Guild Wars 2

EotM ranks among the worst PvP of every game I’ve played. It has so many issues that prevent it from providing a real PvP experience, and functions more like a PvE farming area.

Teams are severely unbalanced.
In all my time farming EotM, I have seldom come across come across a fair or exciting fight. One team always steamrolls the other, and since everyone runs around in a giant group, combat is hopeless for 2 of the teams.

The objective doesn’t matter.
Players are given no incentives for holding objectives or increasing their score. The only rewards that are handed out are for taking objectives, so the only incentive is to take territory. It is more beneficial for a team to lose their entire side so they can recapture it, and that is nothing short of flawed design.

Players are not encouraged to split up.
Because of the rewards system it’s more beneficial if everyone bunches together. The objectives take too long to breach and capture, allowing a large group to go through and prevent smaller groups from taking anything.

Issues like those prevent the game mode from functioning as a healthy PvP format.

What EotM should have been was:

• There should be 2 types of EotM, 1 for guilds and 1 for hotjoins. In the guild version your guild would fight players from 2 other guilds, each team having equal size teams. Only 40(?) players from each guild could participate, and you could not join the queue with less than that. In hotjoin you would be placed in a queue with a random team until there were enough players on each side, or get thrown into a match already in progress that had unequal teams.

• Games should last far less time, around 15-30 minutes, and players should receive the bulk of their rewarded at the end of a battle based on their score.

• Walls are gates should be far easier to breach with siege and take less damage from normal attacks, encouraging players to split up and attack multiple objectives rather than bunch up and steamroll through everything.

In my opinion, something like this would have created a much more enjoyable and competitive PvP experience.

eotm=worst pvp zone.ever.

sounds like you talk bout wvw

Bri.8354:

EotM ranks among the worst PvP of every game I’ve played. It has so many issues that prevent it from providing a real PvP experience, and functions more like a PvE farming area.

Teams are severely unbalanced.
In all my time farming EotM, I have seldom come across come across a fair or exciting fight. One team always steamrolls the other, and since everyone runs around in a giant group, combat is hopeless for 2 of the teams.

The objective doesn’t matter.
Players are given no incentives for holding objectives or increasing their score. The only rewards that are handed out are for taking objectives, so the only incentive is to take territory. It is more beneficial for a team to lose their entire side so they can recapture it, and that is nothing short of flawed design.

Players are not encouraged to split up.
Because of the rewards system it’s more beneficial if everyone bunches together. The objectives take too long to breach and capture, allowing a large group to go through and prevent smaller groups from taking anything.

Issues like those prevent the game mode from functioning as a healthy PvP format.

What EotM should have been was:

• There should be 2 types of EotM, 1 for guilds and 1 for hotjoins. In the guild version your guild would fight players from 2 other guilds, each team having equal size teams. Only 40(?) players from each guild could participate, and you could not join the queue with less than that. In hotjoin you would be placed in a queue with a random team until there were enough players on each side, or get thrown into a match already in progress that had unequal teams.

• Games should last far less time, around 15-30 minutes, and players should receive the bulk of their rewarded at the end of a battle based on their score.

• Walls are gates should be far easier to breach with siege and take less damage from normal attacks, encouraging players to split up and attack multiple objectives rather than bunch up and steamroll through everything.

In my opinion, something like this would have created a much more enjoyable and competitive PvP experience.

What you want isn’t WvW nor close to what EotM was supposed to be.

What you want (and describe) is nothing new or anything it’s called…. a Battleground.
There is dozens of game with thoses already, and isn’t RvR or FvF or anything.

It’s battlegrounds with a random and premade queues.

(not saying it wouldn’t be nice to have battleground in WvW, it’s missing as far as i’m concerned, but it’s not something you should get by gutting EotM and removing it from the gate to be replaced).

Filovirus.6258:

What you want isn’t WvW nor close to what EotM was supposed to be.

What you want (and describe) is nothing new or anything it’s called…. a Battleground.
There is dozens of game with thoses already, and isn’t RvR or FvF or anything.

It’s battlegrounds with a random and premade queues.

(not saying it wouldn’t be nice to have battleground in WvW, it’s missing as far as i’m concerned, but it’s not something you should get by gutting EotM and removing it from the gate to be replaced).

I suppose my suggestion is more like a “battleground” and less like traditional WvW. But without systems that create equal teams and rewards players for the core objective, the game mode falls apart.

Bri.8354:

Filovirus.6258:

What you want isn’t WvW nor close to what EotM was supposed to be.

What you want (and describe) is nothing new or anything it’s called…. a Battleground.
There is dozens of game with thoses already, and isn’t RvR or FvF or anything.

It’s battlegrounds with a random and premade queues.

(not saying it wouldn’t be nice to have battleground in WvW, it’s missing as far as i’m concerned, but it’s not something you should get by gutting EotM and removing it from the gate to be replaced).

I suppose my suggestion is more like a “battleground” and less like traditional WvW. But without systems that create equal teams and rewards players for the core objective, the game mode falls apart.

The 24/7 and long term match ups IS what makes RvR and things like that interesting.

Now the 3way fight makes it a bit weirder, and a bit more imbalanced, but not that much.

The main problem is the segregation between NA and EU servers, and the fact Anet keeps artificially alive Servers that haven’t been able to sustain WvW decently (not even properly) for a year or so….

Your system doesn’t solve that at all, it removes EotM (a fun and relaxed game mode who allows to do boring stuff like leveling/grinding ranks/grinding gold/grindding badges/etc, that are important because despite what Anet promised this game is a giant grind like there seldom is in occidental games…) to replace it with something that has NOTHING to do with WvW/RvR but all to do with Battlegrounds.

Once again as i told Dayra and a few others multiple times, i have no problem with battlegrounds, it could even be a good idea, but (very) short, numbers balanced, terrain and side balanced game mode ISN’T what people like in WvW and EotM.

Ask for a NEW game mode all you want (more content and things to do is never a problem), but stop trying to get what you lack from other more “classic” games by destroying game modes that are quite popular (and for a reason).

Actually “battlegrounds” could be a nice addition since with a segregation randoms/full premades queues you could get the GvG community what they’ve been asking for over 2 years.

(after that, they’re free to play the game mode as “intended” or in frontal classes only, their choices)

New Game mode would be cool. I proposed one, especially as NEW ADDITIONAL mode https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Proposal-combine-the-best-of-WvW-and-EotM

But, you know, a new additional mode has two drawbacks:

1) It does not help to solve WvW-Problems.
But, ok, no problem, I played the first year of GW2 intensively WVW, and have no problem ignoring it from now on, when there is an alternative.

2) It increases the WvW-Problems.
I will probably not the only one who will ignore WvW after a (in their and my view) better mode get added.

Any new game mode included PvP of 20+ people will be another nail in the coffin of WvW, as EotM was already one.

PS: This is an EotM thread. EotM is by all means already a battleground, i..e only 4h matches, only one map, no fixed realms that fight each other. Your argumentation dos not fit here.

EotM can’t be a battleground when it’s a 3 way for once.
Can’t either be without a queue system. And it’s still short mu but still not battlegrounds.

Can’t be a bg without a way to balance sides (wich the concept of EotM don’t allow actually).

Would a new mode remove people from WvW ? Maybe. Maybe not.

More than probably it would take people out of it (those people that are playing it because they refuse to accept that what they are looking for was NEVER WvW and isn’t in GW2 and should move to other games to find it… like you), probably some out of EotM/PvP too, but it would more than likely have it’s own population too.

And honestly if that means Anet finally assuming their game, removing totally the concept of “servers” from PvE and keeping it for WvW while revamping it (ie : remove all current servers, merge NA/EU, and then recreate a number of servers small enough there is actually the population to support it) no one will have a problem with it.

At least you’ve stopped rehashing and reposting all day long your “ideas” to kill WvW and finally accepted it should be a new mode.

It “only” took months….

And, once again, stop trying to remove options from the game from people who enjoy them.

If you want something new, ask for it, instead of trying to destroy everything specific in other game modes to try to force them to fit to YOUR small view of games already….

As usual you contradict yourself, but he happy with your battleground conception used everywhere how irrelevant it is.

And for sure would a working competitive game mode take a lot of player time from WvW, EotM already took a lot of player time from WvW and e.g. a mode that would support GvGs better would take a lot of guild-raid time out of WvW. They would train and play in their better suited mode and only occasionally go to WvW to slay some pug zerg for the baggies. Everyone that say WvW-score is irrelevant I only play there as there is no alternative is a potential loss.

Potential loss, maybe, maybe not. But once again, who cares if there is OPTIONS and you can CHOOSE what you want to play instead of having people wanting to REMOVE a game mode they don’t understand, don’t like, to transform it into something there is dozens of variations out there already ?

I don’t like JP (i hate them), yet i don’t ask for them to be removed or changed to something i like screwing over the players who like them…

The problem with you is that actually you don’t like WvW, it’s not what you want at all (all your propositions/ideas proves it every single day), but instead of asking for something else (that you might actually get one day) you are trying to get the game modes quite some people like gutted and remade into something totally different, REMOVING their ability to play it so you can have your shiny personnal toy.

It’s the worst possible kind of behaviour possible.

Remove all NPCs.

Remove all buffs.

Let players build fortifications.

Profit.

Filovirus.6258:

The 24/7 and long term match ups IS what makes RvR and things like that interesting.

Now the 3way fight makes it a bit weirder, and a bit more imbalanced, but not that much.

The main problem is the segregation between NA and EU servers, and the fact Anet keeps artificially alive Servers that haven’t been able to sustain WvW decently (not even properly) for a year or so….

Your system doesn’t solve that at all, it removes EotM (a fun and relaxed game mode who allows to do boring stuff like leveling/grinding ranks/grinding gold/grindding badges/etc, that are important because despite what Anet promised this game is a giant grind like there seldom is in occidental games…) to replace it with something that has NOTHING to do with WvW/RvR but all to do with Battlegrounds.

Once again as i told Dayra and a few others multiple times, i have no problem with battlegrounds, it could even be a good idea, but (very) short, numbers balanced, terrain and side balanced game mode ISN’T what people like in WvW and EotM.

Ask for a NEW game mode all you want (more content and things to do is never a problem), but stop trying to get what you lack from other more “classic” games by destroying game modes that are quite popular (and for a reason).

Actually “battlegrounds” could be a nice addition since with a segregation randoms/full premades queues you could get the GvG community what they’ve been asking for over 2 years.

(after that, they’re free to play the game mode as “intended” or in frontal classes only, their choices)

The reason I suggested something like this to replace EotM is because we have 2 versions of the same thing, only one is so broken it has degraded into a farm. Sure some people enjoy farming it, and a group of people will enjoy it no matter what form it takes, but it is in no way a proper PvP format.

I get that some people wouldn’t like it being “instanced”, but that group already has WvW for that. Why do we need 2 open-world game formats when we could have EotM being an instanced, fair, and competitive game format while WvW could be the open-world, “its not meant to be fair” (as put by the developers), game format.

Filovirus.6258:

The problem with you is that actually you don’t like WvW, it’s not what you want at all (all your propositions/ideas proves it every single day), but instead of asking for something else (that you might actually get one day) you are trying to get the game modes quite some people like gutted and remade into something totally different, REMOVING their ability to play it so you can have your shiny personnal toy.

It’s the worst possible kind of behaviour possible.

The problem is not that I don’t like WvW, the problem is that I liked WvW a lot during the first year.

However after a year, it was no longer possible to ignore that: Scoring is a mess, the majority of (prime-time) players is irrelevant for match outcome, only a minority of off-time players matters for the outcome of the match. “who has a handful more player during the longest off-time period” decides the matches.

The second disaster that happened to WvW was the introduction of the seasons with season rewards that encouraged over-stacking and imbalance. Combined with the introduction of EotM that defused the only existing corrective to over-stacking: the queues.

Together with the unavoidable loss of player to other games and the failure of ANet to correct the imbalance situation, most WvW-matches (probably all beside T1) aren’t matches any more, but most of the time (20 of 24 hours) empty wastelands, only rarely visited by map-jumping PvD blobs.

So the WvW game-mode I liked, dissolved on it’s own. What can be done to bring something that work under the new conditions back is what drives my proposals.

If you actually liked WvW you wouldn’t ask Anet to remove all that makes it WvW in every single one of your proposals….

And yet it’s what you do.
You like WvW when it was “new” to you, you played long enough to burn out, and instead okittennowledging it you pretend it’s all because of the problems of WvW…..and try to get it changed into something that isn’t WvW at all.

Your problem is that you’ve had all you could get from the game mode (for now at least) and refuse to accept it.
Changing it won’t bring back the fun, best case scenario you get your way and there is a new mode taking it’s place until you’re bored of it too…. but in doing so you remove a mode that is both original AND liked by quite some players.

There was quite some problems that should be fixed yes (the way seasons works, the way Anet handled the transferts to favour stacking on a handful of servers without penalty and so on), but totally changing WvW and removing what makes it original/special isn’t the solution at all.

By doing that you lose pretty much all that’s left of the current WvW players, because if they wanted battlegrounds like you propose, they would have moved to other games a looooonnnnggg time ago.

Oh and can you stop with the “majority of player in prime time don’t count it’s off time that matters” line ? It’s a logical falacy and a lie.

If those players aren’t there at prime time, you can do whatever you want at off time, unless you have the same numbers off time than the opponent peak time AND people at peak time to delay them, it won’t matter, you’ll lose by miles.

Most mu aren’t decided during off time, they are decided during prime time, by wich server(s) take the upperhand, is able to upgrade their stuff, siege it while keeping ennemy’s down, and then their ability to keep it off hours.

Off hours DO have an impact (sometimes quite important) but it’s not the “go it all” you pretend, otherwise you’ll have unofficial NA/OcX servers in EU for quite long, totally absent during prime and just PvDing off hours.

That don’t work actually.

Filovirus.6258:

If you actually liked WvW you wouldn’t ask Anet to remove all that makes it WvW in every single one of your proposals….

The sense of forum discussion is of course to find out, who like which aspect of WvW more than the other. Your view of what is WvW is clearly different than mine.
But neither is correct nor false, they are just different. If you ask 100 people they will likely tell you 100 different most important aspects. If you ask 100 people they will likely tell you 100 different worst problems.

So instead of telling everyone that makes a proposal you don’t like “you destroy WvW”, tell everyone which aspect it is that you liked most and that you see harmed by the proposal.

And coverage, imbalance and PvD aren’t just my burn-out problems,they are problems of a lot of people. But obviously not yours.

Filovirus.6258:

Oh and can you stop with the “majority of player in prime time don’t count it’s off time that matters” line ? It’s a logical falacy and a lie.

You obviously don’t like to hear it. But it is the case.

695 objective points for 1000 people in the match at primetime gives 0.7 points per player.
695 objective points for (less than) 100 people in the match at off-time gives (more than) 7 points per player.
Each off-time player fight for more than 10 times as many points and is therefore 10 times as worthy for the match outcome.

Another example of the imbalance is the question “how much differene does it make to have 10 people more or less”
In prime-time 90:100, you will rarely notice the difference.
in off-time where it means 30:20 or 20:10 or even 10:0 it will generate a huge (score-) difference.

So yes: off-time is favored over prime-time by the game, it has more objective per player and it makes more difference in fights and scoring to have a handful player more.

And if you still not believe it: look all old (pre-EotM, where queue was a problem) recruiting threads that all more or less contain: “If you play off-time, we need you, if you play mainly primetime, we don’t want you”

And if you are still not convinced look at the tick per time graphs at http://www.gw2score.com/ or http://mos.millenium.org/

Much to many otherwise balanced matches are decided by (an) inadequate high tick-peak(s) in off-time (Graph 1). And a dominating server dominates most in off-time and much-less in prime-time (Graph 2). There are even cases where a server regularly wins matches – even if it is worser most of time than the others – just due to off-time peaks (Graph 3).

While I dislike EotM, clearly it is a popular place for a lot of players. I think some balance changes should be made so Red doesn’t end up being hammered all the time but otherwise probably best to just leave it be.