Guild Wars 2

Junkpile.7439:

Chaba.5410:

Junkpile.7439:

if they build cart place where enemy can’t hit.

How was it ever intended that defenders were allowed to place an AC where it cannot be countered? That is not balance.

I’m not saying the LoS implementation isn’t broken, btw.

Because wall is wall and wall idea is give defenders advantage. Now wall is just disadvantage. You can’t do anything in wall because it’s full of red circles. Maybe walls should be over 1500 high so attackers can’t hit there, but defenders can hit ground.

That’s always been a problem with the wall design, yes. So the fix for that is to the walls, not to have arrow carts that can’t be countered. Have you seen the new WvW map yet?

Junkpile.7439:

if they build cart place where enemy can’t hit.

How was it ever intended that defenders were allowed to place an AC where it cannot be countered? That is not balance.

I’m not saying the LoS implementation isn’t broken, btw.

briggah.7910:

I don’t even read half of the nonsense you post

And that’s why no one should read you either.

Preventing zergs is not and never was supposed to be the intent of the arrow cart buff. That’s why LoS is finally being added to ACs. And zergs can still PvDoor through a gate with the ACs on them. That’s why the new WvW map finally has an upgrade where gates can only be damaged by siege engines.

briggah.7910:

Chaba.5410:

But you still didn’t answer my question. How is wanting people to fight not a good argument? These are PvP maps. They are supposed to encourage PvP.

Answer is simple. If you want to find fights you WILL find fights.. If you can’t because acs bother you, you are doing it wrong…

happy now?

What’s bothering me is your inattention to what others are saying to you regarding how arrow carts affected fights and how attackers ended up zerging/blobbing more to counter. It is something that has been known for over two years now. How long have you been playing this game? Maybe you unfortunately have only known the WvW meta that came after the buffs to AC.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Update-on-Arrow-Carts-in-WvW/first

“Arrowcarts now have not managed to disperse zergs. They have managed to make the minimal group size of an effective gathering of players bigger. That means it encourages zerging.”

“You just turned it from AC Wars to Golem Wars.”

“I haven’t yet heard any dev specify that this change was introduced as a counter to zergs. There are dozens of counters to zergs, not least playing as a co-ordinated group with communication.

Zergs as you call them are not going way either. By your own admission you already need twice as many people now just to man a couple of rams so you can rotate them.

The changes have done nothing to introduce more strategies – they instead made the strategies incredibly stale and boring. Build lots of arrow carts when defending. Build lots of trebs when attacking. Sit around pressing one of three buttons or watch someone else do it.

If your hope that zergs will reduce is based on people just being bored out of their minds by the current meta game then I think you actually might be on to something. Less players enjoying the game should eventually mean less zergs."

And… let’s keep in mind that ktraining players can do damage to the gates in the first place. That was never a problem that needed solving by buffing arrow carts.

briggah.7910:

Reverence.6915:

If a structure was defended, sieged up and upgraded by just a few people, any group smaller than 20 would find it more or less impossible to take. How is that a good thing?

I’m going to just LOL at this.. I’d say those less than 20 players only know how to ram gates, can’t double dodge ac fire if they got in and probably are lost without a commander tossing their siege.

Thanks for pointing out that higher tiers can’t take anything with less than 20 since its impossible with less.

I’m done for the night. I can’t wait another 9 billion seconds to post because I was a bad boy Only good thing is now I can toss my acs on players I kill since I really have no use for them.

Do you normally think you can sway opinion by offering strawmen arguments? How do you know they only know how to ram and can’t dodge AC fire? How is a hypothetical situation in any way proof that higher tiers can’t take anything with less than 20 people?

And this is what your idea of a “good argument” is?

I certainly agree that the fix doesn’t appear to be doing what it is supposed to do. You aren’t convincing anyone though that ACs are just fine with your arguments.

briggah.7910:

Chaba.5410:

briggah.7910:

Coldtart.4785:

People with good arguments don’t have to put words in their opponents’ mouths.

Nobody has a good argument that is defending the change besides they want to take easier objectives and any sort of challenge slows down the k-train.

Wanting people to fight is not a good argument?

If you want to find people to fight, find people to fight. If you can’t draw an enemy zerg out of a tower while they sit on acs, learn how to do so to get your fights.

You probably won’t even get any more fights either. People will realize that the acs are useless in certain spots now so once gate drops they’ll wp out.. Happens already. If people do not want to fight they will not fight..

The change was suppose to be for acs shooting over walls. Now acs can barely shoot down when they are on top of the wall. The opposite happened.

That’s not what this fix was suppose to do.

Are you saying that people jump out of keeps and wp out when defenders outnumber the attackers? I didn’t see that, but I did see defenders build more ACs and ballistae when the gates were down and we pushed in. Clearly we found people to fight and brought the fight to them.

But you still didn’t answer my question. How is wanting people to fight not a good argument? These are PvP maps. They are supposed to encourage PvP.

Munted and ER are on hiatus until HoT.

briggah.7910:

Coldtart.4785:

People with good arguments don’t have to put words in their opponents’ mouths.

Nobody has a good argument that is defending the change besides they want to take easier objectives and any sort of challenge slows down the k-train.

Wanting people to fight is not a good argument?

CREW starts up during Hawaiian time, around 2pm AEST (11pm PST?) and usually covers the transition between PST and OCX.

XIII has been running havoc sized during OCX. CC is also small and runs during OCX. XIII has a few people tagging up into SEA too.

In SEA there is GK, WB, and Dx. GK runs most nights.

TK rallies during EU but only raid a few days a week. There’s usually a few pugmanders during EU.

Blix.8021:

when you make defending easy for outnumbered players, you make it miserable for players to take a keep against equal/greater numbers.

30 people against 30 people on a wall with ac support = stupid

Exactly. I saw this just last night.

briggah.7910:

You are right though that not many want to fight but look at why.. All the so called fixes make it easier to just zerg and k-train stuff.

That’s right. People don’t want to get off their ACs to fight ever since the damage was buffed and AC mastery introduced because they don’t have to. So the opponent resorts to zerging as a counter.

briggah.7910:

No wonder this game mode is dying. Not many good players are left in it. Everyone wants to zerg and take empty objectives..

I don’t want to take empty objectives. I want to have a chance as a smaller force to siege a keep being defended by a larger force who just builds a ton of ACs and sits on them instead of coming out to fight. That’s another reason this game mode is dying: players who don’t want to fight.

Hi Tealhawk,

Check out the recruitment pages at http://www.fort-aspenwood.com/

For PvX I’d look into RBP, SDS, Echo, and WP.

briggah.7910:

Chaba.5410:

Malediktus.9250:

I am glad ACs are useless now, they are one of the worst parts of WvW

Yep, good riddance.

YAY! Now you can k-train with out being hit with ac fire..

Yea, I’m gonna go ktrain with my 20-man against T3 keeps being defended by 30 TC who won’t push out while another 40 are on my homebl flipping my paper keeps!

If the EOTM map was inserted into actual WvW, the way it gets played would change real quick. As it is now, it just sits out there and does nothing.

Malediktus.9250:

I am glad ACs are useless now, they are one of the worst parts of WvW

Yep, good riddance.

WvW guilds? From FA? The last few that left went to Ehmry Bay and another split with some going IOJ and others going NSP.

There are only six more weeks to reserve your spot in a higher tier before Heart of Thorns.

There are no Fort Aspenwood guilds looking to leave for Dragonbrand at this time. The ones that did left over a month ago.

http://www.dragonz.es/tienda/dragonzfire/

LOL! Feel the Zhaitan within!!!! Is this what Baruch Bay players use?

Looks like they’ve been using that logo for several years now. My guess is they hired some artist to do that logo for them and they had no idea the guy was using copyrighted material.

Pink Ninja Man.4375:

The do have an event that is out in the middle that has a major effect on PPT. It’s has some PvE mobs to it but it sounds like what you are looking for. Something that will convince players to come away from the objectives and fight in the open.

I’d like to see that event run more often than it did during the last beta.

Reverence.6915:

It’s us AUS/NZ and Asian players that determine which tier a server is in.

It is no accident that the servers in this game with stacked OCX or SEA historically have a weak NA for the tier they are in. The NA on your servers end up having a difficult time competing against the NA on the opposing servers because they are too high up in rank for NA.

I’m not blaming OCX/SEA players for this. You guys are stuck without your own set of servers.

Dhemize.8649:

vanderwolf.7084:

Did they? And no I am in NA. It’s just I watched FA go from being on top, to being hilariously at the bottom, unable to hold anything or do much of anything. If our “still active” WvW player base is still only able to barely scrape the bottom of SOS’s shoes….I don’t think we are doing very well :/

But hey, those fights though, huh?? Now you can look forward to SoS back capping and building ACs when you finally manage to capture anything. You’re finally free from YB so enjoy!! Woohoo!

RIP

The fights were great last night! FA took TC’s waypointed garrison then spent the next 45 minutes fighting TC’s late night zerg in and around bay. Everyone logged off satisfied. SoS missed out, but I think they were thankful since they had no real force on map.

US ISPs have been on a downhill slide with regards to their peering and routes. Use a VPN.

I block all FarmVille requests.

You should report what timezone you play in so that more useful answers to your question can be given.

Which timezone do you play in? FA zergs plenty, but in NA prime mostly.

Chase.2798:

Instead of doing it based on which server you started on it should be based on how much time youve spent in servers wvw.

That’s interesting. It reminds me of vacation perks given to veteran employees of a company. If an employee has been at a company for 10 years, they have way more vacation time than they could get from going to a new company and would lose that perk upon leaving.

How is 1v1v1 inherently unstable and 2v2 somehow not?

Junkpile.7439:

You select server in launch and stay there. That is loyalty.

Loyalty cannot be measured that way because loyalty requires dedication to fighting for the server in WvW and not everyone who has been on a server since launch can make such a claim. That’s what is really being asked for here: reward for loyalty to the WvW activity of a single server since launch.

Offair.2563:

lordkrall.7241:

Junkpile.7439:

You select server in launch and stay there. That is loyalty.

So someone that have never ever set their foot in WvW but have been on the server since day 1 is more loyal than someone that have been in WvW several hours each day since they transferred two years ago?

So what. Pve is megaserver now anyway and WvW isnt…

Then this should be in a different forum, not the WvW forum, nor suggested to be a WvW reward.

Puck.9612:

sephiroth.4217:

I don’t know anyone who has stayed on their home server for 3 years. (bronze league)

I’ve always kept an account on AR but both of my accounts have moved off of it at one time or another. Which means that if they actually implemented what the op is asking for I wouldn’t be rewarded even though there was never a time I wasn’t on AR.

There are a lot of players like that, myself included. I moved my original FA account since launch off FA but my alt that I purchased in Summer/Fall 2013 has always been on FA.

The OP is mistaking server loyalty with account location.

It isn’t the 3-way design, it is population.

JQ and BG are the oldest T1-sized servers. They’ve had a continuous feed of population transferring in from lower tiers for the longest time.

TC was a T1.5-sized server that was vacuumed up into T1 by the space SoR’s implosion left. It was able to get some SoR transfers in to grow to stay in T1, but for only a year. It still remained the weakest populated of the T1 servers. TC’s experience can no longer be repeated since the feed of transfers has been cut off.

YB cannot get transfers from TC such as TC had gotten SoR transfers. Now YB will always be the weakest of the T1 servers and it will be weaker than TC ever was so of course matches will be hard for YB and feel like a 2v1 most of the time.

Reward all the casual PvE players who never moved or felt forced to move for WvW? What?

Synosius.9876:

Why would we want a bunch of f2p noobs and spies? Make silver league take them!

Make Germany and Sweden take them! /sarcasm

MRA.4758:

But over the months (years), with tactics becoming more optimized towards scoring PPT, and scouts being harder and harder to find, the fast-cap meta took over. Personally, I haven’t experienced a decent siege in months. While a long-siege would still be very well possible today, commanders (and zergs) have become way to impatient to spent the required time, and the next free fast-cap is always waiting just around the corner.

Because the scoring system does not encourage the two weaker servers to team up against the stronger server. There’s a weird interaction that occurs between the scoring system and the glicko rating system here.

1) The PPT system encourages the two strongest servers to 2v1 the weakest server.
2) The Glicko system encourages the two weaker servers to 2v1 the strongest server.

Because #1 (“The match score”) is far more visible to the casual player and some of the more inexperienced or “short-sighted” commanders, it becomes the overall strategy employed, which leads to a lot of the population imbalances. It is the path of least resistance. The strongest server in a match usually has the most objectives that require a long-siege (or a successful ninja attempt). That leads to the two stronger servers ktraining the weakest server in a match. If the weaker servers do not ktrain each other, they’ll lose more PPT because tying up forces to perform a long siege against the strongest server means giving up PPT from the paper stuff. When more players choose this strategy, imbalances in population become more pronounced over time until it becomes no fun for anyone.

The #2 strategy is best for the majority of servers in a match because Glicko gives better rewards based on performance against a stronger server, but few people seem to understand this. The notorious TC/JQ 2v1 against BG in Season 2 only came about because of the number of commanders and players who understood this longer-term strategy. Again, most players avoid this because the stronger server usually has the most objectives that require a long siege. Maybe Anet can add a “predicted rating” to the scoreboard. XD Or find a different match-making method or rating system.

I know of a few guilds that rally for only 2 hours. Others seem to rally for 3.

IMHO if a guild is seeing progress/having fun within the length of their rally time, it is more likely for their members or even their guild as a whole to stay playing longer. There’s always the effect of “one more fight”. On the opposite side of that, I’ve seen guilds call their rallies early when they feel they cannot make any progress/get the fights they want.

LOL. How about we talk about how dungeon selling ruins the game for players who already paid for a subscription-free game?

Muntedface went on hiatus. Don’t think he’ll be planning one of these again for awhile.

I play 9pm – midnight PST on Fort Aspenwood. There is good action against SoS since they have the largest OCX population in the tier. TC has a zerg somewhere around this time too, been seeing a guild called WL run around. There are no queues. CREW is a 10-15 man guild running from about 11pm PST – 2/3am PST.

gavyne, how is it possible for the game to promote the fights, increase the willingness of players to perform a long siege, without nerfing defense too much and turning into a ktrain?

If you have guilds transferring off, it seems like it will take about 2-3 weeks before their activity level in WvW is reflected in the world population. They are not removed immediately.

http://classics.mit.edu/Tzu/artwar.html

“When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, the men’s weapons will grow dull and their ardour will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.”

Long sieges may be fun and engaging for a subset of players, but as was pointed out above, they aren’t done as much these days as they used to be early on. Players lose interest in them for whatever reason. Maybe it is just human nature to lose interest in it because it requires delayed gratification. The gratification that players get right now from the game for the time they spend in WvW are found mostly in the fights, not the sieges (or scouting/defending). And we all know a siege can fail, which should happen, and there is no reward for that time and effort, especially if the opponent never sallies forth.

But yea, correct. I’m not trying to suggest that attackers should be able to burn through objectives. Only saying there needs to be something in-game maybe that promotes players keeping interest in a long siege or that a long siege shouldn’t be longer than, for example, a timezone’s prime time.

Bumping for Fort Aspenwood’s SEA players and guilds.

We are holding down the fort!

There are many bags to be had in T2.

Odesseus.1472:

strakul.1826:

I frequently use the Look Behind option and have it as one of my mouse buttons. When going up/down stairs in the Air Keep, this tended to pan all the way up to the sky rather than showing what’s behind you.

This happens in the normal client when you approach a wall or steep rise, too.

It’s a long time /reported bug I wish Anet would finally do something about :/

It is about time that a superior trebuchet actually looked like a trebuchet instead of a glorified catapult.

WvW players refer to the sieging of a fully fortified and defended keep as “The Long Siege”. The new map with the automatic upgrades seems like it will increase the need for the long siege.

The long siege is an attrition game involving supply denial, sieging and counter-sieging, and ability to fend off skirmishes. It is a very time intensive task that tends to turn off the more casual players (one reason they go to EOTM). Only the truly “hardcore” WvW players and larger organized guilds are able to accomplish a long siege. Experienced commanders who lead militia have come to know that sometimes so-called ktraining is needed in order to grow/obtain enough of the casual players on a tag in order to attempt a long siege and even after that they cannot stay long at the objective, but must hop back and forth to different maps or objectives as a way to hold the interest of followers and get opponent attention off the target objective.

As you go about balancing defense against offense in the new map, consider finding a way to hold player interest in the long siege.

One factor influencing the lack of player interest in the long siege is that a long siege in the current maps can take longer than the length of time guilds rally. This has had the effect of larger organized guilds complaining about opponents that won’t come out to fight them. Part of that comes from guilds choosing to not spend their limited playtime performing a long siege.

Another possible influence is that there often isn’t any “hand-over” mechanism. There’s no “big picture situational awareness”, like what an RTS provides. Guilds and militia commanders start their rallies and are unaware of the progress another earlier group made in sieging/defending as that group logs off. So they often start over from scratch.

Tyler Bearce.3427:

Chaba.5410:

Needs hidden cat room.

It may already have such a thing.

Purrfect.

Is it right next to the entrance to the secret cow level?