I have proposed years ago that score each server ticks should be based on number of enemies on the map. No enemies = minimum score. Only 1 enemy server appearing = half the score. Full queue of 2 enemy servers = maximum score.
This would also help to reduce impact of nightcapping when there are no enemies around, you can still take objectives as easily as in any PvE map but you would not earn much points for them.
Same way, if primetime home borderland is totally painted to single color and there is huge blob killing few remaining enemies at their waypoint, this would gain very few points and add very little to the overall score.
I had a similar proposal:
Except when you are on your own BL (or own portion of the EB map), the tick resulting of a flipped target should be as follows:
- 100% if the objective was capped when not outnumbering.
- 80% if the objective was capped when outnumbering 2:1.
- 50% if the objective was capped when outnumbering 3:1.
- 0% if the objective was capped when outnumbering 4:1.
WvW experience and karma gained from these caps should work the same way.
BTW, when i speak about outnumbering, I’m speaking of outnumbering all the players on the BL, not just the ones rushing to defend the tower/keep: if they are effectively outnumbered because people are afking at spawn, then too bad.
So for example, let’s say you go on another BL and cap a tower while you outnumber the defenders by between 3:1 and then proceed to upgrade it all the way to T3, your ticks from T0 to T3 will be respectively 2, 3, 4, and 5 instead of 4, 6, 8, 10.
Now if you lose that tower, cap it back without outnumbering and upgrade it again to Y3, you’ll have the full ticks all the way until you lose it again (so respectively 4, 6, 8, 10).
Maybe that way PPT heavy servers such as BB or JS will try to improve their fighting skills in order to cover for the point loss, because lets be honest here: apart from a few guilds and commanders, these servers usually avoid fights if:
- they don’t outnumber.
- they are not covered by AC fire.
- they are not double teaming.
An improvement of their fighting skills would be really nice because that way they would stop being boring servers in a match-up.
This and similar ideas have huge flaws. Here some scenarios:
You are outnumbered on your home borderland. The enemy takes all keeps on the map and moves on to another map. Now your EBG zerg recaps everything on your home while the enemy is gone. You outnumber the enemy 4:1 -> all your keeps on your home BL don’t count anymore for the tick, because your zerg came at the wrong time.
An enemy zerg comes to capture one of your keeps. You have similar numbers but your commander is inexperienced and the enemy commander is really good. You know you’ll lose the keep and you know that you most likely won’t get a chance to get it back soon: “Let’s just log off until the keep is captured, so the enemy won’t benefit from it.”
Your home BL is under pressure. Your main zerg doesn’t come to help, because the enemy would just benefit more from the ppt when you lose something. Now someone wants to help and tags up: “Don’t tag up, you can’t safe everything you just give more points to the enemy as we won’t be as outnumbered as before…”
Green and blue fight in the outer ring of a currently green t3 keep. During this epic blob fight 5 people from red sneak in and capture it. In the end of this epic blob fight blue captures the now red keep. Blue fought for 2 hours to crash a heavily sieged t3 keep, but doesn’t get points for it, because some people from red sneaked in?