24 hour coverage. How do we make play time in off hours valuable without blowing out the score?
As an Oceanic player and WvW commander from ye olde Titan Alliance, responsible for the term “night capping”, I strongly believe that my play time and efforts are equally as valuable as anyone else’s. Having also been on the receiving end of JQ’s SEA dominance for a time, I’d argue that their time and effort are similarly valuable.
I believe that WvW coverage is part of what passes for the GW2 “meta”. It’s not EVE, but the considerable efforts of sever leadership to recruit, retain and resource 24 hour coverage go unrecognised. Particularly by players who don’t have the diplomacy, drive, determination or vision to put in the same effort. Yes, band wagoning plays a part, but that’s a reward issue.
Ultimately, players will go where the intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are the greatest for their playtime. ANet does not create player imbalances, we do. Anet’s role, imo, should be to fix the cause and not bandaid the symptoms. Provide incentives that encourage us to self balance. Carrot > stick.
Snowballing. How do we give worlds a fighting chance throughout the duration of the match?
Assuming you’ve fixed the population balance incentives, then I see the ‘fighting chance’ as largely a question of server leadership and morale. And “losing” a match doesn’t – or shouldn’t, imo – be seen as having a direct correlation to ANet action. For example, during the fixed games of NA Tier 1, Season 2, BG had no chance of winning, but the fights were constant and little less than epic. Being on this losing side has given me far better memories of WvW than will “winning” Season 3.
Stagnation – How do I feel continuously challenged when my world is ahead?
There’s usually some degree of pride when your server is in a dominant position, which can be motivation in itself. If it’s particularly one sided then I might play an alt or take a break from playing, reducing my play time and doing more IRL, saving extended effort for when the match is in doubt.
For me, times like these also build an appreciation for the players and guilds on the dominated server – the ones who WvW regardless of the overall score.
Stagnation – How does my world break the hold that other worlds have on me when I’m behind?
Server leadership. Hard work. Resilience.
A video showing the new Coloured commanders tags in use during NA’s Season 3, Week 1 involving BG/JQ/TC.
To crush your enemies,
to see them driven before you,
and to see the colours of your rainbow.
If you want to see how NA’s Blackgate used the new Commander tags to bring order to the battlefield then ride the rainbow at http://youtu.be/K2ZpoOfzWY4
Kudos for listening and for putting in extra effort to be responsive.
You heard the people sing.
An easy solution is WvW-specific commander icons (same colors as WvW levels) tied to WvW progression (blue > bronze>silver> gold etc) and paid for using WvW currency (badges – some gold if you must).
Imo, I can’t see how you’d (practically) need more than 3 tags on a map.
1. Introduce specific colours for WvW commanders – blue > bronze > silver > etc.
2. Have these unlockable through WvW rank progression.
3. Have these payable for using badges.
4. If you must, make these only available in WvW.
WvW-specific commander icons tied to WvW progression and paid for using WvW currency.
Do it.
REMOVE AOE DMG CAPS – This has been said again and again. The 5 player cap on AOE damage is what allows the stupid stacking zergball tactics to exist. Without AOE caps, a small group could easily wreck a stacking zerg.
Any competent guild core is going to adapt their scouting techniques, class makeup and builds, and engagement techniques (rolling barrages anyone?) to leverage any change and prove this assertion as the puffery it is. Chokepoints possibly being the exception.
This will increase open field and non-ambush ball dominance, not reduce it.
This will result in massive insta kill DPS zones where skill is absolutely irrelevant. Certain weapons classes and skills will dominate.
Warhammer:AoR gameplay pre and post the RoF nerf for those who were there.
- We can’t talk about that right now. Once the in-development features reach a state where we, as a company, are comfortable talking about them, we will.
- Some player requests are under development. What those are and when they will be completed, I can’t say at this time for reasons mentioned above.
Reading this statement I had a terrifying moment of deja vu from Warhammer: Age of Reckoning.
On the action side, the mechanics are too shallow, and there isn’t a proper risk/reward system in place … (the skills are simple and) just hitting every skill on cooldown 90% of the time.
<shrug> This ain’t an ARPG. They’re fun when done well but are a different game type. I think the action element has been well integrated into GW2 in a way that doesn’t overly disadvantage those of us with non-US ping.
I played a bit of Wildstar and the lag and telegraphing system made it very difficult for Oceanic melee toons. Also, in PvP, I found that the telegraphing system often produced a sea of red – ie. becoming largely meaningless – when more than 6-7 were involved.
Additionally, at the risk of sounding elitist, if you’re mashing buttons when everything is on cooldown, then your level of gameplay is a fairly basic.
What I’d argue is that – after approaching 2 years – the builds and combat have become pretty stale. You’ve got it right there.
But making combat more console-like is not the answer.
[edit: grammarz]
<shrug> As a long term PvPer, from UO pre-Trammel on, I approve of the 2v1.
31+ hours of reset against JQ + TC in EB.
219 major engagements won, 16 lost (most to TC). Thousands of bags.
Week 8 video is @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms2GX5kKjaw
Week 8, part 2 (fwaturing CERN) @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcQvimSByPI
Other weeks of JQ+TC there as well.
Good, lucrative times.
31+ hours of reset against JQ + TC in EB.
219 major engagements won, 16 lost (most to TC). Thousands of bags.
Week 8 video is @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms2GX5kKjaw
Week 8, part 2 (fwaturing CERN) @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcQvimSByPI
Other weeks of JQ+TC there as well.
Good, lucrative times.
JQ just completed Gold Boss Blitz event a couple of times.
Gratz. Did TC help?
Hello Cuddlepie,
Good to see you back in game. Out of curiosity how is WvW Clausewitzian, I am an avid war/history reader but I am not quite sure how it fits in.
FW
I’d argue that the current NA situation is a textbook example of the Clauszwitzian trinity in action.
BTW if you’re interested in the field, I recommend Beatrice Heuser’s The Evolution of Strategy – imo the best book on western strategy written in at least 25 years.
The 2v1 in a certain match is not about fair fights in WvW. It’s not even about unfair fights in WvW.
Fundamentally, it’s about not having to fight in WvW.
It’s strategically smart and within the rules.
If you read Sun Tze Art of War, there are strategies such as :
Empty City Ruse
Pretending to be weak while one is really strong
Tactical RetreatYou can lose battles but win the war. Results matter. Imagine the possibility of a rich merchantile server using their economical might to buy alliances and win wars in Season 3.
<shrug> Sun Tzu is not an appropriate theoretical basis for WvW. You have neither the time nor the space to follow an Eastern way of war. GW2 WvW is Clausewitzian.
The mercantile server analogy doesn’t really hold up either. There is no comparative server economic advantage which isn’t a function of player numbers. There’s no controlling the sub-continent, there’s no VOC, there’s no silk road.
The interesting conundrum for ANet is that the 3-sided WvW design was intended to force fair fights, the fact that it’s being used by certain servers to avoid having to fight is strategically brilliant. Paraphrasing Sun Tzu, (yeah I’m being conceptually inconsistent), the epitome of skill is winning without fighting. The servers using an alliance to manipulate Anet’s system for their mutual advantage are showing, yet again, that ANet really doesn’t understand its PvP systems – or player motivations – as well as their player base.
when you say BG is dominant, it sounds like you’re saying nobody can match them in skill. That is far from a true statement. For the most part all three T1 servers are pretty equal in the field. Everyone wipes everyone at some point.
True, but my experience of reset – when pops are equal – does not reflect a ‘pretty equal’ assessment.
<shrug> stats are in the vid, but it’s something like 26 hours and 117 wins to 7 losses.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYBCFb33DOE
A video of some of the action from last NA reset in EB is at http://youtu.be/CYBCFb33DOE
<shrug>No GvG, no best guilds….
GW2 wvw is far form being a game wich requires skill.
Which is like saying: “no SPvP/TPvP, no best guilds”.
Recruiting, training, gearing, guilds to map, comping, cross map coordination, blob/havoc coordination, militia management, logistics (siege, food, banners etc) positioning, buffing, veils, CC, DPS dumping, rebuffing and healing, stomping (or not), and maintaining these over extended sessions are all skills that good blob WvW guilds have – it’s a different but broader skill set in a more chaotic environment than GvG.
An example of effective blobbing from last reset (BG/JQ/SoS in EB) is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQmCbCvOPFY
From my experience on NA: NS, EP, HB, and SUPR (old CA) all stand out as exceptional WvW guilds. Going old school, Condemned from Titan Alliance was very good. Special recognition for TKG, they were a joke in WAR and early to mid-GW2. But they’ve transformed themselves into a tight, effective guild. My vote for most improved.
A video showing blob action at its “finest” from this week’s WvW reset.
Problem Some server have much to many WvW-Player, some server have to few players to play competitive WvW. And even worse people seem to have a tendency to concrentrate on a few server and not to spread out over all servers.
This uneven player distributions lead to very unbalanced matches and as only a few servers are of similar strenght to very repetitive matches.
If you put as much time into something positive for your servers WvW pop balance, say – recruiting?, then your pop imbalance may be less.
The issue here, fundamentally, is that you don’t understand the effort that goes into organising winning coverage. Some of it – inevitably – is bandwagoning, but you want socialised WvW – where those servers that know the meta, who have leaders who actively play and manipulate it, who spend time to play it, are brought down to the level of those who rock up on underlevelled rangers.
If the problem is “Some server have much to many WvW-Player, some server have to few players to play competitive WvW” then you have two options:
1. Do something positive. Recruit. Buy a tag. Set an example. Encourage people to come to you by performance.
2. Move servers.
Your “solution” is enforced WvW meta mediocrity. Ayn Rand says no.
Knights aren't dropping loot [Resolved]
in Battle for Lion’s Arch - Aftermath
Posted by: Cuddlepie.8109
Also, condition builds are baaad for the Watchknights. They reflect condis like crazy. It is a Zerker event.
Thank god. It’s about time ANet changed up the meta.
We are looking into the issue right now. Until we know more, that’s all I can tell you at the moment.
As you’d be aware, this bug has already had a significant effect on this week’s matchup.
I’d be interested to know, apart from eventually fixing the bug, what – if anything, and I’d be happy with an open “nothing can be done” admission – compensatory action you’ll take.
You took our match up forums. Taking our PPT as well seems kind of mean spirited.
As for punishing the large servers, the beauty of a handicap system is that it isnt punishing larger servers for their coverage, nor is it rewarding small servers for their lack of said numbers.
A non-penalising handicap?
No such thing.
If people think that servers like JQ and BQ just turn up and win, then they don’t don’t get the sustained and significant effort that goes into recruiting, organising, managing, training and maintaining those numbers and coverage. Not to mention coordinating and managing the WvW guilds that form their core.
It’s this effort that lays the foundation for WvW success and – in a positive feedback loop – attracts bandwagoners.
I actually this proposal as symptomatic of the attitude that produces noncompetitive servers. Rather make the effort to recruit, organise, and – if necessary for a competitive WvW experience – move, there is a call to ‘handicap’ those who do.
I see it as, essentially, WvW welfare.
Because having more people to AOE and CC means nothing if you get side wiped by a group who instant kills half the people you’re with.
Yep, every game needs more abilities that can insta-gib others. ‘I win’ buttons are synonymous with highly skilled play …
<shrug>
The vast majority of mechanics in multiplayer game naturally favor the larger group simply because:
1. A larger group is able to do X more.
2. A larger group is able to do X and Y simultaneously.
Really good, tight groups can use the downed state as rally insurance. But, from time to time, they too will fall victim to the fifth law of thermodynamics: quantity has a quality all of its own. Regardless, if a small group’s commander is repeatedly putting it in a position where it’s being wiped by a zerg, then the group has deeper issues than the downed state.
Conversely, in GvG and blob on blob situations, I suggest that good commanders consider downed players – enemy and friendly – when calling their next move. Imo, the downed state adds complexity to large group clashes.
This doesn’t mean the mechanics can’t be tightened, but it should be done in a way that preserves the value of the downed state as a factor in large group fights.
Ymmv.
make Crowd control more prominent, get rid of the down state in WvW and get rid of the limit on amount of people an AOE skill can hit.
AOE should destroy mindless Zergs yet in guild wars 2 you are actually rewarded for this dumbed down style of gameplay
CC options are numerous, significant and very effective.
The downed state actually adds another dimension to gameplay: e.g res’ing the downed, and commanders deciding if they should defeat downed or keep pressing. It also requires discipline to stay focused on target and not have your ‘casual’ blobbers chasing stomps.
Unlimited AoE targetting. <shrug> In WAR:AoR, Bright Wizards (and Sorcs) and their Rain of Fire reduced gameplay to ‘I win’ builds and one dimensional positional gameplay that centered around choke points.
In short, I suggest what you’re proposing would:
1. Reduce the complexity of current gameplay
2. Promote a limited range of OP builds (mass cc and ranged AoE).
3. Be adapted by the zergs, resulting in them cc’ing into helplessness and melting smaller groups.
On 29 Dec, a KnT-led float fought Ge and WvW in a rolling series of 17 open field engagements over a period of 16 minutes and 40 odd seconds.
The video of this encounter is @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG_JaXwRWwc
At the end of the encounters, Visual Sun (BG commander) asked us to /bow to JQ for the privilege.
As these forums draw to a close, I wish I could offer the same farewell to the moderators.
Send a card. Shut down the WvW forums. Which one is a truer indication of regard for customers?
Where ever it may be, assuming that one place is found and that the WvW community discussion doesn’t splinter, registration might include a declaration that you’re not working, nor affiliated, with ANet.
My position would be that if ANet is unwilling to moderate WvW discussion, then neither they, nor their employees, should benefit from a service provided by others.
Anet has the tools to deal with people who break their forum rules. Ban repeated offenders.
Group punishment of the majority, who have not infringed, is a crude and fundamentally unfair response.
The patronising tone of the Anet announcement spoke volumes about their attitude to their WvW customers – it was like being chided by an overbearing parent. IMO, there is something deeply flawed in the Anet customer service culture, perhaps a pervasive disrespect, perhaps a laziness towards using the tools at their disposal, perhaps a blindness towards the culture of competitive PvP/WvW they’ve created.
Where’s Harry Tuttle when you need him?
Going away for the Holidays. Merry Christmas/Happy Holidays/or equivalent to the WvWers from JQ, SoR and BG.
You make this game worthwhile.
Random Dec WvW excerpts loading now – mainly of other KnT commanders. Available at approx 5 am Thu 19 Dec AEDST (gg antipodean internet) at http://youtu.be/dq1KhOpauq0
Embrace the Kiwi in all of us.
Ensure they’ve been dipped – preferably shower rather than plunge – thoroughly first.
Cuddlepie is not talking about balancing servers but how and the manner MERC left.
i read before they left not because they want to balance the servers but rather for soemthing else.JQ merc wanted to lose the “dead weight”. That’s what Tarkus said when they left.
That was a quote taken out of context by cuds, I said we lost a lot of dead weight and it was a chance to clean the roster; the active members who stayed were not included in that and I’ve said that a few times already. Why are we still talking about this.
“that was a quote taken out of context by cuds."
Here’s exactly what you posted (before editing it out): “The best fights I’ve had all year have been against the BG ones since we left, as we cut a lot of dead weight from the guild when we moved off”
This is a single sentence, with a clear causal link (that’s the word “as”) between “best fights" and "dead weight”. Therefore you were saying that removing dead weight from your guild improved the quality of your WvW experience.
Here’s where your argument about roster cleaning falls down. If a person is inactive then they’re not playing. Therefore they can’t negatively affect the quality of your fights because they ain’t logged in. Your meaning is clear. You regarded the MERC that didn’t want to follow you as inferior players.
I may have given you the benefit of the doubt, if you hadn’t also called those same players ‘fake’ and ‘incompetent’. Again, here’s exactly what you said: “Fake MERC doesn’t play for ppt so argueing that thier ppt sucks is not indiciative of true coverage. it just proves they are incompetent.”
As you’re aware, I have screenshots of all this.
So, my argument would be:
1. Quoting your own words back at you isn’t taking you out of context.
2. We’re still talking about this because: a. you keep bringing it up, and b. people remember what you actually said.
3. This is an example of my point about you never having acknowledged that there were negatives – resulting from your actions – for the people behind the pixels (Nuked misinterpreted this somehow to be about coverage?).
Why are we still talking about this crap
A good question, let me offer some possibilities:
1. Because what you did and how you did it mattered to the people behind the pixels?
2. Because you insulted the people who stayed behind?
3. Because you’ve never acknowledged, let alone taken responsibility or apologised, for the negative impacts of the move?
4. Because all of this has earned you a related reputation?
5. Because every Dorian Grey needs his picture?
You’ll recall that, when we were talking about this decision, I said this would happen.
So, to answer your question: you know why and you were warned about it.
Your indignant surprise is disingenuous.
(edited by Cuddlepie.8109)
Rewards were meh to insulting (if you rolled poorly in RNG). I appreciate, however, the difficulty ANet faces in giving fitting rewards and encouraging server stacking.
A far more pressing issue is the promise to make WvW rewards equivalent to PvE.
LOLwut Cirus? Are you kidding me? Just stawp with the MERC stuff already. We’re all kitten friends still. calm down!
Superseriouscyruscirus!
I love you long time mate! And to all my ex guildies I see on the field. I miss you. And maybe one day we’ll be together again! <3
As much as you would like the MERC move ramifications to fade quietly away, I think they’ll keep following the main individuals involved. Potentially for years and across games.
Imo, the only thing in gaming that matters in the long term is your reputation, built through your achievements and actions in game. Everything else is digital detritus.
When you take a move that splits a community, insult those that you left behind, and refuse to acknowledge that there were negative aspects to the move, people remember. Particularly, if you like sunbathing in the forum limelight and can’t keep picking at the scabs.
<shrug> I counselled one of your leadership about this at the time.however I think it will be unhealthy for WvW in the long term when some servers have a monopoly on winning.
<shrug> Since release I count four servers in NA who have had significant runs at dominance: on release, HoD was dominant under Titan Alliance, until TA disbanded; SoS had a good run at the top; JQ is still the winningest server since TA left; and now it’s BG.
In 14 odd months that’s not a bad rotation of NA’s top dog.
Regardless, I think a point that’s often lost in these discussions is that coverage reflects server leadership. The leadership of some servers puts considerable effort into recruiting for, organising, and managing their WvW population. Those servers tend to have success – to which there’s a positive feedback loop.
I’d also argue that inter-server politics are part of what passes for GW2’s WvW meta. It’s EvE-lite and we don’t have a Mittani playing it, but it adds spice and interest to what are otherwise disposable WvW encounters.
Servers who don’t have such leadership will never be competitive. ANet can’t introduce a system to mitigate our shortcomings.
There are a lot of WvW guild-based videos about. This video is different.
It showcases one of the reasons why BG has been successful in Season 1: our militia have more than pulled their weight.
The link is @: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShqIyC9qa6w
Video of BG’s militia in action.
You’re missing the point about the EvE comparison.
Corporations and alliances compete for members. The meta of EvE involves – among other things – people who actively ’play, outside the game to build or destroy their competition. Google Mittani, for one example.
Again, I’d argue that you can’t expect coverage if you’re passive in this aspect. Do more.
I’d be happier if the booster timer only timed down when you actually got into WvW.
You’re essentially encouraging welfare PPT to those who haven’t been able to earn it otherwise.
You’re also implicitly disrespecting the efforts of those servers who take active and effective measures to be fully competitive. This would remove the server competition meta that adds an EvE-like (extra-lite) flavor to the game.
WvW population is, to a large extent, the players’ problem.
Does your server’s WvW leadership recruit to cover gaps?
Does your server WvW leadership take steps to cooperate and manage internal issues?
Are you encouraging and training PvE/PvX guilds to participate more in WvW?
If the answer to these is “no”, then move to a server that cares about WvW or reconcile yourself to the fact that your server is not doing what it needs to in order to remain competitive.
Ty to GE for the fights tonight (OCX) in EB. The BG militia was able to handle the other guild groups but you guys were a cut above the rest.
BTW, have [Legends Never] DIE come back to SoR? I’m still getting angsty PMs from their members – this time from Heroic Panda – over the time our BG militia wiped them. Fortuitously, just after Legends Never [DIE] OPed a thread saying they couldn’t be beaten and would embarrass BG’s WvW guilds.
They then deleted the thread and left SoR for T2.
<shrug> If we outnumber you during OCX its because we rebuilt the community after JQ paid MERC to leave. It illustrates the quality and resilience of the MERC who stayed, and of the BG OCX community in general.I refer you to my previous post in which I say "I did not accuse anyone of “buying” guilds"
Also even with TKG and MERC on JQ, BG still out numbers us in OCX, so forgive me if I think that it is better for everyone if they are on JQ.
One other factor is that you have some OCX commanders whose preference is to blob. One, in particular, had/has a catchcry “where are my numbers?”. The issue is that this – from a coverage perspective – is penny wise, pound foolish. The blob does deliver bags and stroke egos – but stuff is capped around them by often smaller BG forces.
I believe that more strategically astute decision making in OCX would deliver JQ better results.
Hello Hints,
The Titan Alliance was on HOD on headstart. They assembled perfect 24/7 coverage because that was plainly the most optimum way to ensure constant PPT. They never lost a match (even when matches were less than 7 days last year). So HOD/TA was the 1st T0 server.
FW
If this is maintained by Monday/Tuesday I think its fair to declare that BG is the first “T0” server in history.
Methinks you’re forgetting the server formerly known as the Titan Alliance.
Who? I’m not an old-time WvW’er so I might be missing some context here.
A little bit of history if you’re interested.
There was an interesting meta pre-release as Titan Alliance and Team Legacy tried to assemble the best coverage they could.
TL were the first to approach some of OCX’s oldest PvP guilds but, among some other things, the reputation of RUIN (primarily from WAR:AoR) counted against them and these guilds went to TA.
TA consisted of ARMA, DiE (the OCX guild, not Legends Never), CND, DROW, The Elite, GIN, LUC, PRX, RMA, SOA, SYN, TRG, TRF, ULTD and YAKI.
When GW2 launched, TA went to a server that they’d not previously played on (HoD), and one with a name that was seen to be ho-hum. The idea was to avoid bandwagoners but free server transfers sunk that.
TA won 30 matches in a row and then decided to disband, announcing it on 5 Oct 12. It’s OCX guilds had been so effective that they gave rise to the term ‘nightcapping’ and prompted a forum response from Matt Witter: “WvW was developed as a continuous never ending battle .. we will not be changing WvW based on some players’ idea of off time hours”.
FWIW.
As a WvWer, BL keys are one gem store item that I think is significantly overpriced.
There aren’t that many RNG items in there that appeal to me (regen, armour buffs etc) so it’s a poor value proposition to buy the keys.
I don’t know how many WvWers buy keys but I wonder if there’s an untapped market for ANet here?
Hmmm, aren’t you that Ranger player I’ve beaten on my dueling account?
Why yes, you are.
Looking forward to your response. Perhaps a video link about slavery this time?lol bragging about beating a ranger? I’ll duel you on your ‘dueling account’ lets do this. I’ll play my awesome ranger even.
Think I remember you as well. Axe+Torch+Wolf?
Already done you over.Try again. Last time I dueled was about a month ago on my necro. It’s ok to be scared.
Comprehension lesson. I said I thought remembered you on a Ranger, not that it was the ‘last time’ you lost. I note the lack of denials from you, tho.
‘It’s ok to be scared’ Does that work at recess?
Hmmm, aren’t you that Ranger player I’ve beaten on my dueling account?
Why yes, you are.
Looking forward to your response. Perhaps a video link about slavery this time?
lol bragging about beating a ranger? I’ll duel you on your ‘dueling account’ lets do this. I’ll play my awesome ranger even.
Think I remember you as well. Axe+Torch+Wolf?
Already done you over.
Ahhh … you PvF like you roam. Three against one, still playing the meta copied from a few months ago, and utterly ineffective.
Classy, a link to a video with the title “Ultimate (insert word referring to non-hetro orientation) Fighter OFFICIAL TRAILER”.
What’s next Ryan.8367, AoN and the Mag community? “Ironic” links to race-inspired videos or a game about domestic violence?
Well played.
Thanks
Hmmm, aren’t you that Ranger player I’ve beaten on my dueling account?
Why yes, you are.
Looking forward to your response. Perhaps a video link about slavery this time?