Guild Wars 2

Sarika.3756

Those kittens stack better than most players…

Only when catnip is involved…

Or just make it count for participation if it’s < 15m left on timer.

Can’t right now, but they were gliding in to that tiny jut of high ground that points toward Veloka.

BTW, people can glide from EBG red keep all the way into an enemy held OW.

Deployable mortars/cannons – I worry that it would become a new pirate-ship meta, except instead of ranged players, it would be standing behind siege. It -might- be alright if the siege-capped volume of damage is adjusted to not prevent fights, but on the whole, I’m not in favor of this.

Repairing siege – As someone else suggested, I see no issue with this as long as combat initiates a lockout timer for repairs. Instead of 1 minute, I’d suggest something closer to 5.

I’m not certain why you can’t take 15 people and go do stuff on any of the T1 servers. You should be able to be perfectly useful and productive with 15 folks. But, it might take a mindset change to accomplish it, as that number no longer represents the bulk of your army. You’ll have to play the ninja instead of the brigade.

Speaking as someone who plays on BG, queues aren’t a problem right now. Plenty of people to play with and against, and you’ll see a queue sometimes, but it goes by quickly unless you’re dead-set on getting into one particular map.

I like the linkage system but understand it may be disruptive to server identity. If there were a way to solve that issue … server linking certainly gives Anet a way to use our server-stacking tendencies against us in a mostly healthy way. Perhaps if we ditched the idea of “host” and “guest” servers but kept the functionality?

3. Make the commander tag float a smidgen higher than it does currently and not be relative to the commander’s race.

4. Add a personal focus option that would look like the target reticle but a different color, which only you can see/change. This should not affect the group target function.

This seems somewhat relevant. I have absolutely no clue how it is calculated, though:

http://coveragewars2.com/timezone/

Sirbeaumerdier.3740:

the more I begin to see a pattern between EoTM and DBL love from them

Maybe that’s a possible solution. Refit DBL to work as an EoTM map since it really is so similar in how it operates. Could rotate the maps there and make it a much more supported game mode. There is a set of people who obviously love it, passionately so.

Question. Would it be easy to add/remove tracks in the future or is this relatively set in stone?

Thank you, Anet! Really loving all your recent changes! Awesome work

I guess I don’t understand why there is so much fuss about what a map looks like. Strip all the art assets off Alpine to make it a wire-frame map, and I would STILL prefer it over DBL. Ok, perhaps that’s a slight exaggeration, but not much of one.

Alpine functions better than DBL. There’s no PvLabrynths. Few PvCliffs. Fewer pirate-ship forcing choke points. No stealth dust bowls.

There may be areas where Alpine could be improved, but at least I don’t feel like I’m fighting the map when I’m in there.

Just a random thought (and I’ve seen other’s question, too), is it that stab should be sprinkled around more classes or should it just be less important? I suppose that has huge implications for roamers/havok groups. Hmm.

I am not nostalgic about Alpine, but I was one of those truly hoping for their return. Form has to follow function. DBL simply didn’t facilitate (in fact actively worked against) what I enjoy in WvW.

ie – I don’t care how pretty it is or isn’t. I care about what I can do with it.

1. Bring back old stability
2. Bring back Alpine maps
3. Class balance after stabs changes to make sure both ranged and melee are relevant
4. Structured brainstorming with us on how to fix offhours population imbalance or minimize its effect?

For me, those four alone would get me back in the game. Honestly, the first two would do it, since I prefer playing melee.

Eldbrand Charging.8902:

Why not support Anet, and by a set for each character.

An account bound bag could cost per slot, and/or be of increasing price per slot. More about convenience, than avoiding paying up. I wouldn’t mind shared slots for my apple and wrench buffs.

Love the idea. Tangentially, would love to see something for ascended/legendary equipment that suffers the same fate!

I see this as a negative quality of life change for guardians. I come from the perspective of wvw. In zergs, it makes no difference whatsoever, since you already had perma-swiftness from other classes. However, for roaming or playing in small groups, this change is detrimental.

It is unreasonable to expect someone to stand still for four seconds out of every 20, or to retrait, or to permanently maintain certain utilities, or to swap out runes, or to always run with a swiftness-granting buddy, just to have reasonable moving ability in the field. Any system where you have to repeatedly and predictably stop to go becomes useless in wvw, which leaves us running mostly -without- any swiftness buff.

Please consider a slight tweak…

if (swiftness < 8s)
{swiftness = 8s}
else
{swiftness += 4s}

… or simply decouple swiftness from the skill, rename it, and give us another option for a speed boost.

Suggestion for SoS, instead of the proposed Dec 10th change:

On entry into a SoS field, increase swiftness -to- 8s if it is less than that. Will pulse twice for a total addition of 8s if you remain in the field for 4s.

This preserves the current wvw use of SoS as an escape/catchup tool on the run while adding a “symbol” feel. It also removes the current 1s addition, which I agree is somewhat clunky and sometimes jarring.