Guild Wars 2

Crispeh beat me to it. A valid tactic should have one or more viable counters (not including using the same cheat/exploit/griefing behavior) that allow for you to stop or compensate for it. Right now, there’s nothing that can be done to stop people engaging in this waste of resources.

I would completely agree with everyone on the “It’s PvP in a PvP zone” and the “If you want to PvE stay out of WvW” sentiments except for one small detail. ANet has made it so that if you want to have 100% world completion, you have to complete the WvW jumping puzzles, way-points, and points of interest. Now you’ve mad it so that an achievements oriented, PvE player has to go into PvP, even if normally they would never set foot in there.

I think the best solution would be to make world completion based on only PvE objectives. That way people will stop queuing inot the WvW areas just to do the puzzles, opening up spaces for people that truly want to PvP.

Inaccordance.7910:

A grace period is not the answer. The answer lies in making the game more stable. Once that happens, you won’t be disconnecting nearly so often as to make it a frustrating experience. Give ANet time to iron things out.

I partially agree. A grace period will always help because at time people can be disconnected because of exterior reasons, not just because of client stability.

Steveo.1574:

Change point capping intervals to 60minutes or 90 mintues rather than 15 minutes
This will mean that both On peak and Off Peak are as equal in terms of point gain +/-12 hour windows. It will mean stronger side during both times will get the point gain. Keep the supply/tower/keep/castle point gains as they are .. i think this will promote a much closer fairer and balanced matchup, at the moment servers that have the largest populations and/or night time players will dominate in off peak because of the next to no contested areas they can get for their point gains.

I think this is probably one of the only ways to change this so onpeak is as fair as offpeak in terms of point generation.

I would suggest taking the point ticker away entirely and changing it so that point get added to the running total at random intervals instead of even intervals. A big dynamic that we’ve been seeing is right before points get added a huge zerg group forms for each team and starts running around trying to cap as many things as possible. As soon as the score ticks they stop. It makes it close to impossible and a useless waste of time and resources to upgrade towers and keeps since there never seems to be enough time to make structural changes before the zerg arrives close to the five minute mark to simply overwhelm place with numbers. And defending a specific structure is worthless since, if a defending team leaves groups at the structures to defend then their numbers are just to low to deal with the zerg.

Maybe I’ve missed it but I’m surprised that a thread about the max size of groups in being limited to 5 people. I’m a member of a small guild and on busy nights our guild team is usually 7 or 8 people, which is too small to merit a second group but big enough that we have trouble finding the people that are in the main group on the map. Its surprising to me that ANet chose to go with such a small group maximum. 8 or 10 person groups would be ideal for small guilds.

And this is how the game tactics will evolve. There are counters to the AoE zerg and as the organization on the servers get better they will start emerging. One example was already given above, a massed melee attack, especially with a good number of Guardians providing defensive buffs would have a good chance of doing some real damage.

As you mentioned, these kind of fights tend to be static, stating in the same general area for 5-10 minutes or even longer when the forces are well matched. That’s when flanking movements come in. Get a group of melee oriented characters together, swing around to the side or the back of the zerg and hit them hard before they know what’s happening. Even better, coordinate two groups and hit them from both sides at once.

Another good use of melee skills is forming a group of three of four and hitting smaller targets, which is also mentioned above. Or catching the inevitable stragglers that are trying to get back to the zerg and sending them back to their spawn the hard way, cutting off the other team’s reinforcements.

I agree this is an issue. I disagree with the idea of the walls being permanently down until keep ownership is decided. I think a good option would be to allow wall repairs but until a certain amount of supply is put into the repair (say 100 supply, for example) the wall stays down. This would mitigate the instant division of forces by not making the wall come immediately back up as soon as even one person starts to repair while at the same time allowing a concerted, well-organized force of defenders to bring the wall back up in a decent amount of time.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Siege-can-be-built-in-invulnerable-zone/first#post192738

The above is the thread where devs mention that we’re not supposed to be able to build trebs inside each server’s safe area. As far as everything I’ve read being able to build siege equipment inside any of the other towers and keeps is intentionally possible and I think should remain that way. Its a perfectly valid tactic, both in game and historically in RL, with viable counters.

That’s a great idea actually. And it doesn’t really have to stop at a few yards. Just make the movement speed slow enough to make it useless to try and move it (and arrow carts while we’re at it) in the middle of a battle.

Yes, the bug is happening to everyone. But this would have been a much better post if the OP had stopped insinuating… Hell, outright accusing SBI and ET of collusion. I was there for the whole battle and guess what? SBI was waiting in the wings, for ET to do the work of breaking down the walls. Once the walls where down and ET had swooped in for the attack we came in behind them to try and pin their attack against HoD’s forces, hoping that in the chaos both ET and HoD would miss us long enough for us to cripple both armies. My guild was actually the main part of a smaller group that went up on the ramparts and cost ET two trebs and a few other pieces of equipment.

The walls and areas ended up divided they way they did because ET reacted fast enough to actually push us back and give HoD time to notice we were there creating a situations where all three armies were fighting a two way battle. Its getting really annoying to continually have servers accusing each other of working together when all that is happening is that people are taking those tactical chance they are being provided by the other teams. Last night was a great battle and all these unfounded accusations are just diminishing the fun for everyone all around.

“And yes, the guild leaders on ET have already agreed to bend over for SI and let them have a victory just so henge would be last place.” Fugly, I don’t know where you get your information but, as far as I know, if this decision has taken place its taken place on ET only. And if that’s the case then the ET leaders are, in my opinion, a bunch of quitters who should be ousted and replaced by people that are willing to actually try their best to take the first place spot from both SBI and HoD. And I would welcome the challenge.

“However I do think right now the people on the wall have to stand a little to close to the edge to get their attacks to fire down, which negates the major advantage you should have on the wall. Why should I have to be basically on the edge of the wall to throw my grenades? Can I really not throw my grenades in an arc? Am I throwing them like baseballs? It is very weird.”

I agree with drwookie. As a Guardian I can stand both on the wall or beneath a wall with massive AoE raining down and as long as I’m not rooted or otherwise immobilized I can jump in and out of the AoE area to deliver my own attacks and support spells without dying. Its a matter of tactics. Like drwookie what I think does need to be fixed (and this has been mentioned on multiple threads) is the line of sight from the walls and the range from the walls.

Walls should really provide a small boost to range and there shouldn’t be a need to stand directly on the edge of the wall to be able to make your effects work appropriately on people that are well within range outside the walls.

The dynamic of AoE’s hitting through doors, although unrealistic, is OK. It works for both sides so its not really an unfair advantage to either side. And after all, if we can suspend disbelief to play a game where people are hurtling fireballs and disappearing from plain sight why are we worried about a little AoE splash-through?

fatboy.5016:

Yes, stop the ability to cannon, seiges a keep/tower or castle from another keep/tower or castle. make the range of them have to be alot closer to work. Atm for stonemist, got red with 6 trebs in their keep and tough to removem. then blue with trebs in their towers. so with 10+ trebs on SM, its a pain to keep the walls up when they keep gettin drilled. Sure we killem, but it turns wvw into a job. make it so trebs need to be ont he ground and out of a tower/keep/castles rangs(inside walls, hills etc) and only allow them to be on the ground outside these places for sieging. Sure they can still be put in these places to fend up zergs, but if their there make so they cant dmg other towers/keeps etc. Its not fair and from wat i heard its not intended, so please fix it.

The use of siege equipment from within a keep or tower is a perfectly acceptable tactic. The weakness behind this tactic is that both catapults and trebs are long range weapons that have a minimum range. Once people get close enough to them they can’t attack. If they’re constantly bombing you from afar, get a team together organize a well-thought out attack on the keep that the siege equipment is built in and take the keep away.