Guild Wars 2

Lots of things seemed stacked against defending now. Siege costs have escalated and supply depots are now so far away from where you need siege such as arrowcarts that by the time you build one it’s too late. Oasis event is just horrid, really not understanding why it was developed, plus now it takes less effort. Catas have had their build cost cut so that attackers can speed up the karma train. Lords are so weak that solo caps are a frequent event. Keeps are laid out so defensive siege is obstructed.

Sounds about right.

What? If you don’t think defending is far far easier now than it used to be you’re doing it wrong.

The last time Arenanet listened to defenders we ended up the New Bordlerlands travesty.

Hopefully they’ve learnt their lesson.

Yup, you’re doing it wrong.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

Lots of things seemed stacked against defending now. Siege costs have escalated and supply depots are now so far away from where you need siege such as arrowcarts that by the time you build one it’s too late. Oasis event is just horrid, really not understanding why it was developed, plus now it takes less effort. Catas have had their build cost cut so that attackers can speed up the karma train. Lords are so weak that solo caps are a frequent event. Keeps are laid out so defensive siege is obstructed.

Getting siege behind gates isn’t bad; but, yeah, running supplies for what seems like miles to those good ac spots in keeps can be a real pain.

At the small level, a few players per side defense v. attacking is about the same.

Once you get to higher population levels taking keeps is insanely harder than it ever has been due to all the upgrades, the stats boosts, the tactics etc.

Siege is actually fairly cheap, if you wait for the gluts and buy lots of it.

I agree they need to change the oasis event, the damage to doors from it is excessive. Worse this just makes it easier for the server with the most people to cap everything – it makes the already overpowered worlds even more powerful. Personally I would get rid of it and put something else there.

A seventh damaged and easily capped fortification would be useful. One that doesn’t upgrade.

The central ruins from the desert map would also be an option, except increase the counter time and make it that you have to hold the ruins constantly to get the buff. Make it you need 5 people minimum to cap one. Give PPT for holding each ruin, or put teleporters to enable fast travel to different areas of the map for a side that holds them, not a buff.

Even a flat plain for GvGs, no matter how much I hate those personally, would be better.

You also get an hour to complete the event, 20 mins is normally excessive for doing it. With the reduction to just 12 power cores the time should be massively reduced.

LOL….. your doing it wrong.

Pro Tip 1. If you are trying to build seige after the enemy attacks, then you are doing it wrong.

Pro Tip 2. If you are trying to defend a tower or keep by yourself, then you are doing it wrong.

Currently WvW is stacked toward the defender. With more hp on the doors and walls and over the top stupidly buffed lords with pve mechanic all the defenders have a advantage. The problem is very few people want to defend, and even less want to play on the new bl’s. Ac damage reduced, and the ability for people’s armor types to effect seige damage needs fixed.

Superior carts need some serious buff. You can almost afk under ac fire. If enemy can cap keep without 20 min trebbing it’s clear that attacking is too easy.

Sureeee.., I’m doing it wrong LOL. Well these replies reinforce my argument, they show that attackers like to cap with a minimum of effort and skill and want it kept that way. I do agree that being a lone defender is a disadvantage, my point after 3 yrs of doing an excellent job of it I know what to do and it has become harder. Another disadvantage for my server is the devastation it suffered from fighting between transferred DB guilds and native players unwilling to accept them. We lost many guilds that worked as partners, my own guild transferred and at the advice of one of our main troublemakers went so far as to form a new guild to seperate those of us who stayed. The problem players from both sides are now mostly gone and we are rebuilding but are left with players who seem to think its better to hold 1 Keep in EB then rush to defend 3 in BL, opting instead to backcap. So yes I guess because I solo defend I’m doing it wrong in your view. My argument still stands correct tho, and that which I described have made defending much harder now and attacking much easier… unless the attackers are doing it wrong.

Poor guy…. the main problem here is you want to be able to solo defend an objective from a 50 man zerg. That is an unrealistic expectation! We should not rebalance the entire game because your server imploded. It didn’t get harder because defense got weaker, it got harder because you lost population, and most importantly because all the people that use to fight on the bl’s now only fight on ebg, and are afraid to Leave e bg because they can’t get back in, so no one responds to attackers on bls.

Bearded.6485:

The problem is very few people want to defend, and even less want to play on the new bl’s. Ac damage reduced, and the ability for people’s armor types to effect seige damage needs fixed.

This is true. Defending, or defenders, do not get any rewards outside of personal satisfaction. Same thing applies to solo roamers who scout, flip camps, sentries, and NPC’s.

Bearded.6485:

Poor guy…. the main problem here is you want to be able to solo defend an objective from a 50 man zerg. That is an unrealistic expectation! We should not rebalance the entire game because your server imploded. It didn’t get harder because defense got weaker, it got harder because you lost population, and most importantly because all the people that use to fight on the bl’s now only fight on ebg, and are afraid to Leave e bg because they can’t get back in, so no one responds to attackers on bls.

LOL who said anything about a 50 man zerg? Please refrain from your poor attempts at trolling and read the original post. From the sounds of it you never even attempt to defend or roam, just zerg. My server is fine with population, I did acknowledged that there is a lack of defenders which we had a nice close knit community of. I never insinuated that I expected to hold a Fort against a large group, its when a 5 man party can use the event to open all the Towers and bring Keep gates to less then half so they can speed cap everything before you even have a chance to build siege to defend. There needs to be more of a balance. Anet admitted they garnished their ideas for new maps from convention attendees , the large WvW guilds on high end servers who PPT, and PvE players ( for ideas on making WvW more attractive to them). If they had talked to defenders and roamers things would be different. Also plz refrain from your silly veiled insults, if you wish to have an intelligent discussion that is wonderful but trolling is not appreciated by anyone.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

Sureeee.., I’m doing it wrong LOL. Well these replies reinforce my argument, they show that attackers like to cap with a minimum of effort and skill and want it kept that way.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

From the sounds of it you never even attempt to defend or roam, just zerg.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

Also plz refrain from your silly veiled insults, if you wish to have an intelligent discussion that is wonderful but trolling is not appreciated by anyone.

Remind me again who is making silly veiled insults? You got your discussion then started the insults. but gg

First, they did listen to defenders…that’s why it took 45 minutes to take a keep when HOT came out with 5 sup rams on a paper gate. No one liked it so they reduced the amount of HP on doors and walls. Then they reduced the supply cost of catapults because once again no one liked it, because game was tilted too much towards defense. Gates, walls, and Lords still have more HP than before HOT, but now you have banners airships, supply drops, hardened doors, and invul walls. Defense has gotten a HUGE buff, even tho before HOT defense was just fine.

I use to be a defender. I spent 2 years primarly being a BL defender. I spent most of that time being poor because I was paying for upgrades and seiging up towers and keeps. I know how to defend I also know how to break a defense. Then I relized this game isn’t about defending towers, and that the only reason the towers exist is to force 2 or more sides to fight. Most people and most servers do not PPT, most wvw commanders don’t attack a tower to take it to improve the score, they attack it to force the other server to fight them, and that’s what this game is about FIGHTS…. not defense. If they listened to defenders then all this game would be is a red, blue and green guy setting in a keep with airships on every tower and camp.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

Sureeee.., I’m doing it wrong LOL. Well these replies reinforce my argument, they show that attackers like to cap with a minimum of effort and skill and want it kept that way. I do agree that being a lone defender is a disadvantage, my point after 3 yrs of doing an excellent job of it I know what to do and it has become harder. Another disadvantage for my server is the devastation it suffered from fighting between transferred DB guilds and native players unwilling to accept them. We lost many guilds that worked as partners, my own guild transferred and at the advice of one of our main troublemakers went so far as to form a new guild to seperate those of us who stayed. The problem players from both sides are now mostly gone and we are rebuilding but are left with players who seem to think its better to hold 1 Keep in EB then rush to defend 3 in BL, opting instead to backcap. So yes I guess because I solo defend I’m doing it wrong in your view. My argument still stands correct tho, and that which I described have made defending much harder now and attacking much easier… unless the attackers are doing it wrong.

Your issue is your servers population, not the mechanics of defending/attacking.

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

My server is fine with population

DaVid Darksoul.4985:

when a 5 man party can use the event to open all the Towers and bring Keep gates to less then half so they can speed cap everything before you even have a chance to build siege to defend

Either your server is fine with population and can defend and win the Oasis event against a whole 5 man group, or it isn’t and your arguments are invalid.

/thread

The argument is valid. If a given number of players could defend against a given number of attackers using siege before in a castle or keep and can no longer do that due to mechanics changes then it nothing to do with population or doing it wrong.

My own belief is this not so much the cheaper catpults provided the attacker though this does play some role as it is the increase in the AOE at range that can be used against those manning castle walls and the damage that AOE causes.

I used to man a cannon with the same build a lot longer back then than I can now against the same number of enemy just because now That AOE comes in thicker and faster.

Now on the new Home BLS wall design does make it harder to place defensive siege overall. Prebuilding siege makes no difference if there so many places where it can not cover an area that is attacked. I also think there less people to reset said siege as some areas just take longer to get to and remain “dead” for many long hours unlike the old home BL’s where you could pretty well count on every keep and tower and camp getting hit thus make the rounds as you stalked enemy groups to reset the stuff.

babazhook.6805:

The argument is valid. If a given number of players could defend against a given number of attackers using siege before in a castle or keep and can no longer do that due to mechanics changes then it nothing to do with population or doing it wrong.

An outnumbered group should never be able to defend forever against an overwhelming force.
Defending requires fighting, not arrowcarts. If you don’t have the people to fight the attackers, you lose the objective, it’s as simple as that. This is a Player vs Player mode, not Siege vs Player.

Menaka.5092:

babazhook.6805:

The argument is valid. If a given number of players could defend against a given number of attackers using siege before in a castle or keep and can no longer do that due to mechanics changes then it nothing to do with population or doing it wrong.

An outnumbered group should never be able to defend forever against an overwhelming force.
Defending requires fighting, not arrowcarts. If you don’t have the people to fight the attackers, you lose the objective, it’s as simple as that. This is a Player vs Player mode, not Siege vs Player.

We have pure PvP game mode and it’s NOT WvW.
There is a reason (or there was one once) of having fortifications. And I mean something else besides having stuff to K-train all day round.
The whole point of fortifications is to give some edge and allow outnumbered to hold off attackers. Heck that was and is the point of creating fortifications in real life. It’s all point of having some balance.

That balance was shifted towards attacker on new BL. What makes me really really angry is not that it shifted, but that it shifted by bad design. By design “Oh i like it I think it looks cool”. Design that gives attackers sweet safe spots practically under your wall. That places siege in useless position.

For example the cannons on keep gates. The only more useless position would be for it to be on the ground outside of the gate.

friendly? ermm….

u know, the +100 stats buff make lots of difference
the +100 can become +200 with the scribing thing

so what so friendly to attacker?

Menaka.5092:

babazhook.6805:

The argument is valid. If a given number of players could defend against a given number of attackers using siege before in a castle or keep and can no longer do that due to mechanics changes then it nothing to do with population or doing it wrong.

An outnumbered group should never be able to defend forever against an overwhelming force.
Defending requires fighting, not arrowcarts. If you don’t have the people to fight the attackers, you lose the objective, it’s as simple as that. This is a Player vs Player mode, not Siege vs Player.

Please do not put words in my mouth. I never stated that one should be able to defend against an overhwelming force. This has never been the case in WvW.

I have playved WvW since inception and without reservation can state it harder to defend now as compared to prior. The populations overall THAN were higher so why is it harder to defend now?

The reasons are as stated. The keeps and towers are not designed so as to allow appropiate siege placement. There is far more ranged AOE than there was before that can clear the walls and this AOE hits much harder. In Home BLS it takes much longer to run to camps to get supply so as to effect repairs or build siege.

NONE of this is related to a small force holding off an overhwhelming force.

babazhook.6805:

I have playved WvW since inception and without reservation can state it harder to defend now as compared to prior. The populations overall THAN were higher so why is it harder to defend now?

The reasons are as stated. The keeps and towers are not designed so as to allow appropiate siege placement. There is far more ranged AOE than there was before that can clear the walls and this AOE hits much harder. In Home BLS it takes much longer to run to camps to get supply so as to effect repairs or build siege.

I’ve seen siege placed where attackers find it very hard to get to and I only know of 1 spot where attackers can place siege that defenders can’t destroy with their siege. Plus there are now shield generators, use them to protect siege and the gate or walls. Not to mention the plethora of tactics now available to defenders which weren’t available before.

The consensus is that defending is easier then before, too easy in fact. The fact that you and the OP state differently just says to me that you are both doing it wrong.

morrolan.9608:

babazhook.6805:

I have played WvW since inception and without reservation can state it harder to defend now as compared to prior. The populations overall THAN were higher so why is it harder to defend now?

The reasons are as stated. The keeps and towers are not designed so as to allow appropiate siege placement. There is far more ranged AOE than there was before that can clear the walls and this AOE hits much harder. In Home BLS it takes much longer to run to camps to get supply so as to effect repairs or build siege.

I’ve seen siege placed where attackers find it very hard to get to and I only know of 1 spot where attackers can place siege that defenders can’t destroy with their siege. Plus there are now shield generators, use them to protect siege and the gate or walls. Not to mention the plethora of tactics now available to defenders which weren’t available before.

The consensus is that defending is easier then before, too easy in fact. The fact that you and the OP state differently just says to me that you are both doing it wrong.

I am sorry I do not see such a “consensus”. The majority of names that posted here agreed with the OP. I on my own going solo on a cannon on an enemy wall can take it down 30 percent faster then before just because of boosts to damage of a single skill.

Those in disagreement to the OP speak from the perspective of massive zergs on each side. Every measurement goes out of whack when there are “overhwelming numbers” fighting. (ie 10 of me attacking that same cannon with the boosts to a single skill will take it down even faster)Tier one servers may experience things differently than those lower in tiers but that hardly means there a consensus and it speaks to how sheer numbers affect mechanics.

babazhook.6805:

I am sorry I do not see such a “consensus”. The majority of names that posted here agreed with the OP.

There are 3 on the thread agreeing with the OP including yourself, another 2 who agreed with aspects but not the general proposition, its not a majority. And the clear consensus outside this thread is that defending has been made too easy. There may be specific issues with siege placement but that doesn’t lead overall to it being harder to defend a keep or tower from being taken.

morrolan.9608:

babazhook.6805:

I am sorry I do not see such a “consensus”. The majority of names that posted here agreed with the OP.

There are 3 on the thread agreeing with the OP including yourself, another 2 who agreed with aspects but not the general proposition, its not a majority. And the clear consensus outside this thread is that defending has been made too easy. There may be specific issues with siege placement but that doesn’t lead overall to it being harder to defend a keep or tower from being taken.

I think you should re-examine what consensus means. Consensus is not a majority of opinion. Consensus is when peoples set aside their differences to agree on a singlar statement.

This thread itself shows there is no consenus on either of these statements .

Defending keeps and towers is more difficult then prior to HOT expansion.

Defending keeps and towers is easier then prior to the HOT expansion.

Note I did not state that because the majoirty of opinion on this thread in favor of the OP meant there consensus on his point. I stated clearly there was no consensus. A consensus might be something like “Defending keeps and towers is different than prior to the HOT expansion”

[Quote=]Simple Definition of consensus

: a general agreement about something : an idea or opinion that is shared by all the people in a group[\quote]

Dictionary….is your friend…bra….

I believe what your referring to is a COMPROMISE…….

Defending has gotten easier… sort of but not really.

Once structures/ranged projectiles stopped being bugged to clip through walls and we don’t have the issues of druid airborne divisions, defending will be objectively easier.

Cata costs are getting reduced because guild catapults (superior-level stats) got normalized to 60 supply from 20. This hurt smaller groups substantially, and buffs to defensive structures on top of catas already being slower and more expensive than rams could justify a cost reduction.

If they bumped rewards for defending such that more people did it, I think we’d start seeing an obvious understanding of the favor defense has. A thing to realize is that a bulk majority of the players in WvW right now just want fights, and with the gimmicks placed in structures from upgrades, fighting inside is unappealing. Thus, many find it more fun to go on the attacking side and play aggressively. Since you’ll see more people playing aggressively, it’s only natural attacking forces will appear at an advantage; typically speaking combat favors those with superior numbers, as it should in the event of equal skill, attacking or defending. Favoring defense too heavily yields stagnant gameplay such that people don’t both to attack, which then de-values defense. Either then it’s a constant push back and forth, or simply the players just leave the game mode and it dies, and neither are very good for the game’s future.

No I am using the word properly. I used the thread itself as evidence. From wikipedia “what is a Consensus”.

>>Consensus is not a majority vote. An opinion expressed by 51 percent is not a consensus.

note even your defintion from the dictionary contradicts your claims.

Your defintion states AN Opinion shared by ALL members in the group. Obviously not all members agree on this matter. I used the thread itself to show there no consensus. The person stating otherwise gave no evidence he just stated it the case as a matter of fact.