Guild Wars 2

I think there is another thread that already goes over this. You could try searching…

But then again the search is broken on this site so…..

Ok, but I think I have some good posts in my upvoted list…

SleepingDragon.1596:

Cantur Soulfyre.5409:

…snip

OMG! First message you’ve posted that I am in agreement with.

First message today or all time? Cause I think you should agree with almost everything I say… :P but that is just me…

K U T M.4539:

Cantur Soulfyre.5409:

Is this the same StaR that used to be on SF? How many servers have you guys transferred to and from to keep ahead of your bad reputation?

They changed the first word in their name, no one will ever suspect

LOL, almost spit out my coffee!

Interesting point about the AoE cap. I always thought it was strictly because of the massive amount of additional processing of AoE and DoT.

Perhaps an overall damage reduction based on the number of people in a certain radius? the more people the less overall damage they do? If worked with the right ratios would enable smaller groups to handle larger groups better.

By the way, I am just throwing things out there. I do not think zergs need to be removed or entirely discouraged. But I also get the frustration of small group folks. I run both actually.

Prysin.8542:

actually, there are laws governing how warfare should be conducted. Breaking those will lead to you being deemed a war criminal

Why don’t we discuss the actual question instead of trying to sidetrack this? You know what I meant by the are no rules. And this is not the real world, this is a game and I do not remember there being any rules listed when I press B to get into WvWvW.

lol, dam (the other spelling) is a bad word??

Well, most likely they would be sweeping the map anyways if they outnumber you that bad.

I really think it is a kitten ed if you , kitten ed if you don’t kind of thing. Does it make sense to help the side that is outmanned with a buff? I think it does. But then I also think that could be taken advantage of if you make the buff too good. It would be a strategy to move people off a map to GET the outmanned buff.

It is an interesting problem with no single resolution, at least to me.

I still have to ask, why is zerging so bad it has to be removed for everyone? If it is not your thing then don’t do it. But just because something is not to your liking doesn’t mean it needs to be removed from the game. Clearly Anet wants that mechanic there or they would already have done something about it. And clearly many, many people like that fighting style. Should small groups be nerfed because other people do not like small groups? No.

I know I am going to get flamed for this post because many people on this board do not know how to DISCUSS things rationally (To those can can discuss rationally, thank you!).

But when it comes down to it, this is a battlefield, this is war. Do you think that when the Greek’s first started using the phalanx that the people they were defeating complained to the God of War that it was unfair? No, they worked on figuring out how to counter it because ALL is fair in war. There really are NO rules. If something works, then work it. If something doesn’t work that tactic doesn’t get employed much if at all.

Now, I would like to point out that the AoE-cap is grossly unfair to those that do not zerg. No way around that, I think less people would complain about the zerging if they could hurt everyone in their AoE circle. And in the end, the reason there is an AoE cap is that Anet is not willing to put that much money into more hardware. (At least that is why I think the AoE cap is there, I could be wrong)

kaltastic.3146:

I’d love to see ‘Player doesn’t drop loot bags when killed’ added as well’…

This would be awesome. GREAT idea.

I tried nerfing my hours at work but they wanted to nerf my salary too.

Is this the same StaR that used to be on SF? How many servers have you guys transferred to and from to keep ahead of your bad reputation?

Dabrixmgp.4758:

pza.8024:

^this.

pza.8024:

pza.8024:

And why the heck should 10-12 people be a stronger group than 40? In which universe would this be balanced?

why should 40 unskilled mouth breathers beat 10-12 skilled people? Have been in plenty of fights where our small 12-15 man group has won against twice as many enemies. 3:1 we can hold our own pretty well but eventually they wipe us. We only end up losing because for every 1 we kill 2 more join the fight and eventually we just cant keep up.

Yeah i suppose, you’re at least twice as good as any other player. every zerg of 40 people are just noobs compared to thy.

it just seems like WvW is about who has more numbers on the map and not who has the better players.

WvW is all about coverage if you fight the PPT war. My server can hold our own and more during our prime playing times. But we lost the PPT battle overnight and during the early day due to we have pretty much zero NA overnight and morning coverage. Sleep and work keep getting the way!!

We always post people (well, we TRY to) with pull skills by the gates and pull them just before they get downed so they are away from the gate. It has been since I have seen a mesmer try to do this, besides the Bay watergate. For some reason mesmers love the watergate in Bay. I hesitate to call this an exploit, I think it is more a lack of actual skill on the mesmers behalf.

And yes, we do tend to laugh at the mesmers that have no skill at hiding.

Yes, we have a Quaggan guild too, they like to run around as quaggans, usually in EB.

lol 15chat limit thingy

You attacked one of our Quaggans??? Shame on you!

Got any vids to show how awesome you are?

Wonder how this “sale” went…

King Amadaeus.8619:

If you ever catch me escorting a Yak you should either:

1. Assume there is a thief nearby that I plan to troll
or
2. Call my sponsor, I am off the wagon.

Notice he didn’t dispute the stealing candy from babies!! LOL

Do not get off the Battle Wagon! JK, miss you Sav, don’t know what I did (besides no flowers maybe?) to make you hate me so much you transfer away.

Where did AKD go? Loved fighting that zerg…

Do you REALLY want a Legendary weapon?? As heard in VoiP so many times, “Look, that guy has a Lgendary! KILL THEM!!!” Commence the zerg turning to go after a solo person who is leaving little spots behind them when they run….

LOL, how is that Legendary working out now?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ +1 and a whole lot more. Servers are tanking, guilds are transferring, same results from Season 1 except SLIGHTLY less lame rewards. Oh, and a non-scoring map thrown into the mix…

250+ rank, should be higher but I do the support work “upgrading, walking yaks, defending” that really doesn’t get you wxp. Anyways, one ascended ring drop, 15 or so exotics, best selling items I have ever gotten was some light and armor (I am a heavy) that have Traveler runes on it.

Just wait until EotM is required for map completion!! So much fun!! #Sarcasm

Wait, did you say one ring or The One Ring?

“Closed” raids are for those commanders who can’t deal with pugs. Period, that is the only difference. Those commanders may not like that label, and I get why you wouldn’t. But you need to be a very good commander to run a raid with pugs tagging along and still get those loot bags.

Straegen.2938:

Cantur Soulfyre.5409:

But just to take something because your Guild has more buffs, in my opinion, shouldn’t be allowed unless they also then either restore that buff (or buffs) back to the guild that had it up OR something like charge the new claiming guild 5g (or whatever) and give that to the guild that possession was taken from. Again, if the claiming guild has no buffs running then i see no problem taking the claim from them.

If I come up to a camp and XYZ guild has it claimed but no +5 supply buff, why should they get to keep the camp claimed? The current system is stupid. The concept that somehow a guild “owns” a shared resource is ridiculous.

Why does the first person to make the claim have priority? Why would they deserve money to override the claim?

That is why I said if there is no buff then no penalty or wait time. However if a buff IS active, then a penalty should apply.

If a zerg is coordinated and performing well in open field, then it is not a zerg, it is a number of small groups who happened to be fighting in the same area. #SarcasmWins

I still have yet to bring an uplevel into WvW for anything besides bordlerland defense/upgrading/yak escorting.

I think the minimum you need to be is level 50 and buy new armor every 10 levels and the latest upgrades at the levels those upgrade. As another post said, you can being a properly equipped lvl 2 character and do good damage, but you are missing your elite skill and a bunch of traits.

Karma trains and blobs are good for uplevels, raid times not so much.

Call me crazy but isn’t overwhelming number a strategy in and of itself? Just because it is not what you may like to do doesn’t mean it isn’t legit.

Don’t get mad, get even. If it really is a mindless mass of players pushing 1 over and over, there are plenty of very easy and quick ways to disperse them. If you have even 5-10 people you can fracture them all over the place and never die, as long as you know the map. Once you have a group of them separated you can easily focus them and kill them.

Arkvan.3561:

I’m still not really seeing the problem here. You won’t get a surge of PvEers filling up your WvW zones (this is good, yes?) and it’ll be easy for both WvWers and PvEers to get the Gift. The only thing I’m really seeing here is people demanding other people join “their” games. Yes, I’m a PvEer. Yes, I’d like the occasional WvW if my pc could handle it. What I don’t like is this endless, seemingly meaningless discussion about who has sweat more to get their kitten.

So you are saying that the Gift Of Battle shouldn’t need a WvW requirement? I would agree to that if I could get one Gift of Exploration for completing just the WvW maps.

Straegen.2938:

Kraag Deadsoul.2789:

The problem is this is a stick rather than a carrot approach. Rather than introduce a punitive system (guild A has more buffs than guild B, so guild A gets preferential treatment over guild B ), the suggestions I’ve made seek to motivate guilds to activate buffs by rewarding this behavior.

If the objective of WvW is for a server to win, whoever has the best buffs should be able to claim a location.

I really don’t care about some petty guild’s imposed drama. “Oh heavens me I cannot keep Overlook claimed because my guild isn’t running all the buffs.”

Besides practically no location is taken or defended by one guild. Why should XYZ Guild have rights over a location… because they got there first? What?

I think this is more practical than the current system, however even with more buffs than the current claiming Guild I think there should be a waiting period or it cannot be subjugated until any current buffs expire. Claiming something and not having buffs is useless so I think you should be able to take over a claim when that happens or when the buffs expire.

But just to take something because your Guild has more buffs, in my opinion, shouldnt be allowed unless they also then either restore that buff (or buffs) back to the guild that had it up OR something like charge the new claiming guild 5g (or whatever) and give that to the guild that possession was taken from. Again, if the claiming guild has no buffs running then i see no problem taking the claim from them.

I agree with most of that, though the tick of each structure wold begin when that structure is claimed, right? Not on the score tick, so it is still a slightly dynamic process and not included with the current score tick.

I actually really hope these ideas get implemented somehow, especially if they can also reward the folks who defend/repair/upgrade/walk yaks, etc. with more wxp than they do now for these tasks. People I have played with for a long time in WvW are far ahead of me in rank because I do the behind the scenes support work unless it is a raid time.

Thanks for the good conversation about all this, refreshing to find here after some of the “interesting” conversation I have been a part of. Some people just do not know how to discuss and argue without bring rude.

johnnymiller.5968:

Prysin.8542:

Even good guilds aren’t THAT good. But a feeling of superiority drives them, this feeling or aura or whatever, makes others think they are that great. Even though they aint.

Ain’t that the truth. One of the guilds on my server said they did not want anyone else running with them – no problem. Then came the statement about their superiority to everyone else and how much they can achieve. Having witnessed some of the decisions by their commander its highly debatable. Although when something goes wrong apparently all the players lack skill; never the commanders fault.

Have to love Elitist guilds. Had a couple of these on the server for a bit, they typically transfer from server to server over time, they come in telling everyone how great they are but if you want to run with them you have to 100% rep, change your class and build to match what they want, etc., etc. They poach a few players and then jump to their next bandwagon. Funny thing was I saw them wipe many times to even numbers, wonder why they never posted those vids…

I agree Phantom. Look at Faction Battles in GW1. That had lore and a reason to fight. The more your side won, the more actual of Tyria was “claimed” by your faction.

Kraag Deadsoul.2789:

In the first post, I proposed both actually. Point #4 spoke to one-time influence rewards; either when an upgrade ordered by a claiming guild member is completed or when a siege blueprint thrown down by a claiming guild member is built to completion. Point #6 then went on to add influence-earned-over-time rewards while an objective is claimed and a buff is active.

There are 61 claimable objectives between all three borderlands plus Eternal Battlegrounds. Three each of the twenty-seven EU servers are placed into a match for a total of nine matches running per week. Assuming every single objective was claimed by a guild and every guild simultaneously activated their buffs (a situation I’ve never seen happen, but let’s assume the worst case scenario), this would result in 9 × 61 = 549 additional transactions/processes to keep track of if implementing an influence-earned-over-time reward.

What’s more is these influence-earned-over-time rewards aren’t really being tracked over time. That’s just the perception from a human standpoint. Programmatically, they’re still one-time events. Timer ticks down and reaches its zero point. This triggers a function call. Function checks if (a) an objective is claimed by a guild and (b) does that guild have a buff or buffs active. If both those conditions are true, then the function adds some influence to the guild’s existing pool based on the number of buffs active.

Timer is now reset and – 15 minutes later – the process repeats; but there’s no calculations or tracking happening second by second. It’s only the humans watching the clock who are telling themselves, “If we can just hold this tower for another 6 minutes and 32 seconds when the timer reaches zero again, we’ll get another reward of influence.” The code itself makes no such assumptions; it’s a discreet event which occurs once every 15 minutes just like the PPT calculations.

But, sure, if limiting the rewards to one-time events will strike a balance between incentivizing guild claiming while not placing too great a strain on the servers, then that’s a fair compromise. I just don’t see it as being that great a load on the servers to add an influence-earned-over-time reward when we consider how much processing is already going on in a typical WvWvW match.

Like I said, I get what you are saying. But you sounds like my boss who has no idea about how these things actually work. “We have a nice server we just paid a lot of money for, surely we can add a program to it.” Of course we can, but then you start dragging the server down from it’s original purpose.

If you pay attention to load times and skill lag during peak WvW times you know that the servers are already overloaded with transactions and that a queue of transactions build up, hence the skill lag and game lag. This is the queue bottleneck slowing transactions down. Just from that we can safely deduce that their server hardware is already overloaded during those times. Add more to that without addressing the queues AND the hardware and you are in for a big letdown. (Queues on servers are not just fixed by adding hardware, you have to resolve the queue bottleneck too, especially when it comes to read/write queues, which even at a minimum the database that stores their information will have to be increased also to store the information on the additional things to keep track of).

Would the total added transactions you are proposing shut stop the servers from running? No. Will it cause lag every second? No. Will it affect gameplay unless hardware is added/upgraded? Yes.

And that is all I am saying. Great ideas and I hope Anet decides to implement them. Just realize it is a cost to benefit thing for them.

Around 95% of our players are in WvW when they are on doing whatever they want, most usually gather when a call is made but it is not required.

However, during our scheduled raid times, you are required to be on the commander (unless you are scouting), be in a party (hopefully a good balance for buffs, etc.), and be in the VoIP we are using. Works well when you have players that listen (mostly).

I understand and agree that what you are proposing will help with more responsible claiming.

However, even if the code is still there you are still talking about thousands upon thousands of executions of that code and then storage of the resulting data. The timer on siege is very simple, very static. They even keep track of who threw the siege so they can re-claim it from someone so that code can be applied structure claiming.. But the code already being there has nothing to do with the amount of transactions that would be increased.

You changed some of what you said about the influence in your second post. I agree that if it is a one time influence posted to that guild then the processing is minimal (but still additional to the current state). In your first post you talked about the influence (#6) gaining per additional structure and over ticks. The tracking of something like that per structure will add more system stress. I work on servers for a living and while it may seem like not much more code and a couple transactions, when implemented in such a large scale it can really back those queues up.

I am not saying it wouldn’t be worth it, at least to me. I think all your suggestions are great. All I am saying is if you really want Anet to implement, keep it to something less dynamic (cumulative) and more static (one-time transactions). Your second post was much more accurate as far as keeping the transactions down to a minimum.

katniss.6735:

Join Maguuma.
Get rich.

I heard Savannah is on Mag now, he steals candy from babies and I heard that he “escorts” dolyaks. Not good for recruiting really….. :P

Love the ideas but please realize that it would be very hard for Anet to justify adding more processor allocation for something like this. You are talking about many variables that would have to be added to the system, then multiply that by all the different structures on each map that can be claimed, then multiply that by how many matchups are occurring.

I think it is much more likely that they would look favorably upon just letting it expire like siege if it is not refreshed. Or maybe make it another gold sink, 5g to take over a claim as long as no buffs are running….

^ +1 I spend alot on upgrades, siege, etc. And never lose money unless I make big purchases. Usually end up with +2-3 gold for a couple hours with the guild.

King Amadaeus.8619:

Killing players, most of them are bad and need to know when I:

Throw siege on their dead bodies
Jump on their dead bodies
/emote on their dead bodies

Is there any other reason to play?

Do not forget knocking players off cliffs!!

PetricaKerempuh.7958:

why is this in wvw discussion?

Because they put a requirement to get rank 30 in WvW before you could purchase Gift of Battle.

Meehael.8240:

Buran.3796:

If you mean in raids: Hammer/Axe+Warhorn or Hammer/Sword + Warhorn.

Yes, in zergs. So, a warhorn is a must? For the speed buff?

Speed buff is a plus but if traited correctly you can also convert conditions to boons with both the 4 and 5 skill. And less recharge time with a trait. I believe the convert also works on allies in the area.

I run hammer (bloodlust) and sword/horn. I also carry an axe to switch otu with the horn for bigger fights, that number 5 is too good for widespread damage when whirling around. I also have a rifle I switch out with the hammer for those times you need a little range. Never liked the longbow so I never use one.

The main thing is to try everything and figure out what works well for your playstyle. Use the build templates as a baseline and then experiment. Play to your strengths…

If things were working properly, how is there ANY approximation involved?? Using the above example of a dynamic queue, why wouldn’t the system be programmed to tell the person in A position that they are first? No need to calculate and re-calculate positions and then display them on the client. When the person falls into position A (1st in line) their client displays them as 1st in the queue.

There is no need to actually merge servers. They have shown with EotM that multiple servers can join on the same side of the same map against multiple servers on the “other” sides. Just merge WvW instances between servers so that NA and EU servers play together.

Boonprot.6274:

Cantur Soulfyre.5409:

First, please understand that Necros and Mesmers are NOT people so those characters should not be included in this discussion.

If 3 of 4 players are Guardian or Warrior that is because a zerg needs those to really operate. As was brought up before, crowd control is very important to controlling a fight and winning, hence why hammer trains became so popular (and why I love carrying Saffron bread around). So more guardians (for Stability support) and more warriors (counter-crowd control and Stability/clears) were needed, etc., etc.

Except the counter to hammer trains is synergy between, and intelligent use of, Well of Corruption/Axe 3 and Null Field with hard CC skills. Hammer trains are exceptionally self-limiting and are generally easy to deal with. Their mobility is abysmal because all of the guardians are running Hammer/Staff (which is an awful idea; people need to stop encouraging newbies to use that weaponset). Their over-reliance on hammers (and the associated glacial attack speed) means that they are EXTREMELY susceptible to blind, and they always, without a fault, push in straight lines. If you dodge to the left or the right of a hammer train push you’ll miss 100% of their damage every time. The myth that parties need to be composed of 2x warrior 2x guardian 1x backline to be successful is just that, a myth.

I would even argue that backliners are MORE important than frontliners. In the current meta, the truly skilled guilds have absolutely rock-solid backliners, and the guilds who don’t tend to have little to no sustain. Furthermore, I firmly believe that backline has a far, far higher skill ceiling when compared to frontline. Throwing more stability at the problem isn’t how you solve the issue. Better movement, more intelligent skill use, coordination, and proper builds all contribute far more to a group’s success than an extra bit of stability or another hammer.

tl;dr: Hammer trains are only good for either outnumbering your opponents or wiping pug groups.

Ermmmm, please don’t use logic, you are making too much sense! Plus, you are letting the walking bags (ie hammer trains) on to our little farming secret.

All kidding aside, we try to run one warrior, one guardian, and the rest backline. As long as your front line knows how to do their thing and the backline knows how to do theirs, we end up wiping pretty much whoever we go up against.

Palom.2095:

“My point is that the enemy had us outnumbered by so much, they had time to goof off like that and still own the entire map.”

So… we’re not allowed to have fun? ;_;

Not while you own the map! When you own the map you have to sign the “Do Not Enter Citadel or Else I QQ All About It” agreement. You must be a noob bronze or silver rank….

First, please understand that Necros and Mesmers are NOT people so those characters should not be included in this discussion.

If 3 of 4 players are Guardian or Warrior that is because a zerg needs those to really operate. As was brought up before, crowd control is very important to controlling a fight and winning, hence why hammer trains became so popular (and why I love carrying Saffron bread around). So more guardians (for Stability support) and more warriors (counter-crowd control and Stability/clears) were needed, etc., etc.