Guild Wars 2

Scoring will have the biggest impact in terms of balancing game play but do like the QoL improvements.

Definitely prioritize scoring changes.

The QoL improvements seem rather pointless to me except for the cross-map chat.
I’m too for prioritizing the scoring improvements.

Any possibility for you looking into visibility of commander tags for colorblind people with the QoL at some point? This would mean the world to a lot of us who barely see the tags already.

Build Templates?, anyone… ?huu ? nooh ??

Nice!! /15 characters

I’m surprised its as close as it is (although not sure how many people have voted yet). I think hands down scoring changes is what needs worked on next.

My suggestions: add a temporary buff to wvw reward track gain when joining / playing outnumbered. Change the wvw icon at the top of the screen when your team has an outnumbered matchup so people know to get in there! Finally, make a reward at the end of the week for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd that gets scaled by your participation over the week so that people want to win!

Draxjon.1790:

Build Templates?, anyone… ?huu ? nooh ??

That’s more of a game-wide QoL feature. So not really something that the WvW team would be working on. That of course doesn’t change I would really love Build templates.

noseminer.7034:

Suggestions
1. Add a temporary buff to wvw reward track gain when joining / playing outnumbered.
2. Change the wvw icon at the top of the screen when your team has an outnumbered matchup so people know to get in there!
3. Make a reward at the end of the week for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd that gets scaled by your participation over the week so that people want to win!

Hey nose. Those are really good suggestions. Not sure which ones I like more.

Can you guys just throw in cross-map team chat with the scoring changes? Please?

noseminer.7034:

My suggestions: add a temporary buff to wvw reward track gain when joining / playing outnumbered. Change the wvw icon at the top of the screen when your team has an outnumbered matchup so people know to get in there! Finally, make a reward at the end of the week for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd that gets scaled by your participation over the week so that people want to win!

or remove the exp buff from outnumbered and the mist war buff since they removed exp from wvw and change those to reward track bonus

Can we have both? Because we need both. Cross-map chat and reducing clutter sounds so tasty.

But if we are forced to choose then scoring improvements should be the priority. Definitely.

Personally I would like to see none of the proposed subdivisions take priority at the current time and instead look towards an optional reduction of visual noise. While not directly within the WvW teams hands(?) I would like to see an option for “Adaptive Culling” where, when activated the game will automatically reduce model quality/the number of player models shown to maintain a playable framerate in the large scale clashes which would then be automatically turned up again outside of these fights (perhaps with a slider to alter the severity of the culling); this alongside a better Effect LOD option (where you have it broken down into multiple layers (detailed below)) would make the large scale clashes a better experience for everyone. Persoanlly I have an overclocked i7 at 5.1GHz with dual-overclocked-980TIs and can’t maintain 30fps in large scale clashes with Effect LOD off – so I dread to think how lesser systems are handling it, and I feel that adding “adaptive culling” QoL changes would help in this area.

I mentioned that I would like to see Effect LOD broken down into subparts; these are the following divisions I would like to see:

- Friendly Effects
- – Combo Fields
- – Crowd Control Fields
- – AoE (AoE effects that have no Combo Field or Crowd Control associated with them)
- – Projectiles
- – Melee Attacks
- – Auto Attacks (Would also be filtered by projectiles and melee attacks depending on the attack)
- – Other (i.e Coalescence of Ruin, Dragon Banner etc would be toned down by this. Skills that do not fall into any of the other areas)

- Enemy Effects
- – Combo Fields
- – Crowd Control Fields
- – AoE
- – Projectiles
- – Melee Attacks
- – Auto Attacks
- – Other

- Exceptions
- – Always Show High Damage Skills (i.e Coalescence of Ruin, Gunflame, Killshot etc. High damage (might have a wind up) skills that need to be dodged)
- – Always show Party Skills (Always shows skills used by your party/subsquad)
- – Always show Squad Skills (Always shows skills used by your squad)

These would all ideally be sliders, so we could alter the severity of the LOD on each type (all ideally with a checkbox to toggle ‘automatic culling’ on the effects as well, to optionally increase the severity of the culling when the framerate drops . If checkbox is not checked then the maximum amount of LOD is the level the slider is at (i.e. if the slider is at maximum and the framerate drops with the box unchecked no LOD will occur. If the box is checked then LOD will happen, up to the severity shown by the slider). The slider would prioritize skills closest to you; so with a slider on “enemy autoattacks” at 10, only the 10 closest enemy auto attacks would have effects (they would still have animations). It is important that this is a number, not a %, as it allows the user to precisely control the minimum amount of effects shown in fights. A slider would range from 0 (no skills of that type shown in heavy fights) to 100+ (the same as unculled, so no matter the intensity of the fight no culling would occur on that type, unless the checkbox was checked).

Animations would still continue to play as normal (animation drop down is for that).

With the “adaptive culling” option for player model number and quality I would also like to see them transitioned to sliders (like the proposed effect LOD changes) and again, broken down into friendly and enemy. You could build them in as part of the effect LOD system, by adding “Models” to the list of effects and having an exception for Party models and Squad models.
—-

I know this is not specifically the WvW team’s area, but these changes would have huge positive impacts for the large scale fights often observed in the WvW gamemode, with a knock-on effect in PvE with the world boss fights having increased FPS. These suggestions would help improve the QoL for players playing with any type of rig, and would help improve individual skill level in the fights.

Scoring changes are way more important than QoL ones, in my opinion. But as Chaba suggested, cross map chat would be really nice.

noseminer.7034:

Finally, make a reward at the end of the week for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd that gets scaled by your participation over the week so that people want to win!

This.

Can we get an explanation on what each of these things means? I understand the scoring, probably, but I’m not sure what an objective-summary tool tip entails or what a territory-control map overlay is. Also, a sparkle trail? Sparkles are all good and well but…what am I signing up for there?

Still, while I believe scoring does need to be addressed, I think score visibility (which is included in QoL) needs to come first. No scoring system can be properly tested if players can’t actually kitten it.

The problem with this is the suggestions for scoring improvement do not necessarily reflect what the WvW community want to see happen to scoring. SCoring improvements need to happen, just not the changes ANet is suggesting. If you focus scoring on PPK instead of PPT and stop rewarding PvE, PvD kill NPC get rewarded system and instead make it so the score is more based on PPK while fighting over objectives you solve numerous problems at once rather than make more. People who play outside of " prime time" timeszones should not have their efforts devalued, instead the scoring should be based on PPK while fighting over objectives without the use of siege and it will balance itself instead since there are obviously less players to PPK during the off hours and still the same number of PvE objectives.

It is the PvE objectives that are throwing off the score, remove that from the score to solve the primary issue. Make is so the better fighters win instead of reward lazy game play.

The current system rewards dying as fast as you can so you can run back and PvD something undefended or get a whole zerg to sit in a keep and siege hump instead of fighting over objectives with a fun fight IS the problem with scoring. Make it so the teams that do that will lose and the players actually using their characters to fight over objectives win instead. That is what it will take to make players see the system as fair and worth keeping score on. Players do not care about the score due to it being based on such lame game play. If you make it right and base it on PvP game play in a PvP game mode and people will start to care again.

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives without including siege damage on players rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

The thing is players WANT these things fixed, they just may not want them the way you think they need fixed. In fact some of the proposed ideas may make most the players who do not play prime time leave the game all together, and if that is the case, you are doing it wrong again. It very well may be the opposite of what you think should happen. What players have asked for from the beginning is for the score to be PvP based and rewarding the better fighters rather than reward the lazy people instead.

QoL suggestion: Build Templates.

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

lil devils x.6071:

The problem with this is the suggestions for scoring improvement do not necessarily reflect what the WvW community want to see happen to scoring. SCoring improvements need to happen, just not the changes ANet is suggesting. If you focus scoring on PPK instead of PPT and stop rewarding PvE, PvD kill NPC get rewarded system and instead make it so the score is more based on PPK while fighting over objectives you solve numerous problems at once rather than make more. People who play outside of " prime time" timeszones should not have their efforts devalued, instead the scoring should be based on PPK while fighting over objectives without the use of siege and it will balance itself instead since there are obviously less players to PPK during the off hours and still the same number of PvE objectives.

It is the PvE objectives that are throwing off the score, remove that from the score to solve the primary issue. Make is so the better fighters win instead of reward lazy game play.

The current system rewards dying as fast as you can so you can run back and PvD something undefended or get a whole zerg to sit in a keep and siege hump instead of fighting over objectives with a fun fight IS the problem with scoring. Make it so the teams that do that will lose and the players actually using their characters to fight over objectives win instead. That is what it will take to make players see the system as fair and worth keeping score on. Players do not care about the score due to it being based on such lame game play. If you make it right and base it on PvP game play in a PvP game mode and people will start to care again.

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

The thing is players WANT these things fixed, they just may not want them the way you think they need fixed. In fact some of the proposed ideas may make most the players who do not play prime time leave the game all together, and if that is the case, you are doing it wrong again. It very well may be the opposite of what you think should happen. What players have asked for from the beginning is for the score to be able PvP and rewarding the better fighters rather than reward the lazy people instead.

No thank you for a PPK focused score.. That will make the zergs even bigger than the ones we have running around right now.. Players need to split up more if you ask me and this is one way to not make players split up.

I this the place to post suggestions? Regarding cross map chat, people can talk to each other accross maps through squad chat. Can we just change team chat to something that will be seen accross all maps? We already have map chat; having both have the same function seems meaningless. And what about World specific chat; for recruitment purposes? These are really the only things I look for QoL wise. Otherwise please move forward with scoring

lil devils x.6071:

…

Sorry WvW is not only about PKK… If you remove the tactical aspect, with protecting your supply line, upgrading and defending your keep, then it’s just massive PvP and structures will have no use at all…
We need change yes, like more PPT if upgraded, less reward when you take something and increase reward when you defend.
More reward if your server win, actually there is not a big difference if you are first or third… The 3 bonus chest are not a reward for me ! But no easy to reward players with partipation… Maybe something based on the actual participation system, and you need x amount of participation to have the gold reward at the end of the week.

But thx for this poll, good to see interaction between dev and players !

I can’t read it because the page is sliding off the left side of my phone screne and won’t load that side. I’m missing 2-3 words per line. :/

KOPPER.1458:

QoL suggestion: Build Templates.

I would love these as well. A one click build change would be awesome in WvW. We would have to be out of combat but it would still be a great improvement.

ZombieLeach.5862:

I can’t read it because the page is sliding off the left side of my phone screne and won’t load that side. I’m missing 2-3 words per line. :/

Turn your phone sideways.

briggah.7910:

lil devils x.6071:

The problem with this is the suggestions for scoring improvement do not necessarily reflect what the WvW community want to see happen to scoring. SCoring improvements need to happen, just not the changes ANet is suggesting. If you focus scoring on PPK instead of PPT and stop rewarding PvE, PvD kill NPC get rewarded system and instead make it so the score is more based on PPK while fighting over objectives you solve numerous problems at once rather than make more. People who play outside of " prime time" timeszones should not have their efforts devalued, instead the scoring should be based on PPK while fighting over objectives without the use of siege and it will balance itself instead since there are obviously less players to PPK during the off hours and still the same number of PvE objectives.

It is the PvE objectives that are throwing off the score, remove that from the score to solve the primary issue. Make is so the better fighters win instead of reward lazy game play.

The current system rewards dying as fast as you can so you can run back and PvD something undefended or get a whole zerg to sit in a keep and siege hump instead of fighting over objectives with a fun fight IS the problem with scoring. Make it so the teams that do that will lose and the players actually using their characters to fight over objectives win instead. That is what it will take to make players see the system as fair and worth keeping score on. Players do not care about the score due to it being based on such lame game play. If you make it right and base it on PvP game play in a PvP game mode and people will start to care again.

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

The thing is players WANT these things fixed, they just may not want them the way you think they need fixed. In fact some of the proposed ideas may make most the players who do not play prime time leave the game all together, and if that is the case, you are doing it wrong again. It very well may be the opposite of what you think should happen. What players have asked for from the beginning is for the score to be able PvP and rewarding the better fighters rather than reward the lazy people instead.

No thank you for a PPK focused score.. That will make the zergs even bigger than the ones we have running around right now.. Players need to split up more if you ask me and this is one way to not make players split up.

Agreed there. But PPT in and of itself doesn’t really promote splitting up either. Megablobs are way too effective at capping stuff.

So maybe having PPK + PPT isn’t necessarily a bad thing, because some PPK prevents that servers just PvD to victory, since enemies will attack them.

Mystle.4538:

Can we just change team chat to something that will be seen accross all maps? We already have map chat; having both have the same function seems meaningless.

I think that’s the idea. Should be done together with scoring changes because increasing team communication would be such a huge impact.

Well I want everything but I would say that tweaking the PPT score design would be the most important thing. I like PPT, I think its part of what makes WvW work, but reducing the impact of exponential score growth during low population times is way, way overdue.

Doing something as simple as diminishing returns would be enough as a first attempt.

Nerfing PPT during night and Buffing PPK and nerfing night capping would make PPK too strong. Its already hard enough to make 280+ tick during day when all servers are playing and defending their home bls.

PPK already makes like 20-30k difference on MUs which with 280 vs 180 tick which is about the same as ticking 100 more as enemy 8 hours a day 7 days a week.

So if they nerf effect of Nightcapping, PPK should not be buffed, it already makes up for ticking 100 more than enemy for 8 hours a day

How about letting us make more than one piece of sup siege at a time???

TorquedSoul.8097:

ZombieLeach.5862:

I can’t read it because the page is sliding off the left side of my phone screne and won’t load that side. I’m missing 2-3 words per line. :/

Turn your phone sideways.

Tried that as well as zooming out. The left couple inches or so of the page isn’t there at all. It’s like the page loads seceral inches off center.

ZombieLeach.5862:

TorquedSoul.8097:

ZombieLeach.5862:

I can’t read it because the page is sliding off the left side of my phone screne and won’t load that side. I’m missing 2-3 words per line. :/

Turn your phone sideways.

Tried that as well as zooming out. The left couple inches or so of the page isn’t there at all. It’s like the page loads seceral inches off center.

Well get to a computer! The future of WvW is at stake. Unless you are voting for QoL, then I wouldn’t go through the trouble.

ZombieLeach.5862:

TorquedSoul.8097:

ZombieLeach.5862:

I can’t read it because the page is sliding off the left side of my phone screne and won’t load that side. I’m missing 2-3 words per line. :/

Turn your phone sideways.

Tried that as well as zooming out. The left couple inches or so of the page isn’t there at all. It’s like the page loads seceral inches off center.

WvW Quality of Life Improvements
Add an option for reduced nameplate clutter.
Add cross-map team chat.
Add objective-summary tool tips.
Add a display effect for Righteous Indignation on map markers.
Add floating indicators when gaining points toward war score.
Add a WXP-gain sparkle trail.
Add a territory-control map overlay.
Take suggestions from the community!
WvW Scoring Improvements
Reduce the impact of night capping.
Lessen the gap between winning scores and losing scores so losing teams can still recover.
Adjust objective score relative to upgrade level.
Adjust score for capturing objectives.
Rebalance the score awarded for activities that don’t reward points per tick.
Take suggestions from the community!
No preference

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

THAT is why so many stopped caring about the score. If you want them to care you have to make it value their PvP efforts in a PvP game mode.

Sviel.7493:

Thank you! I can wait until I get to my comp before reading the paragraph.

More polls please. For anything. At all.

Scoring really needs to be worked on.
I’d love a cross-map chat though, so I hope you guys can fit that in there.

briggah.7910:

lil devils x.6071:

The problem with this is the suggestions for scoring improvement do not necessarily reflect what the WvW community want to see happen to scoring. SCoring improvements need to happen, just not the changes ANet is suggesting. If you focus scoring on PPK instead of PPT and stop rewarding PvE, PvD kill NPC get rewarded system and instead make it so the score is more based on PPK while fighting over objectives you solve numerous problems at once rather than make more. People who play outside of " prime time" timeszones should not have their efforts devalued, instead the scoring should be based on PPK while fighting over objectives without the use of siege and it will balance itself instead since there are obviously less players to PPK during the off hours and still the same number of PvE objectives.

It is the PvE objectives that are throwing off the score, remove that from the score to solve the primary issue. Make is so the better fighters win instead of reward lazy game play.

The current system rewards dying as fast as you can so you can run back and PvD something undefended or get a whole zerg to sit in a keep and siege hump instead of fighting over objectives with a fun fight IS the problem with scoring. Make it so the teams that do that will lose and the players actually using their characters to fight over objectives win instead. That is what it will take to make players see the system as fair and worth keeping score on. Players do not care about the score due to it being based on such lame game play. If you make it right and base it on PvP game play in a PvP game mode and people will start to care again.

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

The thing is players WANT these things fixed, they just may not want them the way you think they need fixed. In fact some of the proposed ideas may make most the players who do not play prime time leave the game all together, and if that is the case, you are doing it wrong again. It very well may be the opposite of what you think should happen. What players have asked for from the beginning is for the score to be able PvP and rewarding the better fighters rather than reward the lazy people instead.

No thank you for a PPK focused score.. That will make the zergs even bigger than the ones we have running around right now.. Players need to split up more if you ask me and this is one way to not make players split up.

Not rewarding players for their kills is why so many have left WvW from Day 1. Players can accept losing to the better fighters, but not to the guys who die as fast as they can so they can run around and PvD because that should not be able to happen in a PvP game mode.

If you solve the actual population issues, every server will have a blob, so you will no longer have just a bob vs a few, instead you will have blob vs blob and that is not imbalanced. You have to keep in mind this IS a large scale PvP game mode and that the game already has a small scale PvP game mode, so yes they should not be concerned about catering to small scale PvP in the large scale PvP game mode. Instead, you can play small scale PvP in the game mode designed for Large scale PvP and if you get steam rolled, it just comes with the territory.

If you want fights restricted to lower numbers, you play the small scale PvP instead, as this is the only place in the game you can get large scale PvP. I prefer to be outnumbered in fights as that increases the challenge and fun for me personally, and do not want the numbers restricted so that if you win it felt like you earned it and if you do lose, at least it was a fun fight.

Some people like big fights in open areas, other likes siege wars and capturing objectives. They both make up large part of WvW and many players like to do one or other (or both). Just because you only like one thing, does not mean everyone else does. Removing one part from WvW completely would not make better game, it would just be less game.

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

Sorry, but I think that asymmetrical combat most certainly should be supported and sometimes that involves hit and run tactics and ducking fights.

The problem right now is that nearly 90% of the scoring can happen passively. Dropping that number to about 40%, and having fixed scoring for objective upgrades and captures, and boosting fights to about 40% will balance things nicely.

I like the idea of guerrilla warfare in WvW … and that revolves around objectives and deceptive play.

Pure PPK scoring would reduce the map to an gladiatorial arena and produce low complexity game play.

What I’d like most in WvW are rewards scaled to opposition faced. For example, if a solo player engages 3 enemies and wins, that player’s loot should be greater than that of one of the 3 enemies if they win.

I think a single player who can capturer a map objective such as a camp or tower should be rewarded more than a player who is simply following a zerg of 30+ players who can’t help but win against undefended objectives. This kind of reward system would encourage players to approach the territory capture aspect of the game with more strategy without completely ruining the zerg experience for those who enjoy that sort of thing.

As an aside, I love that this type of feedback is being used to improve the game. Of course, I think the poll should be in the game (as they were during beta), where the maximum number of players can vote. There is a large population of players who don’t watch the forums; but, are interested in helping improve the game.

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

Sorry, but I think that asymmetrical combat most certainly should be supported and sometimes that involves hit and run tactics and ducking fights.

The problem right now is that nearly 90% of the scoring can happen passively. Dropping that number to about 40%, and having fixed scoring for objective upgrades and captures, and boosting fights to about 40% will balance things nicely.

I like the idea of guerrilla warfare in WvW … and that revolves around objectives and deceptive play.

Pure PPK scoring would reduce the map to an gladiatorial arena and produce low complexity game play.

The gameplay has already been reduced to " dumbed down mode" due to the impact of PPT and not using the scoring to actually reflect the effort. This is why I think it should not just be about " PPK" but ALSO the objectives, but in a different way than they currently are using them. If the highest PPK in the game is given to players who are actually fighting over objectives rather than the objectives themselves, it will STILL matter that they have the objectives, just will creating value for the objectives in a different way. The defenders get slightly higher rare loot drops and PPK than the attackers so you do actually want to own the structure to increases the loot and PPk for the players on your team, which gives a reason to defend them outside of " PPT" which does not offer personal reward.

This would remove PvD value form the gamemode and bring players to where the action is instead of just rewarding PvD or " outnumber or run" mentality as it currently does.

WvW is not just PvP. Making PPK be a thing in WvW has reallly screwed up the basic intent of WvW: objective capturing and keeping. The current attitude in WvW is really negative and outright hostile when it comes to anything PPT.

I WvW for all aspects of WvW, and I feel there needs to be a stronger focus on ensuring a healthy balance of all aspects of WvW.

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

Sorry, but I think that asymmetrical combat most certainly should be supported and sometimes that involves hit and run tactics and ducking fights.

The problem right now is that nearly 90% of the scoring can happen passively. Dropping that number to about 40%, and having fixed scoring for objective upgrades and captures, and boosting fights to about 40% will balance things nicely.

I like the idea of guerrilla warfare in WvW … and that revolves around objectives and deceptive play.

Pure PPK scoring would reduce the map to an gladiatorial arena and produce low complexity game play.

The gameplay has already been reduced to " dumbed down mode" due to the impact of PPT and not using the scoring to actually reflect the effort. This is why I think it should not just be able " PPK" but ALSO he objectives. If the highest PPT in the game is given to players who are actually fighting over objectives rather than the objectives themselves, it will STILL matter that they have the objectives, just will creating value for the objectives in a different way. The defenders get slightly higher rare loot drops and PPK than the attackers so you do actually want to own the structure to increases the loot and PPk for the players on your team, which gives a reason to defend them outside of " PPT" which does not offer personal reward.

This would remove PvD value form the gamemode and bring players to where the action is instead of just rewarding PvD or " outnumber or run" mentality as it currently does.

If you don’t want someone to PvD, don’t let them. Get in their way.

I don’t see why Anet needs to accommodate your play style exclusively.

If you blob up and cant track down the havoc groups doing the PvD, then maybe you need to de-blob to create a counter offensive.

I think strategic thinking and countermeasures make the game more interesting. Narrowing the scope to fit only one play style is pretty lame.

You would be trading one problem for another.

Sich.7103:

lil devils x.6071:

…

Sorry WvW is not only about PKK… If you remove the tactical aspect, with protecting your supply line, upgrading and defending your keep, then it’s just massive PvP and structures will have no use at all…
We need change yes, like more PPT if upgraded, less reward when you take something and increase reward when you defend.
More reward if your server win, actually there is not a big difference if you are first or third… The 3 bonus chest are not a reward for me ! But no easy to reward players with partipation… Maybe something based on the actual participation system, and you need x amount of participation to have the gold reward at the end of the week.

But thx for this poll, good to see interaction between dev and players !

I think you misunderstand. The highest PPK in game should be given to fighting over objectives without the use of siege, with the defending team slightly higher than attacking team. This encourages you to fight over camps, towers, yaks, ad keeps much more so than the current system, it just does not reward Pvd undefended objectives and zerg siege humping is all.

You would have more players, not less fighting over the objectives because the objectives would be more valuable to players personally than they currently are. You get the increase loot and PPK from fighting over the objectives instead of getting it from NPC’s. If no NPC’s give you rewards, only fighting players without the use of siege, players will try much harder to do so and win than the current system.

Simplified:

• Highest PPK and LOOT in WvW is only given when you are fighting over an objective, whether it be a yak, keep or tower ect.

• Defending teams PPK and LOOT are slightly higher than attacking team ( stopping the K train by making defending the highest reward in the game. which will bring players back to defend instead of just attacking, forcing players to make harder choices.)

• Players can still do more damage on players with siege than with their characters, but give up their PPK and LOOT to do so thus not rewarding siege humping and encouraging them to learn how to play their characters instead.

• Objectives become more valuable to players than they are currently, because without them, you cannot receive the highest LOOT and PPK in the game mode. You are rewarded for fighting over them more than you are rewarded just for having them, thus not rewarding Afkers or people who only PvE in WvW.

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

Sorry, but I think that asymmetrical combat most certainly should be supported and sometimes that involves hit and run tactics and ducking fights.

The problem right now is that nearly 90% of the scoring can happen passively. Dropping that number to about 40%, and having fixed scoring for objective upgrades and captures, and boosting fights to about 40% will balance things nicely.

I like the idea of guerrilla warfare in WvW … and that revolves around objectives and deceptive play.

Pure PPK scoring would reduce the map to an gladiatorial arena and produce low complexity game play.

The gameplay has already been reduced to " dumbed down mode" due to the impact of PPT and not using the scoring to actually reflect the effort. This is why I think it should not just be able " PPK" but ALSO he objectives. If the highest PPT in the game is given to players who are actually fighting over objectives rather than the objectives themselves, it will STILL matter that they have the objectives, just will creating value for the objectives in a different way. The defenders get slightly higher rare loot drops and PPK than the attackers so you do actually want to own the structure to increases the loot and PPk for the players on your team, which gives a reason to defend them outside of " PPT" which does not offer personal reward.

This would remove PvD value form the gamemode and bring players to where the action is instead of just rewarding PvD or " outnumber or run" mentality as it currently does.

If you don’t want someone to PvD, don’t let them. Get in their way.

I don’t see why Anet needs to accommodate your play style exclusively.

If you blob up and cant track down the havoc groups doing the PvD, then maybe you need to de-blob to create a counter offensive.

I think strategic thinking and countermeasures make the game more interesting. Narrowing the scope to fit only one play style is pretty lame.

You would be trading one problem for another.

PvD happens because no one cares to defend objectives due to this design flaw. They fix that and people will care to defend. You will still have " strategic and countermeasures" due to objectives being more valuable than they currently are to players, just in a different way. They will be more valuable since you cannot receive the highest PPK and loot in WvW without them.

This will bring the people to the objectives instead of the field where they currently are. The people are fighting in the field because they have no reason to fight in the objectives currently and this would give them a reason to.

As for thought on this not being large scale PvP mode, you should consider Anet should listen to " the blob" since they are actually the majority of the players in the game mode. If the " blob" leaves the game, they lost the majority of the players playing it. Asking them to ignore " the Blob" when that is the most people, would be asking them to willfully kill their game off by ignoring the majority of players in it.

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

TorquedSoul.8097:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

Why can’t it be both. As it stands PPK represent less than 15% of the overall score. I think the weight of fighting should be increased but territorial control should not be completely thrown out.

IMO.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

Sorry, but I think that asymmetrical combat most certainly should be supported and sometimes that involves hit and run tactics and ducking fights.

The problem right now is that nearly 90% of the scoring can happen passively. Dropping that number to about 40%, and having fixed scoring for objective upgrades and captures, and boosting fights to about 40% will balance things nicely.

I like the idea of guerrilla warfare in WvW … and that revolves around objectives and deceptive play.

Pure PPK scoring would reduce the map to an gladiatorial arena and produce low complexity game play.

The gameplay has already been reduced to " dumbed down mode" due to the impact of PPT and not using the scoring to actually reflect the effort. This is why I think it should not just be able " PPK" but ALSO he objectives. If the highest PPT in the game is given to players who are actually fighting over objectives rather than the objectives themselves, it will STILL matter that they have the objectives, just will creating value for the objectives in a different way. The defenders get slightly higher rare loot drops and PPK than the attackers so you do actually want to own the structure to increases the loot and PPk for the players on your team, which gives a reason to defend them outside of " PPT" which does not offer personal reward.

This would remove PvD value form the gamemode and bring players to where the action is instead of just rewarding PvD or " outnumber or run" mentality as it currently does.

If you don’t want someone to PvD, don’t let them. Get in their way.

I don’t see why Anet needs to accommodate your play style exclusively.

If you blob up and cant track down the havoc groups doing the PvD, then maybe you need to de-blob to create a counter offensive.

I think strategic thinking and countermeasures make the game more interesting. Narrowing the scope to fit only one play style is pretty lame.

You would be trading one problem for another.

PvD happens because no one cares to defend objectives due to this design flaw. They fix that and people will care to defend. You will still have " strategic and countermeasures" due to objectives being more valuable than they currently are to players, just in a different way. They will be more valuable since you cannot receive the highest PPK and loot in WvW without them.

Well hopefully the scoring change will win the poll and we can start breaking it all down.

In the meantime, here is my proposal for scoring change if you want to continue the discussion.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/PPT-less-Scoring-model-Fights-and-Dolyaks

Add a WXP-gain sparkle trail.

Why is this even a thing….? Please just don’t, that’s pointless and more visual noise we don’t need in WvW. No one that actually plays WvW cares about ranks/WXP.

Scoring is the most important part to change right now to keep WvW going in a better state in the hopes of it becoming a really good game mode again . What’s the point of winning if the way you win is out of your control or simply just a mess like it is right now? There is no meaning to winning right now, fix the scoring and then we can look back into this.

I honestly believe that some of the QoL changes proposed in the polls could make it in a scoring update. If not, make them the next thing to focus on.

lil devils x.6071:

lil devils x.6071:

What needs to be on the poll is :

• Make scoring based on PPK over objectives rather than rewarding PvE game play in a PvP game mode, and I do not see that option there.

As long as the fighting over the objectives is rewarded more than the objective themselves it will improve the way players are rewarded for their efforts, both offense and defense. PvD Should have never been part of the score in a game mode where you want to encourage players to fight one another instead of NPC’s.

The problem when you allow for " avoiding fights" to be rewarded is it will encourage players to do exactly that in a PvP game mode. What is the point of playing a PvP game mode if the players who do not do so are the ones who win?

THAT is why so many stopped caring about the score. If you want them to care you have to make it value their PvP efforts in a PvP game mode.

I don’t want to call this player out for his/her view, it is all good, however I disagree when you say PPK should be scored even more then it is currently. If you have been around since the start of GW2 and for that matter games such as DaoC… WvW has never been about PvP… In fact, Anet themselves have called WvW PvE… Your PvP or like we have in WvW Zerg vs Zerg, is usually a desired side effect. WvW is about world domination, how much of your enemies turf can you take and hold. We have a great example here in this game of what happens when you make either one of these two systems more rewarding then the other… EotM, I think we can all agree is way to rewarding to Capture then it is to hold (PPT) to work, while WvW is way to rewarding for PPK. I have been in T1 all the way through T8(I am currently on SoR who is teamed up with Dragon brand). T1 all they are concerned with is mobbing stuff or Zerg vs Zerg fighting which again usually, but not always comes down to who has the largest Zerg, while in T8, Its not about zerg size, its about who has any numbers on at any given time of the day to cap when no one is on.

I know many in higher tiers want to see large scale fights, bash there heads against each other 10 hours a day 7/days a week… Those in the lower tiers want to have a challenge once in a while taking something. You have to balance PPT and PPK or you will in effect see larger zergs, or EotM repeated. While I like seeing that in theory a 60 against 60+ fight is possible, in reality, it happens way to much. 20 vs 20’s should be the norm. Break up the zerg and you can reward all you want on PPK, Don’t break them up, then they should have to hold as much as possible (PPT) I would propose you go back to 8 tiers and drop the player cap per map to say 40 instead of 80… Those that want to play and can’t do to queue, give them the option to transfer… For free if needed.

Sirendor.1394:

Draxjon.1790:

Build Templates?, anyone… ?huu ? nooh ??

That’s more of a game-wide QoL feature. So not really something that the WvW team would be working on. That of course doesn’t change I would really love Build templates.

If I remember right they said during the last AMA that if templates were to be introduced, it would most likely get developed/tested by either WvW or sPvP crew.

Thanks for the poll, very good ideea.

Currently population imbalances (across 24/7 timezones) are still the top problem, it’s absolutely pointless playing for a win: the differences are unsurmontable, despite this server linking.

You did well with these latest changes, but they are by far not enough: keep doing it until last place server really can compete for 1st place. Otherwise the players will give up, already seen a lot exasperated. The key is to make it competive again – one side matches are not fun – and currently all 3 tiers NA are completely one-sided, as in not winnable by 2 out of 3 servers in each tier. If not, all this effort is futile – not being able to play to win – makes it pointless.