Showing Posts For MuscleBobBuffPants.1406:
1 2
Hmm I have to echo the concerns of other players that mixing queues between two different game modes will cause some headaches. Particularly those who want to play one mode or the other. As well as those who make a build for one mode and then end up having to play in the other mode.
The game mode looks good though but I am disappointed there were no 8v8 or 10v10 options. Oh well maybe the next PvP mode will find room for slightly bigger teams!
@sephiroth.4217
I think you are correct, but still even just a subtle change was nice to see. I bet they could come up with some even cooler ones in the future!
I would be interested in new siege skins too! When I saw the Lunar New Year ones I stopped for a moment just to admire the new design, good job!
I think for me as well the biggest question will be the allowance of more than 5 players on each team. As they mentioned in the article they considered it a condensed version of WvW, but I dont want it to be too condensed either. I think 8v8 players or even 10v10 could be alot of fun, so I hope those team sizes will at least be considered and tested during beta!
I agree with what others have stated as well. Even if they sold different kinds of skins to for siege equipment that would be cool. I guess though it would also need to be balanced for clarity on the battlefield so people know whats going on, but if you got different golem skins or treb skins or even new flame ram skins that would be cool!
I thought they said it would still be beta tested at 8v8 or even 10v10 to see how it plays out. Maybe Im mistaken though!
@Aeolus.3615
Hey Aeolus, ah sorry I should clarify these wouldnt necessarily be stationary NPCs that could even be farmed/killed so to speak. This would be more active NPCs that are either actively attacking towers/keeps. My hope is that it would give lower population servers and groups a chance to start slowly regaining territory while keeping the higher population servers distracted but also engaged. I feel like they would only be used during those times to help keep the combat going during those periods of time when either someone is completely dominating or being completely dominated. But yeah I understand your concern though too and I wouldnt want it to turn into a kinda farm fest either, just a way to keep things more active and engaging.
Hmm I can understand your concern about them after having been on both ends, one where we charge into a keep with 20+ golems and other times when we are defending against them. Ballistas are no doubt the key to countering golems but as others have stated line of sight can be a big problem. If there was a more mobile anti golem siege weapon introduced maybe that could help balance things out more, maybe like a charrzooka that acts as like a heat seeking missle to bring down golems. I remember when I used to play a game called Planetside that was generally how you dealt with heavy mechs and tanks, most people would bring out their rocket launchers and bring them down. They sacrificed their ability to fight infantry, but thats kind of the point. It would also be a quicker counter to golems than the hard to hit with ballistas and also the ballistas lack of a shield to defend itself.
@Prevas.9305
As far as the new Borderland map is concerned, Im completely in the dark as to what it could be. So I can really only speculate on the current Borderlands map, but my guess is that if defending becomes more important, roaming and flipping camps will only be part of the process, the other part will be staying there and defending it for as long as possible too. I hope that will just mean more PvP battles in the long run as people really fight to try and hold positions even as small as camps, but I think that will make it more engaging and fun!
Interesting idea, I would love to see how the game plays out differently with this kind of mechanic introduced!
@Meglobob.8620
That is exactly the kind of battles that I hope happen more often. Those are so fun and even though you lost it was a good battle, well fought. That is the funnest part of WvW!
@Victory.2879
They already have it to some extent with NPCs attacking camps and caravans if you flip them to your side. But this would be a bigger involvement of NPCs so I think it would have to be tested before being fully implemented. And definitely if more people enter the map the NPC numbers should be reduced/debuff to give the players a chance for more player versus player battles.
@Pinkamena Diane Pie.8054
I hoping defending also means defending the towers or keeps they just flipped too, so hopefully when they come in to your territory so to speak, by the time you reach the tower to take it back, they are still there working to keep it. I feel like those kind of battles will be better if they kind of fight to the last man so to speak, to hold on to it as long as possible.
@mistsim.2748
Thanks, and yeah I think it could help. It wont completely replace a person in terms of usability, but it could give a smaller server a fighting chance!
@Skeletor.9360
Yeah I definitely think there are many pathways to helping with server population balance, the introdcution of more NPC interactions/buffs/debuffs etc. is just something Ive thought might be fun and should be relatively easy to implement, I think!
@Quells.2498
Exactly what I was thinking! For servers who are low on population, they could get a super kitten NPC to help them fight their way to towers and what not like the commanders. I was also thinking that on the flipside, servers that are dominating a map, like maybe they own over 50% of the map and the castle. Maybe NPCS could be sent out to attack their keeps and towers. Maybe even like a big dragon could swoop down and start raining down fire on keeps. This would keep the winning side engaged and keep it exciting for them. While also giving the smaller pop servers a chance while the winning side is engaged and distracted to start making small gains and get back territory. Ive been on both sides, when we are completely crushing the map and when we are completely crushed and honestly neither is that fun for me. I like when things are frantic, when things are being disrupted and when general there is good fighting going on.
When they mentioned that “defending will be more important”, I thought that was a good direction. The funnest battles for me are when the enemy team is either trying to take down our keep and we have to defend. Or we are running into the castle while its being defended. I know EoTM is kinda a karma train right now but I could see that being turned around if defending objectives granted you more rewards then just running around and capping, and running away and letting other people flip it back. I know even now Eternal Battlegrounds has become like that in many ways where Ill see the enemy team running around flipping camps and towers, but then just running away and letting us flip it back.
One thing that also got me thinking and I apologize I dont remember who said it but someone else mentioned it in another thread, but giving more NPC interactions in WvW might be a way to help balance out server population differences. One thing that got me thinking about it was they mentioned a MOBAish inspired SPvP map, Stronghold and one of the underlying things in MOBA games is that there is always a constant NPC and Human threat. And if you are defending from the NPC threat its usually not a big deal. But if you ignore it then it can overwhelm you and defeat you. Maybe one way they could implement that in WvW is for there to be more NPC threats that are not only attacking caravans/camps but also attacking towers and keeps. Maybe the NPCS could be buffed/debuffed based on your current server map population/presence and/or maybe increased or decreased in amount based on that too.
Either way I think they have a good foundation for WvW set, but I am looking forward to the changes to make it more fun and engaging.
(edited by MuscleBobBuffPants.1406)
1 2