Showing Posts For Drys.4018:
So I suggest the following to help balance WvW:
Adjust the number of open maps based on tier. For example, T1 gets 3 BLs and EB. T2 gets 2 BLs (of the lowest ranked servers) and EB. T3 gets 1 BL and EB, and below T3 just gets EB open.
This will help fill up the maps for more even balance. In lower tiers with less WvW pop, you won’t have to spread as thin to defend and the top server won’t run away with points as easily b/c they’re sitting on an uncontested BL. By giving the underdog(s) the BL advantage, maybe that helps competition.
Thoughts? This is just a framework, so suggestions are welcome..
I didn’t actually read your entire post but:
1. Premises can be true, but the conclusion false.
P1. All crows are black
P2. Crows are birds
P3. I saw a black bird
C1. I saw a crow (False)
2. Conclusions can be true, but premises false
P1. All beer comes in bottles (False)
P2. I’m drinking beer
C1. I’m drinking beer from a bottle (True)
For someone so well versed in “logic” you should really reconsider the validity of your premises.
The forums only repent a fraction of the people who play the game. The forums are also heavily biased towards people who have complaints about the game. I’m more inclined to believe the statement from someone who has access to the numbers for all subscribers than someone who based their judgment off of forms and a /say poll in LA…
I was hoping to get some feedback primarily for WvW. Here’s the build:
The concept is to use the shield stun and mace KD to set up Evi. and final thrust. Shouts to provide cond. cleanse and help build adrenaline. High fury up-time from leg specialist and opportunist. The survivability seems a little low, but maybe if I used a different rune / sigil set?
Make the bloodlust buff scale with how outnumbered your server is on a map. Servers with few people (but many opponents) would get a large buff to stats per point while the server with the most people on the map would get no buff from the points. If two servers have roughly the same number of players on the map, they would have the same buff to stats.
This would help the underdog servers put up more of a fight and better defend towers/keeps when they’re outnumbered. It would also increase the challenge for the dominant team, making gameplay for them more fun.
This was suggested by several people in several different posts already, but thus forum thread is a good idea.
The side with more people is more likely to have someone walk by and spoil your fight…
I disagree. I think people would like the stat buff in this fashion. It helps the underdog hold out in defenses and helps give a challenge to the larger force (making it more fun to play).
I mentioned this in another post and didn’t realize this was already brought up.
You could have brackets and brackets for team size disparities. Update periodically rather than continuous to avoid excessive calculation cost? You’re really only calculating the delta for the the teams – its only a few calculations. The update to stats would be like the zerg walking into a buffed keep.
I tried to hold some nodes once, we were 3-4 players, then we got zerged by blobaddon sending out 30 people to cap nodes, because they can…
Yea, figures I am not playing anymore.
Which was my point. A scaled buff to you could have helped, and if nothing else, would make going down more epic and fun.
Why not flip the buff around so that its a function of the difference in number of players you server has and the average of the other two servers. The buff per ruin would be on a sliding scale from 0 to 100.
For ex. if your server only has 10 ppl in a bl, and the other two have large zergs, you get a large buff per point. Conversely, the server with the most players on the map would get no buff from controlling; they only prevent their opponents from getting buffed by controlling the ruins.
This would strengthen the underdog, making their objectives harder to take and allowing a greater chance of success for lopsided defense.