Normal golems are countered by hardened gates, omegas are countered by shield generators. Honestly, I kinda like it like this, I hate golem rushes.
I actually like the banners. They allow for a smaller skilled group to fight larger zergs. The big abilities (turtle bomb, dragon’s breath) can be outplayed if your group is skilled. I only have a complaint with the turtle banner #3 which should probably be reworked because it can’t be outplayed. Everything else is mostly fine.
So…wait…cata cost was a main complaint on this forum? Really? I think if we rank the complaints, it wouldn’t even hit the top 20 let alone be one of the top 5 that are being addressed. Sigh.
Cat cost change indicates they’re sticking with the desert BL. Even at the cost of unbalancing EB gameplay. It’s a good sign they’re not listening at all.
If 25 supply guild catas didn’t break EB, I don’t think 40 supply guild catas will either.
Is there anything that can let soloplayers directly help their server win without finding another group?
Currently, its actually most efficient to gain points solo. Just by flipping camps, killing yaks, and killing enemy solo players, you are doing quite a lot for your server. The problem is that while solo, you only see your solo contributions, while in a zerg you see the entire zerg’s contributions.
Question: What about camps? This mentioned nothing about camps. Will they still upgrade automatically over time? If so, that is potentially still problematic. For example: prior to HoT, while roaming alone, I could solo a whole camp quite quickly, but only if it wasn’t fully upgraded. After HoT, since I am on a low WvW population server, and due to the auto-updating, most camps are fully upgraded, making solo capping alot slower and harder.
Honestly, I think camps took a nerf after HoT. Even in a fully upgraded camp, its pretty easy to only agro the lord + a couple of guards, and cap the camp while only killing half the guards in it. I wish there was a guild upgrade to make camps actually hard to solo.
To keep trying to give some sort of importance to fights and kills in WvW is a terrible idea in my opinion. It encourages fights over strategy and made WvW what it was before HoT, a map full of zerg only looking for a fight, and GvG, making the whole purpose and the huge possibilities of the gamemode useless. And it promotes even more numbers over quality.
Unless your “quality” members are dying more than the enemy, you should come out ahead.
tl;dr I like the changes, go ahead with them, but they could be better
- Objectives upgrades will no longer be automatic based on time. They will upgrade based on dolyaks that reach them. Smaller groups can now prevent an objective from upgrading by preventing dolyaks from reaching that objective.
The main problem right now with upgrades is that yaks or not, they upgrade way too darn quick. I hope this change also makes it take longer for upgrades to complete, because in most servers its pretty easy to find a one or two hour window where there are no attackers and everything gets upgraded quickly. Also, increase the range of the dolyak protection buff. You pretty much have to stand ontop of the yak, which makes it hard to fight players, and dolyaks absolutely need this buff if they want any chance of surviving a fight.
- Supply cost for all catapults are being reduced by ten supply. The layout of the Desert Borderlands map has increased the number of catapults required to take some objectives. We agree with your feedback that also increasing the cost of catapults pushed the balance too far towards defense so we are tuning that more towards offense.
Before HoT, walls upgraded before gates, and gates couldn’t be fortified, providing a reason to attack gates instead of walls. Now, walls and gates upgrade at the same time, so the risk/reward ratio for attacking a gate instead of a wall was pretty poor, and this will make it even worse. While I like the idea of lowering supply needed for catapults, something needs to be done to incentivize attacking gates again, whether it be a supply cost reduction to rams or HP reduction on fortified gates.
- Points per kill will be turned on and kept on. This is to more directly recognize the contribution that fighting other players adds to the success of the world.
PPK helps equalize coverage, and discourages graveyard zerging, which is great. The only downside is that holding towers becomes useless in the grand scheme of things, as they give very low PPT and unlike keeps, can’t have a waypoint. But this can be remedied later.
- The number of players who can rally off a single kill has been reduced from five to one. Both of these changes are designed to help fights resolve and to give smaller, more skilled groups a better chance against larger groups.
Great change, but bad reasoning. Rally is a mechanic that favors snowballing, and mid sized groups need to snowball in order to beat large groups. However, in about equal numbered fights, this is a great change that promotes skill, diversity, and prevents one bad player from rallying 5 enemies. Currently, most zerg fights end with one side completely snowballing off a few rallies, and win with only a couple causalities, even if they were equal numbers/skill, and this should fix that. This isn’t that big of a nerf to skill groups, and they should be able to find a way to play around this.
Players will also no longer be able to revive defeated players while in combat. You still will be able to revive downed players while in combat.
This is good. Skilled players shouldn’t be needing in-combat hard rezzes. If your commander gets pin sniped, you should have a backup commander or be able to function w/o one. Skilled, organized play should be rewarded, and if you run around like headless chickens because your pin got sniped, you aren’t skilled or organized.
That being said, I’d like it to be harder to pinsnipe, my suggestion would be to make it harder to find the enemy pin by hiding wvw ranks from enemies, and making tonics (similar to the AC ghost one) buyable with badges.
(edited by Cake.4920)
“Active Medium Pop Server” is an oxymoron
You have this 100% backwards. If queues would drive balance they would have done so over the past 3 years. Top tiers have queues and lower tiers that don’t are open for transfers, yet here we are.
Except on reset night, t1 hasn’t had full queues in years. T5 1 month after release is more populated than t1 currently.
I’m on JQ, and even if we were being double team (we aren’t), it would be a good thing, because were in 1st.
If they didn’t change anything the SH tourney will be extremely awful
Tome of Courage was super powerful in Stronghold, it was one of the few ways to keep your npcs alive, and keep an offensive push going. I’m afraid if you change it, you’ll see more stalling and defense. Are you sure you want to change it?
Another shout that works off traits AND gives fury/quickness seems super OP. Just my 2 cents.
No. This is not even remotely close to the same thing.
Its exactly the same thing.
With no servers – meaning no communications and no community – your idea would:
1) Kill all guilds larger than a couple of people
2) Kill WvW completely
3) Be like a larger scale sPvP version of EoTM.
GG.
You’re jumping to conclusions that are not necessarily true.
He is jumping to no more or less conclusions the those who suggest a change are. You cannot suggest “I think we should change X system because……” and then blindly accuse someone with a opposing opinion as being the one jumping to conclusions.
Actually he can, because the rest of his post give reasons to back up his statement.
We don’t need to see it in-game, sometimes good video evidence is enough for me to track down who it was. In this case, the video was enough for me to find out who it was and take action. Thanks for the video, and to accompany your video, I give you this video of his account’s last moments:
Oh yah, he’s also banned
Where does one send in video evidence?
if they just added dueling into this game any time in the last 3 years this would be a non issue. all the people who are just wanting to duel can get out of the wvw maps and go fight some where else, and the people who want to fight for objectives and run on tag can get through the ques and play. (probably only a t1 problem)
Couldn’t disagree more. The last thing this game needs is a warped reason for the forums to be spammed with more players crying about 1 to 1 balance.
Might as well not add anything to the game then, because there are forum complaints every patch. Forums > Gw2, after all.
You get reduced rewards if the match ends early. Red Resign wont be a thing.
And lastly; we are considering allowing video evidence to lead to account action. I will say that even if we don’t use it we always check on the accounts in question and I can assure you that the one video link I received last night is leading to two account terminations.
Sorry for bumping an old topic, but where should we send videos so that you or the correct person will see them? Do the videos sent to the exploits email get passed on?
It is a tool for them to confirm the account whose logs they need to look through. They have to personally see a player doing it, or find solid log evidence.
Source?
You should spend some time reading GM proheals AKA Michael Henninger’s post history. It will teach you a great deal on handling this issues.
“And lastly; we are considering allowing video evidence to lead to account action. I will say that even if we don’t use it we always check on the accounts in question and I can assure you that the one video link I received last night is leading to two account terminations.”
Doesn’t say anything about checking logs, assuming that “check on accounts in question” means something like marking them to observe when they log on later.
However, I am very glad my original post is wrong and they are doing something with the videos.
(edited by Cake.4920)
Teamfighting is key in stronghold, and if you bring mobility you give up teamfight strength.
I was running a zerker GS/staff shout gar and while I didn’t have enough mobility or lockdown to kill a nike warrior, I had much more teamfight presence than them while retaining enough mobility to get around.
It is a tool for them to confirm the account whose logs they need to look through. They have to personally see a player doing it, or find solid log evidence.
Source?
You shouldn’t be relying on inner cannons to do anything other than hit rams on the outer gate, which imo is much worse than what you described.
Build more siege.
Don’t bother sending in your video, Anet won’t use it.
TDM should’ve worked like it did in GW1, ie. no respawns and a seperate queue. If you win one teamfight, you’re very likely to win them all, so there’s no point in having the games take so long.
Also, make the middle of the map somewhere people actually want to go.
technology isn’t there yet
Wait, are you telling me that Anet has been working on gw2 esports for 2.5+ years, but they’re leaderboard system is based on grind and not mmr?
I don’t know whether to be sad, angry, or amused. I really hope everyone that continues to play pvp does so because they enjoy it, and has 0 expectations of it getting any better. I’d say this is a wakeup call but let’s be honest, this is typical Anet.
Whose idea was it to make ascended armor/weapons a gold grind anyway? Much less an economy balancing act? If you want to artificially balance mats, please do it around convenience items or fashion products, not core gear.
And they wouldn’t have been able to drain so much glicko from t2 servers if they hadn’t been so overstacked,
Honestly, have you been to t1 recently? Its nowhere near as stacked as you make it out to be. Like I said earlier, t2 scored more points during the ppk event, which one could conclude means that either t2 players die a lot more on average, or theres just a lot more people in t2 to begin with.
http://youtu.be/7EnWFmTQjb0?t=6m20s
This video is a few months old (and theres been an increase in population since then due to PPK event, expansion announcement, gw2 pricedrop, holidays, etc), and its before the PPK event, but you can see the major guild leaders talking about how there weren’t even 4 queues on reset for JQ and BG. I remember soloing a keep on my guardian on reset night during the PPK event.
Also, look at mos. T1 has consistently had ~2100 rating and T2 ~1900 rating since records started to be kept. The reason for this is a byproduct of how the flawed glicko system was designed, it’s been a problem since launch, it’s something Anet should know about, and it’s something the players can’t really do much about.
You say destacking won’t fix a thing. I will list things that destacking will either fix or improve (as we’re not necessarily saying it’ll fix stuff, just improve stuff):
1. Matchup variety. If t1/2 were to spread around somewhat to tier 3 and maybe even tier 4, we’d see a lot more variety in matchups. This means more guilds to fight (as many servers have native guilds that refuse to leave), and new play styles to come into contact with, without necessarily seeing a drastic decrease in overall population for any individual server.
If all the guilds worth a kitten moved up to the upper tiers, there’d be more guilds to fight without having to wait week to week.
2. Ability to move through the ranks (mobility). Currently, t3-2, and t 2-1 have such massive gaps it’s almost impossible (or in the case of t1-2, 100% impossible) to even get a matchup. What this means is, since glicko moves pretty slowly in general, it is very hard to move ranks. If Dh were to suddenly be bandwagoned into oblivion, to the point where we were bigger than all y’all, we’d have to spend weeks beating up on t2.5 servers and t3 servers draining every ounce of glicko they have available. Funnily enough, the fact that there’s a t2.5 server actually alleviates this issue. If the tier 2 fights heaven were working perfectly as everyone seems to want (3 t2 servers, not 4), it would take months and months of complete utter domination of t3 to even get a chance at rolling t2.
This won’t be fixed by destacking/this isn’t a player caused issue. If t1 tomorrow had t8 populations, it’d still be impossible for them to drop.
If you care about WvW, and you want a balanced matchup/don’t want to play in a wasteland, transfer to t1/2. Its the best player solution.
Do you honestly think destacking will work? People like to play on populated maps and even t1 isn’t populated enough for my tastes. Not to mention the quality of players is generally better, the higher tier you are. I’d much rather have my “stale” t1 balanced matchup facing competent people whenever I want over facing each random server’s random style of suck in only certain timezones.
Look at EU, the rank 5 server is beating the rank 1 server. The top 6 servers are all within 120 glicko of each other rofl. There’s amazing matchup variety because they didn’t successfully overstack 2 groups of servers (tier 1/2 in our case were heavily over stacked, t1 especially).
If you look at the matchup score during PPK week, you’d realize t2 was outscoring t1 and the problem is ANET’s ranking system, not player populations.
It’s the players’ fault that they stacked. It’s also the players’ fault that overstacking servers is unstable, as can be seen on various servers over the lifetime of the game.
It’s the player’s fault that, to maintain that particular “solution” that it practically requires a constant influx of additional people, or the merging of other servers (depending on where you are on the ladder).
It’s the players’ fault that they don’t destack, too.
Is it an oceanic players’ fault that they transfer in order to play with other oceanic players? Is it an Japanese players’ fault they transfer in order to play with someone who speaks the same language? Most servers use to have relatively even primetime populations, but you can’t just spread out all non-prime players over all the servers, and that’s where the imbalance starts.
This is why stacking just 2 tiers was a stupidly bad idea, that’s having terrible repercussions for completely unrelated servers. It isn’t about the fact that you’re leaving a server, draining a server, or anything like that. It’s about the fact that your tier is making our tiers unplayable no matter what style of WvW you enjoy (unless you enjoy being spawn camped).
There’s simply not enough coverage to go to every server. Some people want to play on high pop servers, others want to play on low pop servers. If the server you are on doesn’t have the population you like, transfer.
No, not that I am aware of. Good thing I never suggested it did. As well, it has nothing to do with the conversation, other then confirming that some posters have an agenda to change the game mode as a whole for their personal issues with there limits in current match ups. For that, I thank you.
Thank you, but it sounds like confirmation that some users have an agenda to keep the game mode unbalanced as a whole for their personal issues with there limits in current matchups, but that also has nothing to do with the conversation.
As well, there is a plethora of counter to golems+zergs. Players have been fending off large forces with golems for almost 3 years now. Twitch and YouTube are packed with video evidence proving that.
Twitch and youtube are filled with video evidence of people winning 1v2, 1v3, 1v4, 2v5, etc. Does that prove that having less people is better than having more people?
I just checked the numbers for unranked arena.
Skyhammer has 7.5% of the votes, and is the map used in 7.2% of games.
I know quite a few people that enjoy the map, so I wouldn’t just assume only trolls vote for it.
I’m curious, do you have winrates for people who choose skyhammer, on skyhammer?
And what of the people who had to do it before you? Is it fair that they had to do it but you don’t? Sorry not buying it. If it matters so much transfer servers. You can also pay people for their gifts of mastery/clovers.
Is it fair that some people worked hard, sieged the enemy keep/tower while their server was equal/losing, and slowly got wvw completion, while others just strolled in and grabbed everything when their server had an unbalanced matchup, or switched colors every week?
Ive been here since prelaunch, and whether you can get 100% wvw completion pretty much depends on which server dynamics, not how much you work for it. Theres been countless times on reset where red and blue will try to 2v1 the green keep in EBG, but even with all walls down green will hold. Some structures may not flip for weeks… or even months. And if you miss it when they do flip, too bad.
I’d wager that most people with completion didn’t “earn” it, whatever that might mean. Meanwhile, there are times that servers that have been the same color for months.
I think pvers needing wvw for their map completion is as stupid as me needing to pve to get certain stat combinations or food.
I have lvl 80 mesmer. Full zerk – exo armor, ascended trinkets. Anything non-zerk would have less damage. Max crit hit I have done is about 2,000.
blue sword?
I’ve heard GvG in GW1 was well received, it had depth to it when it came to strategy (not just straight up TDM) and it had a decent competitive scene.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdJM0xsbHhsIt was also very RTS like – just as they seem to envision WvW.
They just haven’t released every piece of info though. Watch the video before judging because its not Pure TDM.
http://youtu.be/zkM93pwvWDM
http://vimeo.com/28875923
Posting some more vids, though non-gw1 players might not know whats goin on
Way to ignore the entire second half of my post, and bring up an irrelevant topic.
Because often player claim lag as hacking.
As well, I can make a video that makes it appear anyone is hacking? Would you like a doctored video that someone you do not even know, that is fabricated, get you banned?
Doctoring a video would be extremely hard, and it shouldn’t even get an innocent person banned. They way Anet bans, they have to catch you twice. As long as Anet catches the player once, they can accept player video for the other catch. A truly innocent player wouldn’t be banned that way
2. First offense in many cases is a 2 week suspension. Further violations (of any kind) will result in account termination.
Hacking only nets a 2 week ban for first offense? You don’t ban them outright? That’s very very very forgiving.
Why not accept player video of hackers, since you aren’t even going to permaban them for the first offense? I have a couple of videos of speedhackers that I reported, but nothing happened to them. I’d love to see justice served.
>“Can we come up with a system that doesn’t involve constant policing from GMs?”
Asking questions like this make me want to play the game less than I do nowadays.
Without an active team of GMs to police WvW, you will always have problems. You need to be more proactive in your solutions. Stop being cheapskates, Anet (it’s no secret that you guys pay your employees less than the industry average). You NEED a team of GMs to actively police WvW and to a lesser extent, sPvP.
I’ve stopped playing WvW almost entirely, because you guys refuse to put in the manpower necessary to properly referee the battlefield.
Its not even a manpower/cheapness issue. If Anet only responded to just the reports where people sent in video evidence, that would be good enough to solve the problem much better than any ingame system, and it would cost much less manpower.
I have explicitly said defensive siege for the following reason. Siege that is used to assault ie. Cata’s / Rams / Trebs should never be inside a keep or utilized for Defensive purposes. These should have a no build indicator inside keeps as the promote stagnate and ways to defend that cripple the offensive aspect.
Trebs do significant damage to other siege for a reason you know, they are very much intended to be used for both offensive and defensive purposes.
They also negate the usefulness of having meaningful offensive siege. They also horrendously stagnate assaulting with 0 risk associated with them by means of firing through solid objects and utilizing massive splash radii.
The goal here is to make siege meaningful and tactical not abusive.
Sure, they probably weren’t meant to fire at rams on gates, but they’re purpose is to counter enemy trebs/catas. If they couldn’t be used for that, attackers would pretty much have a free way into every tower/keep as long as they outnumber the defenders.
They won’t do it. Ever. I promise.
Anet won’t ever turn gw2 into a viable esport, or actually fix many of their problems with this game.
That doesn’t mean its wrong to try.
I have explicitly said defensive siege for the following reason. Siege that is used to assault ie. Cata’s / Rams / Trebs should never be inside a keep or utilized for Defensive purposes. These should have a no build indicator inside keeps as the promote stagnate and ways to defend that cripple the offensive aspect.
Trebs do significant damage to other siege for a reason you know, they are very much intended to be used for both offensive and defensive purposes.
They cannot ban a player for placing siege and using supply. Lets just eliminate that line of thought right now. The player only has to claim ignorance and then Anet as a company is liable for discrimination.
Anet is not liable for anything; they can ban anyone for any reason. Intent is a very good reason to ban people, other games do it all the time.
Can we come up with a system that doesn’t involve constant policing from GMs?
Why bother creating a flawed system when its probably less than 20 people across all servers who siege troll people? Just ban the people deliberately trolling when people send videos of them. It’s not hard.
Guardian has no viable condition build, and that’s fine with me.
Guardian is just fine as is, we have our F1 for supplemental burning that doesn’t require speccing for, as well as a few other aoe burns that work well with Guardian lore (style? concept? can’t think of the right word). Stacking condis just doesn’t “fit” gar.
I really hope this doesn’t lead to the homogenizing of classes, where every class becomes less and less unique as time goes on. I don’t want to see necros with high regen, or non evade-tank thieves. I want classes to be different.
WvW
In large groups, Rangers do not have a niche to fill. They bring nothing unique and have low dmg/utility.
Suggestion: buff utility for larger groups to carve out a new niche for ranger
New skills
utility Natural Spirit: 1.5c 25cd Summons a spirit that has grants allies a chance to remove boons (35% chance 10s cd).
utility Natural Spirit → Natural Cleansing: Remove one condition from yourself and nearby allies 0c 20cd
elite Quicksand Trap: 1.5s 300cd Set a trap that reduces movement speed of up to 15 enemies by 50% (effect is unique and can’t be removed). 180 trigger radius 240 effective radius untraited, 7s duration
Trait changes
Trap Potency: now doubles the number of targets traps can hit
Evasive Purity moves to adept tier
Circle of Life is removed
New trait
Nature’s Realm: Spirits grant their effects to twice as many targets and triple their radius. Master in Nature Magic
Risk Level: low
with many of these effects not stacking and only effective in large groups, these changes won’t change spvp/pve and won’t encourage stacking rangers. The changes I propose also will hopefully provide some counterplay to the current WvW meta which is currently warriors and guardians stacking tight and sharing tons of boons.
If you want only people of a certain skill level or so involved to change their build for every fight I suggest you introduce a licence system that in the event of failure you cannot play this game as you are not deemed good enough for the game.This is elitism in its purest form.
Making no challenging content is elitism in its purest form.
One more thing: no matter what you do, there’s no way to weed out bad commanders from becoming commanders. No wxp rank, achievement, money needed, badges, etc. will stop a bad player from becoming commander.
How often do people actually join squads and use the features that are there? (4 different way point markers, /supplyinfo). What would make you join squads more?
Never. Typing in chat is better than using the waypoints, and the aoe supply check is better. Also, joining a commander’s squad only shows that commander’s tag.
Should we allow a WvW upgrade to see enemy commanders (not on the map just on screen) ?
In fights when I find the enemy commander (due to buff icon), I mark him and the fight becomes much easier if the enemy zerg is running together. Really, the icon buff should be removed as there shouldn’t be a penalty for running a tag.
You are suppose to play Guardian Wars 2 with 33-50% of your team comp being Guardians, didn’t you know?