Guild Wars 2

This post could possibly become one for the “Suggestion” board, but for now I would like to get some feedback from other players.

It seems to me that there is a lot of criticism on the Orb of Power mechanic in WvW. The basic argument against the current system is that when a stronger team steals an Orb they only get stronger, leaving a greater divide between them and the opposing teams. While this is true, there also has to be incentive for the opposing servers to take and defend the Orbs. Without the Orb bonus, no one would care about the Orbs at all.

The Orb mechanic broken down is just a “capture and hold the flag” game. This has been a tried and true system in games like Dark Age of Camelot, from which I think GW2 takes a lot of influences from. In and of itself it is not a bad system.

What makes the Orb of Power system bad in GW2 then? Why do some players think it leads to furthering the “skill” gap between servers?

I think that the problem comes down to is very simple: the Orbs begin in a very vulnerable position at the start of a match. The home server may as well not even defend their Orb and instead focus offensively on taking the Orbs in the other two zones. What we have at the start of a server is a very non-dynamic, non-seige zerg battle for the Orbs. Whoever out zergs the other server steals the Orb, places it in a well fortified defensive keep, and clearly has an upper advantage for their efforts.

I question whether or not this type of game play is really deserving of an Orb bonus, especially at the very beginning of a match up.

My proposal has two parts. The first part is as follows. Start the Orbs off in a defensive area that is comparable to the keeps that the enemies will be able to defend stolen Orbs in. This could be the home server’s keep, or the Cradle of Power could be redesigned into a keep that is protected by two gates (or three? read on).

The disadvantage of this change is that it is a bit “carebear” in comparison to the current system. The current system starts off with a bang as the fight over Orbs unfolds. The Orbs can switch hands a lot, at least at first. However, the benefits I think would create a better overall gaming experience. The attacking enemy would have to actually work at stealing the Orbs from the beginning by seiging a well defended keep, and the home server would have a fighting chance to defend their Orb. Although it would happen less frequently, taking an Orb would be an epic moment (like taking a relic in DAoC).

The second part of the proposal is to try to resolve the problem of the Orbs giving too much of a disparity between an already better opponent without penalizing the opponent for working hard for a real benefit (that benefit being the Orb’s power bonus of course). Not only start the Orb in a keep at the beginning of a match, but allow that keep to be more easily defensible by the home server than the opponents’ keeps. If the attacking servers are not strong enough to take the Orb at any given time, the defender wins and the two (or three) teams are at least equally matched. The Orb bonus doesn’t change. If an attacking team wins, the defender truly is out matched (at least at that moment). The attacker is awarded for their effort, meanwhile the defending team knows that if they can steal the Orb back they will always have a defensive advantage. The home server’s keep is already more defensible, so if the Orb started there then the issue is already solved (as far as I know, please correct me if I am wrong with this assumption). If the Orb starts off at the Cradle of Power, somehow beef that keep up to be more defensible than the other two enemy keeps.

Thoughts? Do I have any misunderstandings of the current system? I am looking for a slightly more balanced approach to the Orbs while not taking away the rewards from the “winners”. Also, even though I am a veteran DAoC player, I may have also overlooked some dynamic in the three-server system.

orbs are fine because its 1v1v1

if it was 1v1 orbs would be a horrible idea

the end

I’ve seen this discussion in a few posts as well as converstation amongst those in server chat / teamspeak. I’ve heard people state they’re seen posts stating nothing would change, whether that’s true or not I’m not 100% sure. However, here’s what I’ve heard and think would work for now.

If the Orbs gave the outmanned buff, i.e. extra karma, xp, magic find. That would yield more badges, monies, and of course karma and xp which helps with the lower levels and people gear hunting. Then give outmanned buff to the understaffed battle grounds as that would make a little more sense. Given right now from what I’ve seen, if the outmanned buff is on you it’s because how many of your people are in the battlefield not how many you’re out-matched by. (Could be wrong but can’t say for sure around it)

Currently there are a lot of people trying to get gear for WvW, given there are several people who already have it as well. I think with the Orbs a long term solution would be what we have right now, when everyone is pretty geared up and evenly matched. The current system should probably be tweaked ever so slightly though as 3 orbs can give people an enormous advantage. However, that said advantage can be overcome with careful planning. But then again careful planning won’t always work vs the masses that come your way.

There’s a number of flaws in your analysis. First, the most serious bit of orb fighting is right after the reset, when all three sides should be going for it. There are no well-fortified keeps at this point. In fact I would be surprised if any side could complete more than a single keep upgrade before someone deposits it in a keep. Because of this, what you get is actually a very dynamic battle for the first six hours.

For some anecdotal evidence, I was in a borderlands at the start last Friday. We rushed for the orb, grabbed it, and started running back to our keep – only to be killed by HoD en route. They were unable to secure the orb in time, so we waited for the reset and tried again. We got the orb after the reset, but failed to get as far as the first time, let alone back to our keep. HoD managed to haul it off to their garrison this time. What followed was two hours of crazy fighting, siege and a wide variety of strategies, eventually resulting in our capturing the orb, where it stayed for the next couple days.

I like the current mechanism because it actually allows a wide variety of strategies on the part of the world in the top position of the borderland. Should you mass at the orb’s spawn location and kill everyone that shows? Mass at garrison, let one side take it, then intercept them? Perhaps you consider one opponent to be a significantly greater threat than the other; you could send your forces to intercept them before they even get to the orb, so that the other side is guaranteed to take it. Or perhaps you consider a specific keep easier to assault than another, in which case you might want to let the side holding that keep take it. Let us not forget that there’s a variety of chokes, tight paths and cliffs on the way to the orb that lend themselves to all varieties of uses (blocking, ambush, AOE siege, assault from flank/back, etc.)

The core problem is (and has been) that the average WvW player doesn’t understand the importance of orbs. As that changes, I think they’ll become much less of an issue.

Why not have the orb reset to the middle of the map every 24 hours?

It would result in that same “And their off” mentality not only once, but as of the moment a total of seven times. This would allow the home team, if their holding a keep and they retrieved it, to place it somewhere far safer than the original cradle.

The biggest problem is when a single server holds all three, granting the superior bonus. Breaking into a location where the orb is held becomes an almost suicidal tactic.

By resetting the playing field every 24 hours it would allow for the orb bonuses to be a great asset to have, but not something that would continue to lengthen the gap between a leading server and the other two.

Having a reset every 24 hours would mean that after someone secures the orb, no one would bother trying to get it. After the first day, you can expect most keeps to be at least partially if not fully upgraded. 12 hour buffs would make assaults even more difficult. Why would you bother if you can just wait a day for the reset and try again?

Here’s an alternative concept that might help with the “strong getting stronger” everyone complains about.

On securing an orb, the holder is given three choices – minor bonus, major bonus, superior bonus. The minor bonus gives a 3% stat bonus, the major gives 5% (same as current), and the superior gives 7% (could be 2-5-8, or 3-6-9, or whatever, depending on balance).

The minor bonus becomes active immediately, as orbs currently do.

The major bonus requires a ramp-up time – half an hour per 1 percent of power. As such, it would take an two hours before the 5% bonus is fully applied (ramp would start at 1%, not 0). The duration of 12 hour guild bonuses would also be halved if applied to a keep with an orb in major mode.

The superior bonus would also require a ramp-up time – two hours per 1 percent of power (12 hour ramp). 12 hour guild bonuses would last only 3 hours. Further, no orb bonus would be active for the defending players in the vicinity of the keep.

The numbers in this example are all adjustable. Bonuses could be larger, smaller, have a wider spread. Ramp-up times could be different. The local disadvantages for choosing higher levels of power could be different.

Regardless, the point would be that orbs often might not take effect immediately, encouraging opposing sides to fight harder while they’re ramping up. The disadvantages of choosing a superior bonus might mean a world would have to deploy their best guilds to hold it – a “hard mode” effect, since if the other worlds have an orb or two, the defenders will actually be at a stat disadvantage. (Not to mention that an keep with an orb in superior mode is likely to attract a lot more attention from the opposing worlds than a keep with a major or minor).

Another interesting mechanic might be a “sacrifice” option. On activation, the orb charges for an hour before finally exploding (possible side effect – kill everyone in the keep?). Three hours after the explosion, the orb resets to its default location. This option might be useful if you fear your keep will be overrun during a long, grinding siege; it might also be handy if you have a fear of nightcapping. Set the orb to blow an hour before your server’s expected low-pop hours and hope you have enough people to pick it up three hours later. These mechanics could even be tied together – an orb that is captured while charging from the sacrifice might have a reduced ramp-up time – or none.

In any case, I’d rather see mechanic changes that allow for greater player choice and more complex strategy around orbs, rather than less. The majority of balance issues should sort themselves out as people learn to play and the world rankings adjust.

Daish.6139:

orbs are fine because its 1v1v1

if it was 1v1 orbs would be a horrible idea

the end

Can you elaborate please? Keep in mind that my main point is that the ability to zerg a single target at the match reset just doesn’t seem like a skillful way to steal an Orb in comparison to the effort and skill it takes to take one back from a defended keep.

Libalaw.5218:

Currently there are a lot of people trying to get gear for WvW, given there are several people who already have it as well. I think with the Orbs a long term solution would be what we have right now, when everyone is pretty geared up and evenly matched. The current system should probably be tweaked ever so slightly though as 3 orbs can give people an enormous advantage. However, that said advantage can be overcome with careful planning. But then again careful planning won’t always work vs the masses that come your way.

I agree with you in part. Part of the disparity is gear, I am sure. The other part of the disparity is pure organization, skill, leadership, and even luck.

My main concern is that the ability to zerg a more or less indefensible Orb at the server reset just doesn’t seem to merit the reward that it gives (a highly defensible Orb bonus as opposed to a non-defensible one).

What do you think of giving the defenders the advantage of being able to defend the Orb better than the attackers would be able to defend the Orb if stolen?

rndmize.9274:

There’s a number of flaws in your analysis. First, the most serious bit of orb fighting is right after the reset, when all three sides should be going for it. There are no well-fortified keeps at this point. In fact I would be surprised if any side could complete more than a single keep upgrade before someone deposits it in a keep. Because of this, what you get is actually a very dynamic battle for the first six hours.

Thanks for your feedback. Maybe I am misunderstanding something here. Is the home server able to zerg their Orb at the Cradle of Power, and bring it to their Garrison?

Keys.7395:

By resetting the playing field every 24 hours it would allow for the orb bonuses to be a great asset to have, but not something that would continue to lengthen the gap between a leading server and the other two.

That is an interesting proposal, and I have heard others recommend it. However, to me resetting the Orb every 24 hours seems to go against any kind of persistence that the game has (within the one/two week match). To me it also devalues the decision to attack or defend an Orb. If the Orb is going to reset tomorrow, why bother defending it? There is an obvious answer to that, but my point is that it is much easier to give up on an Orb battle if you know that it will be reset tomorrow. That seems to me like it would dumb down the overall experience of WvW.

The orb buff simply has to be changed. Fighting a server with 3 orbs is just ridiculous. As individuals the scaling of the buff for defence, attack, crit etc etc is bad enough but fighting a whole group of people with this buff makes them scale in offensive and defensive abilities to a massive degree. Guards get the buff, downed state gets the buff, trained sharks get the buff…I have no idea why someone concieved this idea in wvw to make the strongest team even stronger.

I don’t mind losing to the most organised team, and some of the tactics Arborstone have used this week have been superb, especially a couple of their guilds. When we managed to get one orb for a while versus the 2 of Arborstone the difference was unbelievably noticable.

My suggestion like many others is simple, swap the outmanned buff with orb buff plus give the keep the orb is kept in double points or something. I don’t particularly like giving any buff to players in wvw , but undermanned worlds need some help to help prevent some of the nightcapping which occurs when undermanned.

Also when a team is well ahead they get alot more vitality from the wvw general world buff, which just exacerbates the problem, so this buff needs to be removed. Once these issues are resolved I expect to see far closer battles.

Well it make sense orb bring a bonus (or why hold it), what could be done is that keeping it cost more and more as time goes through (orb doing damage to the keep holding it or something like that). Keeping an orb should be challenging in itself, the idea of having a dragon attacking the keep with an orb, would be even more awesome, but a simpler mechanics would be alright too.

Boulderbolg.3460:

Thanks for your feedback. Maybe I am misunderstanding something here. Is the home server able to zerg their Orb at the Cradle of Power, and bring it to their Garrison?

The home server can’t touch the orb until it has been removed from the starting altar. They’re effectively required to zerg one of the sides attacking or to try and defend the default location (losing proposition). My general point was that things are more dynamic when any server has a reasonably equal chance to get the orb rather than having to start with a siege. Because the paths to carry the orb to a keep run along the spawn position of the home server, they have a number of opportunities to try and take it back, even if they can’t take it from the altar initially.

Personally, I think they should just make the boon on the orb into a condition, and have the orb ownership itself add points to the ticking totals.

That way, those people taking orbs are making a strategic decision. Do we grab the orb for the points it will give us, knowing it’ll collectively give us a condition that makes us a little weaker?

They also have a downside to holding them (and especially holding multiples) and the condition can give the people trying to take the orb away a better shot against odds stacked against them.