Best fight I ever had was my little thief friend from BULL who introduced me to duelling, although he confused the heck out of me that first time by not killing me and then bowing.
Great chats long after. Cheers to making a new friend.
… when you purposely do not tick poorly placed siege or normal siege so it will despawn and replace it with superiors
No that’s being a snob, lol.
Superior is preferred, but never discourage anyone from building. There are too few of us. Big deal, regular siege. Build a superior beside it and refresh both.
Take the time to teach if you can do it gently and patiently.
Which brings me to:
A good scout is endlessly patient and willing to teach anyone who’s interested.
This whole discussion about duels and so many morally ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ things people should consider when in WvW just proves the point that duels shouldn’t happen in WvW map.
Suggestion like: “if you see people bow it’s duel” is useless if you run into 2 people already fighting.
It’s a battleground – red it’s hostile.
Sure there are ‘spots’ that are kinda known duel spots, but why should everyone playing WvW care about that and keep in mind and always have dilemma whether to jump in to some fight or not when passing those areas?
If you can’t respect another player’s way of playing wvw, why should they respect yours? Are they throwing themselves against empty tower gates and preventing you from using your rams?
Why should everyone care about flipping towers or keeps? Are they throwing themselves against empty tower gates and blocking your rams?
If it’s not affecting your game play, leave them be.
Since you put it this way, then if there’s someone not respecting someone then it’s duellers taking spots on map that is about flipping towers and keeps and generally making confusion among some players passing by. It’s affecting everyone’s gameplay on map, if we gonna go so far.
How so? They’re not flipping towers, they leave you to do that to your heart’s content. And you can no longer claim they’re taking up map space.
So praytell, how are they preventing you, personally, from playing how you like?
This whole discussion about duels and so many morally ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ things people should consider when in WvW just proves the point that duels shouldn’t happen in WvW map.
Suggestion like: “if you see people bow it’s duel” is useless if you run into 2 people already fighting.
It’s a battleground – red it’s hostile.
Sure there are ‘spots’ that are kinda known duel spots, but why should everyone playing WvW care about that and keep in mind and always have dilemma whether to jump in to some fight or not when passing those areas?
If you can’t respect another player’s way of playing wvw, why should they respect yours?
Why should everyone care about flipping towers or keeps?
If it’s not affecting your game play, leave them be.
Actually I totally agree with you on catas. I was surprised when I logged in yesterday to see how fast/powerful they were, compared to even six months ago.
I think it’s a tiny bit unreasonable that three of us on two superior catas managed to get a T3 wall down to 20% in a couple of quick minutes.
Catas need a relook I think.
Actually it’s the T3 walls that had their health reduced at some point (T2 and T1 remain the same). Catapults still do the same damage they did since the WvW ranks masteries were added.
Great.
They need to take a look at that then. At the very least it should be a reasonably steady horse race to get the wall down/kill the cata to make it fair.
They barely hit that spot if you throw it right. Unless there is like 10+ staff eles, you are likely to be able to man the AC and kill the catas from that spot without even needing a shield generator. Walls with staircases are pretty much the only walls where you can place ACs because they are wide enough to Meteor Shower.
Good joke – they had that wall down in 1,5 minutes.
ETA: An AC takes 3 to 4 times as long to get an cata out. Now we also have repair hammers and like I siad; I was unable to hold it out long enough to throw a disabler, but even then we wouldn’t have any chance.
Actually I totally agree with you on catas. I was surprised when I logged in yesterday to see how fast/powerful they were, compared to even six months ago.
I think it’s a tiny bit unreasonable that three of us on two superior catas managed to get a T3 wall down to 20% in a couple of quick minutes.
Isn’t it without siege anyway already? Just need a few necros and eles and all walls are clear within seconds.
Screenshot: I couldn’t even throw a disabler as I had to dodge non stop.
There’s a core group that plays NA time on Piken each evening. They always always always make me laugh. One Dutch commander jumps in a golem and solos towers and doesn’t care if anyone follows him or not. It’s probably why I’ll never leave Piken, there’s so many .. um .. characters
I remember when everyone laughed at my poor original condition Mesmer. They scoffed at the build. Lol.
You know, I’m now on an opposing server to you. Most definitely not going to entertain the possibility of duels after this comment.
Awww c`mon! I haven’t played in months, I’m total crap now. You could down me easily.
Sniff.
My point was that I used condi build at launch of GW2 and while it wasn’t optimal, it fit my playstyle. And everyone was like “you’re using condi on a mesmer?!!” … and now I find it mildly amusing that’s all people run now.
Most games are a 20-30 minute match, then it repeats. WvW can be hours of continous fighting.
Fondest memory is still the early days when we had 4+ hour battles in garrison. No other maps, no running around other places, just hours upon hours of 3 entire servers fighting over the same objective because defenders kept bannering the lord, lol.
I actually reverted my Mesmer to vanilla and find I play better. Perhaps it just fits my play style. I have no issue with hot elites. Except Rangers. They’re my new thiefs to master, lol
Any rangers reading this, whisper me in games for duels pls.
I have angst that we end up in the same horrible situation as NA where three server are are so dominant that they almost never can fall down. I have been always quite happy that EU was different and the first 10 servers were very close.
Now we have for sure two dinos in EU: FSP and JS. VZ can maybe join the club of dinos.
In a perfect world they would have implemented and tested this in NA only, as it was mostly an NA issue, because EU was fine (and fun) prior.
Perhaps they can still consider this. EU will spread back out again if they did.
Meanwhile CU, predecessor to DAoC that GW2 wvw is based of off, is running a 3 faction game, 10 unique classes per side built solely for rvr and pvp, an engine that an handle up to 500 players in one space while maintaining 30 fps, one map without instances and load screens… and a whole lot of other stuff…
So tell me more that it’s the players fault for any of the design choices and issues here?
lol something tells me you didn’t play CU this past weekend. It was just exploring, running around, and it crashed with 100 people on map. Not even fighting.
Chatter in map chat was about FPS/latency and oh wow what’s going to happen when you get more than 100 people actually fighting in one spot?
or you can just deflect and keep blaming players lol…
kinda like you just did?
You failed to respond to the spirit of the post and instead decided to comment on a game still in the alpha state of development…
I’m sorry that you can’t respond in civil ways and instead just deflect. You can keep blaming players for the wvw balance issues if that makes you feel good, but that doesn’t make you right.
I’ll respond again when you can actually carry a decent conversation…
I believe I responded directly to your post and even quoted you and the relevant material. I would recommend you just not respond to anything I post as you seem to have a very different set of rules for yourself than you do for everyone else. And you wind up derailing threads with arguments about dichotomy.
Any time I hear someone reference EVE, I recall long, drama-filled stories about people manipulating the system to their own benefit and not caring about anyone else but themselves or their immediate circle.
Which is nice, but irrelevant, and doesn’t alter that games like EVE that don’t have individual servers can have stronger communities than games like this with separate worlds/servers, and therefore the idea there is no community/identity without being attached to a world/server is utter nonsense.
Ok, how are you going to prevent faction bandwagonning/stacking? How will factions prevent people from doing exactly what they’ve been doing with the server system?
If you cannot prevent stacking, then what’s the point of factions? It’ll result in the same situation, just with different lipstick.
Under some systems you don’t need balanced populations as much, because those systems can handle the negative effects on the gameplay much better.
For example if you have a game like ESO with 3 factions that uses a campaign system, where players/guilds choose one campaign of several to join for the duration of the matchup, then if say the red faction overall has the least players, it can still get fun competitive matchups by stacking a couple of campaigns and have the same numbers in those campaigns as the more populous factions.
It also has other advantages, in that guilds that like to fight can all join a certain campaign, those that like to do the equivalent of PPT can join a certain campaign, those that like a sparsely populated type of gameplay can go join a low population campaign, etc, all things WvW struggles with due to its rigid system.
Now if you want a system that produces better population balance, one example is you can use an alliance system of guilds, you prevent stacking by limiting the max numbers in a guild, solo players can get assigned to a general alliance guild based on their friendlist, etc, this way you are dealing with much smaller units and can dynamically assign players/guilds to an alliance for each matchup, to provide a more balanced match, obviously in a system like that identity/community is built around guilds, much in the way it is in WvW for a lot of players whose “loyalty” is to their guild, not whichever server they happen to be on at that time.
And how well is ESO doing? And if it’s superior, why are you here?
Your proposition for alliance restrictions can be easily employed to the existing server system, without alienating the existing playerbase.
Change for change sake is never a good idea.
The whole solo players can fill in the gaps indicates a basic lack of understanding of wvw GW2 gameplay. Those single players and small guilds are your server’s defense team. Split them up and you’ll get a pve champ train map and nothing else. Both sides need to exist for wvw to work.
What you are proposing STILL doesn’t resolve the core issue: stacking. The end result, as I’ve said, is the same thing with different lipstick. Plus the added bonus of ticking off the loyalists,
In any event, this debate is academic, at best. A poll would best determine results.
And those guilds are all running the DBL? Why? Because all other maps have queues? If so mission accomplished “WE NEED TO THROW MORE PEOPLE AT THE PROBLEMS” – for now at least.
ETA: Yeah, I’m mad – I want my server back how it has been but that ship has sailed long ago, one of our biggest guilds will leave us and we’re the next satelite server when EU is reduced to 4 tiers – because why not, right? MOAR PEOPLE!!
ETA²: But maybe we will circle Piken at some point and this time I’m not standing shy next to you in Lang
You were next to me in Lang? Why didn’t you tell me? I woulda given you a hug
I’m just pleased our guys are doing the lemonade thing and making practical use of the situation. Seems to be working well so far … Nobody’s kvetching about map QQs.
Meanwhile CU, predecessor to DAoC that GW2 wvw is based of off, is running a 3 faction game, 10 unique classes per side built solely for rvr and pvp, an engine that an handle up to 500 players in one space while maintaining 30 fps, one map without instances and load screens… and a whole lot of other stuff…
So tell me more that it’s the players fault for any of the design choices and issues here?
lol something tells me you didn’t play CU this past weekend. It was just exploring, running around, and it crashed with 100 people on map. Not even fighting.
Chatter in map chat was about FPS/latency and oh wow what’s going to happen when you get more than 100 people actually fighting in one spot?
Not really, for example EVE Online is based on player made alliances and has a far stronger, far deeper community than the rather superficial WvW communities will ever have, and as for WvW “communities” please, you are in the minority, most veteran WvW players (those that have not quit) have swapped servers multiple times. (including a fair number of “loyalists” that make up your little community)
Any time I hear someone reference EVE, I recall long, drama-filled stories about people manipulating the system to their own benefit and not caring about anyone else but themselves or their immediate circle.
As does EVE Online, and in all 3 games there are a myriad of reasons why they are still chugging along, claiming that it is down to using an individual server based system in two of them is laughable.
If you think the only way to have “community” in a game is fixed servers, you are misguided, if your “community” is any sort of “community” worthy of the word then it would cope fine with adapting to another system. (not that you need worry, this Anet, they only do band-aids, not actual fixes, which is why WvW is in the state it is in)
And yes factions / alliances of guilds, etc do fix things, because they more flexible systems, you can create balanced matchups far more easily because you are dealing with smaller units, or even if factions are imbalanced you can deal with it better by doing things like campaigns so even the weakest faction can stack a campaign or two and play on an equal footing in those, unlike the joke that is WvW where for most matchups over the course of this game they have been foregone conclusions over by Monday morning simply due to imbalanced numbers or where players have to take a week off because they are in a dead matchup.
Ok, how are you going to prevent faction bandwagonning/stacking? How will factions prevent people from doing exactly what they’ve been doing with the server system?
If you cannot prevent stacking, then what’s the point of factions? It’ll result in the same situation, just with different lipstick.
Population balance is on the players. You can’t put this on Anet. Players have created this issue.
Not really, putting aside any real incentive/disincentive for the bandwagoning aspect, population balance has been an issue at all tiers and goes way beyond “bandwagonning”, in fact imbalances have often been far worse in mid/lower tiers where “bandwagonning” was not really an issue.
The simple fact is server vs server is a bad design for RvR type game mode, factions / alliances are far better because they are far more flexible at producing balanced populations, but also at handling imbalanced populations to give better gameplay, server vs server is literally the worst most inflexible design you can have.
Factions will reduce identity. Loss of identity means less attachment to game. Less attachment to game means players fairweather to other games,
Without community, identity, population balance becomes moot. Because there will be no players.
There’s a reason games like WoW and EQ franchises are still chugging along with paid monthly subs after 10-plus years.
Couple that with the fact that ANY rework of faction/server is useless without resolving bandwaggoning (aka community building/attachment), will result in the same scenario we are in today. Factions in no way will magically fix anything. It will only serve to alienate the loyalists and drive them away.
ANet is in the position to incentivate or force players to balance out, but so far they failed to achieve that.
They tried server caps, then T1 players flooded the forums with complaints. People want instant fixes. This mess took four years to make. It’s not going to magically be remedied overnight.
Yea, but that everyone goes to EB could also mean, that this is the map-type and the playstyle the “average” wvw player enjoys the most and the majority of the players may want to play it. Everyone likes different things. But we cannot expect arenanet to adapt to our personal wishes if they do not represent the wishes of the majority of players.
This always confused me, if EBG is the most popular map/style, why is it 1 EBG map and 3 Borderland maps ? Seems so backward.
Always thought it would be better with 3 EBG maps, and a single Borderland map that is actual 3 ways, but gives a fairly easy defensible home area, and some stuff inbetween “border areas” to fight for.
The cachet of only one team owning stone mist. Otherwise it’s just a bigger Garrison.
To those predicting that no-one will run on the DBL, I’ve been running with a squad of around 40 on the DBL for a while now.
OTOH the changes to the wall around the rampart lord are utterly ridiculous and give the defending team an unfair advantage.
I will give them credit for opening up two more stairways to the lord. I had been part of many a Mexican standoff up there both attacking and defending. While those were fun, it often decayed into an arrow cart pirate ship battle.
I’m not really opposed to defenders having an advantage.
There really SHOULD be an advantage for defenders on the home map, however minimal. Keeps shouldn’t be a cakewalk.
Maybe Arena net should scrap the “Home borderland” concept and try make maps that are suposed to work in thirds (Like EBG or even EotM). Most activity in EBG tend to be around SMC. People flock to that one different thing that neither side have.
I’m pretty sure the desert borderland was also created with the thirds concept in mind (thus why the towers/keeps had the WP tied to the server that spawned at that side), but since people still had the ABL “Homeland” mentality, DBL ended up making a poor job (discount all the sheer hate for DBL).
Naw people wanted their own home — with the perks — like WPs to go in for last-minute heroic saves, instead of only being able to be used by the enemy. I personally hated the EB-like division on DBL, and I think it turned off a lot of home defenders too.
EB is EB. While it’s popular, it’s more a cultural thing for that map than the architecture. It’s become the natural evolution of where those new to WvW go to learn, there’s less pressure to defend home turf compared to home bls, so ofc it will always be more popular.
)
