Guild Wars 2

I always thought the red outline (red on enemy) you get on noise over would help a lot if with finding your current target if it didn’t vanish once you hard targeted someone.

Multiple, nearly unlimited team composition, consisting of multiple, nearly unlimited build that is fun!

The term meta or metagame as used here (to me) means the game within the game. Or the game above the game, however you want to look at it.

Conquest mode (the game) will develop and foster the individual classes, builds, and tactics that are the most effective at winning the game.

The effect this information has to influence team compositions and tactics would be the meta or metagame.

Ideally there would be multiple viable options (multiple metas). However many seem to be in agreement that the current GW2 tPvP meta is too narrow and does not have enough variation.

Inappropriate behavior?

Allard.5704:

Draedark.8193:

No rating loss for a 4v5 is a novel idea but would however be too easy of a system to abuse.

How are you going to abuse it if its random who you are up against?

What would prevent someone from leaving as soon as the match was not going their way?
Also in this system, would the other teams (the 5) win be invalidated or would it count?

No rating loss for a 4v5 is a novel idea but would however be too easy of a system to abuse.

Update starts midnight (pst) on the 6th I believe and will take up to 6 hrs from the info in the notifications.

@Authority: A win/loss ratio is pretty much what we currently have by my understanding. The system also weighs those wins/losses relative to your opponents.

@evilapprentice: That is what I am also hoping for, something the same or very similar to what we have now for tPvP. It could probably use some tweaks for Solo-Q but so many people have differing opinions on what defines “skill” and “PvP” that it is difficult to see where to begin. I find it very difficult to quantify the things each player can do that go into a win so I keep coming to the conclusion that the end result (win/lose) is the best way to determine which team (players) played better.

Whatever the build meta ends up being will be interesting for sure. I myself have a sustained damage ranger build that has proven to be a lot of fun in hotjoin that I plan on trying in SoloQ.

My biggest question is will the leader board rank still be contingent on winning the match or will it be based on personal score or some combination thereof?

I am of the school that it should be based on match wins, though I know that some may not agree with that.

I have played ranger since release, in tPvP since around February (when the free tour ices were introduced).
Right now I play spirits because that is what currently works and is what teams want in a ranger, not because I find it particularly fun or engaging as a player.
I am always toying around with the build and other builds to try and find something else but keep coming up short.

Interesting idea but then the door would be open for the opposite progression:
PvP progression from PvE/WvW. Also the reward system would need an overhaul else fresh 80s would emerge from the mists poor and in level 1 gear…

As someone who plans to take advantage of this que during the times when a team is not available, I sincerely hope that the leaderboards rating derived from this is still contingent on the win. Otherwise I fear this will just be a ranked “hot join style” environment.

Two Soul (Ranger) – theme would be he is as wild as the animals he keeps
Prison Riot (Thief) – inspired by Mortal Kombat Scorpion

@Stof – I think I better understand what your saying, and again I totally agree with you and most other posters here about the issues with Hot Join. If we are saying add this as a third PvP option it may just work, and hopefully not spread the population too thin.

Here would then be my only concerns: Without some overhauls to the way Rank Points/Glory points are earned, I fear that this environment would not help further your cause any better than current Hot Join simply because it is not-rated (leaderboard wise) the motives of the players could remain the same as when they are in Hot Join so the play styles would remain similar.

As much as I agree with your points, I have to disagree to let go of the hot join format.
This gives a needed avenue for a different play style, glory farming, etc.

Changing the rules will not (in my opinion) change the behavior of the players. I wager most are in hot join in the first place because the don’t want to play by the ranked tournament rules or get stomped by premades.

Have you considered a custom arena as a solution to your goals?

One possible way to use the guild entity to track team tPvP leaderboard ratings would be to add a permissions toggle for tPvP representation to the guild ranks tab (similar to the ability to Claim / Unclaim WvW Forts in WvW).

This way, whatever players are allowed to effect a guilds (Team) tPvP rating would be under control of the guild itself. Players could be removed/added/substituted on the team on the fly as needed. Existing guilds could start using the system so a bunch of temporary tPvP Team guilds would not need to be created. Guilds could have elections, use custom arena scrms, lotteries, etc. to choose their tPvP champions. The core idea here is team member selection is under control of the the guild itself.

A match result that would effect the Team tPvP (Team-Q) would only happen if all 5 members on one team had the appropriate guild rank permission. Otherwise it would only effect each team members group or solo tPvP rating as appropriate for that system.

You would basically then need only three leaderboards;
1. Solo-Q rating (as I understand is already in the works)
2. Group-Q rating (the counter part to the solo-q, also already assumed to be in the works)
3. Team-Q rating (a new one based on the guild rank permission above)

If two teams representing the same guild were matched against each other, the result could default back to Group-Q/Solo-Q as appropriate, or be thrown out all together.

Assuming they are not already, the guild permissions would need to be “locked at match start” to avoid exploiting this system.

Nice document and thanks for taking all the time to compile and gather this data!

I am assuming this test was done with all pets on “auto attack,” without using any F2 abilities? I realize some may slow the DPS down, but there are some that in my opinion may be worth factoring in.
Example with the bears, the Arctodus (spelling?) has an extra attack on F2 which may make them the highest DPS bear.
The cats and birds also vary some, I think that with those active skills considered the results may be a bit more revealing.
This does confirm some of my “gut” feelings about pet a vs pet b (especially canines and felines).
Thanks again and keep up the good work sir!

The question I have is why Sic ’em has a range of 3000, while pets have a leash range of 2000?
Sic ’em appears to work at 3000 range, apart from the leash limitation. Ie the icon shows as being in range and there is no visual indication that the skill will fail.

My current build will not change very much. I am however intent on making off-hand axe work somehow as I find the proposed buff to Path of Scars very interesting and at the very least will be something fun to toy around with.
For reference, I mainly play tPvP and some WvW.

I agree, also for “pet” classes to be able to see the cooldowns on their AI abilities would be nice.

Thanks for this! It seems like such a small detail but it will in increase the experience positively for a great many of us I think.

Since joining in this effort, I have seen the eSPT guild go from: struggling to get 5 folks together at the same time to: running 4 teams at once during NA prime time and its continues to grow every day.
So I would say yes it’s making a difference and helping to grow the tPvP community.

I saw this had gone to the third page with all the SOTG excitement. Can we perhaps get a sticky?

For tPvP bunkering, the purest form of the role is to maximize point control by staying on it and keeping the enemy off of it.

1. Client options to reduce amount of particle effects/screen clutter.
2. Client options for normalized player models.
3. Client options to reduce the amount of conflict between camera and targeting controls.

The end game to me is the activity that brings me the most enjoyment out of time spent in game. For me, it is tPvP with the occasional side of WvWvW.
I am of the mind that if you spend your time on experiences (doing something fun) as opposed to spending it earning imaginary material possessions (glory, items, gold, etc.) you will have more to take away. In the end, when you finally move on, the fun, experiences, relationships, etc. have a much greater potential to continue to reward you long term.
Great thing is that there are options for different players to find their own end game.

So PvP only and then emerge from the mists as a freshly leveled 80 with no gold or gear? Not only would we need ways to make gold and gear ourselves for PvE, it would not seem fair to the PvE/WvW guys who don’t gain PvP levels as a side effect of thier day to day activities.

I like that they are separate for that reason but I hear ya, it’s odd to go to LA once in a while and look like a brand new character again.

Can we get an ETA on the option to toggle off other people’s dresses?

I all seriousness though, if everyone shows up in the same dress it’s pretty obvious even if they didn’t spy each others tailor ahead if time.

Now in all seriousness for real, if your build is that good and a custom fit, chances are nobody will be able to play it to the same level of effectiveness as you. They can use it as a base for thier own of course but the difference will still come down to the players behind the builds.

Also, imitation is one of the highest forms of flattery. If someone is copying your build you should take it as a compliment.

IGN: Two Soul / Prison Riot / Effing Effer
Main Profession: Ranger / Thief
Alternate Professions: Guardian
Account name: Draedark.8193
Practice Availablity: Day, times, time Zone
Weekdays 5pm-8pm server time (PST?)
Weekends highly variable
Current PvP rank (Not Leaderboard): 33
Level of Desire: example (Active Tournament Play, Casual Play, Leaderboard hogs)
Active tourney play/casual play
NA or EU: NA

I have been added and was able to partake in the first scrims for this effort and all I have to say is thanks to Bas and all the other guys who are putting effort into this. They are really working hard at promoting GW2 tPvP and are also helping to train shoutcasters on our scrims.

We learned a ton and the pros where not only very respectful but also helpful and gave us advice.

Thanks again and I recommend anyone who is even entertaining the idea of trying tPvP to give this a try!

Would also be interested. I will provide times in said post.

Whatever the current state, I am hopeful that the complaints about some of the other classes points at the possibility of a new meta, or what would be even better multiple metas, emerging.

I have to somewhat agree. Though deemed over powered by some it seems that many classes now have at least one build that offers good sustain with limited ability to also do bust damage.
Others have exceptional sustain and others exceptional burst.
This goes along with the direction aNet seems to be taking with slowing down the pace of PvP.

Some more options for things to spend glory on would be great, though gems/gold for glory would be a risky prospect for aNet. It would be too easy to exploit a system like this unless safeguards were put in.

Update for this. I put Sigil of Minor Corruption on just one of my weapon sets, and now it seems to be working okay. I also have a sigil on one of my underwater sets but have not tested that yet.
So it appears to be buggy when you have the Sigil on both weapon sets.

Buggy since patch on the 30th. I also run this sigil on both weapon sets. Also like previous poster this is on a ranger. I have not tested any of my other characters. Experience this both in hot join and tourneys.
One thing to note is that it would proc sometimes. I also noticed once (day after patch day only) I had 2 stacks in PvP so when it did proc is was not always procing in multiples of 5 as it usualy did.
I have since switched to force sigils so do not know if the last hot fix or two addresses te issue or changed anything.

Shadow Return (sword #2 after Infiltrator Strike) also cures one condition but of course costs initiative to use. Without the traits in Shadow Arts, I also find myself struggling with keeping clear of conditions.

A d/c anytime is always bad luck. The score before your d/c does point a bit to a possible match imbalance (your d/c was counted as a loss vs a much lower ranked team) which may have been the cause of you losing so many ranks.

That stinks man, nobody deserves that. But if you were #7 you can hopefully climb back up there relatively quickly.

Good hunting sir.

This brings up a question. What is the default value of a new accounts MMR? This practice could be a part of how volatile the ranks currently are. Even so, I would think that this practice will begin to taper off when the leader boards stabilize.
More money for PvP resources is always a welcome thing in my book. Hopefully ANET has a way to track this to help justify specific dual accounts were purchased for the sole purpose of PvP and get a budget credit!

Looks like a steal + mug w/ stealth then backstab followed by 3 heart seekers. If I am reading that correctly. This would be totally possible but would probably take closer to 4-5 seconds. Maybe 3-4 if hasted but I don’t have any experience with haste as a thief.

Would the winning teams rating then not go up? Either way, much to easy to abuse.

The generic tab would be for items of over 255 quantity or an alternate to being able to stack items.

Stacking items would be great, or at the least a generic bank tab like in the PvE bank.

What I have done in the past with mixed success (more positive than negative though) is start out by just saying hell-o to break the ice. You’ll know in a few seconds roughly how open to communication the team is.

Usually I will follow up with “I am going to go to X and then do Y, unless someone has a different idea to try?”

Have made quite a few new friends to pvp with this way.

I don’t I know about the rest of you, but also being a casual tPvP-er (R24 around 50% win/loss ratio) I find it encouraging to not see myself on the top 1000. To me that is an indication of a fairly healthy competitive pvp population.

Would I like to be there of course! But with only running a few matches per day that would seem to be an unrealistic expectation or an indication of a dwindling pvp population.

I also thought that ratings beyond 1000 were going to be made visible in the future and at the least your personal rank showing up somewhere on you hero panel. That way even the more casual end of the spectrum will be able to track their progress.

Rewards for defensive play are very hard to quantify as a player could potentially be rewarded for essentially doing nothing.

Implemented poorly, and you could have servers full of 5 “defending” at node A and 5 “defending” node C and nothing going on at node B for part (or all) of the match once someone crunches the numbers on how to abuse the system to gain max glory per hour.

I do agree defense in critical to winning a match, but the extra 300 glory is already there to help mitigate some of the point loss incurred by selfless actions during the match if your team does win in the end. At least that is how I interpret the win bonus.

From reading other posts, there may be other ways to leave a match before the end to avoid the loss that allow it to happen without counting as a loss on the hero panel/leader boards.

I do not want to detail the possible method for obvious reasons.

I do not think this will effect how most thieves play, and more worry the truth of how much this will actually “nerf” thieves will not live up to the hype.

Just to be clear, I main a thief and am looking forward to the culling fix as well as the correction to being able to “chain stealth.” That to me always seemed to be a play style that was right on the thin line between skilled and exploitive.

If I understand how the change will work with the reveal debuff, perma stealth builds will still be possible though this should help downgrade their performance somewhat. Stacking stealth will also still be possible, as the notes did not seem to mention forcing a thief out of stealth, just that ones they are out they will be revealed for the standard time even if they did not do any damage to anyone.

This would only work if there was one node on the map. We could end up with playing servers, dueling servers, and node sitting servers if implemented poorly.

Defensive play is always in a hard spot in games. Hard to quantify but a crucial ingredient to victory.

Interesting idea though.

B should happen with some margin of error added in for mobs. Players would be “on their own” and need to aim the attack where they think the stealthed target is.

It is not just hitting targets after stealth. I see a lot of projectiles/ranged attacks “correct” their trajectory mid flight. The final LoS check must have quite a bit of forgiveness built in.