Guild Wars 2

Well if you cant put a block next to something, put it on top and hope for the best. Standard Lego logic.

Zackie.8923:

Main problem that my solution solves, 24h coverage issues. now state the 3 problems it will lead to.

And you only have to kill WvW for it, what a deal. Its like taking a hamburger and stating that the solution to make it bread is to remove the meat. I get that. You like bread. But its no longer a hamburger. I like hamburgers. But anyway, sure, I can state problems with your “solution”.

- It does nothing for 24h coverage. More players doesnt automatically mean coverage. Sides will still stack nightcappers to win.

- “balance the numbers in eotm!” you say? How? If you want to balance it, I assume you see it as a problem too.

- Even if we assume that the 3 sides are originally created equal, how do you plan on balancing the EoTM matchup in the long term to avoid a complete stalemate in the scenario of one side having all the nightcappers and winning constantly? With WvW, this ensures that they only meet the 2 servers that are performing second and third best. With EoTM, this could mean that we see an SFR vs Elona vs Underworld matchup every week.

Forget about converting to gold.

What you want to use gems for, in order of “importance”:
- Character slots. 1 for each class minimum.
- Stack expansions. 250 isnt enough even for a halfarsed farmer.
- Bank tabs. If you play the game a long time, your gonna want to double them. Or triple. Not even bank guilds is enough if you have lots of armor sets.
- Inventory slots. If you play WvW for example, you want lots of room.
- Living story if you like PvE.
- Infinite tools.
- Hats and outfits and crap like that
- Maybe some small things like dyes or keys but they are not really worth it.
- Gold

Not interested in signing up but I got bored and browsed the rules so I have a question.

What happens if you actually use “gg” for its intended purpose as you called good game to an opposing team that fought valiantly but lost in the end… You concede the match, lol?

I didnt think the use of gg had gone completely to kitten so that tournaments needed a special rule which proclaim “gg” is the direct eqvivalent of saying “we yield”. I mean they could just say that instead…

Or maybe I’m just getting to old for PvP.

Zackie.8923:

Please state the 3 new problems for each problem i solved

I cannot. You only said that it would solve alot of problems. You didnt actually solve any problems with WvW in your post.

also not everyone uses TS or is involved in your “communities”

Then they are not really part of the TS community so they wont care either way.

Many people are still thriving in eotm without the need for TS and i must say that the fights in EOTM are much more fun than in TS “guild groups style”.

Few WvW players think that EoTM is real WvW.

If you want to give WvW players EoTM, thanks but no thanks. You can keep it.

Sifu.9745:

Do you think i should go more power or condi oriented build to increase damage of staff?

Staff has weak condi damage output except in very specific situations when you transfer with 4. It has some secondary condi effects where you mostly want duration.

Its regards to being support or offensive, its pretty much like the Guardian staff. Its the best tool the Necro got. Yes it has damage and yes it has utility skills critical for Necro gameplay regardless of build.

Zackie.8923:

a lot of problems will be solved if we abolish servers.

make it instance based like EOTM so that off peak hours can still have respectable numbers on all sides, and kitten , balance the numbers in eotm!

with regards to server identity, you can still do it by creating like say 3 races/organizations/countries etc something like helbreath’s elonia vs aresden

And you’d still introduce 3 new problems for every problem you solved.

In regards to server identity, its not the identity thats the most important part. Its the community around that identity. Today, we have server size communities. But they arent really that big, are they? No, because WvW player counts are comparably few on the server. In the middle of primetime, our TS could have as few as 40 peeps in the pug channels. Thats for all borders, fighting T1 servers.

Good samaritans host these communities. Anet doesnt care, they dont host communities. They shut down the WvW matchup forum. Server pride is not a thing for them, so if EoTM would become baseline, these good samaritans would have to host 500+ pug players. And thats the low end. Our TS also has like 50 guild channels and various others, which means that guilds can join each others channels and be a true community. With all servers smashed together we are talking a TS so big you could see 5,000+ players on it. Good luck managing that. Anet could do it easily, with their own servers… But as I said, they arent going to.

The end result would be that guilds go back to their own TS and pugs have to read what the commander write in say, like how they commanded in the medieval times.

The game is so CPU bound that if you get say 40 fps on max settings on a GTX980Ti… You can set it to minimum settings and still get 40 fps. Yeah, its actually that “bad” in low fps situations.

I always see people chatting, especially in daily zones. The only bad thing is when you join a zone where they are roleplaying and using Black Speech. Or maybe its German, I dont know.

Rieselle.5079:

Personally, I’d prefer a more open-world-sandbox, kinda like EVE Online.

For example:

- Have a world map composed of tiles. Each tile is an instance. There are several different types of tiles available, with different terrain.
Each tile can have up to 8 exits along its edge, to take you to the next tile.
eg. 9×9 map:
ABC
DEF
GHI

- To travel from tile A to tile C, you’ll have to walk all the way across tile B. However, if tile B is full, then you can either queue for B, or skip it and go directly to C, D,E, or F.

- In each tile are a variety of keeps, towers, camps, and other objectives.

- Each guild is its own faction. Guilds can ally together to form alliances.

- Every guild/alliance is just out to expand its territory and defeat its enemies. There are rewards associated with holding objectives and entire tiles.

- Just like EVE, to move supplies, equipment, siege, anything around, you have to physically carry or escort a yak across the map, allowing enemies to come and steal/destroy your stuff if they intercept you.

- PUG players can list themselves on a marketplace to be hired as mercenaries, or they can simply enter the maps solo/in a party and try to do bandit raids on yaks etc.

- If your guild/alliance holds some objectives in a tile, you can teleport into the tile and spawn along any edge.

- If you don’t hold any objectives anywhere, you can only spawn along the outer edge of the entire map.

- ANet can add more tiles to accomodate more players. The size of the map is adjusted to fit the game’s population.

- There is no reset, the match continues. However, if one alliance has taken all/most of the tiles, ANet can declare a winner and reset.

So yeah, basically I wanted fantasy EVE Online, with GW2 combat. (Well, ideally, Dark Souls combat :P)

Thats actually not such a bad idea. If we consider GW2 limitations and try to translate WvW directly to your idea, I would however do this:

- an 10×10 grid for a near 1:1 duplicate of current map counts.
- no freeform “alliances” between guilds, forget about that
- 8 servers form a faction (some EU servers bite the dust). These 8 are friendly to each other and share similar colors, but not names (ie you still see other friendly alliance tags as “servername rank”)
- 3 factions duke it out in the matchup.
- a matchup would last longer than now (2 weeks? 3?).
- when a matchup ends, alliances are shuffled per individual perfomance into 3 new factions to keep them fairly balanced.

This should in theory allow everyone to share the same battlefield while maintaining server size communities (with an option for even bigger ones) and rivalry against other servers in a matchup.

Apolo.5942:

Healer may be, but with no tank to absorb the 1 hit kills the boss and mobs throw, its kind of pointless.

That comment doesnt make a whole lot of sense you know. I dont know any scenario where a full tank build get insta-killed by any boss, unless its an actual mechanic of the fight (which are often well announced and avoidable)

The problem isnt the damage, its the funky aggro. You can take it from mobs some times, but other times you cant. With no way to make mobs focus you its hard to truly tank. Add the fact that most attacks are AoE ans it can be a mess. Especially when your zerker backline rush a buffed keep lord and make 10 people go down in 1 second, compared to the tanky melee frontline that lost 30% and can heal it up passivly in 3 seconds.

I upgraded from Win7 on a GTX670 to Win10 on a GTX980Ti the other day and I can tell you it still drop below 60fps where it doesnt matter if you change from low to high settings, its still the same fps. While GW2 remain pretty and stylish, its built on an engine that is completely CPU bound. Win10 cant help it all that much.

Xillllix.3485:

EotM isn’t an alliance system, it’s just a random melting pot of all the servers together. ESO has done it right for the WvW alliance system and it’s what Anet should base a new system upon.

ESO alliances worked because you could have thousands of players in a campaign and they could still join because the map supported a ton of players. If a GW2 map is supposed to be an ESO style campaign, you’d have to list hundreds of them. Active campaigns would fill instantly, making the global pugs guest flood others, which cause them to guest, etc. Thats not WvW. Thats a ffa sPvP server list with an 80 slot cap per side.

But hey if you can get Anet to try a 2000 player cap on EB, sure. Just let me get far enough away before the server go nuclear.

OR they could just increase the healing power modifiers on skills. That would be even quicker and much less dirty.

Ben K.6238:

I would have done away with servers, except for the geographical blocs (NA, EU, China), and used guild alliances instead.

That would technically still be servers, but yes I have always been in favor of moving the abstract servers to ingame factions. Even though it would work exactly like now, it also make WvW a part of PvE and allow Anet to do some fun things, such as faction halls, ingame rivalry between NPCs, ingame functions for stuff like transfers or rewards, etc. Imagine if you are in Divinity and see a faction hall with an ongoing feast and fireworks etc. Why? Because that faction just won the matchup. Yep, that simple, PvE reacting to WvW.

But an all EoTM design… ugh… dont want.

You cant truly be a healer in the same sense as other MMOs because the heals just arent high enough to keep people alive, but you can most certainly be something more GW2 styled between a tank and healer using Nomad gear on tanky builds. Guardian in particular squirt HP all over the place while you will can facetank buffed keeplords.

ManaCraft.5630:

Designing a serverless WvW system is a relatively simple matter.

There are 3 major issues with using EoTM style design however:

- Community based Teamspeak become impossible to manage. Thus, communities would die (or in this case, never have existed). The communities that have formed is pretty much the only reason for WvW still being a thing after 3 years.

- Guilds would not be able to organize GvGs and have to put in alot of work just to get the raid on the same map. You would pretty much kill raiding. They would never know what guilds they face either.

- Coverage would be a complete mess and pretty much ensure 1 side win every single week. One side having stacked nightcappers and its gg, no point in even playing WvW since nothing will change next week.

TL;DR if we had no servers we would have no WvW.

Wryscher.1432:

So you agree, more ktraining. Just what we want in WvW.

That is not what I said. Karma training as a practice assume no defenders. If people know when to defend a keep, they will come. Just like how swords is a zerg magnet today. If they dont defend, well no amount of Anet changes can fix broken players.

Imagine… If superior siege didnt exist as items.

When you drop a cata, it cost 50 sups to build.
After being built, you have the option to use it or continue building upon it with an additional 50 sups.
When fully built with 50+50 sups, its a superior cata.

I just solved a WvW inventory, health and poverty problem. I should get a Nobel prize.

There are few if any ways to cap/limit siege without applying that to legit usage… which is going to frustrate players, commanders in particular. Any system you can think of can be abused.

Anet could make it so that if enough people report a player for siege trolling he wont be able to build siege on that border for quite some time. But people will probably troll commanders with it.

The only way to completely “solve” this is to limit siege to build sites, much like how cannons/mortars work. Like a keep has 3 positions for arrowcarts, 2 ram positions on the door and 3 surrounding sites where you can place 3 ranged siege on each. That way the hardcap for siege is actually all the siege you can build on a border. But that would probably get boring and predictable.

An easy way could be to raise costs every time you solo build siege. Like, first ram you build cost 40 sups. If you dump all those 40 sups into it, the next ram cost 80 sups. If you dump all those 80 sups into it, the next ram cost 160 sups, etc and so on. But you would have to time limit it in order to make solo play viable (say 10 min cd), which only delay the troll. Or they bring groups to troll. Maybe thats good enough, I dont know.

Wryscher.1432:

But using it against them? How exactly? I guess more ktraining? Because the only way you can use it against someone is race there right before an upgrade hits and take it from them.

Lol.

You just stated the exact way to use it against your enemies. Think a little about what you just wrote there. If you are “exploiting” the system to race to a keep in order to cap it right when an upgrade hits… there is absolutely nothing stopping your enemy from having an entire army there waiting for you, because they know you’re gonna race there to try and flip it.

More information on the battlefield should mean that the pace increases, which is a good thing. Focus the battles around higher priority areas (ie keeps about to upgrade). Which should mean more PvP.

Why on earth do you require stability for something as mindnumbingly simple as boss trains or Orr? You barely need to use any other skills than autoattack. If you get knocked back… meh its not like it matters. Just get back up and keep pushing 1111111.

Just curious about the reasons. No need to do a particular build, just pick stand your ground and call it a day.

If its against a boss, you often get tons of buffs from friendlies as well as tons of debuffs on the boss. Feast of Corruption is obviously going to deal a buttload of damage on a boss with 200+ stacks of various conditions covering half the screen, compared to when you solo a single player having 3 bleed stacks and some weakness.

I havent done much PvE with my Necro as I use it mostly for WvW, but for my Mesmer I usually got like 5K hits on iWarlock (if even that)… Which could reach a whooping 15-20K damage on bosses.

Khezekiah Bellamy.5016:

Considering how the upgrades happen automatically, in 3 tiers, and at set times(only sped up by dolyaks) anyone who notices when something flips can know exactly when the upgrades are happening. On top of that, every time an upgrade happens you know those exact upgrades because they are the same as your’s. AND objectives always get a door/wall upgrade or things such as oil and cannons when they do upgrade, anyone can walk by an objective, see one upgrade and know all of the upgrades.

But is that such a bad thing?

Tbh I see nothing bad about this feature. Yes, it means that you can see the more predictable upgrades (the way they upgrade and whether passive or passive+dolyak timings is good in comparison is a whole other discussion). But that also mean you can devise your tactics around them. No longer does precious few scouts need to be everywhere at once in a lootless job just to give you the upgrade status of keeps and upgrade them, they can focus on actually spotting more offensivly and defend the right keep at the right time. Clever people will learn to use the known upgrade statuses against their enemies.

Besides, we already have unofficial tools that pretty much does this already. Lord timers, overlays, time since last capped, etc.

Kaiser.9873:

DiscoJacen.1590:

For instance it is still a GIANT mystery to me why there isn’t a chest spawning when you defend something.

That Anet would not give the same amount of rewards for defending AND capturing is beyond me. Even more dramatic after so long into the game and countless threads on how ppl tend to not defend just to keep farming.

This would do a great deal to solve the KTrain mentality. Also since there are many people that don’t necessarily want more loot from WvW, how about different loot?

For instance take a week and instead of badges of honor make the “badge drops” into dungeon tokens for a particular dungeon instead. You could cycle through with “special events” of different dungeon tokens for the week instead of badges of honor every month or so. May be a terrible idea, but it would be something different.

It would also be easily abused. Just place a character on another server beating a gate and your character inside the keep would have loot raining over him every 3 minute or whatever the timer is. I have gotten plenty of gold defense badges for not even doing anything – or being in a keep for that matter, just having ran past one earlier. That you get a chest when attacking something mean you actually did something, even though your contribution may have been small. You wont get a chest if you dont attack the lord, putting it on exact equal terms as defensive badge.

Giving loot for doing nothing is not a good idea. Improving loot from players is a much better one.

Xillllix.3485:

Not the same system. They need a much better system than the terrible EotM color based system that puts people together randomly.

They need a campaign system with a guesting system, like ESO has. Basically you would have a server, but if your server is full you can guest on a server of the same alliance with a loot penalty and lack of reward, just for fights. You can only guest on 1 server per week. (so you have a guest server and a home server)

The only reason EotM is a useless Karma train is because they have removed it from the PPT score and made the walls non-upgradable.

How would an ESO guesting system solve stubborn players? T1/2 servers arent full even if the population stats says they are, players are more than willing to sit in 50 man queues to EB when all 3 borders are empty. Players go where commanders are, end of story. Why would they guest another server… unless that has a commander and is queued?

EoTM is indeed terrible, but it only works because its random.

Hahaha no.

The cloth physics was already there 3 years ago, the wings add nothing new. While many armor pieces are indeed static, most notably it can be seen on the winged armor leggings.

Current meta? What has changed to make sPvP not suck for anything but random romps when bored with something else?

sPvP has two main problems – the gameplay mode locking people down and the fact they can never balance it due to way GW2 combat mechanics works using power and condi. It cant do anything but fail. The rewards was needed but it didnt change anything.

Condi works exceptionally poor in PvE considering Necros is good for squirting out lots of various conditions, but not so high stack counts. Its also pointless for zerging since you want burst damage, not condi attrition.The build you seek doesnt exist where you are looking. Power zerker is the only one that does ok in all scenarios (yeah you can even roam as 4 well bomber, lol. Not ideal, but it works).

Darkness.9732:

And you play guardian. Immagine who plays ranger….
This game is far from being balanced. And many players are quitting it for this reason.

Why should Ranger have a problem? Since trapper they have more stealth than both Mesmer and Thief.

TexZero.7910:

Dawdler.8521:

Steelo.4597:

“I am getting a bit tired of seeing this line thrown about. There exist lots of PvE in WvW, if you removed it, WvW wouldn’t work at all, since it is designed to be a hybrid between pure PvP and PvE. Remove all guards and lords, and dolyaks and enjoy the map.”

no problem there, camps would have to generate supplies in towers / keeps directly (while still granting to players) and wvw would play out exactly the same except for the npc you kill before capping and the loot you get. the pve is pretty irrelevant for wvw, the npcs only matter a bit if you are running solo.

You always begin solo if you join an empty border to roam. Which will happen no matter the tier you are in.

Some PvE aspects are needed to keep WvW from being boring to anything but a 50 man zerg or guild raids. NPCs are also critical in giving you warnings about player movement around their camps and keeps. No NPCs at camps mean no one could even try to protect them from small groups, they’ll just flip.

Removing features from a gamemode people enjoy usually isnt a good idea. I have enough reservations about the new border to even consider making WvW glorified sPvP.

And none of this has any bearing on the fact that i said

“We dont need MORE PvE in WvW”

We legitimately need LESS as to actually actively promote people getting out of the keeps for a change. Make them interact with the map and the players in a meaningful way.

Adding a farce of a “Win-State” determined by killing a PvE mob, does nothing to add to gameplay.

I mean lets look at Eternal Borderland for example. There’s 4 Champions that spawn, Hylek, Harpy, Grub, Arboreal Tree Spirit. How often do people go out of there way to kill these unless there’s absolutely no one around ?

They add no value to gameplay and in fact only take away from it as it requires that people move to places of low traffic and kill a creature who has no impact on the map or the objectives that players should be fighting over.

You didnt say what I quoted and what I responded to.

Saying it doesnt add to gameplay is like saying meatballs in spaghetti&meatballs doesnt add anything to the meal. Sure you may absolutely love spaghetti and only eat that, but many people like the complete package and no matter how you look at it the meal would be less if you remove them. I cant argue with you there. Maybe for you NPCs doesnt add anything to gameplay.

Personally I think WvW would be empty without them. Yes, even the champions. They are completely pointless and rarely killed, but they make the maps seem more alive rather than just a terrain map with some static objects that’s in the way of players fighting.

Steelo.4597:

“I am getting a bit tired of seeing this line thrown about. There exist lots of PvE in WvW, if you removed it, WvW wouldn’t work at all, since it is designed to be a hybrid between pure PvP and PvE. Remove all guards and lords, and dolyaks and enjoy the map.”

no problem there, camps would have to generate supplies in towers / keeps directly (while still granting to players) and wvw would play out exactly the same except for the npc you kill before capping and the loot you get. the pve is pretty irrelevant for wvw, the npcs only matter a bit if you are running solo.

You always begin solo if you join an empty border to roam. Which will happen no matter the tier you are in.

Some PvE aspects are needed to keep WvW from being boring to anything but a 50 man zerg or guild raids. NPCs are also critical in giving you warnings about player movement around their camps and keeps. No NPCs at camps mean no one could even try to protect them from small groups, they’ll just flip.

Removing features from a gamemode people enjoy usually isnt a good idea. I have enough reservations about the new border to even consider making WvW glorified sPvP.

Pff who cares about the meta? My guardian has almost 30K HP and I still kill things! Eventually. After like several minutes. Preferably with the help of others. Alot of others.

You can expect issues with Windows 10 for at least 8 months, lol.
But I suppose its decent enough to use anyway.

Vydahr.4285:

The way I see it, Lich is heavy artillery. Hits hard, but needs good positioning and/or defensive support. If you have a guardian or an ele (or both) passively assisting you, Lich works well. If you don’t have that support, or if you need to support others, Plague is the way to go

The Necro itself is the heavy artillery. When you go into Lichform, you loose that and become a .50 cal sniper rifle… that has the visibility and mobility of an elephant.

No really, try going 1v20 (find any guild group and rush them head on). Do it as Lich and do it as Necro. I think you will find that wellbomb is far more effective artillery. If Lich is better, at least I got you to 1v20.

Pikka.6023:

With this you can also allow Alliances to prefer Sparse, Moderate, or Dense WvW population loading for the match-ups they receive each week.

Lol, how did you plan that to work? FFA matchmaking, like an lfg?

Oh you have a small 1000 man alliance, looking for sparse fights with similar alliances… Sorry, you only got two opponents left, the other matchups are already set. GLHF fighting these 20,000 man and 30,000 man alliances prefering dense fights.

Tiered glicko matchmaking is a kitten, but kitten if I know a better solution. ESO style alliances does not work with current GW2 instance limitations. FFA EoTM we can all agree is kitten for competetive teamplay.

gavyne.6847:

ESO added relic gameplay, I’m really surprised GW2 haven’t.

GW2 did have it before ESO. It was broken, Anet disabled it, promised to return the feature, went completely quiet about it… then introduced the ruins and quietly wiped all trace of the orbs ever existing.

The area behind north camp was once a big ramp with guard NPCs, holding an orb that you had to carry to bay (cant remember if it was hills as well). That “relic” is part of the reason borders look like they do.

Lich in small group (like, not even 5, more like 2-3 people), plague in anything above. Lich is like painting a huge bullseye on yourself while considerably reducing your flexibility in movement and skill usage. Only when a zerg bomb group decide that all use lich will I use it. Otherwise, plague is for an extra stunbreaker/stability. Its long cooldown for such simple usage (because it sure is worthless for damage), but if you arent going to use lich… well then there is nothing else anyway. Golem is fairly pointless in WvW (it could have been of some use in 1v1 if the AI wasnt completely braindead).

Mireles Lore.5942:

Well it just got that much harder to move guild members in other servers into Yak’s Bend that want to experience WvW with their friends. Give people another reason not to want to WvW.

Anet seems to have tunnel vision when it comes to metrics. Yeah this might make since on paper but people forget that people have a choice not to play WvW and are more likely not to play if they can’t play with their friends.

I see some players constantly posting how to make WvW more popular. Making it harder to get your friends together to play this mode is going to make it less popular. They will play another mode or a game they can play together.

Its just another reason highlighting how fundamentally WvW and the server system is broken and Anet has no idea how to fix it. Anet is leaving it to the player base to achieve balance. When has that ever worked?

Being able to join the guild that you want is a core part of WvW, but on the other hand… full is full. You have to draw a line somewhere. You may look from it from a “but its only my buddy!” perspective, but if all the guilds and players on a server started argue that they want to bring in just one more it would be chaos. We already knew that GW2 servers had limited slots before. All you can hope for is that players move away from the server.

If population is based on WvW activity, it should be much more dynamic. I mean before a guild could disband and stop playing and the server population probably wouldnt budge. If they do that now, it should be a significant drop in activity even if several of them join other guilds. But I dont know if Anet mentioned somewhere on the update frequency here. If the stats dont update until next year then meh. If it update every other reset you might see movement on some servers.

probably placebo. I bet that just as many people can come here and say that mf give less exotics or that they salvaged 10 rares and got no ectos since the patch.

So OP as a Thief faced the class that counters Thief easily due to heavy AoE and thus, its OP… when fighting 3 of them. Good thinking there. Really logical.

I am sure OP would have done better facing 3 rampage Warriors or 3 Guardians putting 40 stacks of burning on him. Or 3 Mesmers killing him before the next frame updates.

I thought buff Moa was the obvious point.

Xillllix.3485:

ESO has a guesting system for WvW, and the amount of server campaigns are created according to the population of the previous campaigns. That way no maps are empty, there are no transfer cost, and you can play with all your friends.

ESO campaigns was designed for 2000 players. Guesting in WvW would take a significant percentage of the native population. 10 people guesting EB and that’s like 15% of the population. In ESO it wouldnt even be noticable. It would also dilute server pride, just look at EoTM.

I could imagine something similar to ESO alliances instead of servers, but you have to realize that the ONE GW2 server community today is hard enough to manage. Imagine if we had say… 3 in 1 (ie an entire tier). Using TS would become cumbersome (that’s going to be alot of people on a community run TS). You would need at least 4-5 more borders to spread out the population, which open up a whole heap of coverage issues. I fail to see how it would be any better than what we have now.

If WvW maps supported a larger amount of people so that entire WvW would be just half a dozen maps, it would be possible to have alliances the size of current GW2 servers fighting it out (sort of like EoTM lumping servers together in 3 teams, but giving us the freedom of movement like in WvW which would enable individual server communities to join a specific border). But they dont and they never will.

Ravenmoon.5318:

Here’s another funfact about current state of graphics (unless you have G/Free-Sync GPU/screen). Did you know that when your fps goes below 60 fps, even if it is 55, your screen automatically goes down to 30Hz refresh rate? Thus tearing without V-Sync.

That’s when you have kittenty ingame Vsync enabled. Stock Vsync is completely obsolete technology and has been for many years, IMO games should stop adding that stupid option. It does no one any good. Also that’s 30fps, not hz. Your hz stay the same. Fps will always half when dropping beneath the even threshold (120/60/30/15 etc).

You either want to use dynamic Vsync (I think AMD has something like this now, Nvidia call it Adaptive Vsync) or a frame rate limiter. Most good engines have built in frame rate limiters instead of kittenty vsync. As long as they run in exclusive fullscreen mode (like GW2 does) you can force Nvidia/AMD settings.

ceanonmurchadh.1368:

Is it possible for someone to explain what “Light Adaptation” actually does? I have played around with it, but from my point of view all it does is lessen the contrast, and then not even always.

Could it be just another word for an HDR setting? I havent really checked out the new options.

SkyShroud.2865:

anet has made it clear. players has to destack the servers, spread across all servers and obtain a variety of matchup. it should have be been designed this way from the beginning anyway.

Why would you ever want to destack servers? If anything, this is great for showing which servers that should be completely abandoned by the community so that we can finally kill an entire tier (or two) and stack upwards. Move from lowest tier medium pop to highest medium pop, until that start going high/very high/full. Then move on to the next highest medium. Ideally we would achieve very high or full on all servers except the dead ones.

The lowest tier servers are stuck in glicko hell anyway.

There are currently no WvW population less than “medium” on any server (both EU and NA).

Guess as is well with the WvW populations, lowest tier got lots of people.

Well if you want healer/support, you got the option of Guardian or Elementalist. Some classes can output some considerable heals (Mesmer mantras or Necromancer DS healer) but they sort of distract from their main purpose in WvW. For Guardian it comes naturally with more tanky frontline builds and Elementalist dont even need to build for it since they use AoE fields other blast in. Try them out, see what you like.

Hvaran.6327:

correct me if i’m wrong, changes that are mentioned in this thread are coming today, right? Tuesday, because when dev was writing “tomorrow” it was tuesday in east europe

(so and the lag changes coming too)

Patches are always on a tuesday (unless its a follow up patch because the tuesday patch broke something). Usually around 18:00 CET in my experience, give or take an hour or two.

Thieves have always had higher damage output in WvW due to the way the PvP amulets limit stat combos and use of stacks, WvW bonuses etc. Anet only balance the game for PvP.