Showing Posts For aicalas.8276:
Don’t feed the troll guys, don’t feed the troll.
One of the biggest problems that I’ve noticed in WvW is the snowball effect.
The winning team goes from strength to strength as they acquire the orbs, gain more supply, gain more gold and gain more badges as they gain more map control (from the jumping puzzles and supply camps to the keeps and castle) and more kills than the opposition (not to mention that they die less). All of these benefits have the effect of further establishing their dominance. Worse, the buffs from WvW also boost their health, healing and gold from kills which further exacerbate the imbalance.
Meanwhile, the losing teams go from weakness to weakness. They die more, so they spend more gold on repairs. They can’t hold supply so they can’t build as much seige, or fortify as much, hat they do manage to build and fortify gets captured by opponents with more money, supply and buffs so the losers have to throw away more and more supply and gold.
What this means is that during the week or longer battles, the weaker teams will simply be starved out of existence and grow weaker over time, from gold, supply and orbs plus WvW buff differences, whilst the winning teams gain more and more supply and gold.
Anet needs to reconsider how both gold and supply are spent and earned and how the orbs and WvW buffs should function, especially as they make the push towards the 2week battles.
One of the biggest problems that I’ve noticed in WvW is that of the snowball effect.
The winning team goes from strength to strength as they acquire the orbs, gain more supply, gain more gold and gain more badges as they gain more map control (from the jumping puzzles and supply camps to the keeps and castle) and more kills than the opposition (not to mention that they die less). All of these benefits have the effect of further establishing their dominance.
Meanwhile, the losing teams go from weakness to weakness. They die more, so they spend more gold on repairs. They can’t hold supply so they can’t build as much seige, or fortify as much, hat they do manage to build and fortify gets captured by opponents with more money, supply and buffs so the losers have to throw away more and more supply and gold.
What this means is that during the week or longer battles, the poor teams will simply be starved out of existence, from both a gold and supply viewpoint, whilst the winning teams gain more and more supply and gold.
Anet needs to reconsider how supply is gained and gold is spent, especially as they make the push towards the 2week battles.
No amount of supply donations will make up for an easy 500+ supply advantage and multiple gold advantage that a dominant alliance led team can incur during a single hour.
(edited by aicalas.8276)
Well I’ve heard that people have been reported for posting mumble/voice comms for other servers to join and help coordinate efforts, and whilst I think that reporting people for stuff like this is ridiculous its important for anet to be clear about their stance here.
Personally I think alliances are something to be expected and not regulated against, but an official response from anet would be appreciated and I’m interested in hearing their stance on the matter.
Can we get an official response regarding whether collusion between servers to create a 2v1 situation in wvwvw is forbidden or permitted?
Just curious to know Anet’s stance on this.