Guild Wars 2

Allie Murdock.8152:

Hey all,

Just wanted to let you know that we’re working on another Collaborative Development initiative that we will be rolling out soon. So, start thinking about some things you would like to see in WvW, and watch out for the new thread!

- A

As per this quote from Allie, thought maybe we could get on with the chatter here to be productive.

• How about contested gates. So if a gate is being attacked, enemy players can’t run into the portal for that gate.

• Perhaps they can only if in stealth.

• Reason being this would mean a force coming to save a besieged tower/keep would be forced to rally outside the tower and engage in actual combat. Not just rush past the sieging force, drop/man siege, and avoid PvP. It also stops the free gate from being used as a means of escape, which is nothing more than a free invlun with no cooldown.

I would be opposed to that particular suggested change if implemented alone. IMO defense is already hard enough to promote. If such a change were to occur, it would have to be paired with something that would buff defensive capabilities (ex. PvD damage reduced to 1-5 per hit).

So, unless you are already inside the tower etc, this means that just about no one would show up to defend a location unless it is a large blob, because the smaller or solo people will know they will not be able to get inside to man the siege there, so why try? Sounds like a poor idea. Also, dropping and manning siege is a part of WvW, we need things that make people want to defend places, not more reasons to turn people off from it.

New things I’d like to see related to WvW? How about ANet actually following through on any WvW CDI? That would certainly be startlingly different.

1. How about rotating WvW lands that changed at reset. It would be nice to have 3 or 4 different maps. I think we all know the secret spots on this current map.

2. Anet could change reset every time using the current map. Maybe start out every borderland keep with a waypoint and full supply every now and then. Or have all towers and keeps be fully fortified. Mix it up.

It would be exciting at reset not knowing what to expect.

Catleana
IOJ [WolF]

Three things I would like to see in WvW.

1.) Controlled queues so that a reasonable proportion of population between servers would be maintained.
a.) I recognize that this defeats part of the purpose of WvW by denying access to
some players who wish to play. However, I believe that the improvement in game
quality and the reduction of “trains” would compensate and it would be a win in
long run by favoring quality play over numbers.

2.) Make fortresses more defensible.

a.) Make the doors and walls invulnerable to hand weapons and magic. This would
serve Arena Net by encouraging people to buy siege and defend camps.

b.) Reconfigure the catwalks in such a way that one can hide from aoe while still
being able to fight. It is frustrating that I mostly can’t hit a defender with an
aimed attack, but any noob can spam wells and/or Ranger barrage to make
catwalk impassible.

3.) Create boats! I think a pirate ship would be mega cool.

• A community coordinator who’s role is to liaise between players and wvw devs. Talks openly and frequently on the forums, participating in threads or starting discussions at least once a week.

• More resources on WvW. Monthly updates instead of half-yearly. It’s shown to be possible with story content.

• Redesign of ruins. Instead of capture points for the bloodlust mechanic, keep them as open field cap points but introduce map wide Events that occur periodically on random, individual points. All teams would be drawn to the point for open field fighting, at which point some sort of victory condition would reward one team with a PPT bonus and supply/rewards.
  -Victory conditions could be things like standard point cap, or deathmatch point tally, or deathmatch point attrition etc.

• New matchup conditions. Left 4 Dead 2 introduced weekly alternative game modes for players to play. GW2 could mix things up week to week by adding/removing new gameplay elements.
  -Example: All keeps reward no ppt but come with instant tier 1 WP. PPT only ticks on the respective BL if all 4 towers on the map are held at the same time.
  -Example: No gates week. No gates on towers or keeps.

• Meta Capture/Defend events for Camps, Towers, and Keeps.
  -Anything can be captured at any time, but the map promotes certain targets for periods of time according to their difficulty. This is to draw attackers and defenders to key locations for to promote more player interaction (as opposed to PvDoor’ing).
  -Alternatively, make these Meta capture/defend events THE ONLY time players can cap locations. That way even a server with a minimum force has the players due to coverage to defend against servers who have more men to field more sieges in various locations at once.

That’s just a few to start with.

So, is Grouch gone already? We’re going through these community coordinators pretty quickly these days.

#VoteTaquitoNextCC2014

TeamBattleAxe.3901:

So, is Grouch gone already? We’re going through these community coordinators pretty quickly these days.

#VoteTaquitoNextCC2014

I think that’s ANet’s plan … cycle them through so each one can ask us to start from scratch again.

Perhaps there should be a sticky of things we want to see so that every time a new community coordinator comes it, he/she has to look no further than the first page.

Though honestly, considering how well our previous CDIs turned out, is anyone even going to bother to participate?

Would really appreciate an inventory for siege only, separate from bag slots. As it is now, my siege blueprints take up almost 20 slots (regulars, superiors, guild) in my bag. Sounds like it’d be an easy fix for something that would greatly convenience commanders.

Bring aistrikes, kodan hamer and light sprite transformation from EoTM to the regular maps…

Borderlands maps and weekly PPT + EOTM “faction” based match ups and overflows.

1) A much stronger binding between guilds and towers/keeps in WvW:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/If-you-could-change-the-scoring-mechanic/3552163
combined with a different scoring, that punishes Karma-trains and nerfs the domination of coverage.

2) Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance instead of World vs World vs World, so you are free to choose whom you want in your team.

3) No item spiral in WvW. Upgrade stats of Exo to corresponding Asc while in WvW.

4) Add a plausible movement checker to the server that teleports (with dead if in fight) all implausible movement back to spawn (no more flying, no more below ground, no more teleport, no more glitch through doors/walls, …)

5) Make future leagues with different and varying match-durations/play time. E.g.:
a weekend-league combined with a weekday-league, a time-sliced league with a NA-prime-match, an Oceanic-prime-match, an EU-prime-match

6) No possibility to rally in WvW. On total dead immediate port to spawn. (Attrition war becomes possible, no longer the winner wins unharmed. No more need to guard dead Mesmer waiting for a perma-stealthed thief).

7) Change the WP-block in keeps/SN: the teleport is blocked permanent (without “port-window”) whenever a visible and not dead enemy is inside outer walls area (inside inner walls of course as well). As soon there is not one visible enemy left port opens immediately. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-is-SM-waypoint-contested-all-the-time/1810315

Alternative for 1): Nerf the domination of coverage: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage

Alternative for 2): Compute transfer costs based on WvW Glicko-rating instead of the completely meaningless overall population. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Free-transfers-to-small-pop-servers/2126651

In general: More variation, e.g. in match-duration and alternative scoring such that match-outcome becomes less predictable and boring.

Bug/exploit fixes

Offair.2563:

Bug/exploit fixes

That would be a really brand new innovation in WvW

Why not randomized maps. If some appear unbalanced then deal with it.

Larger maps with more objectives creating more space and time so smaller groups can thrive.

The ability to manually carry supplies to restock a keep.

A secondary supply source that “powers” the waypoints which are delivered to the keep by dolyak or hand. Rather then waypoints shutting down on a tap they shut down when that supply runs out. The source of this type of supply is more limited and any inventory of the same vanishes when using a waypoint (ie if a player allowed to carry 1 and tries to run it to a keep it stripped if he waypoints to another borderland )

A wait period on all server to server transfers. I just do not like the notion of transfers to another server mid way through a season just because they are winning.

The ability to build temporary roadblocks anywhere. It a type of siege that allows the construct of roadblocks at choke points that must be taken out first before one can pass. It very temporary and will only remain 15 minutes.

More “trap” types sold by the merchant that sells supply and stealth traps. As example a trap that launches a group back from the area when stepped on.

A reward for the successful defense of a keep or tower rather then just getting the sacks when one takes the same.

The ability to capture another teams siege and use it rather then just destroy it. If you swing on it as example you destroy as usual. If you stand by it for a length of time and use the F key it captured and changes sides. An owning side can destroy said siege more rapidly if they think it will be captured.

I would like old maps to be replaced by EotM or similar maps in the future.

mango.9267:

Would really appreciate an inventory for siege only, separate from bag slots. As it is now, my siege blueprints take up almost 20 slots (regulars, superiors, guild) in my bag. Sounds like it’d be an easy fix for something that would greatly convenience commanders.

Should come with the commander tag – once one bought the commander tag, one gets room in inventory reserved for plans… and when one tags, he/she gets an easier access to those plans than through inventory… since it might bring misclicks in combat by some, it can be a toggle on/off through options.
Even just for siege and superior, it would be great!

I would like to be able to build open field defenses like trenches, moats, barricades and outposts and stuff to make access our towers more of a challenge.

Dayra.7405:

1) A much stronger binding between guilds and towers/keeps in WvW:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/If-you-could-change-the-scoring-mechanic/3552163
combined with a different scoring, that punishes Karma-trains and nerfs the domination of coverage.

2) Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance vs Guild Alliance instead of World vs World vs World, so you are free to choose whom you want in your team.

3) No item spiral in WvW. Upgrade stats of Exo to corresponding Asc while in WvW.

4) Add a plausible movement checker to the server that teleports (with dead if in fight) all implausible movement back to spawn (no more flying, no more below ground, no more teleport, no more glitch through doors/walls, …)

5) Make future leagues with different and varying match-durations/play time. E.g.:
a weekend-league combined with a weekday-league, a time-sliced league with a NA-prime-match, an Oceanic-prime-match, an EU-prime-match

6) No possibility to rally in WvW. On total dead immediate port to spawn. (Attrition war becomes possible, no longer the winner wins unharmed. No more need to guard dead Mesmer waiting for a perma-stealthed thief).

7) Change the WP-block in keeps/SN: the teleport is blocked permanent (without “port-window”) whenever a visible and not dead enemy is inside outer walls area (inside inner walls of course as well). As soon there is not one visible enemy left port opens immediately. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Why-is-SM-waypoint-contested-all-the-time/1810315

Alternative for 1): Nerf the domination of coverage: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Nerf-the-domination-of-Coverage

Alternative for 2): Compute transfer costs based on WvW Glicko-rating instead of the completely meaningless overall population. https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Free-transfers-to-small-pop-servers/2126651

In general: More variation, e.g. in match-duration and alternative scoring such that match-outcome becomes less predictable and boring.

win.

WvW needs one thing. Way point to commander tag from anywhere for 1 gold.

Zylonite.5913:

WvW needs one thing. Way point to commander tag from anywhere for 1 gold.

Hell no.
A large part of dealing with enemy zergs is cutting off their reinforcements.

1. I look forward to seeing a new CC in 3 weeks, not because I think anyone is doing a bad job of it. I just like to maintain averages.

2. The new CC should ask us for a “concise list” of the things we players want, because it’s too hard to read the previous CDI.

3. I would also like a copy of Inception for my birthday next June, while we wait for this meta to repeat itself.

Change the matchups to a series of 3 hr ( could be 4 ) sessions, resetting all structures at the end of each session. ( no more day/night capping )

and

Remove the high gold costs of upgrading and increase the supply carried by yaks so that a keep can be fully upgraded in 25-50% of the game period if “x” yaks arrive.