Guild Wars 2

Those suggestiong cause more problems than they are worth. Think before you post them because it is obvious they are not very though out.

Here is why.

We have enough people on the server causing grief by using supply to siege cap and waste supply.

We don’t need to give these people another tool to cause problems.

If a debuff is applied because a group of players are in a area, all it would take is just that one player to put a group over the limit.

Then there is the defense. Say guild x left so many people in hills to defend and the rest to apply pressure. Hills get attacked so now so that we don’t get a stupid debuff, the commander will have to do some math and leave behind the group applying pressure. Add to that the rest of the server that happen to enjoy hills defense so they come along to help and instead they hinder because of a stupid debuff suggestion. So now we also get server drama because people wanted to help but didn’t know they were going to cause more problems than actually help.

These things are dumb. Quit suggesting them because they cause more problems than actually help.

If you want to encourage something other than a zerg, come up with something else.

I happen to enjoy all aspects of WvW, I don’t care to see the zerg portion ruined just because some of you people don’t like it.

The rebuttal to a debuff is math…?

EDIT: I understand what you are saying. I posted this exact reason (server drama/player griefing) as why something like this wouldn’t be implemented. It’s the same reason outnumbered buff doesn’t give stat increases.

Sadly, as long as “more people less problems” is the meta, people are going to be looking to change it. It’s not skillful, people don’t enjoy fighting in huge lag-fests outnumbered 80 to 45. It’s not fun. I, personally, am glad people have been very vocal about wanting to spread out the player population, if not on a server basis but on a per-map basis.

I don’t think it is a stupid suggestion, almost no suggestion is stupid, if it is implemented correctly and very gradual, something like this could work.

The bad part is hitting multiple objectives is a WAY more efficient use of man power but it isn’t as easy.

LilMcGinley.3890:

The rebuttal to a debuff is math…?

EDIT: I understand what you are saying. I posted this exact reason (server drama/player griefing) as why something like this wouldn’t be implemented. It’s the same reason outnumbered buff doesn’t give stat increases.

Sadly, as long as “more people less problems” is the meta, people are going to be looking to change it. It’s not skillful, people don’t enjoy fighting in huge lag-fests outnumbered 80 to 45. It’s not fun. I, personally, am glad people have been very vocal about wanting to spread out the player population, if not on a server basis but on a per-map basis.

I don’t think it is a stupid suggestion, almost no suggestion is stupid, if it is implemented correctly and very gradual, something like this could work.

The bad part is hitting multiple objectives is a WAY more efficient use of man power but it isn’t as easy.

The skill lag isn’t because of zergs.

Skill lag is a server problem. Zergs just make it show more.

Skill lag should be fixed with a server fix, not a player grouping fix. Any skill lag fixed for WvW will also fix the skill lag in PvE. It would be nice to do a Shatter, Teq, any other boss event without having the skill lag present(not that it would change those events from auto attack anyway but it would still be nice.)

Skill lag is what a lot of people blame and something they often want to fix with their suggestion but it doesn’t fix the actual problem, it would still be a band aid for what really needs to be fixed.

fighting a zerg 45 to 85 isn’t terrible because you’re outnumbered

Its terrible because of all the crap mechanics in the game that make Zerging so much more effective.

AOE Cap, Downed System, Boon System (Crap tons of Retal) ect ect..All these add up to a system where stacking into a huge ball and spamming a bunch of blast finisher’s on top one of one another for boons followed by running over smaller numbers because your AOE’s are more likely to hit a larger % of their force then they will hit of yours hence your AOE’s are more effective, followed by a Down system that lets large numbers of people instantly res (Thus inflating the numbers of the zerg even more)

This is why people suggest things to counter the zerg, Because the zerg right now is vastly over rewarded..

It needs some major negatives added to it to make up for all the positives it currently has.

Xsorus.2507:

fighting a zerg 45 to 85 isn’t terrible because you’re outnumbered

Its terrible because of all the crap mechanics in the game that make Zerging so much more effective.

AOE Cap, Downed System, Boon System (Crap tons of Retal) ect ect..All these add up to a system where stacking into a huge ball and spamming a bunch of blast finisher’s on top one of one another for boons followed by running over smaller numbers because your AOE’s are more likely to hit a larger % of their force then they will hit of yours hence your AOE’s are more effective, followed by a Down system that lets large numbers of people instantly res (Thus inflating the numbers of the zerg even more)

This is why people suggest things to counter the zerg, Because the zerg right now is vastly over rewarded..

It needs some major negatives added to it to make up for all the positives it currently has.

It has been stated in the past that WvW was about large scale battles.

I happen to like those battles.

There is more involved than what you describe. It isn’t all about pressing 1 if you can get other skills working. I use a variety of skills to deal with the other zerg when we don’t have lag(it does happen.)

If you want to suggest something to encourage small groups, that is fine but it should be something that does not add a negative just because of x# of players because that will just lead to other problems that would impact the game in a much more negative manner.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

It has been stated in the past that WvW was about large scale battles.

I happen to like those battles.

There is more involved than what you describe. It isn’t all about pressing 1 if you can get other skills working. I use a variety of skills to deal with the other zerg when we don’t have lag(it does happen.)

If you want to suggest something to encourage small groups, that is fine but it should be something that does not add a negative just because of x# of players because that will just lead to other problems that would impact the game in a much more negative manner.

It really depends on what your, mine, ANet’s and everyone else definition of “large scale battles” is… To me a very large battle is 100 people, be it 33v33v34 or 50v50 and that is pushing the envelope for me. A decent battle, one where I get very excited and start getting nervous about is 30v30. That to me is the ideal match-up where you don’t have enough people to create insane lag but you don’t have enough people to hide in the zerg. You will get focus fired down if you are caught in a bad position but can still reliably use your skills and actually coordinate with your guild. Like I said, that is what I personally look for in WvW, you have a different point of view and I enjoy reading about what you want to see happen to WvW.

Those are the fights I live for…

You can have suggestions to encourage small groups but they won’t help, why? Because large groups will still want to reap the rewards and will do it faster. That is why zerging is the “thing to do”. Pure, unadulterated numbers is the fastest and easiest way to cap an objective and reap the benefits of doing so.

WvW reminds me of one of the last scenes from ‘I, Robot’ – the part where Will Smith runs into the old graveyard with all the robots and where are they? Huddled together.

Zerging is not the core problem, and years ago when speculating about how WvW would be on Guru forums I recall discussing eloquent methods to counter zerg strategies. The principal one I can recall was a basic notion of efficiency. As it stands the zerg is more efficient than small groups or solo roaming in all aspects of play. Originally there were orbs to counteract the notion that you needed a zerg to be efficient, but now there’s a void in the design that they clearly left behind. The simplest method to counter these zergs is not to debuff them, but to force them to split up to be efficient. If I put a single piece of cheese in a maze and toss in 5 rats they’ll all gang up and find that cheese. But, if I put in 5 pieces of cheese they all won’t end up at the same piece. Same concept. If an event is dropped in some random open field location and pings on everyone’s minimap and that event grants a substatial amount of points the zerg will hit it…but if I threw in twelve, three on each map, then they’d be forced to split up to be efficient. Stay together in a sever zerg and secure one, or split up and fight for them all.

Problem is it requires development time, and a development budget, both of which the WvW team seems to have neither of.

My post, about the 1 confusion stack for every ten people over the limit of 20 in the range of the skill one uses, was the reason for this thread i guess.

I did not mean to cause panic. The chances of arenanet seeing my suggestion, deciding to implement it as is with no thought to balancing issues and thus ruining your 60+ people blob for ever, are slim to none. Rest assured, game developers have some experience in these matters and i believe there are conference rooms and powerpoint presentations involved in the process. Now do you feel better?

As to your argument about people trying to stay under the limit and being griefed by people running into their not quite zerg shows the lack of imagination. The confusion would apply to everyone, attackers and defenders alike. New tactics would be needed, spacing and formations would be required.

Large scale battles would not disappear because 50 people running around kitten to face nuking everything would get confusion.

And in my opinion, anyone that so desperately clings to a broken mechanic deserves to be debuffed.

In my thread you wrote:

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean you need to suggest something so stupid that it would ruin a lot of fun for the rest of u

If there is something in the game that i feel needs changing, and i have an idea of how to change it, and i think it makes sense… I will most definitely post it here. What is the alternative? Reading other peoples suggestions and ragging on them in the vain hope that you one day find one you agree with?

Kreten.9208:

My post, about the 1 confusion stack for every ten people over the limit of 20 in the range of the skill one uses, was the reason for this thread i guess.

I did not mean to cause panic. The chances of arenanet seeing my suggestion, deciding to implement it as is with no thought to balancing issues and thus ruining your 60+ people blob for ever, are slim to none. Rest assured, game developers have some experience in these matters and i believe there are conference rooms and powerpoint presentations involved in the process. Now do you feel better?

As to your argument about people trying to stay under the limit and being griefed by people running into their not quite zerg shows the lack of imagination. The confusion would apply to everyone, attackers and defenders alike. New tactics would be needed, spacing and formations would be required.

Large scale battles would not disappear because 50 people running around kitten to face nuking everything would get confusion.

And in my opinion, anyone that so desperately clings to a broken mechanic deserves to be debuffed.

In my thread you wrote:

Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean you need to suggest something so stupid that it would ruin a lot of fun for the rest of u

If there is something in the game that i feel needs changing, and i have an idea of how to change it, and i think it makes sense… I will most definitely post it here. What is the alternative? Reading other peoples suggestions and ragging on them in the vain hope that you one day find one you agree with?

That was the final straw actually. I’ve seen too many suggestions that were really bad ideas.

And I do not lack imagination. All it would take is one player that does not care if they die or not, they just want to grief. You are lacking imagination if you cannot see how this will vilify those that are new and don’t know about mechanics but just wanting to learn, those that just want to cause as much problems on the server they are playing against because there are spies and others that just want to cause problems.

Also don’t need to be debuffed just because my guild is running together and we happen to be over those limits you people are so hell bent on imposing.

You and anyone else that thinks applying a debuff to other players are the ones that need to be nerfed. Let you people play with that, I’ll play without the stupid debuff.

If you make a sensible suggestion that encourages smaller grouping without applying anything negative to other players, I would support such a suggestion. I have no problems with positive suggestions but not something that is going to penalize other players.

I would assume, at least I think of, people wants debuffs for groups of 50, 60 or even 80… 30-35 would be the ‘average’ guild group size so this doesn’t/wouldn’t effect them unless they all want to run together in a 600 range (which is really small for 50 people)

LilMcGinley.3890:

I would assume, at least I think of, people wants debuffs for groups of 50, 60 or even 80… 30-35 would be the ‘average’ guild group size so this doesn’t/wouldn’t effect them unless they all want to run together in a 600 range (which is really small for 50 people)

I like those garrison fights were all servers have a full map zerg.

I like all the fights that are that big, garrison just happens to be my favorite.

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

LilMcGinley.3890:

I would assume, at least I think of, people wants debuffs for groups of 50, 60 or even 80… 30-35 would be the ‘average’ guild group size so this doesn’t/wouldn’t effect them unless they all want to run together in a 600 range (which is really small for 50 people)

I like those garrison fights were all servers have a full map zerg.

I like all the fights that are that big, garrison just happens to be my favorite.

I prefer the open field.

No siege. No towers. No camps. No keeps. Just us versus you and a whole lotta bags in one of our near futures. A straight up fight is the most fun you can ask for in WvW, provided the skill lag doesn’t show up to make it miserable for everyone.

Honestly, it’s just overdue for a GvG 25 vs 25 mode that contributes to the winning server’s world score…but I guess its asking to much of Guild Wars 2 to give us guild wars…clearly I’m filled with unrealistic expectations.

Obscure One.4357:

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

LilMcGinley.3890:

I would assume, at least I think of, people wants debuffs for groups of 50, 60 or even 80… 30-35 would be the ‘average’ guild group size so this doesn’t/wouldn’t effect them unless they all want to run together in a 600 range (which is really small for 50 people)

I like those garrison fights were all servers have a full map zerg.

I like all the fights that are that big, garrison just happens to be my favorite.

I prefer the open field.

No siege. No towers. No camps. No keeps. Just us versus you and a whole lotta bags in one of our near futures. A straight up fight is the most fun you can ask for in WvW, provided the skill lag doesn’t show up to make it miserable for everyone.

Honestly, it’s just overdue for a GvG 25 vs 25 mode that contributes to the winning server’s world score…but I guess its asking to much of Guild Wars 2 to give us guild wars…clearly I’m filled with unrealistic expectations.

Agreed. GvG is looked down on the NA side, but honestly, it is gaining ground and I couldn’t be happier. I just don’t see the allure of sitting in a tower or keep pushing upgrades for magical points that mean absolutely nothing. I’d rather go toe to toe with and against great players on a nightly basis. When we all leave GW2, who is gonna have the better memories?

“yeah we played ppt for 2 years and I got my supply mastery achievement and tons of arrow cart kills”

or

“dude you remember that 1 fight …?” “no man, this fight was better and here’s the video” “you guys are stupid, remember that GvG where x-person lost his kitten because we lost 1 round hahahhahaa HE MAD”

Obscure One.4357:

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

LilMcGinley.3890:

I would assume, at least I think of, people wants debuffs for groups of 50, 60 or even 80… 30-35 would be the ‘average’ guild group size so this doesn’t/wouldn’t effect them unless they all want to run together in a 600 range (which is really small for 50 people)

I like those garrison fights were all servers have a full map zerg.

I like all the fights that are that big, garrison just happens to be my favorite.

I prefer the open field.

No siege. No towers. No camps. No keeps. Just us versus you and a whole lotta bags in one of our near futures. A straight up fight is the most fun you can ask for in WvW, provided the skill lag doesn’t show up to make it miserable for everyone.

Honestly, it’s just overdue for a GvG 25 vs 25 mode that contributes to the winning server’s world score…but I guess its asking to much of Guild Wars 2 to give us guild wars…clearly I’m filled with unrealistic expectations.

Usually when BG garrison has a full map zerg from all servers, it typically is swissed and lacking siege.

I like the multiple levels that garrison has. I like open field also, I just the like garrison the most.

Wow, that is actually a good point for debuffing zergs, and the perfect counter to what I suggested a month ago lol. There will always be people around to grief, which in turn would be more than happy to debuff a zerg lol.

The thing is, the only way to stop zerg play (which Anet doesn’t even want to do), is to give zergs a reason to not form in masses.. Now how do we do that? Perhaps to disallow loot or any kind of gold/karma/xp for objectives met if say more than 30 people are in a given area?

Realistically, the ultimate solution is to just spread the population out across the servers. It really doesn’t make sense that 2 servers have enough coverage to que all maps 24/7, another 2 that are close too it, and another that can half the week. Then leaving others that whenever they join, are always outmanned.

Long term solution? Spread the population out amongst all servers so they are even. Then, you’d probably be hard pressed to find zergs in excess of 30-40 people.

And I do not lack imagination. All it would take is one player that does not care if they die or not, they just want to grief.

And thus proving my point. Sigh. Ok i will explain as if you were five. Storytime.

Btw, CreativeAnarchy i’m assuming that you read the entire post before answering, if not then this is not for you, please do not respond in that case.

Before we begin, someone mentioned an average guild group size of 35, ok lets go with 30 as the limit before things get confusing (ie debuff) Also, lets make it clear, my suggestion would in no way kill a zerg if it wanted to do it. But there would be a cost for zerging.

For those of you who are just joining us, my suggestion was that every-time you use an ability a check is made to see how many friendlies are in range of the ability. For every 10 people above the zerg limit you would stack 1 or 2 confusion on yourself.

The Zerg Story

We have an imaginary guild called. Small Collective Psyche [SCP], and SCP really like to zerg. And when they get their zerg going, they are unstoppable.

Now, SCP read patch notes one day, they see that running around as they usually do causes confusion, but they still want to keep 60+ people together.
What do scp do? Well grasshopper, they adapt.

SCP know that if they split the zerg up into three groups, 3 groups of 20 that stay about 900 – 1200 away from each other, now they don’t risk getting griefed or confusing themselves , yay being smart.

When they get to a gate at garrison, they make sure that they dont bunch up in front of the door to minimize accidental zerg limits. They also know that the defenders will also need to watch themselves, so that when SCP eventually get the gate down, they cant all be stacked in the lords room.

SCP did something never before seen in WvW: Tactics, movement discipline, formations. SCP cant get griefed, they are too smart for that.

The End

Also, and this is entirely aimed at CreativeAnarchy, if you see a problem with someones suggestion. Please ask them how they view that problem and ask if they have suggestions to counter that problem, instead of breking out in a sweat and getting heart palpitations because “teh griefers, you are stupid, i know best”

“Hey Kreten, how do you solve the griefing that could happen with the zerg confusion?”

Something like this.

If there is a debuff-zerg mechanic, commanders should have the ability to expel members from the zerg so it is not at a disadvantage. So which would you rather have? Large map-zergs clashing in one area with skill lag (Which is actually the fault of A-net not upgrading the servers and there is a solution, unfortunately, not implemented yet) or commanders having the ability to expel members from the zerg (Don’t even ask me how it will work until you have a viable solution for debuffing-zergs).

We (BG) currently have supply trolls which go into garrison and use up 1700 supply before we go into NA prime which is our weakest time zone. I am sure you can make an assumpion about what the debuff-zergs will do without the ability to expel members.

LilMcGinley.3890:

CreativeAnarchy.6324:

It has been stated in the past that WvW was about large scale battles.

I happen to like those battles.

There is more involved than what you describe. It isn’t all about pressing 1 if you can get other skills working. I use a variety of skills to deal with the other zerg when we don’t have lag(it does happen.)

If you want to suggest something to encourage small groups, that is fine but it should be something that does not add a negative just because of x# of players because that will just lead to other problems that would impact the game in a much more negative manner.

It really depends on what your, mine, ANet’s and everyone else definition of “large scale battles” is… To me a very large battle is 100 people, be it 33v33v34 or 50v50 and that is pushing the envelope for me. A decent battle, one where I get very excited and start getting nervous about is 30v30. That to me is the ideal match-up where you don’t have enough people to create insane lag but you don’t have enough people to hide in the zerg. You will get focus fired down if you are caught in a bad position but can still reliably use your skills and actually coordinate with your guild. Like I said, that is what I personally look for in WvW, you have a different point of view and I enjoy reading about what you want to see happen to WvW.

Those are the fights I live for…

You can have suggestions to encourage small groups but they won’t help, why? Because large groups will still want to reap the rewards and will do it faster. That is why zerging is the “thing to do”. Pure, unadulterated numbers is the fastest and easiest way to cap an objective and reap the benefits of doing so.

WvW reminds me of one of the last scenes from ‘I, Robot’ – the part where Will Smith runs into the old graveyard with all the robots and where are they? Huddled together.

And I happen to enjoy map-zerg vs map-zerg vs map-zerg clashes at garrison. What you are describing is open field fights, so why don’t you ask for something different, like gvg or structured zvz? Don’t try to change something others enjoy because you think ‘more than 100 people is pushing it’ I happen to enjoy un even battles too, whether I am on the outmanned side or on the outnumbering side. Also, don’t assume we are fighting in large zergs because of petty rewards. My server, BG, is most effective after reset when we have 5 guilds on each map running separately and helping eachother out when need be. But on weekdays, we can’t do that obviously because of lack of commanders etc.

Kreten.9208:

And I do not lack imagination. All it would take is one player that does not care if they die or not, they just want to grief.

And thus proving my point. Sigh. Ok i will explain as if you were five. Storytime.

Btw, CreativeAnarchy i’m assuming that you read the entire post before answering, if not then this is not for you, please do not respond in that case.

Before we begin, someone mentioned an average guild group size of 35, ok lets go with 30 as the limit before things get confusing (ie debuff) Also, lets make it clear, my suggestion would in no way kill a zerg if it wanted to do it. But there would be a cost for zerging.

For those of you who are just joining us, my suggestion was that every-time you use an ability a check is made to see how many friendlies are in range of the ability. For every 10 people above the zerg limit you would stack 1 or 2 confusion on yourself.

The Zerg Story

We have an imaginary guild called. Small Collective Psyche [SCP], and SCP really like to zerg. And when they get their zerg going, they are unstoppable.

Now, SCP read patch notes one day, they see that running around as they usually do causes confusion, but they still want to keep 60+ people together.
What do scp do? Well grasshopper, they adapt.

SCP know that if they split the zerg up into three groups, 3 groups of 20 that stay about 900 – 1200 away from each other, now they don’t risk getting griefed or confusing themselves , yay being smart.

When they get to a gate at garrison, they make sure that they dont bunch up in front of the door to minimize accidental zerg limits. They also know that the defenders will also need to watch themselves, so that when SCP eventually get the gate down, they cant all be stacked in the lords room.

SCP did something never before seen in WvW: Tactics, movement discipline, formations. SCP cant get griefed, they are too smart for that.

The End

Also, and this is entirely aimed at CreativeAnarchy, if you see a problem with someones suggestion. Please ask them how they view that problem and ask if they have suggestions to counter that problem, instead of breking out in a sweat and getting heart palpitations because “teh griefers, you are stupid, i know best”

“Hey Kreten, how do you solve the griefing that could happen with the zerg confusion?”

Something like this.

Sigh. You just don’t live in reality. It must be nice to live in rainbow and unicorn land where no one is going to come along to grief you people. Must also be nice to have a server that doesn’t have trolls.

You are also describing organized guilds that train, not a commander with pugs that are not in team speak that can only play so often and don’t train with guilds for whatever reason they don’t.

It doesn’t matter how small any kind of debuff is, people don’t care to have a condition just because of x# of people in a area.

All your suggestion to do so will only cause more problems and give another troll tool.

Not only that, there is a lot of ebb and flow in these battles. Do you even play the game? To really think that groups will be able to maintain that small distance you suggest, well you are out of your mind. The second level in garrison is within the range you’ve suggested, most of inner garrsion would be a debuff zone.

But you also lack imagination, as proven by your post because you can’t seem to grasp the ramification of your suggestion. You can only see what you want to accomplish because you don’t care for a particular aspect of WvW.

I agree with those that are against punishing the large zergs, but I also would like something to be done about the one-sidedness often observed. I come from a wvw focused guild. We are very capable of handling superior numbers…but there is a limit. Anyone who posts here saying "My guild is able to beat 3x our numbers is either foolish, or they are leaving out key details such as terrain advantages, element of surprise, open field siege, etc. I’m not saying it is impossible, but there are circumstances that permit such a great victory. All I suggest is a slight aoe cap increase to the outmanned group. If my group of 30 is going against a 70 man, Give the 30 man an aoe cap of 7 or 8 instead of 5. Make it so our water fields are more sustainable to our group since…well…we have less. For aoe damage, it seems logical that a large cluster of bodies would make for higher casualties resulting from aoe. If a bomb goes off at the feet of 100 people standing nut-to-butt, more will get hurt than when they are spread out.

Overall, I don’t care either way. But that is a realistic mechanic that could help. BTW I’m not a spreadsheet guy so if someone runs an analysis and finds this to be a game-breaker, then fine I am wrong.

Seigfried.5938:

And I happen to enjoy map-zerg vs map-zerg vs map-zerg clashes at garrison. What you are describing is open field fights, so why don’t you ask for something different, like gvg or structured zvz? Don’t try to change something others enjoy because you think ‘more than 100 people is pushing it’ I happen to enjoy un even battles too, whether I am on the outmanned side or on the outnumbering side. Also, don’t assume we are fighting in large zergs because of petty rewards. My server, BG, is most effective after reset when we have 5 guilds on each map running separately and helping eachother out when need be. But on weekdays, we can’t do that obviously because of lack of commanders etc.

If you read the forums, you would see PLENTY of people asking for organized GvG… there simply is NO PLACE in GW2 that you can do it except for WvW.

I don’t want to change map-zerg vs map-zerg because that’s lagfest for both parties, therefore, even ground as stupid as it may be (to me). My problem is when a map-zerg wants to fight 30 people. There is simply nothing the group of 30 can do to give them a snowballs chance in hell to make it anywhere close to an even fight or have a chance of surviving. That is when some form of “debuff” needs to be implemented.

Choke points and terrain only goes so far when they have enough numbers to simply ignore the AoE limits and push through.

ANet said they were “working on ways” to make smaller groups more effective and I really hope it’s something good.

LilMcGinley.3890:

I don’t want to change map-zerg vs map-zerg because that’s lagfest for both parties, therefore, even ground as stupid as it may be (to me). My problem is when a map-zerg wants to fight 30 people. There is simply nothing the group of 30 can do to give them a snowballs chance in hell to make it anywhere close to an even fight or have a chance of surviving. That is when some form of “debuff” needs to be implemented.

Choke points and terrain only goes so far when they have enough numbers to simply ignore the AoE limits and push through.

ANet said they were “working on ways” to make smaller groups more effective and I really hope it’s something good.

First, the mere idea that 30 people should have anything greater than a snow balls chance in hell against 100+ is an absolutely absurd statement. You clash with 3 times your number, you lose, game the !@$% over, see you at spawn. End of story. This is not a problem this is a symptom of poor design that encourages players to gather in the largest possible group they can manage. You can’t cure cancer with morphine: attack the problem not the symptoms.

Second, skill-lagging is a separate can of worms altogether, and I’m certain we can all agree it needs to be fixed, yet the suggestion that debuffing zergs will even remotely lessen its impact is misguided. Sure there won’t be skill lag anymore, because everyone quit playing in general, much less zerging.

Thirdly, the fix, is giving players a reason not to zerg that doesn’t just open the door for griefers like a zerg debuff:
Concept: Time sensitive multi-point orb events. If there are 3 orbs worth 1,000 points a piece when turned in, in each of the four maps, and each drop a rare or better for the contributors, they will split up PuGs by default and present a trade off for the map-population-cap sized zerg; only get one for 1000 or split up for all three for 3000. Simply dropping these orbs in random mid-field locations, or even being obtained from some massive orb champion that must be killed before the orb can be taken, would resolve more than one problem with WvW.

I remember wiping 100 people with 8 people in DAOC.

Know how those 100 people countered it, By not standing ontop of one another like morons.

LilMcGinley.3890:

ANet said they were “working on ways” to make smaller groups more effective and I really hope it’s something good.

LOL

…………

I don’t really want to see any type of debuff but I do believe that WXP has done more to increase massive zergs than to reduce them.

If anything I would like to see a speed debuff for groups over 25.

If a server wants to bounce from map to map with 30, 40, 50 or more people then they need to have quickness removed for those groups.

They can respond to something happening on the other side of the map way too quickly making it very difficult for a smaller group to complete a goal.

An example scenario.

Server A brings 50 ppl to server B BL and rushes Bay. Server B might have equal people but usually does not right away. They can spare 6 or 8 to try an push a structure that Server A owns but do not have the supply or build ability to do it quickly. Server A can rush over there, kill them and rush back to the original structure and the plan was pointless.

The maps are too small for allowing large armies fast movement. If a debuff is ever added this is the only form I can get behind until something “fair” can be introduced.

LilMcGinley.3890:

ANet said they were “working on ways” to make smaller groups more effective and I really hope it’s something good.

Wow are they implementing the trinity!? Good News Everyone!

LilMcGinley.3890:

Seigfried.5938:

And I happen to enjoy map-zerg vs map-zerg vs map-zerg clashes at garrison. What you are describing is open field fights, so why don’t you ask for something different, like gvg or structured zvz? Don’t try to change something others enjoy because you think ‘more than 100 people is pushing it’ I happen to enjoy un even battles too, whether I am on the outmanned side or on the outnumbering side. Also, don’t assume we are fighting in large zergs because of petty rewards. My server, BG, is most effective after reset when we have 5 guilds on each map running separately and helping eachother out when need be. But on weekdays, we can’t do that obviously because of lack of commanders etc.

If you read the forums, you would see PLENTY of people asking for organized GvG… there simply is NO PLACE in GW2 that you can do it except for WvW.

Plenty doesn’t mean the majority. And no one is stopping you to gvg in a quiet area. There is no need to reduce the zerg cap for you to do that. And, skill lag is a technical issue, not a direct consequence of large zergs.

Xsorus.2507:

I remember wiping 100 people with 8 people in DAOC.

Know how those 100 people countered it, By not standing on top of one another like morons.

and yet this game encourages it. it baffles me too.

Right now, everything is totally unbalanced.
- If you are on the winning server, players probably have more WXP upgrades than your opponent.
- you probably have more players, bigger zerg.
- you will likely win non stop by beating homeless players, until your opponents quit the game or move to your server. Yes you are “awesome”.

Imho, Arenet needs to keep balancing the servers:
- make sure servers of fairly similar values play together
- If you kill someone, give additional wvw points based on the difference between wvw rank
- If someone from a winning server die, he should res with 2 conditions applied to him for 2min. If someone from the #2 server die, he should res with 2 conditions applied to him for 1min.

Doing nothing is definitely not in the favor of Arenet. Weak servers have no incentive to even play WvW besides the daily/monthly… and even that can be skipped.

As one person mentioned, the maps are really small overall given the size of the zergs involved. I have ideas to hopefully reduce the mega zergs, especially off hours.

1) Remove all WP upgrades in the boarder land maps. Allow SM to have WP but the spawn timer works differently than it does now. Have it start the moment fighting stops and/or walls/gates repaired. IN BL’s instead of a WP you can order an upgrade to keep siege weaponry that still adds in the supply from building the WP (and can cost the same). This improved siege weaponry can have slight bump to damage, range and in case of cannon reticule size. In case of oil can grant person there perm stability and offer some other defensive buffs that don’t make manning oil suicide. Also, these improved defensive weapons have increased health pool.

2) Other issue is use of WPs now to mass rush in mass of players to save a keep/SM. if not removed have it so there is a rather long debuff and have it set so attacking/killing INNER guards resets the WP timer. Make it so spawn timer is a bit longer than re spawn rate for guards.

3) Not sure about viability about this idea but allow spawn WPs to be contested if your already in WvW for short 1-2 minutes. Of course it only affects those who are already in WvW. To stop people from just leaving WvW and going to the out manned map have leaving WvW cause a simple 1 or 2 min debuff that prevents requeing. This debuff even runs if your offline so if you crash your not really penalized.

Idea/goal is to not debuff a zerg but rather truly penalize a server/commanders for rolling that way.