Guild Wars 2

I’d really like to know. The single most ruinous aspect of WvW has always been the incredible influence of population and coverage over everything else. Skill, strategy, teamwork, communication, organization, guile, cleverness … all of those are virtually meaningless compared with simple player numbers. The presumptive argument has always been that instanced matches would be counter to the sense of community and loyalty that server-vs-server-vs-server would offer, but that has been proven over and over to be irrelevant given the rampant and continual server hopping that we’ve seen.

So why can’t we get some sort of faction-based matches where player populations are more closely balanced?? Players in most tiers don’t even play WvW for WvW anymore, at least not in terms of the blend of siege warfare and open world PvP it was originally intended to provide. WvW has degenerated into random groups zerging around flipping undefended towers/keeps, guilds organizing their own balanced fights amongst each other, and fight clubs holding duels in some far corner of the map … all of which make more sense than embracing the delusion that anything other than population will determine the actual match score.

It could have been instanced GvGvG (or alliances if a guild doesn’t have a large roster) battles. Guilds could be cross servers, 20vs20vs20 or 50vs50v50s or whatever and different modes for those who like siege and those who enjoy death matches. They could unlock guild/rank skins or even buy some from the cash shop. Even siege skins they can activate like finishers. People already have to concern themselves with maintaining guilds now with this silly system they’re recruiting at a server level too(personally, I don’t know how they stomach it).

Right now, the BPvsCDvsIoJ match is close, but I’ll tell you now, while it’s a nice change this will eventually turn stale or get completely borked by transfers. It’s a horrifically flawed system at it’s core.

so you guys want WoW BG’s but in a three way match?

Elder Scrolls Online will do this, but they have to, since their game doesn’t have servers. The matches are longer and players are put into a campaign. Each campaign is balanced for player population in the 3-factions.

Then again ESO has the genius behind DAoC, which is Matt Firor. So you can expect better design choices from them.

I personally think servers should be separated from WvW, it will make a better experience. But that is just me.

yup that would be proper WvW. instanced 6-hour matches that start when the queue is full, several of these could take place at the same time for more heavy populated servers. fiddle with the upgrade timers a bit and reduce max population by about 50% and gogogo.

Keiel.7489:

so you guys want WoW BG’s but in a three way match?

WvW with three factions wouldn’t be the same as BGs at all, WoW or any others, but hell yes … I’d take that in a heartbeat over the mess WvW has turned into. People actually play BGs in other games to win.

Xcom.1926:

Elder Scrolls Online will do this, but they have to, since their game doesn’t have servers. The matches are longer and players are put into a campaign. Each campaign is balanced for player population in the 3-factions.

Then again ESO has the genius behind DAoC, which is Matt Firor. So you can expect better design choices from them.

I personally think servers should be separated from WvW, it will make a better experience. But that is just me.

That’s why, in spite of the fact that I dislike the trinity concept, I’ll be abandoning GW2 in favor of ESO whenever it comes out. I would really, really like to stick with WvW in GW2 for various reasons, but I have zero expectation that ANet will get their act together in the meantime. It really is a monumental shame.

Defense has been made obsolete by superior rams and ram mastery (slight exaggeration).

Also, I predict they will add an arena area in the EB JP for guilds to GvG.

Xcom.1926:

Elder Scrolls Online will do this, but they have to, since their game doesn’t have servers. The matches are longer and players are put into a campaign. Each campaign is balanced for player population in the 3-factions.

Then again ESO has the genius behind DAoC, which is Matt Firor. So you can expect better design choices from them.

I personally think servers should be separated from WvW, it will make a better experience. But that is just me.

-WvW should be separated from PVE, it doesn’t mix. PvE needs constant new dungeons, gear rewards etc to keep the players happy. WvW need balance between classes, new better gear all the time means rebalancing.

-WvW don’t need levels or leveling. WvW player skill should be based on personal skil and choises and team skill and choises. Not some system that makes players who play more stronger.

I am still waiting for the first game studio that really understands WvW and their players wishes.

Gut the server system and replace it with a guild alliance system. Guilds would be grouped together based on alliances, typical play time, average play duration, overall ranking and some randomness to keep the matches fresh.

Each week 3 groups of guilds would face off. This would help even out population, and coverage as well as create fresh matches every week. The WvW scoreboard would become a Guild scoreboard for bragging rights. Rewards would be based on how well a guild alliance does in the match up.

If someone can pluck a hole in that system (aside from the work necessary to do it), I would like to hear it.

Straegen.2938:

Gut the server system and replace it with a guild alliance system. Guilds would be grouped together based on alliances, typical play time, average play duration, overall ranking and some randomness to keep the matches fresh.

Each week 3 groups of guilds would face off. This would help even out population, and coverage as well as create fresh matches every week. The WvW scoreboard would become a Guild scoreboard for bragging rights. Rewards would be based on how well a guild alliance does in the match up.

If someone can pluck a hole in that system (aside from the work necessary to do it), I would like to hear it.

I’ve been saying this for a while now. Server vs Server vs Server is a bad idea that has no hope of balance and a score handicap won’t change the undermanned server getting rolled kitten the field. You can’t just slap a scoreboard on open world pvp and not expect major problems.

If it were GvGvG or alliances then if you lose, it’s most likely because you didn’t have your kitten together. And since guilds are cross servers, population will be a non issue it would be a matter of guild maintenance. However, I’m sure GW2’s multi-guild feature would cause problems with this somehow, ugh.

Cactus.2710:

Keiel.7489:

so you guys want WoW BG’s but in a three way match?

WvW with three factions wouldn’t be the same as BGs at all, WoW or any others, but hell yes … I’d take that in a heartbeat over the mess WvW has turned into. People actually play BGs in other games to win.

Well, I wouldn’t mind 3 way BG-style battles either, perhaps have it in somewhat affect WvW. Maybe have 3 matches (maps) people can que for ever 30-90mins and whichever side wins on that map gets the orb. I would also like to see the orbs reduced to just having the stomp bonus and no stat bonus (at least combat wise, GF/MF/XP/WXP) bonuses would be fine.