Guild Wars 2

Terrier.8732:

I still reckon a skirmish event that opens a WP in the middle of the oasis for the winner would be fun.. and useful

When a skirmish ends another starts unceremoniously. You wouldn’t even notice unless you opened the WvW panel.

An event to kick off the next skirmish would be nice. The reward could be a waypoint in the Oasis and an extra point-per-finisher until the end of the skirmish.

The red team has an advantage to access the Oasis area. On the other hand they do not have domestic bloodlust and an enemy waypoint in the middle of the map would put the northern parts of the map in danger.

Thea Cherry.6327:

Korgov.7645:

Thea Cherry.6327:

Btw. how good 2-1-1 works can be seen atm in the BB – Piken – Kodash MU.

BB is second, with 19 first places 16 second places while Kodash is last with 13 first and 33 second places.

Mmm 2-1-1 is soooooooo rewarding. Not.

Finally someone who is actually looking at scores and not just expressing beliefs.

You just didn’t look close enough.

As you can see BB has won the 00-08 skirmishes almost every day. It’s called nightcapping. However Piken has been able to recover from 08 onwards, not leaving the PPT tick for BB all day.

Kodash won the reset skirmishes, Saturday noon skirmishes and 2 more on Monday’s prime time. And after that no more wins. Weekend warriors got their morale broken?

Actually it’s been this way the past 2 years or so, the only difference is: while we were able to minimize the loss in the night by playing for second place, with this system it doesn’t matter so the nightcrew has shrinked from max 30+ people to round about max 20. :/

Well, nightcapping will never be fixed and BB will always be a nightcapping server.

Btw. why is BB full and you rarely see more than 10 people during the day?

Maybe it is time to update your 2 years old strategy and play for the win instead of for the second place? :P

The skirmishes were a good attempt to diminish the effects of nightcapping. Unfortunately the increase in PTT worked the opposite. Luckily for your matchup Piken has been able to stop the PPT ticking in the mornings.

I think BB is playing their strengths here: let the other teams fight over the prime time, then night cap, and hope other teams cannot recover until next prime time.

Sarrs.4831:

Korgov.7645:

Suggestion: Let the siegemasters sell the upgrades for Badges of Honor.

let the siegemasters sell the flax fibres for badges of honor!

Why jump the extra loops to buy Flax Fibers with Badges of Honor, craft Flax Fibers into Linen Supply Sacks, craft Linen Supply Sacks into Bags of Energy, craft Bags of Energy into Schematics, put Schematics into Assembly Device?

+1

The main source of Flax Fibers are the 2 farm locations in PvE maps. Farm locations are in Verdant Brink and Tangled Depth. These are places where players park their alt characters to login, gather and logout every day. How fun and engaging gameplay is that?

The main target of Flax Fibers is the WvW upgrades. All WvW guilds’ scribes are constantly asking for more Flax Fibers to keep the guild’s warchest filled.

I refuse to go to PvE and farm, and the syntheziers in WvW don’t provide Flax Fibers. So I have to buy them from the Trading Post. It is a gold transfer from WvW players to PvE farmers.

I want WvW to be a self-sufficent game mode. Flax Fibers are a main offender.

Suggestion: Let the siegemasters sell the upgrades for Badges of Honor.

Thea Cherry.6327:

Btw. how good 2-1-1 works can be seen atm in the BB – Piken – Kodash MU.

BB is second, with 19 first places 16 second places while Kodash is last with 13 first and 33 second places.

Mmm 2-1-1 is soooooooo rewarding. Not.

Finally someone who is actually looking at scores and not just expressing beliefs.

You just didn’t look close enough.

As you can see BB has won the 00-08 skirmishes almost every day. It’s called nightcapping. However Piken has been able to recover from 08 onwards, not leaving the PPT tick for BB all day.

Kodash won the reset skirmishes, Saturday noon skirmishes and 2 more on Monday’s prime time. And after that no more wins. Weekend warriors got their morale broken?

Rashagar.8349:

If you can anticipate the arrival of zergs I find traps very helpful in lag situations, especially in sm. Don’t put them all in one place, scatter them about likely areas and then when they’re tripped or you’re bored, amidst your autoattacks try placing more traps wherever you happen to be while you’re running around blindly hoping you don’t die, since it doesn’t really matter when you actually use the skill and the other servers are also likely running around blindly hoping they don’t die.

Aye. Traps seem ideal for lag fights. No need for a target in range, no timing needed.

Guardian’s Wave of Wraft is also well suited for skill lag fights – short range auto-attack AoE requiring no target to be in range.

Namer.9750:

Korgov.7645:

We all are painfully aware of the lag, don’t like it, and wish it never existed in the first place.

If I may side track the discussion a bit:

Which prof and build is the most resilient against skill lag? Can it still do any damage? Could you assemble a squad of those and be successful?

This isn’t sidetracking the discussion. This is what the discussion SHOULD be, instead of whining and crying about something that can’t be fixed and refusing to understand why it can’t be fixed.

I’ve found that, well, in skill lag your opponents are having pretty much the same lag as you are. The easiest thing to do is to grab as many hammer warriors as possible, gear them up to like 25k hp and 3k armour, and go ham. Indeed, the idea of ‘hammer train’ came from this. In 2017, a hammer train also needs tanky frontline Reapers to strip enemy boons, however much as possible amidst skill lag, for maximum impact.

High vitality and toughness, passive healing and condition cleanse. Warriors have a lot going for them in skill lag fights. Hammer implies stuns, but the enemies are already effectively dazed due the lag.

Swamurabi.7890:

For scoring I’d recommend pi/e/i as the new values.

I agree scoring discussion seems pointless at this time. The game mode is struggling with the very reason to play for the win. You could put any numbers on the match score when nobody cares for the result.

Giddy up the population rebalancing, fix coverage issues, stop linking and manually adjusting ratings. After those we can fine tune scoring.

Xenesis.6389:

Tiny Doom.4380:

heydurian.6459:

moreover anet should focus on" guild "
why this game call guild wars

As I’m sure most people reading these forums are very well aware, the “Guild” in the name “Guild Wars” has absolutely nothing to do with player guilds:

https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/The_Guild_Wars

I often wonder if Anet regret coming up with that name for their MMO. It has caused nothing but confusion ever since the first game was announced.

At first, these were economic organizations, a means for merchants to meet, disseminate goods, and set prices. However, the guilds grew beyond the bounds of mere trade. Soon there were guilds geared toward warfare, religion, magical ability, and even social concerns—in short, any purpose that would bring together a group of people.

It’s called guild wars because of the conflicts between those “guilds”, not really any different than player “guilds”, which have mostly been formed with the same purposes but most of the conflict comes through warfare. Story wise both npc and players guilds would be the same thing, but player guilds are not written in the story other than your character in the living story now building their own “guild”.

While yes the name isn’t about guilds fighting in wvw, it still would have been nice to have support for them in there other than guild upgrades they repackaged into the guild hall.

The guild wars, conflicts between guilds, the one area (ok two if you want to count spvp) where that actually happens for players, is ignored.

Aye. Wouldn’t it be great if player guilds could grow to be such major forces in the game world, and then clash against each other? All the PvE areas being the battlefield. Guilds fortifying borders of the lands they had taken from the wild or other guilds. Unaffiliated having to pick a side or move out of the way.

We all are painfully aware of the lag, don’t like it, and wish it never existed in the first place.

If I may side track the discussion a bit:

Which prof and build is the most resilient against skill lag? Can it still do any damage? Could you assemble a squad of those and be successful?

I feel WvW is lacking a reason to win. Some kind of tournament with rewards might help. However due to loss of world identity, unfairness of linking, population imbalance and coverage issues it is premature to hand out any rewards in WvW.

Your suggestion may work for PvE and sPvP, but WvW is not about individual players.

It is nigh impossible to measure a player’s contribution to the victory. A seasoned scout or commander on field can be a game changer even if they only typed in chat or talked in TS. A pack of zerglings without a commander is as good as finders-keepers lootbags for the enemies. Individual players cannot be credited for PPT which is significant part of your team’s success.

Punishing (reducing rewards) for more players participating is against the foundations of GW2. Players are to be encouraged to take part and welcome more players to join.

As for the balancing, players would probably still rather win with 100% certainty and then take their chances with the contribution ladder. Rather than risk losing the tournament.

DevilishLyx.2340:

Korgov.7645:

BTW megaservers is a curse word for WvW players.

What do you think the server linking is all about?! It’s one step closer to WvW Megaserver! i.e EOTM!

You are right. It is.

When the world linking was introduced it took us all by surprise. It seemed to even out the population disparities and allow low tier worlds to enjoy high activity WvW.

The downsides were discovered later: loss of world identities, easier bandwagoning, guest worlds not caring to play to win, matchups predetermined by ANet manually adjusting links and Glicko ratings, host worlds being carried by links, the leaderboard becoming meaningless. The motivation for teams to win in WvW got eroded away.

That reminds me a lot about EotM where no team tries to win, but hoard as much karma/xp/gold/whatnot as they can.

Swagger.1459:

Korgov.7645:

So factions? That’s been suggested before and shot down for good reasons. Pity these forums do not have a search that works.

BTW megaservers is a curse word for WvW players.

Introducing task specific squads is a fresh idea. I do not want to micromanage my play session hopping between squads according to the task at hand (scout/roam/fight/zerg). Not even if there were few extra green items as rewards.

For example: I am roaming and see a fight nearby. I leave my current squad to join the guild squad fighting before I kill off enemy stragglers. Then I leave the guild squad to join my earlier roaming squad before going to capture nearby supply camp. The camp capture gets interrupted by an enemy zerg coming for resupply. I have to leave my roaming squad to join a scouting squad before I type in the details to map chat.

And it’s obvious the overall wvw populations can’t support a healthy individual server model, hence linking lol

And when CU launches with factions, and wvw dies more, you’ll beg anet to do factions or they will do it out of need.

What does your roaming woes have to do with this? Seems a silly personal issue.

We already have EotM if you want factions. Go see how much fun that is.

Roaming woes? I don’t have any problems with roaming. I was just giving an example what it means to have squads which are purposed for single task only.

CU is an attractive title no matter what happens in GW2. As a WvW player I will be facing at a hard choice when it launches.

Sinmir.6504:

The way the queue works confuses me. I wasn’t going to claim anyway but I was roaming, cleared out a camp solo, while waiting for it to tick over 3 players in a guild joined me in the circle. When it was captured they were given priority to claim. Nothing against leeching, I’ve done it myself if another player from the same server has beaten me to the camp and cleared it out before I got there but putting the ones who leeched ahead in the queue?

The number of players representing a guild taking part in the capture is the deciding factor. 3 players > 1 player.

When the numbers are equal, then I don’t know. Random?

Vova.2640:

literally all it needs is a ‘skip’ button so the next guild can claim..

You can already close the claim window to ‘skip’. The next guild in queue gets to claim immediately.

The OP is complaining about the 10-30 second delay when the other guild(s) do not bother to click ‘skip’.

I don’t see this delay as a major quality of life issue. But I would suggest a small change anyway:

The delay could be reduced by allowing the second and the third guild to express their desire to claim within the 10 first seconds. Their claim would not succeed until the first guild ‘skips’ or the 10 seconds passes. Then the maximum time to wait for the 4th and other guilds to claim would be 10 seconds instead of 30.

There is a limit of 5 revivers at the same time. Each reviving 5% per second, the lord is back on his feet in 4 seconds.

It can happen, but more seasoned players tend to put AoE on the corpse which will put any thieves in combat thus unable to revive.

The lords’ maximum health scales according to number of nearby enemy players. If you have a full zone blob visiting, the lord has millions of health.

Reviving works on percentages of max health:

• Reviving a defeated target gives 1% of total health every 0.2 seconds, for a total of 5% per second. It takes 20 seconds to revive a defeated target.

Source.

Dawdler.8521:

Or you could, you know open it and stack the siege?

How about the developers had to double click every box for us? Those boxes would be changed to blueprints in the very next patch.

Whoever is coding the item management does not play WvW. I have 3k reward track boxes waiting for an Open All option. I so hate those boxes. And that Trading Post’s “you must wait for few minutes to sell next 10 items” when I have a hundred polluting my inventory after a WvW raid.

The best would be giving up on this boxes-inside-boxes-on-top-of-boxes-with-few-more-boxes-on-the-side madness and give us meaningful loot straight up.

I think Oasis waypoint has been suggested before. But it’s not a bad idea at all.

The waypoint needs to be protected from enemy campers and siege fire. On top of a cliff, a tower around it, inside a cave or something like that.

About the bloodlust suggestion: I like it that there is not enough bloodlust for all teams. That creates some competition.

I don’t have statistics but I’d imagine points from finishers are not that significant percentage of the total warscore. Players tend to mindlessly spam ranged AoE skills on enemies , downed or otherwise, and not risk going in for a stomp.

Dawdler.8521:

Korgov.7645:

Sigh. These couple of week we enjoyed 2-1-1. This victory points distribution has potentially many benefits over 3-2-1. But I haven’t seen anyone analyzing the effects. Lot of touchy, feely based opinions only.

Or people saying stuff without really saying anything.

What potential benefits?

Presumed pros such as “well this surely encourage 2 and 3 to focus 1!” has been thoroughly plowed into the ground both in theory by people in the forums and in practice ingame over these weeks.

Care to share the benefits?

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/1-point-for-2nd-and-3rd/first#post6430481

Both losing teams teaming up against the winner is an obvious one. The motivation is not necessarily to win the skirmish yourself, but to make the leading team lose a victory point.

I just haven’t seen that happen. All commanders seem to go about their business as usual: the easiest target is the priority. But that could be because of the linking. Guest servers have nothing to gain by winning a matchup. We just enjoy fighting and winning a fight is more important than gaining Glicko rating for our host server.

There’s been lot of discussion over this and not any hard evidence.

Digikid.7230:

The only reason to go 5-4-3 is to make glicko losses or gains smaller for matchmaking purposes, apart from that it plays out exactly the same as 3-2-1. Was this change really needed? Could have just messed with the glicko system itself and kept 3-2-1 or 2-1-1 and have the same results.

Maybe some simple minded players don’t know they already lost when their victory points show 228v285 instead of 57v114. Then those players don’t get demoralized and keep happily marching towards the inevitable.

Sigh. These couple of week we enjoyed 2-1-1. This victory points distribution has potentially many benefits over 3-2-1. But I haven’t seen anyone analyzing the effects. Lot of touchy, feely based opinions only.

5-4-3 is exactly the same as 3-2-1. Except for the Glicko ratings adjustment part.

We already have the temporary manual adjustments and the world relinking in place. The Glicko volatility and deviation get reset every 2 months. There are only few tiers remaining to matchup. How much more outside help the Glicko system needs?

Or would it be time to stop the linking nonsense, rebalance the world populations for good and then let the ratings evolve on their own volition?

eye floater.7140:

When did mesmers acquire the ability to produce more than 3 clones at a time?

First Chronomancer sets up an attack: Illusionary Leap, Echo of memory, Deja Vu. Now there are 3 illusions up. Mind Wrack shatter will send the illusions walking towards you and they no longer count towards the 3 illusion limit. The illusions will not explode instantly but only after they reach their target. The traits Illusionary Reversion and Chronophantasma re-create one clone and one phantasm and you will briefly see 5 illusions in total.

The shatters have always worked that way. Only the F4 shatter makes the illusions explode instantly.

The Chronomancer trait Time Catches Up helps illusions reach their target in a timely fashion by giving them superspeed. The shattered illusions seem to explode in thin air after a second or two if their target runs away from them.

I did not join my guild for more WXP or more reward track boxes (I so hate those boxes). The incentive for me is to have players I can rely on next to me. Playing WvW together with guild mates is very rewarding on itself.

Don’t the WvW guild missions and Guild WvW Reward Track Boost already cover your suggestion?

reddie.5861:

couldnt give a rats kitten about stealth traps cus i barely ever stealth on thief anyway

How about a Stealth Disruptor Trap also prevents evasion for 30 seconds? :P

Stealth Disruptor Traps are only needed because of Stealth stacking. Both are bad for the game and should be removed.

Yuffi.2430:

One of the problems that I see with the current scoring system is that you can earn warscore by doing nothing because PPT ticks carry on until someone else takes your stuff.

I would like to see a more continuous scoring system so that player actions are valued at all times, not just in time for the tick. I think this happens with PPK, so why not other activities too?

Finally there are some actions that do not gain credit which should do. Destroying siege and repairing objectives are part of this.

The idea behind using WXP is more about bringing WvW scoring together under one simple system that rewards player actions and activity.

PPT is reward for something your team, and not necessarily what you, did in the past. It is essential incentive to defend your team’s objectives.

I agree the whole WXP, warscore, victory points, Glicko rating -system is complex. I find it impossible to know whether my team is winning or losing in the leaderboards unless I leave the game and visit an external website. Due the world linking and especially my server being a guest server, I haven’t even bothered anymore.

If anything I would ditch WXP and WvW ranks. Instead I would credit every player/guild their share of the warscore that they could use for bragging. Leaderboards for players/guild split between types of warscore sources, unique cosmetic rewards for holding/reaching top places and so on. PPT is of course bit of a problem again due its nature to reward the whole team instead of players/guilds.

Yuffi.2430:

Ok, so how do we make the system work? There are enough people who post good ideas here for us to come up with a workable solution.

Let’s start with the problem. You say the problem is that teams do not get warscore for:

• Destroying siege
• Destroying gates/walls
• Repairing gates/walls
• Acquiring/eliminating mercenaries
• Killing the spirit or the grub

I’d say those activities already get rewarded by capturing (PPC) or holding (PPT) nearby objectives. Except for the spirit and the grub, which I don’t feel should be reward warscore anyway.

You may argue that PPC and PPT are not direct enough. That there should be more immediate link between those activities and the warscore. Maybe so.

Wouldn’t the simplest solution be rewarding some warscore for the listed activities?

Yuffi.2430:

As for WXP being gained by every player present at a capture – that’s a good point to raise. Is it really a problem however?

Yes it is. I would advice my team to have 80 players together to kill a sentry near spawn. That’s as much WXP as killing 80 sentries solo.

Same extends to capturing objectives and killing enemy players. 80v1 would be optimal way to play.

Gwaihir.1745:

This wont work for the sole reason WXP is given to everyone at an objective. This would mean forcing everyone to be in the circle for every cap, and the server that can que the map gets exponentially more wxp simply due to more players.

Hear hear. This is the most compelling reason not to use WXP as warscore. It scales by the amount of players present.

Yuffi.2430:

Also – finally – outnumbered buff might have some real meaning (25% extra WXP would mean more score when outnumbered).

Score bias due low coverage is unfair. It can be meta-played: “only guild X is allowed to enter this map to get the outnumbered buff”. Score bias is also demeaning for the low population server: you get carried by the bias and not by your own skill. And score bias is unfair for the high population server: despite all the effort put in, the other servers get same amount of score by just playing less.

Just say no to score bias.

Vova.2640:

Literally no point for any off-peak players on smaller servers to play anymore.
If you don’t come first, you might as well just go play something else.

That was true with 3-2-1 system when both the 1st and the 2nd server attacked the weakest server together.

Now the weakest server (after finding it impossible to win the current skirmish) can play as a kingmaker or can build up momentum for the next skirmish by upgrading its objectives.

There would be no incentive to hold objectives (PPT and unescorted dolyak deliveries do not yield WXP). Therefore nobody would defend anything.

You may suggest multiplying WXP for defending to encourage defending. In which case nobody would attack in fear of giving defenders lots of warscore.

It is very hard to give a fair (WXP) reward for defensive activities like: scouting, timely use of siege, disablers, opening emergency waypoint, rallying breakout force and so on. Except for the PTT gained by being able to hold on to the defended objective little while longer.

Also any WXP gained in EotM should never count towards warscore.

Lord of Rings.5371:

Why not 1 for the winner and 0 for others?

The 1 in 2-1-1 only marks the passing of time and everyone gets it even for not playing.

All teams need some victory points for fair adjustment of Glicko ratings after the matchup. Even though the ratings no longer reflect the strength of servers nor anything else for that matter.

Guardian

• Piercing Light: This trait no longer causes traps to daze enemies and will instead inflict slow on enemies for 1.5 seconds on the initial trigger of a trap.

It is a nerf for DHs of course. Seeing how powerful DHs are in ZvZ, WvW professions are ever so slightly more balanced now.

There are 2 benefits for 2-1-1 victory points over 3-2-1 victory points:

1. There is no incentive to fight for the 2nd place in a skirmish.
2. Both losing teams will be at equal position to catch up.

There are 2 downsides too:

1. Glicko rating rewards for the losing teams will not reflect their relative strengths.
2. The matchup can be decided earlier into the week (halfway instead of 2/3rds).

I see this as an excellent change. Thumbs up. Maybe now we will really see the ebb and flow of 3-way warfare instead of lopsided, stale matchups.

However the Glicko rating rewards may need adjusting in far future. Right now Glicko doesn’t mean a thing due ANet manually changing the ratings and the world linking artificially changing teams’ strengths every 2 months. Once the world linking ends and the server populations get rebalanced, the leaderboard becomes meaningful again.

The yet unreleased Last Stand feature could make the last day of the matchup significant. On the other hand it could make Friday too exhausting. First you need to giddy up 24 hours to secure the matchup victory. Then comes the reset and you need to up your game to strike fear and hopelessness to the enemies of the next matchup. That’s a long play session that.

I would like to see Stealth Disruptor Trap removed from WvW as well.

The trap is meant to counter thieves hiding in objectives. The trap is also needed to counter trolling thieves. Both activities require thief to maintain 100% stealth uptime. Which can be achieved by stealth stacking: repeated leap combos through a smoke field.

Unfortunately the trap is an awkward mechanism – both from trapper’s and thief’s point of view. Trapper has to visit a vendor to buy it, open inventory and spend supplies to use it, trap has long set up time, it is locked to specific location and you can only place one trap at a time (competing with supply traps). Thief has no counter for the trap and if triggered the thief is stripped from defensive and offensive abilities for 30 seconds.

Let’s fix the root problem instead: remove Stealth stacking. Now there is no need for the Stealth Disruptor Trap and it can be removed as well.

So Factions with free choice of color?

K-training should not be a problem however once players and guilds realise there is good experience to be gained train-wrecking.

What would prevent players all choosing red team, and then k-training otherwise empty maps? Train wrecking pales in comparison to all-maps-uni-color-T3-PPT.

Taobella.6597:

But to fix the problem is not to add physical damage to traps. it lower stealth time trapper rune set. would be enough to mess the build make it a lot harder to play.

Ghost thief does not even use the Trapper runes. Ghost thief gets 100% stealth uptime from stacking leaps through a smoke field.

Easy fix is to prevent Stealth stacking.

A ghost thief would become visible at some point allowing the enemy to attack him back. This would also mean dagger-pistol thief does not automatically win every duel against any other thief weapon combination.

Sounds a lot like Diku’s Globes.

Let PvE developers develop. The content is uninteresting anyway. Nobody will play it when the new content arrives with better rewards.

BlaqueFyre.5678:

Learn what exploit means, it is not an exploit. Yes it shouldn’t exist but then no other class should be able to apply conditions while stealthed like Druids, Scrappers, Mesmers and so on.

Mesmers cannot apply conditions while remaining in stealth. Except for illusions auto-attacking but then again those illusions would not be in stealth.

Svarty.8019:

Svarty.8019:

• I would advise against developing a system to award more Warscore for holding higher tier objectives as this will reward an already dominant world.

Self-quoting because of the new patch… and…

I love to say I told you so.

One of the goals of skirmishes is to reduce the importance of off-hour coverage (nightcapping). The increase in PPT does the exact opposite. I’m not sure which way ANet wants to go.

Vavume.8065:

Jayne.9251:

Justine.6351:

Jayne.9251:

ESO has been f2p for 7 months.

pretty sure its b2p with an optional subscription.

Regardless, it’s still a terrible game.

Copying a terrible game would explain why this new name plates thing is terrible, I mean really, it’s like a child thought of it, my server is currently red, I see allies with green guild tags and red spots above head, I see enemy’s with red guild tag and green spots above head or blue spots, it looks like something they knocked up in 5 mins. Try harder Anet.

Just to clarify, I will never use it.

The red dots on friendly players and green on enemies was too much of a culture shock for me, too. I have turned off this feature and will advice everyone else to do so.

I do like the simplicity. If only the coloring was consistent.

Suggestion:

• use different symbol for each team and keep the normal coloring
• remove guild tag from pet and NPCs nameplates (they are not your guild members)
• align guild text center (looks like the guild text is little to right from the center)

Please no. I do not want anyone trying WvW told off siege because she does not have the masteries maxed out. New players are already at serious disadvantage in WvW.

I would rather have WvW masteries baseline for all players or removed completely.

Players want progression but it should all be horizontal/cosmetic/glory. Quality-of-life progression is also not acceptable. Unless it is for supporting the aforementioned horizontal progression. For examples build saver, blueprint wallet, common name across alts, stat/upgrades selector for gear.

Aury.1367:

My suggestion to avoid this:
Make server transfers only possible 2 week BEFORE the new serverlinking is happening, like an open transfer-window for 1 week. So people have to decide while a Matchup is up, not when they see where they get most of the loot right after re-linking.

So players may have to wait 2 months before allowed to transfer to the server where their guild mates are? Don’t you think that’s a bit too harsh?

There is known issue tracker where you can follow up on progress on fixing bugs:

https://help.guildwars2.com/hc/en-us/articles/231272908-Known-Issue-Tracker

Unfortunately everything in WvW falls under category “minor issues unlikely to impact most players”. If you could just reproduce and report the issue in PvE context it would get the attention it deserves.

Problem with your kill green players progression: green team would downplay to make sure some other team is on top and then spawn camp them. Defending any objectives would be counter productive.

Jayne.9251:

I raise you that and add unique server armour and weapons.

I raise you +10% damage bonus for a full set. There will be riots on PvE forums. :P

Adding bloodlust ruins to the Oasis a bit unimaginative.

The mega laser was terrible, so whatever happens don’t bring it back.

I would propose adding a tower in the Oasis. The kind that grants an easy path to attack the earth keep. For example access to an elevated position for a trebuchet which can be defended from the tower. Or to a tunnel below the keep which can also be used by the south camp dolyak to supply the keep.