Showing Posts For Shinon.4513:
I’m a bit late, but I also prefer the Desert Borderlands. Let’s see why:
What I like about the Alpine Borderlands:
- The Northern Camp, because:
- It’s one of the most detailed areas on that map
- Easy to reach
- Fun to defend
- Ideal to resupply
What I do not like about the Alpine Borderlands:
- The Northern Camp, just because the dolyaks have to travel way too far and the routes feel boring
- The deadly cliffs, that kill me more often than the cliffs on the Desert Borderlands, as the landscape is so width and empty and boring
- Chasing a mesmer inside bay
What I like about the Desert Borderlands:
- Towers have two entrances and Keeps have many routes to the inner. This makes it much harder to cut off the supply for attackers and prevent any defence.
- Cannons and Oil are build more strategical, making them valuable defences. For towers there are even two of them, instead of only one each
- Keeps need at least two series of catapults to be opened. Only exception I know is the north of the Rampart. A small advantage for the Home Team
- No “save” spots to build catapults or trebuchets, that are very hard to destroy, e.g. in keeps or towers or on unreachable cliffs
- Every keep, tower and monument is different, so some strategies work better for some objects than others
- Many possibilities to attack and defend, also some strategies are more common
- Larger structures with more room to fight
- Walls feel better for defenders
- The Oasis Event. I enjoyed some of the most exciting fights there
- The landscape is more exciting, so I don’t realize any longer ways, if there are any
- High flexibility. When you can’t take the fight for one object, there are always enough options nearby. So your attacks can become less predictable
- +40% movement speed from shrines
- The Citadel feels more compact but modern
What I don’t like about the Desert Borderlands:
- Getting killed by the Rampart defence, when 20 attackers entered and I was caught in a blind end. Also this only happened once
- Feels too empty, as many players still run long paths and don’t know for some nice shortcuts. Therefore the map obviously feels tedious
- Trying to find and kill a thief or mesmer hiding inside your keep
I like these suggestions, but I’d like to add some more:
- Tonics: Make them a mix between finishers and miniatures. You should still be able to use them like now (and maybe sell them later, if you really want), but you can also unlock a finite or infinite number (depending if infinite tonic) and use them any time with any character. As tonics would yield only one charge each, add an option to add all. This is especially useful, if you use a big number of non-infinite tonics.
Also allow us to select a preferred (or random) tonic and to bind it to a key, similar to finishers. - Blueprints: Actually the same as for tonics. However, as a “favourite” blueprint doesn’t make much sense, it would be more useful to bind each blueprint to a key (or if you have the time, add an interface to select a blueprint quickly).
- Toys and Instruments: Well, not much to add, but a key bind option would be great too.
- Miniatures: A bit off topic, as these are already there. However, sometimes it would be nice to have a key bind option to show/hide, too.
P.S. I hope there wasn’t any newer topic, that I missed.
there are some attacks if used will prevent capture point. My suggestion is mouse over your specials and see if your using one of those attacks while trying to capture an objective.
Could you please be more vague?
What type attacks do you speak of please..
Edit: If you can pin-point down exactly what causes this behavior I am sure the devs would like to hear from you so submit a ticket so they can put in a fix asap.
I’m saying its not a bug and its working as intended and all of you should look at your utility specials and see if your trying to use one of them to capture objectives.
the skills will tell you they prevent capture point.
Example=
Guardian skill “renewed focus” prevents capture point.
you’re misunderstanding the OP. This isn’t about not contributing to the cap. It’s about contributing to the cap yet not getting any rewards.
It’s a weird bug that’s been around for a while, but it doesn’t happen consistently enough so it’s hard to work out what the exact cause is. It also only happens rarely so not a major issue tbh.
No I get what the OP is saying. I’ve not been in game long compared to many of you, so when I read “prevents capture point” I assumed it also voided out any reward.
If this is not the case and it is a bug could there be a correlation between the two?
I recall this happened to me once when we (a group) were taking back SW tower in our borderlands. After receiving nothing when the tower flipped I went digging for an answer, and that’s when I realized that I had used “renewed focus” during the cap.
I assumed that was the reason my reward had been voided out though the objective was captured by the group.according to the Update – 03 December 2012
Invisible & invulnerable players can no longer contest capture points in WvW. WvW capture points now follow the same rules as PvP capture points.
Anyhow that was my experience so I offered it up hoping it might be helpful in some way.
I’m sorry to say, but you can capture objects completely alone (so you obviously contribute) and still get no rewards. It happened at least twice to me, probably even more often. One day I even had to capture four or five camps (I think it was before the daily changed to two camps, but it was two more than required) and at least the first one I did completely on my own (can’t remember for the other four).
While I didn’t realized this issue in the last weeks, this week it already happened four times to me. No idea why. Twice on Monday, sadly the first was a keep we sieged for maybe 90 minutes (and it was a daily achievement). The second was a tower, right after I changed the borderland. Once more on Tuesday, if I’m right and today it failed to credit me Bravost. I hope it will get better soon again (or hopefully completely fixed).
By the way, you often already get the reward, if you kill at least two guards and the camp/tower/keep gets captured later by a different group. Therefore it’s really disappointing, when this happens to you after a very long siege, especially if it’s a daily achievement.
(edited by Shinon.4513)
There is an issue, where I think about for some time now. Not sure, if I just didn’t find anything similar or if no one had this idea yet. But I think it’s a big issue, when it comes to a tournament, like soon again. So there is the need of some kind of handicap.
Situation:
Matches are generated by a rating. This rating is mostly influenced by the number of people playing. So basically it’s the more people playing, the higher the server rating. This shouldn’t be anything new. However when servers are matched, the winner is determined only by the highest achieved points in that match, regardless whether the servers are close to each other or not, measured in the current rating system.
Problems:
- In most matches, the highest rated server will have an advantage.
- If the difference in rating is too high, the lower rated server has nearly any chance to win the match.
- Server Transfers will favour higher rated servers.
- When it comes to a tournament and servers are split into different groups, it might be worth to lose some rating to become the highest rated server in the next group, instead of the lowest rated server of the previous group.
Now let’s assume, we had a handicap to give lower rated servers a better chance to win against higher rated servers.
Idea:
Determinate the winning server of a match based on the change of the rating. If a server did well, the rating is increased, if a server didn’t, the rating is decreased. So let the winning server be the one, which got the most increase in rating. And 3rd should obviously be the one with the highest decrease in rating.
Example:
Server, Rating, End Score, Rating Change
- A, 1640, 255000, -22
- B, 1560, 230000, +6
- C, 1430, 158000, +18
You can perfectly see, that A has the highest rating and the highest score at the end of the week, while C has the lowest rating and the lowest score at the end of the week. However, if you look at the rating changes, C has the highest increase and A the highest decrease. Applying the suggested detection would result in:
C 1st, B 2nd, A 3rd
You might get an idea, that this easy change would make the odd matched easier for lower rated servers. However, there are some consequences you should respect.
Consequences:
- For nearly identically rated servers this handicap has hardly any impact.
- Higher rated servers have to fight, to obtain the best reward, instead of idle for a week.
- If servers with too high gap in rating are matched, the higher server can hardly win the match, unless they own almost everything most of the time. Also this is almost impossible, this could make it even more difficult for the lower rated server to get a starting position on an empty map.
- Server transfers are more difficult to plan, especially when the rewards are given weekly. Once a server gets an increase in rating it will become more and more difficult to obtain the first place and the highest reward.
- If server are split into different groups, if will be better to fight for the higher rated, since the handicap will favour you there most of the time.
I think you get the idea now. It’s obviously not the best idea, but it’s easy to implement and already has a huge impact on matches and therefore transfers.
Final thoughts:
- Make the item modifiable:
Allow to set some options for the duel. These can be either saved for next time, reset to default (everything off) or only for next usage.
Possible options could be a custom bet. Set up a bet, say 50 silver, then you and your opponent have to pay 50 silver each. The reward will be increased by 1 gold (5 silver for the one-time-item). Or you can add a win when downed or revive when finished option. However using these options costs a small fee each time, say 2 silver for win when downed and 5 silver for revival (don’t forget you get loot for the kill, at least in WvW).
Also an option for nourishment not working or removing any passive attribute bonus, like from Bloodlust, nearby claimed structures, World Bonuses, would be nice. These options shouldn’t cost much (maybe even nothing), but there should be a clearly visible warning for these. - Add duel groups:
After sending the duel invitation and before starting the duel, each player (leader) can invite up to 4 players (maybe only if enabled in the item-options). These are shown to all participating players, so that you can plan for a 2vs2 or even 1vs5. Duel starts, when all are ready. When new players join or leave (except the leaders, as they can’t), everyone has to check ready again, to prevent e.g. 2vs5 duels, due to fast invitations before starting. - Duel Chat and Teams:
Add /duelteaem and /duelsay chats to allow some preparations before and during the duel. This also allows players from different servers to communicate (only after invitation was accepted). Furthermore, set targets are only shown in /duelteam chat and can only be selected by players in the same duel team, so you can set targets even in a 2vs2 in a dungeon, while waiting for the last one (all players in the same group). - Guild Version:
After announcing the GvG Area in Obsidian Sanctum coming next Tuesday, why not allow (large) guilds to get a private copy of this area? Either in the Gem Store or (what I would prefer) for 250 Guild Merits (maybe less) as Art of War upgrade. Guilds can then send guild invitation to any other guild to join their Arena. These Guild will be hostile by default, so that they can get some GvG matches vs. any other guild, even on the same server or even not involved in the current WvW match. Each invitation costs say 3-5 Guild Merits and is active for 24 hours. It can only be 1 invitation active at any time and can be removed any time.
Active invitations are listed and can be send/accepted in the Guild Window, probably best in a new panel. It could also include last 5 invitations sent and got, and up to say 50 favourite guilds, you can easily invite again.
These toughs are actually only some nice to have features, to make the item even more interesting, especially for some small groups/guilds.
Finally, any numbers given here, in terms of gold costs or merits are just something, that seems reasonable to me.
First, before you start reading, it’s actually only a sketch of two ideas, which would be nice in combination, but would also work alone each.
The main idea is the Gauntlet-Item, inspired by the Queen’s Gauntlet, it should allow players (outside of the mists / PvP) to duel other players. The item should only be usable, if both players are out of combat, but it should be usable everywhere. Like in
- Cities, e.g. Lion’s Arch
- Any Open PvE-Area
- Dungeons,
- WvW-Area
The advantage of this item would be, in different to the PvP-Mode, that it allows Players to actually test their PvE equipment, especially in a controlled area, like by duelling a friend. Or just give them a new kind of mini-game, which can be done in a dungeon, when waiting for some players. Or even in WvW, when e.g. guarding a camp.
However, since the duel can be started everywhere, it could be affected by any nearby friendly player. As this would lead to unwanted match manipulation, I’d suggest to make duelling players unaffected by friendly spells. Maybe due to an effect, that blocks any friendly action, like heals, condition remove, etc.. Or, depending on how hard that would be to add, put the duelling players into two new independent teams, but still allied in terms like chat and foes. That could also make it easier to detect duels between friendly and enemy players in WvW, if say friendly players appear in a different colour, if one of the players used the item.
- Why should this item be used anyway in WvW between enemy players?
Well, it’s an one-time-item. To encourage players to accept the duel-invitation (even in PvE), give the item a small reward for the winner. Say, the item itself costs 10 silver and the winner will get 5 silver reward. Furthermore, since it should also be usable at dungeons or even Fractals of the Mist and can be some kind of mini-game, the losing player shouldn’t get any repair costs, unless finished by an enemy player (obviously not the one involved in the duel). Since the cost for the item is still higher than the reward and not gained repair costs, these shouldn’t be a problem. Everything else should be unaffected, like loot bags or a point for the server, if finished by an enemy player having any Bloodlust.
- What else to add?
Duels can’t be cancelled when started, but you can surrender. Either by using /bow (or maybe add a new command like /resign) or running away. To make this easier to detect, who actually ran away, add a virtual arena, i.e. a large circle (large enough to move around without feeling restricted, maybe up to Mesmer Portal range, but must be tested).
Also add a permanent version in the Gem Store, maybe 800-1000 Gems (Account Bound). For this, there is no 5 silver reward, but still no repair costs. Players will be seen, when invited to duel, if there is a reward and how much it is (allows maybe custom rewards later on as well).
Second idea, just to make the use of the item much easier: Add up to three action slots for each character. You can put any usable item in one of these action slots, like tonics, miniatures, nourishments, blueprints, etc.. However, the advantage of these is, you can bind each of them to a key. And maybe even add a small icon on the screen, you have to click only once, instead of twice, to activate it (checkable in the options menu or at the Hero panel, then for each slot).
Since the Gauntlet Item would require you to select your target, open your inventory, search for the item and then use it, it would be much easier to just press one button instead. Especially when using it frequently. Furthermore add three slots, to make them useful even for players, who don’t like duels but have a favourite miniature, tonic and/or like to use both types of nourishment as well. So they can use these slots the way they prefer to play.
Since I had similar ideas the last days, I’ll add my thoughts here as well:
I’d like to see global Word vs. World rewards as well, since the current system doesn’t reward players, who escort dolyaks, run supply, upgrade/repair towers and garrisons, build defensive siege-weapons, stand there as scouts, etc. It’s even worse, if you play not at prime time, so you may wait there for hours, doing almost nothing, while everyone else gets rewards for capturing nearly undefended structures. Furthermore, it’s often quite more effective (in terms of personal rewards), if you run around in a large group of 50+ players, instead of splitting. For instance, to capture/open an undefended tower for your team, while your main forces are trying to get the nearby garrison. In many cases, your team will get the garrison more quickly, than you can open the tower, especially if both are not defended, so the larger group can often get both rewards, while the smaller group will only get the lesser reward. I also remember a scenario, Stonemist was under attack (we hold it), inner gate was almost gone and half of our forces waited, to get the rewards for the guard they passed.
In short, the current system doesn’t favour playing for the server. Especially if you like to upgrade or build defensive siege-weapons, you’ll get nothing to pay this. That’s why I think, a global reward system would be fine. However, to prevent players, standing at the spawn, there should be something like a “World vs. World active status”, e.g. a “boon”, lasting 10 minutes, what will be granted to everyone, who killed or was killed by an enemy player, completed any event, escorted a dolyak (not necessary successfully, but at least for some time), used any siege weapon to damage players/structures/siege-weapons (since killing can be difficult, if you defend 2 vs 30 attackers and wait for reinforcement), stood next to a siege-weapon, that damaged any structure (or killed a player), built any weapon or repaired for at least 10 supply, used 5 different siege-weapons (should be there, if you are a scout at an upgraded tower or garrison and forces the players to be active, instead of just standing there). Maybe make it even depending of World Experience. For instance, the character needs rank 5, which is not difficult to reach, so it could prevent players to get lots of gold/experience by hardly doing anything. To also prevent a massive amount of players, standing in the jumping puzzle, you shouldn’t get rewards, as long as you are in this area. Spawn should be fine, since you should get rewards, if you just died and respawn or need to repair/sell.
However, there are still questions, I can’t answer yet. Make rewards equal? But then active players, who just got bronze, will get less, than players, who just capped a guard? Or split the rewards, 60% of the current rewards as gold for everyone, who participated in the event, 40% for everyone else? That would result in gold: 60%, silver: 52%, bronze: 45%, “nothing”: 40%. Or my last idea would be, everyone get the same reward, as the highest achieved event-rank. So not defending a tower will result in no rewards, but if your team active defends it and you only carry supply to build new siege-weapons, everyone will get (probably) gold reward. If these would result in too high rewards, the rewards can also be reduced to say 50% of the current ones. However, there would be no longer be need to burn lots of supply, since someone wants rewards for the defensive event.
Last additional idea: If your team got (most) of any borderland, there is hardly any reason to stay there with 50+ people. Therefore most players will change borderland, while at least one has to stay there, as scout or to build up/repair something. Again this can be a ungrateful job, so it would be nice to get even rewards for successful events of other borderlands. This hopefully would give more players a reason to try fighting on an heavily defended borderland, when you don’t need the massive forces at your home borderland, for instance. Or if your garrison on Eternal Battlegrounds is under heavy attack, you might like to change borderland, get some supply and return. However, by doing so, you will most probably miss the defensive event and so gold/experience. Same, if you attack a tower, you almost got it and than have to change map, since enemies start a heavy attack at your tower/garrison.
Maybe we will get that way more battles with about 25-30 players per server, instead of 70+, which is currently no fun, since the game gets nearly unplayable then.
It would also be nice to make the achievement points global as well, since most of them are nearly impossible to achieve right now. However, this isn’t the most important point, I think.