a player, group, or raid attacks a keep/tower/camp they are tagged as offensive. If a player from any other world attacks that player, group, or raid they are considered defensive. A timer ticks down after they stop attacking which resets their status.

Something like that could be implemented so the defensive player would receive a great reward.

Elochai.1280:

Significantly adjust WXP to reward smaller groups or roamers more. In fact completely change the WXP system to something different. Reward players immediately upon kill with everything they obtain from a kill. Add a more regular WvW currency that drops from every kill. The amount acquired from a kill is directly affected by home many players there were. For instance:

-More than 40 you get 5 units of this currency
-In a 40 zerg you’d get 10 units of this currency
-20 you get 20
-5 you get 40
-1 you get100

Could adjust it for sack of balance and varying contributions. Killing the same players over and over again in a period of time would give diminishing returns. The point would be to encourage less zerging and players fighting players. Give a percentage bonus for killing players while defending your points.

Reward players more for constant participation in WvW throughout the week instead of some end of match reward. Maybe reward servers every hour to the server that had the highest ppt or number of player kills in that hour. However, only reward player that spent at least half an hour of that hour out there or whatever amount of time seems reasonable.

They need to reward players for continued participation and to encourage players actually killing players.

Very excellent points I think one thing that is truly apparent in this forum post is that there needs to be better communication features from a commander, and greater rewards for those willing to put time into WvW both in offence, and defense no matter the size of the group.

1. Implement some serious in-game incentives to balance populations in WvW.

2. Implement a bonus and a penalty to the acquired points which would reflect if the points are acquired by a team on a nearly empty map vs a fully qued map. Another words, adjust the scoring system to reflect off-times.

3. Get rid of bloodlust, or leave it but make it stackable (50-100-150) ONLY on top of the outmanned buff.

4. Adjust loot rewards, if a tower/keep/castle is T3 and has not been taken in a long time, then it is most likely due to it being greater challenge posed by defending team hence requires a greater effort by the attacking team. This would go towards effort vs. reward. T1 Towers/keeps/castles which are being flipped often should stay as is. The system should adjust between the 2 accordingly.

5. Implement a debuff, small, small, but noticable, to groups of 40+ players, per each 5 or 10 players present.

6. Improve travel time to the outlying keeps / towers on Borderlands for the defending teams via map modifications or other means. Perhaps defenders could get an equivalent of roadmarkers at sentry points on their home BLs ?

7. Lower the gold costs of upper upgrades on Keeps / Castles / Towers, or give pure PVE players an equivalent daily gold sink to balance the game as a whole.

bug fixes:
bl garrison watergate
rezzing thru the grilles at bay outer water entrance
bugs relating to teleporting + being launched or knocked back at the same time that allow you to go through gates
ruin invisi-caps
tower rings sometimes dont disappear when the lord is rezzed (probably just graphical, lake is a real common one)
destructible walls eat grenade 1 with no explosions or damage
you can enter lake tower with engi’s jump shot and rocket boots without any busted gate/wall
there is a small hole on the edge of northeast camp’s ring where you can stand “inside” the ring and not have the camp capping

all of these except ruin invisi-cap have been in the game since launch

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

andomon.8314:

Nanyetah Elohi.4852:

Multiple color or otherwise distinguishable commander tags

Without question a warm welcoming feature that hopefully would not take much development effort.

Andomon, I’m thinking it would enable multiple commanders on the field, focusing and coordinating different aspects of the battles. It would introduce creative new strategies and reduce the size of the zergs.

I couldn’t agree more I have heard this same recommendation from multiple commanders.

bradderzh.2378:

Even if it was as basic as this roughly drawn example it would be better than what we have…

When you join a squad you are removed from a party if you are in one and given the option to select a slot in a squad party. Information such as name, profession, and even perhaps a quick overview of the players trait allocation could allow players to make an informed decision about the players in the squad party they wish to join while allowing commanders quickly scan through the resources they have at hand.

The commander himself should have the option to drag and drop players from one squad party to another to organize his force in the most productive way he or she sees fit. Player requests to kick squad party members would be verified by the commander in a separate party modifications tab which would keep track of each request as well as each player who joins/leaves the squad in a similar text fashion as the guild influence page shows (text based primarily).

Each squad should be able to be minimized/maximized should a squad party not be required onscreen (such as if they are tasked with assaulting a camp or harassing supply lines) and color selections for each squad party should be customisable and reflected on the minimap.

The commander can assign targets for the entire squad by simple clicking the Squad title at the top left and then Ctrl+T, or individually for each party by selecting each squadparty title and then Ctrl+T. The target icons designated by commanders could be different from normal party target icons to allow the party to distinguish between the two.

Commanders should also get the ability to use the /announce text tag which allows specific instructions to be announced in a similar fashion to the scarlet invasion announcements for maximum viability for his entire squad. (character limit could be applied). Obviously this wont really be needed by squads using TS but its nice to add some functionality for those who use the squads in a pickup group way too.
If I think of more I will add it.

Very nice I am seeing a lot of people interested in growing commander functions you took it one step further

Here are a few more that have popped up in my head:

1. Show in Combat log who places down siege (recently there have been some trolls).
2. Grant World XP for the person placing the siege.

Tongku.5326:

6. Improve travel time to the outlying keeps / towers on Borderlands for the defending teams via map modifications or other means. Perhaps defenders could get an equivalent of roadmarkers at sentry points on their home BLs ?

I don’t think it would be fair to give such advantage to defenders. Part of good strategy could be attacking place far away from defending force so they can’t get there in time.

andomon.8314:

Very nice I am seeing a lot of people interested in growing commander functions you took it one step further

We’ll anything would be better than what we currently have. Also the option to hide the commander icon from the map should be able to be toggled should you wish to run an anonymous guild group.

andomon.8314:

Brando.1374:

Chris.3290:

Brando.1374:

Make defending things give more rewards than capping.

Give no wxp/loot/exp when someone kills a player while on an ac/ballista

Under Mutually Exclusive the definition is explained as……

get more rewards for defending, get none for manning siege.
I want to promote more actual fighting not spamming ac everywhere.

Ok lets say I am at a tower with a 5 man group then a zerg of 20 attacks the tower wall. If I man siege we could possibly hold them off until I call for reinforcements. I should not gain experience for doing so?

you get exp for defending, not manning the siege.

Addition: double the bandwidth by leaching it off of the countless unpopulated PvE zones during peak WvW server loads.

Fix: Waypoints are destructible objects similar in durability to a tier 2 wall.

Removal: Devon Carver.

That would keep me intrigued for a month or two, but I’d expect my #2 most important addition, fix, and removal items to get addressed by then. Even still I’d presume the damage is already done, the ship has taken on to much water and patching it up a lost cause in the coming storm of next gen games, consoles, MMOs, and next gen console games that’re MMOs. She’s sinking into the sea of bad MMO’s and it was her own crew that doomed her.

“Yer off the edge of the map boy! Here there be monsters!”

1) If a zerg exceeds 12, then make it dynamically visible on the map. This would hopefully discourage zergs.

2) If underpopulated, keep Waypoints active even during battles.

The key to countering population imbalances is to give the lesser populated server more information about what is going on in their world. Treat it as a type of “NPC spy” feeding information to the players of the lesser populated server. This way they can more effectively direct what little manpower they have.

Bigger maps,
no waypoints
remove downstate in wvw
No transfers
after your dead only map view
Make it so you can hit people from on top of walls but they cant hit you.
remove being able to hit through doors
change bloodlust bonus to magic find and gold find unless you have outmanned buff.
make each borderland map different (15 different maps changed randomly at reset)
Do away with yaks and have a supply drop npc.
change the capture circle of towers and keeps to be anywhere inside keep.
do away with stealth it only encourages blobs.
Make the outmanned buff remove the cap on AoE.

- Account wide WXP stuff. Just make that entire page all account-wide. We’ve done this song and dance before.

- A deeper building upgrade system with more room for improvement. At the moment it sounds incredibly hardcoded which is not a good thing, because buildings are basically the core of a game which changes pace as it progresses. It’s like playing Starcraft except you’re not allowed to build anything beyond a Cybernetics Core/Academy/Hydralisk Den.

- Defensive siege upgrades (cannon/oil/mortar) aren’t placed by the 1/2/3 upgrades at the Quartermaster, but unlocked instead. You can attach any of these siege weapons into sockets at relevant positions- You can place a Burning Oil on any long wall edge, Cannons on any wall edge and Mortars on any wall.

- A counter of some kind to Defense Against Guards/Guard Killer. Just have a world ability that gives you a chance to strip stacks with each attack.

- “Fortify” walls using supply. On a full health wall/gate, “repair” is replaced with “fortify”, which reduces all damage taken by the wall by 1% per stack, up to 20 stacks. Removed via structural vulnerability.

- Rewards scaling. Taking a 1700/1700 keep should give you insanely huge amounts of Dragonite Ore/loot/etc.

- Single-player WvW-exclusive stuff. Say; a utility-skill Sapper Kit which you can earn as any class that you spend a few WXP points on to unlock. Give its 1-5 WvW-exclusive stuff that consumes supply, that you unlock by going deeper in the line; say, the 2 plants a large bomb that causes siege damage, but consumes supply. The 3 lets you repair siege. The 4 and 5 might be permanent versions of some basic siege, or traps.

andomon.8314:

Sirendor.1394:

prevent anymore than 50 players on one map per server.

• Make more maps or bigger ones

I have seen a few requests for less players on a map but I feel as if that would make the maps feel empty personally. If the maps were larger it would feel even more empty. Why do you feel the maps need less players what would the advantage be?

Less players availble on a map might be what would do 1 of two things
A) spread the population across the servers
B) make people leave

I know during the first month several WvW based guilds transfered off because they couldn’t get more than 3-10 members in WvW during Prime time

Sarrs.4831:

- Account wide WXP stuff. Just make that entire page all account-wide. We’ve done this song and dance before.

- Rewards scaling. Taking a 1700/1700 keep should give you insanely huge amounts of Dragonite Ore/loot/etc.

I like these two ideas they would greatly improve upon what we already have.

Less lag
-toggle on/off 1500 range rendering. No characters/animations/particles beyond 1500. Unless its siege.

In game voice chat
- toggle on/off in sound menu

I just hate min/max my warrior and not being able to go ham and melee into 2 other servers because of lag. Then when I go down, none of my cc or utilites were used. It really sucks returning to gw2 and the wvw lag is the same after a year. Just my 2c.

Account wvw level.
Fix the population of the servers; Vabbi for example has a totally miserable time in wvw, free transfer to Vabbi until they at least match their opponents server population would do them wonders and make it more fun for everyone. Also, as someone from fissure of woe, I don’t like being matched up against heavily populated servers, it just makes everyone on our server leave because its totally unfair when we barely have 15 players in our own borderlands and they are stomping around in a zerg of 30+

Oh and some kind of push to talk in game voice chat would be really good.

Remove arrow carts until they get zoom hacks fixed.

Limited looting. Anything not a wep or armor is lootable.

I’d love it if I could get all of my existing lootbags, chests, etc. to spawn with me at the wp when I die. Nothing worse than getting run over by a zerg with a chest next to your corpse and no way of retrieving it

Make oil and cannons indestructible. Or put them high enough up, or somewhere where they can’t be reached without breaking through outer walls. In their current state, oil and cannons are useless.
It’s not as if someone can sit on oil or cannons with 5000 ele and necro marks on them.