Guild Wars 2

Reward pips for actively accomplishing things in wvw instead of passive things like wvw rank or the outnumbered buff. Moreover, so long as pips continue to be tied to the world’s most lenient participation mechanic, AFKHeroes taking up que spots will continue to reign.

Escort a dolyak? Get a pip.
Take a camp? Get a pip.
Kill at least 1 opposing player in the span of a 5min skirmish? Get a pip.
Take a tower? Get two pips.
Take a keep? Get three pips.
Take a T3 keep? Get seven pips.
Defend objectives? Get pips.

~ Kovu

Lahmia.2193:

Kovu.7560:

2 second increase to be able to blast finish your own water or ice fields?
I wish my ranger had a blast finisher on their weapon bar (or at all) on a 6s c/d. Instead we got some mediocre changes to a garbage weapon option, half of it only in pvp.

Staff ele just got better. Be happy.

~ Kovu

Umm what?

Bolded for clarification.

~ Kovu

2 second increase to be able to blast finish your own water or ice fields?
I wish my ranger had a blast finisher on their weapon bar (or at all) on a 6s c/d. Instead we got some mediocre changes to a garbage weapon option, half of it only in pvp.

Staff ele just got better. Be happy.

~ Kovu

I wouldn’t be against badges of honor being used as a currency for those 15 minute wxp mini boosters.
Wxp boosters are difficult to come by these days. The mini boosters should also be available from the skirmish chests and as rank up drops in general.

~ Kovu

FA’s getting into a habit of being stuck with big brother and little brother.
An opposing server with queues and map blobs through all timezones, and another tiny server that’s almost never seen through the first server’s queues and map blobs.

~ Kovu

Heh. They should flip it around. Give the EotM heroes less pips.
And then let team chat hilarity ensue. =)

(I’m kidding.)

I’m split on the issue. I mean there’s a fair bit of pve content with rewards that’s gated behind older pve content or barriers (such as masteries) or in itself requires a lot of pve to unlock in the first place. Players who don’t do a lot of pve but want a certain pve-based reward will have to spend more time in the forefront to “catch up” to the pve heroes who are acing every new piece of pve content as its released. However with the exception of wvw rank up abilities which mean absolutely nothing when it comes to generating loot there’s nothing to say that wvw veterans are “ahead” of the game over people who step foot into the gamemode for the first time.

I think its fair to give people who’ve thrown literally thousands of hours at the game mode a small bonus. That said it does scale heavily as it stands now. I hope they introduce more ways for players, new and old, to gain pips, (even if they have to increase the total requirements to adjust).

~ Kovu

-edit: I suppose a simple solution, (instead of the current sytem,) would be to grant a single pip to anyone rank 1,000 or higher. That way the “veterans” get something for their time, but it doesn’t scale so heavily over what the pve/pvp’ers (who are just playing the gamemode for the new rewards) get. Moreover, the pre-HoT EotM heroes won’t get more wvw rewards than actual wvw’ers.

Grant fewer pips via passive requirements (such as being outnumbered or being a higher wvw rank) and grant more pips based on actions the player takes during a skirmish that might contribute to their team:
- Escorting Dolyaks
- Defending Objectives
- Capturing Objectives (based on the tier of the objective)
- Participating in a ruins capture.
- Killing Players (Perhaps 1 pip if you tag 10 kills in a single 5 minute skirmish, for the zerg fights.)
- Stomping Players (More geared towards roamers, perhaps 1 pip if you stomp 3 players.)
(For examples.)

Also, change the pips granted based on your server’s current position in the 2 hour skirmish to grant pips based on how your server performed in that 5 minute skirmish. If your team is behind in ppt but wipes an enemy zerg, they deserve that one extra ppk pip.

Among other things these ideas will discourage AFK heroes by making the players do stuff to earn their pips.

~ Kovu

As a ranger I sometimes roam with the group and sometimes I’m off doing my own thing, (scouting, taking side objectives, popping white swords, that sort of thing). Commanders often give me shared participation since I’m off doing my own thing. Works out well. I generally don’t try to play a healing druid in wvw ‘cause Rangers don’t have the tools to sustain against the conditions a melee ball generally has to deal with. At that point they (or their pet) are just asking to be epi bait.

Looks like the tags you deal with are simply kittens. #JoinFortAspenwoodToday.

~ Kovu

^ +1
I throw a ton of hours at wvw most weeks. That said, last week I was unable to log into the game because I was on vacation from work (out of town, away from computer, visiting family). It’d be silly for me to have to work at it for three weeks again just to make up for being away one week.

Have it decay.

The current system also makes it somewhat more difficult for people of a lower wvw rank to meet the requirement. While I’m not against small loot bonuses for players who have been active in the gamemode longer, (like myself) I feel like weekly participation specifically in regards to a loyalty bonus should be calculated and awarded based on the number of skirmishes active in, not by total pips gained.

That said, I really like this system, (though with all of these additions to wvw it might seem a little clustered and confusing to the new player.)

~ Kovu

Respawn and hit a different objective. If you’re just doing dailies, who cares?

I don’t personally try and kill people who are clearly just trying to do their dailies, unless its an important objective, (trying to do a guild mission, upgrading a structure or if the skirmish is really THAT close etc). Normally I let them do their thing. That said, it’s a pvp mode. One had better get used to dealing with that if they choose to do wvw dailies — ‘cause shatter Mesmer isn’t even the strongest build on Mesmer.

~ Kovu

If nothing else, this week’s T “2” roll won’t happen again.

~ Kovu

Yeah sorry I’m awful at explaining things.
Long story short read the stuff under the line.

~ Kovu

I’ve noticed a trend with the new scoring system, (okay, well its not that new anymore,) that’s in place to encourage defending. The more a structure is allowed to upgrade the more points it is worth.

I understand the premise for such a system (to encourage defending and discourage karma training) but I don’t think it works well in this particular game. Why? Because it grants an inherent advantage to servers with heavy coverage in certain timezones over servers with weaker coverage, and I don’t just mean in those timezones.

For the example I’m going to give lets pretend there are three distinct timezones with equal influence.

Lets say server A has overwhelming coverage in one timezone while servers B & C do not. Server A now owns the majority of objectives and might even have waypoints on enemy maps before B & C “wake up”

Server A wins the timezone.

The next timezone arrives and (lets say) all three servers have about the same coverage. Now lets be optimistic and say servers B & C reclaim each their own borderlands & third of ebg pretty quick (this is hardly a given). For the next 2-4 skirmishes (at least) server A will win the skirmish, even if B or C pop SMC. Why? Their structures are upgraded while B & C all own unupgraded cardboard cutouts. Even if servers B & C focus on server A, A has thicker walls, more wall siege and tons of supply in all of their keeps. As well, server A will often keep server’s B & C paper as their backcappers can flip paper walls like its nothing.

Server A wins the timezone because they own higher ticking structures going into and throughout the timezone, even if they own the same number of structures as their opponents.

The next timezone arrives and now server A has poor coverage while servers B and C have moderate coverage. Maybe server A’s stuff is all papered and they tick 3rd for a while.

Server A loses the timezone. Fine.

Now we’re back to the first timezone. Server A quickly paper the sleeping opposition while their own structures upgrade relatively unimpeded.

To sum up my point, upgraded objectives provide too much of an advantage to the server with really strong coverage in one timezone even if the overall 24 hour coverage of the matchup is relatively the same.

I’m awful at explaining things so let me give an actual example based on experience as an FA player. Last week by the time NA hit Maguuma was able to fortify their own structures including SMC during EU and paper many of FA & SoS’s. Throughout NA, FA & SoS frequently owned more objectives but never won any skirmishes in that timezone in part due to the fact that Maguuma’s objectives were worth more points. Why? Because Maguuma had a timezone advantage to upgrade their stuff before NA which bled into NA, where the coverage was relatively equal. Now lets flip ahead to this week. FA has that same EU advantage over SBI and by the time NA hits FA has a waypoint on SMC while SBI BL’s side keeps & often ebg keep are paper. Throughout NA SBI & FA own about the same number of objectives but (with the exception of reset night where everything was paper) FA won all of the skirmishes because all of their stuff had been upgraded during EU.

The old scoring system wasn’t perfect, but at least servers aren’t at as much of an inherent disadvantage in one timezone because their coverage was weaker in the previous.

My thoughts on potential solutions:
— Increase the points for papering reinforced objectives. Heavily increase the points gained for papering fortified objectives. Maybe flipping a reinforced structure is worth 2x current value while flipping a fortified structure is worth 3×. Generally papering upgraded stuff is a big deal and takes more effort than simply backcapping the paper stuff.
— Decrease the difference in points gained by an upgraded objective compared to that of a paper objective. Right now owning a keep grants 12/16/20 depending on its tier. (For example,) maybe decrease that to 12/14/16.
— Increase points gained by an objective which has white swords placed on it during a 5 minute skirmish, drastically. You want to to encourage denfending? Have a keep normally worth 12 points worth 24 while it is under attack. That might discourage “tagging” a little bit, but I think its worth it to encourage defending.

This system would encourage actively attacking & defending while decreasing the impact of a server having massive coverage in one timezone bleeding into the next, (while not negating it entirely).

Thoughts?

~ Kovu

Crinn.7864:

You can body block the new epi.

I’ll get right on that. =p

~ Kovu

Sviel.7493:

Changing it might not be too hard, though. If the touch-ups done to DBL were in-scope then raising the elevation of Overlook might be possible too.

Raise it up so high that its trebs can hit SMC inner. That’ll get their attention. =D
In all seriousness though, red keep ebg suffers from that “easiest to defend inner, hardest to defend outer” adage that is similarly noted about fire keep on dbl.

~ Kovu

Remove that unblockable facet to encourage counterplay.
Then we’ll be talking.
You’re not going to see an epidemic projectile in a zerg fight, unless the visual effect is obscenely obvious. (I haven’t yet seen it.)

~ Kovu

edit- Though I think the new effect is actually kind of funny. I could see organized guild group members yelling “grenade” in teamspeak whenever an opposing necro launches an epi.

Swamurabi.7890:

Should the WvW version of skills have less conditions to improve WvW server performance?

Yes, please, by all means.

~ Kovu

And EU.

~ Kovu

I recommend you save your wallet and play on whichever server you’re currently on.
Between the changing server pairings and the wild glicko rolls its not really worth moving around.

~ Kovu

Matchmaking threads are not allowed on the forums.

~ Kovu

Bigpapasmurf.5623:

Coincidence…l am actually paired with FA this week. You say they have a thread do they?

Ja.

~ Kovu

Kek. FA has a thread dedicated to this kitten.
Its seriously a good read.

Anywho, you’re going to get whispers from salty people no matter the result of the fight.
It doesn’t matter if you killed them using a “brain dead OP build” or are “a kittening baddie” for dying to their “half-kittened-unarmored-only-been-playing-the-class-for-10-minutes-while-watching-TV-and-petting-the-cat” build.

Isn’t anonymity glorious?

~ Kovu

Its difficult to discern what is simply potent and what is actively overpowered.
I think Guardians, Necromancers, Mesmers and Elementalists are the fan favourites for zerging, while Warriors, Thieves, Druids and Mesmers are more potent roamers.

I guess by that shotty logic Mesmers are overpowered while Revs & Engis are underpowered?

~ Kovu

I’d rather increase the number of maps and reduce the size, so opposing teams actually interact with each other more.

~ Kovu

Ah, yes, snow in the desert.
Fantastic idea, please implement! *raises cup of coffee

~ Kovu

If you don’t own SM those towers are either paper or SM treb bait. Or both.
I’m not sure why you would really care about this.

~ Kovu

That’s a kittening awful idea.
I’m in favor.

~ Kovu

Sleeping after 10 PST.
Only the good lord knows why Mag is a full server.

~ Kovu

I’m sure that random appreciates it.

~ Kovu

Hubal.8571:

Well, how about that bug ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obVKgeXTdWo

I feel like the launch effects in this game are beginning to get a little out of hand.

~ Kovu

Neat. =)

~ Kovu

Epidemic needs to be reworked, condition-based mesmers need reduced potency on some of the effects which produce confusion and condition-based builds inherently need to be inherently less tanky across the board. I have no issues with the damage conditions do, that’s kind of the point.

Personally if I were designing ongoing damage in a real-time RPG the damage per tick would be higher across the board but all professions would have more answers to dealing with those conditions. It would improve the skill involved in actively responding to different types of attacks while reducing those situations where you’ve got 8 conditions on you, have limited removal and can only go “welp, nothing I can do in the next four seconds to deal with this. gg.”

~ Kovu

Mag’s NA isn’t any more “stacked” than JQ’s or FA’s, or at least not with the previous set of links.
Most of the NA servers under this system have comparable NA. T4’s Crystal Desert have been consistently holding their own against T1’s Blackgate, at least during NA.
As you say, matches are won by off hour coverage — its decided by the offhour guilds, what servers they want to play on and by this whole system of linking servers in attempt to balance the matchups.

Giving all servers links in an attempt to cover their weaker timezones should be the whole point of this system. Not, for example, stacking DB’s SEA with DH’s and leaving their EU & NA to get kitten on.

~ Kovu

morrolan.9608:

Kovu.7560:

No link for Maguuma to cover those offhours and two links for TC. Kind of odd.

I very much doubt they take that into consideration.

Perhaps, but they should.

~ Kovu

No link for Maguuma to cover those offhours and two links for TC. Kind of odd.
Other than that things seem somewhat close to being in order.

~ Kovu

ThunderPanda.1872:

Yea, lets putin the oasis event instead

No walls, siege and a mechanic that encourages zergs to break into smaller groups?
Okay.

~ Kovu

coro.3176:

• Charr Car week – all objectives have the Dune Roller upgrade by default

Reading this post brought a legit smile to my face. =)

~ Kovu

Now I want someone to post a video of an AC melting to an enemy guardian heavy zerg.
kitten got lit up.

~ Kovu

I’d be on board with 5/8.

~ Kovu

Chinchilla.1785:

Mutalisk swarm personally. Anything else is a pointless zerg unit.

Muta harass is OP and needs a nerf.

~ Kovu

At that hour JQ would be pulling that kitten even without links.
Especially when there’s a server with absolutely nothing at that hour — they can focus their omniblob entirely on the resisting server.
There’s a reason there are three servers in a matchup.

~ Kovu

I mean as a premise. :I

~ Kovu

I’m in favor.
Seems kind of odd that the other gamemodes have means of accessing that armor but wvw itself does not.

~ Kovu

I killed the warg there once! Needed mah daily!

~ Kovu

I think this sort of variation is a good thing. It gives utility beyond the nine professions, which is good as the professions don’t all provide equal utility in the wvw setting. Not even close.
I can’t speak to the balance or the kind of work that would have to go into implementing it, mind.

It was a fun read.

~ Kovu

I don’t feel this feature would hurt the game as some guilds prefer to run on their own to try and improve their game — meanwhile there are plenty of other pugmanders to pick up the militia.

That said, melee train and any backline that care can call target on the driver while pick does their own thing. Its not a perfect system, but it works well enough.

~ Kovu

Wow. This thread is a thing.

What exactly defines a “PvF player”? I see plenty of salt and criticism thrown every which way from both people who just strictly use this forum and people who “voice their thoughts elsewhere”.

I do agree that this place could use a little more moderation in general and the administration could due to be a little more active in keeping an eye & contributing to this place. Lack okittennowledgement is part of the reason some players feel as frustrated as they do.

~ Kovu

I mean, if you’re desperate to spy nobody is going to be able to stop you.
While amusing, I’m not sure this feature would be beneficial.
Its a fun thought, tho.
OS and perhaps EotM might benefit from this?

~ Kovu

Advice noted. =)

~ Kovu

Jim Hunter.6821:

Kovu.7560:

Shortbow has seen nothing but buffs since the game’s release…..

……not counting the huge nerf to its range, attack speed….

Only the auto had its attack speed reduced iirc, unless you’re counting the quickness nerf. Velocity was actually increased, to connect more reliably. But yes, they nerfed the range, its now on par with thief shortbow except the former can be traited. That said…

anduriell

The weapon is simply bad in skills design and overall usefulness.

Pretty much my feeling on the matter. Ranger’s shortbow desperately need a condition-based burst option to be viable in a competitive environment.

~ Kovu