Guild Wars 2

I’d be interested in lowering them a bit just to see what kind of impact that would have on lag.

X T D.6458:

I will check this out when I can login, I don’t think I have ever noticed it. I will report it if it is not properly upgraded because it should be like the rest, I cant imagine it was designed this way intentionally.

Of course it was. What would be the incentive to attack through water gate otherwise? Even if you make it through outer without getting shredded by cannons and ac’s you are stuck on a small ledge where more ac’s and treb fire will destroy you, or you can try to make the jump to get around to the north side, and likely lose a ton of people who can’t jump because they are chilled /crippled/in combat.

Water gate is the “I hope we can get in before they notice” gate.

It’s intended. Each keep has the risky spot to attack that will let you get in faster and they have safer areas to attack that take longer and require you to use more siege. Water gate is a kill box if there is anyone defending.

HazyDaisy.4107:

Not if your home server is outnumbered 10:1, everything is taken and the server that’s out numbering you has most of their numbers and seige (including omegas) facing every direction of North camp. It’s happened more than once in the past.

I like North camp, but, because of its isolation from third servers spawn, and the fact that its north of spawn rather than south, its the lifeblood of reclaiming and it controls supply to TWO towers, when the bigger server controls it on the smaller servers BL, it is the easiest and most beneficial to camp simply because of where its located and what it does.

….That makes no sense. It isn’t isolated from the third servers spawn any more than it’s isolated from the second servers spawn. And how would moving it south (closer to the enemies spawn) make it better for you if you’re “outnumbered 10:1”?

Dusty Moon.4382:

I think the ABL’s could use a redesign since there is so much wasted space on the outer edges vs. the DBL’s which has wasted space in the middle. Isn’t there some happy medium in design?

I actually liked having those spots, and as much as some people hate them, I also enjoyed the ruins. These areas offer a lot of places to LoS and lose the angry zergs that chase roamers halfway across the map.

HazyDaisy.4107:

It is rather annoying that the closest camp to spawn is the one that’s easiest for an enemy to camp. Also, it always annoyed me that it’s the only one that supplies both northern towers in addition to garri.

Tower wise, sometimes its a good thing for defense to be able to hit garri from the towers, I just don’t know if the tradeoff is worth it with the new numbers.

How is north camp the “easiest for an enemy to camp”?
It’s about as far from the enemy spawn points as it could possibly be and it’s right next to yours.
You even have a portal to run in and out of while fighting, and If they camp the portal you can have invulnerable players pew pewing from the ledge.

If you call in reinforcements you can completely cut off their escape routes since you can send groups out the side exits of citadel to block off the doorways leading into camp.
Literally everything about north camp gives a home field advantage.

X T D.6458:

Tyler Bearce.3427:

There are many reasons this wasn’t addressed when Alpine was brought back:

• Players were genuinely nostalgic for Alpine. Virtually all demands were just for Alpine to return, with no changes. There was no outcry that it was important to change Alpine to prevent spawn trebs before bringing the map back. Had we made a change to the layout of citadel to prevent this, perhaps we’d just be seeing a different set of angry threads, those mad that "we made a change that nobody asked for, dumbing down the map and removing a perfectly valid tactic. "

• We were attempting to bring the map back as fast as possible. Players wanted to play the map immediately. Our timing for releasing on 5/3 was already extremely tight. Fixing this issue would likely have caused us to miss our release window and postponed the update for another 2 weeks.

• This goes along with the previous points, but it wasn’t on our mind. We were just focused on bring the map back as fast as possible, in a state as close as people remembered it in.

• For the last 6 months, I’ve been told daily by players how great and well designed ABL is/was. This was our opportunity to see if they’d still feel that way, or think ABL needs additional work just like DBL.

• It isn’t/wasn’t something that needed immediate fixing, like a crash or an unconquerable objective. Players played with this exploit for years, and still had really fond memories of the map. If it turned out to be a big issue when the map was reintroduced, we could always fix it in a later release.

Since it’s clear that this is a big concern for players, we’ll fix it.

Thank you Tyler. Its understandable that there wasn’t enough time to work on certain issues before bringing alpine back, but I dont think many people would have minded 2 extra weeks if thats what it would have taken to fix the issues. I mean we didnt even know when it was coming back, you could have postponed until August lol. This issue was constantly being reported before HoT, there were many many threads. Nostalgia has nothing to do with genuine concerns for map flaws especially when it comes to things we see as exploits. These things need to be a priority for fixes.

All that being said, love the work you folks have been doing recently, and thanks again for the great news

I completely disagree. They made the right choice by bringing back the alpine first. I’m seeing people that haven’t played in months logging back on.
The treb exploit can be fixed any time, it definitely wasn’t enough of a reason to leave us with a broken map.

I wouldn’t even say fixing it should be their highest priority (although it should be dealt with eventually), there’s plenty of other things that should be worked on first, like scoring and fixing the kinks in the server links.

Hop on an engi and use magnet from stealth to pull them into the legendary defenders, then throw siege on them and spam laugh.

testpig.5018:

Josh XT.6053:

testpig.5018:

1: Example: Bay, and SWT… SWT can treb Bay, but Bay can’t Treb SWT. Proper. This placement forces the players that own the keep to come out and fight, and engage the tower to destory the treb.

Well its been 7 months since I played Alpine, so my memory might be rusty, but I thought there was a spot in Bay that could hit the cata wall at SWT with a treb. I think it was an unconventional place where it could easily be hit by ranged attackers, but I am pretty sure there was a place to do it.

testpig.5018:

Example2: Hills trebbing SET, broken. Requires not planning, or defending of the treb on hills to simply take the SET.

Yeah that has always been an issue since there is no good way to defend against it from the tower itself. I generally would run up to the hills treb spot and build an AC and take out the treb.

As to the rest of your post, I’m just not going to bother replying. You obviously enjoy the PvE aspects of WvW more than the intended game play.

Funny, how people think that creating elements that promote player vs player engagement equals to PvE. foolish.

How did any of the deserted bl’s crappy gimmicks promote PvP? I would try to fight people and they would leap off cliffs (and take no falling damage) to avoid a 1v1, or run into an area of the map that perma stealthed them, or constantly popped up walls in front of me preventing me from catching them.

It needs to depend on how many people the commander has in his squad. We don’t need 50 people running tags while they are flipping camps just to get better rewards.

How many threads do we need on this topic? One already existed before you decided to make multiple threads.

sparc.3649:

LOL if you say so, then if they “unlink” them people will be like OMG AR sucks, and just leave again.

You’re the one who’s clueless here pal

Well if you continue to be an asocial karma trainer who avoids people and caps empty structures then….. yeah, they’ll probably leave.
If instead someone decides to get organized and recruits the new players to their guild they’ll probably stick with their new friends no matter what server you all end up linked with next.
Remember, no matter what the next link is you won’t be going back to the deserted wasteland of T8. As long as you are low pop they will likely link you with a full server. But what do you care, you are leaving……. eventually….. hopefully.

You might be able to get away with this in the middle of a zerg but you will get shredded trying to roam.
No stun breaks, all the projectile hate pretty much shuts down your damage, and negligible condi removal. Bare minimum you should swap cultivated synergy to druidic clarity for a burst cleanse and stun break. You might also want to seriously consider swapping one of those weapons to staff so you can maintain some pressure on the target. And in my personal opinion, if you are going to stick with those trait lines and utilities, you should swap wilderness knowledge to empathic bond and lingering light to ancient seeds.

sparc.3649:

It’s never too late really, although they never address it. Instead they keep giving us BANDAIDS. EoTM was a bandaid to this problem. The current “mashup” (I refuse to call it a “merge” since it’s not permanent), is a bandaid to the problem.

If they’d stop tossing us bandaids and actually FIX it already then they could focus on things that are actually more trivial. Like what map(s) are or aren’t on or how any such “rotation” works or anything like that…

But server stacking is one of the CORE issues with WvW. They need to address the CORE issue(s) first! Because like you said, you wouldn’t mind all maps being active, but you’re concerned about a queue. Okay, this makes sense – but queues would not be an issue if anet would just get off their duff and start with fixing CORE issues.

The rest is really trivial as long as we have fundamental core issues… =\

…..sigh
Think about what the server linkings are doing. T1 servers are full and locked to transfers. T8 servers are still open and cheap to transfer to. Anyone that wants to “stack” a server will be joining the T8 servers and increasing their player base. If that server’s population grows large enough they will be linked with another server instead of the blobby T1 server.
This “band-aid” is slowly balancing out the population.

lil devils x.6071:

This does not work in a game mode where the score is kept due to it giving teams “bad map handicaps”. Not sure who all you think this makes happy due to the fact that many players will not play on EotM map or DBL, it certainly will not make them happy, because as long as there is a score kept they need to be able to play on the entire court.

This is like saying lets divide up the basketball court where only certain players will play on this part but because most the players hate that part of the court because they see it as damaged, they will not even go there.

Do you remember the situation with the Russian 2014 Olympics halfpipe, players complained it was unsuitable and should not use it? Many players see the DBL as unsuitable and will not use it, thus this gives an advantage to teams that have players that will play those maps over the teams who have players who will not, adding a dynamic to the game that did not exist previously. It changes the game dynamic to punish players over a map that changes the way the game is players that they did not want/ ask for being forced upon them in the game , rather than them being able to enjoy WvW as they wanted to.

Most guilds hop maps as needed to find fights, defend, chase zergs, and hit enemy keeps. If only part of their guild, or server, will go to certain maps due to their lack of enjoyment from it makes the game have a " bad map handicap" to whichever team has more players that hate the map, rather than how it had been without that present. That isn’t adding enjoyment to the game, it is taking away from it.

I the map was implemented in a game mode where there was no score, or in it’s own game mode, that would be different, but including it in the game mode where the majority of the players playing that mode hate it, is not a solution to make people “Happy”, as it will have the opposite effect.

+1
I really enjoy your posts even if we don’t agree on everything. Unlike a lot of the posters on here you actually look at problems/solutions from multiple angles instead of just throwing out half kittened ideas.

Daggos Skelito.2910:

Or….EB in the middle, ABL on one side, DBL the other. No home BL and adjust the scoring accordingly. EoTM as que wait if you wish. Play what you want to help. No need for rotation ever.

That would require redesigning 2 maps (and kittening off a bunch of people) so….. probably not going to happen

That creates an unbalanced match.
They need to just stick with alpine until they figure out how to cycle the maps on a 1 or 2 week rotation.

Aileras.9460:

I will add my thanks for bringing back the alpine maps and would like to encourage everyone who feels the same to please log on and fill the maps. That’s the only real way to show anet what is popular and what is not.

I just logged off after 4 hours of constant small scale fights. I haven’t had this much fun in months.

Balthazzarr.1349:

roaming returned? roflmao… so funny… things are much smaller of course… and the big groups of people get to where you are trying to do your little caps and run you over… and sadly some of them even drop siege on you… nothing like a good 15 to 1 kill.. lol, that’s gotta feel good. I’m not sorry to say, I miss the DBL’s already. I mean really, if we’re gonna have these little toy bl’s then let’s go back to our little servers … :P Just sayin…

Being able to duck a zerg is part of roaming…. it sounds like what you are missing was being able to PvE an empty map where no one cared to defend anything.

Angel Heart.6739:

Grow up instead of looking at your self interest look at the interest of the entire WvW population and give WvW a real chance and future before its too late.

Take your own advise. The majority of the population prefers the alpine bl. It was designed with WvW play in mind, where as the desert bl was designed to look interesting with no thought to function.

Today I watched a server trying to zerg around the map like they did on the desert bl and they were getting completely destroyed by all the roamers and havoc groups flipping things around them and picking away at their tail. When it comes to which map is better for small groups there is no competition, alpine wins hands down. Having a map that encourages solo/small group play gives people something to do while they wait for their friends to log on and join them. This is what keeps WvW alive.

Yup. +1 anet, very good change

I miss this https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Zaishen_Menagerie_Grounds

So happy they are back! Roaming has returned to the bl’s, I have been having so much fun!

Chris Barrett.3280:

WvW will re-enable and spin up Alpine maps not long after the new build is available.

Substance E.4852:

Puck.9612:

Substance E.4852:

Puck.9612:

They just need to unlock all the pets in wvw the same way they do in PvP. Just because some of you enjoy this games crappy pve doesn’t mean we should all have to suffer through it.

I can probably count on one hand the amount of pets worth a kitten in WvW and one of them is the one you can only get in WvW…

And 2 of them are HoT exclusive….

So is Druid.

If walking to a static spawn point with minimal enemies and no gimmick gates impeding your path is “too much pve” I can only wonder how you managed to get into WvW in the first place given it’s reliance on pve levels and gear.

When I got into it you could still buy any stat gear you wanted on the TP. Having the current best gear locked behind PvE grinding is a problem but it’s a separate problem from this issue.
And yeah, walking/gliding to find the pets is too much PvE for me when most of my characters have zero map completion done. I am lucky enough that my main account had a bunch of those “teleport to a friend” things, but my alt account doesn’t and all the PvE bullkitten hoops they make you jump through is what is keeping me from purchasing HoT for that account.

I honestly don’t understand why anyone would argue against this. If you enjoy PvE or RP’ing that you are a pokemon master hunting down pets then good for you, but why do you feel the need to impose that on everyone? Let people play the parts of the game they enjoy.

Yup https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Map-Change-Coming/page/2#post6135077

Substance E.4852:

Puck.9612:

They just need to unlock all the pets in wvw the same way they do in PvP. Just because some of you enjoy this games crappy pve doesn’t mean we should all have to suffer through it.

I can probably count on one hand the amount of pets worth a kitten in WvW and one of them is the one you can only get in WvW…

And 2 of them are HoT exclusive….

Chris Barrett.3280:

This WvW maintenance period will be beginning shortly; likely within the hour.

Riesenschnauzer.6049:

Puck.9612:

They just need to unlock all the pets in wvw the same way they do in PvP. Just because some of you enjoy this games crappy pve doesn’t mean we should all have to suffer through it.

Well I’m game with that as soon as they unlock all pets in PVE . Just because some vocal minority enjoys this games crappy PVP/WVW should makes us all have to suffer through it.

Deal??

Fine by me. I never liked the idea of having to do a scavenger hunt to access my class mechanic.

Offair.2563:

Puck.9612:

Osu.6307:

When I read these reactions, it becomes crystal clear why anet usually does not announce big changes well in advance. You all are like a bunch of toddlers with zero patience. When told you are going to get something you want in the future, rationally, you should be happy. I want that and I am going to get that, so that is a good thing, right? However, whenever anet announces we are going to get a good thing in the future, so many of you scream and cry because you aren’t getting it NOW. Grow the f up.

In all fairness we were already told this exact same thing a week ago by Tyler Bearce.

Alpine Borderlands will be rotated back in with the next release (not hotfix.)

This isn’t really news without them telling us a date.

No communication about upcoming changes/updates: RAGERAGERAGE

Some communication about upcoming changes updates without an ETA: still RAGERAGERAGE

Jeeze it is NEVER EVER ok is it? Just arguing for the sake of arguing or not.

Well said Osu.

Did You read “rage” somewhere in my post? I’m just pointing out that hearing it will be back "soon"once a week isn’t news. Especially when in the past “soon” has taken months or even years.

They just need to unlock all the pets in wvw the same way they do in PvP. Just because some of you enjoy this games crappy pve doesn’t mean we should all have to suffer through it.

Osu.6307:

When I read these reactions, it becomes crystal clear why anet usually does not announce big changes well in advance. You all are like a bunch of toddlers with zero patience. When told you are going to get something you want in the future, rationally, you should be happy. I want that and I am going to get that, so that is a good thing, right? However, whenever anet announces we are going to get a good thing in the future, so many of you scream and cry because you aren’t getting it NOW. Grow the f up.

In all fairness we were already told this exact same thing a week ago by Tyler Bearce.

Alpine Borderlands will be rotated back in with the next release (not hotfix.)

This isn’t really news without them telling us a date.

I agree, bring back the dbl…… as a pve map. That garbage has no place in wvw.

The sooner the better!

Cerby.1069:

Lol cmon you kittens….stop whining about the game being too hard and start learning how to play it.

1. Drop stealth removals
2. ….
3. profit.

Truly ridiculous that everyone wants upgrades to go when they are the only things protecting ebg from flipping all over the place. Even more ridiculous they blame them for their own incompetence ingame.

The radius/duration could be changed slightly as it is a bit much to fight against it on the other side of the map. But even then its a case of being very observant of your surroundings to spot uncloaked elements of the zerg, and placing proxies/mines in the way of that zerg (aka around ur location) so some if not most of them reveal the location when they walk by/kill the proxy.

This isn’t like a mesmer veil where the defending zerg had to take the quickest path to you so you know where to place the trap. They have the time to hop off the wall anywhere and hit you from any direction. Unless your idea is to completely surround your group with stealth traps your suggestion is worthless.

Dredlore.1672:

Puck.9612:

Dredlore.1672:

Faux,

*Applause!!! Standing Ovation!
I have wanted WvW to drop this silly attachment to servers since mega-server came into existence. “Silly” because the resources available to guilds no longer match the WvW criteria used for participation…namely that everyone be from the same server.

Once mega-server launched, our guild was essentially excluded from participating in WvW… and we WANT TO, but our members are from literally every server out there.

I personally played WvW since before season 1, and through the last WvW Season. I commanded some, and gained a lot of WvW experience in the process. I picked up a dead WvW guild and became a GL. That was around 3 years ago and we are still going strong as a guild, but all of us have to WvW for our home servers only…which means we could actually end up fighting our guildies in certain matchups.
Additionally this problem takes away from the overall activities that we can offer to members, and has a contrary effect on the problems that mega-server was intended to address because it forces us to disregard mega-server in guild recruiting IF we want to play WvW. In other words we have to think “pre” mega-server, yet we exist in a mega-server world.
This is a mega-problem.
In my humble opinion this is one of the major reasons that WvW has stumbled recently and the only way to fix it is to allow ALL guilds the opportunity to WvW with all of its members regardless of server.
If we were only a WvW guild? Then the negative effect is lessened. But we also pvp.
…and consider this.
The current system pushes all guilds out except WvW guilds who are willing to only recruit in WvW and pretty much only play WvW.
We dont consider ourselves a PVX guild, but we also aren’t “WvW Only”…and speaking from experience (because Ive talked to hundreds of members about this…) nobody thinks that the current system is ideal. Every single member I have ever spoken with wants to WvW with their guild of choice.
Im sure there are ways to fix this problem, and I hope that Anet decides that this is a necessary priority that will put wvw back on track for everyone.
Thanks
Saya

You’re telling me all your PvE players don’t have a 100 gold a piece to pay for a transfer?

lol and here is one result of the server problem.
I can tell the players who came along after mega server, because having never seen WvW before, they dont understand what a “smooth” wvw system is like.

Really… You can tell huh? That’s funny because I started playing GW back in 2005 and have been playing GW2 since the betas. My guild has brought in plenty of PvE players by helping them move their account. We did this because we thought it would be a lot more fun to play together than it would be to cry on the forums like a little kitten.
…The biggest downside to this beta event is it brought out a bunch of PvE idiots posting terrible ideas that would destroy wvw.

Dredlore.1672:

Faux,

*Applause!!! Standing Ovation!
I have wanted WvW to drop this silly attachment to servers since mega-server came into existence. “Silly” because the resources available to guilds no longer match the WvW criteria used for participation…namely that everyone be from the same server.

Once mega-server launched, our guild was essentially excluded from participating in WvW… and we WANT TO, but our members are from literally every server out there.

I personally played WvW since before season 1, and through the last WvW Season. I commanded some, and gained a lot of WvW experience in the process. I picked up a dead WvW guild and became a GL. That was around 3 years ago and we are still going strong as a guild, but all of us have to WvW for our home servers only…which means we could actually end up fighting our guildies in certain matchups.
Additionally this problem takes away from the overall activities that we can offer to members, and has a contrary effect on the problems that mega-server was intended to address because it forces us to disregard mega-server in guild recruiting IF we want to play WvW. In other words we have to think “pre” mega-server, yet we exist in a mega-server world.
This is a mega-problem.
In my humble opinion this is one of the major reasons that WvW has stumbled recently and the only way to fix it is to allow ALL guilds the opportunity to WvW with all of its members regardless of server.
If we were only a WvW guild? Then the negative effect is lessened. But we also pvp.
…and consider this.
The current system pushes all guilds out except WvW guilds who are willing to only recruit in WvW and pretty much only play WvW.
We dont consider ourselves a PVX guild, but we also aren’t “WvW Only”…and speaking from experience (because Ive talked to hundreds of members about this…) nobody thinks that the current system is ideal. Every single member I have ever spoken with wants to WvW with their guild of choice.
Im sure there are ways to fix this problem, and I hope that Anet decides that this is a necessary priority that will put wvw back on track for everyone.
Thanks
Saya

You’re telling me all your PvE players don’t have a 100 gold a piece to pay for a transfer?

Sparky.8724:

Mad King runes on my WvW hybrid druid combined with entangle to proc an kitten of bleeding is always funny

Right? Combine that with a concussion shot/poison volley to proc multiple ancient seeds, quickness and your pet burst, and people just melt.

Cerby.1069:

Loosmaster.8263:

Read the description of what WvWvW is. This will answer a lot of your questions. Any deviation from that is by your own design and not intended for the original game mode. You create your own problems and expect Anet to fix it.

I’m starting an animal roleplay club in ebg. We all que up and when we get in we transform into animals and roam around the map. We bring dynamic wildlife to the players of wvsw.

Anyone Wanna join?

I’ll extend the inv to the OP, I think he/she needs a new perspective of the world……..vsworldvsworld.

I regularly transform into a giant spider and chase people with the birthday blaster.

I’d probably go axe since it’s useful for power builds too.
You might want to think about what other professions you like to play and which weapon you might want for them as well. Like if you play your thief a bunch then you should go for the shortbow first.

Cooking if you’re into wvw. For some stupid reason there are foods you can only get by crafting.

XxColdDeadxX.4839:

From what I hear, Magumma learned it from TC. TC had SMC pretty much all last week, and Mag had to deal with Cloaking Waters, or so I heard from a friend on Mag complaining. Now they’re using it on other servers.

You think this had to be learned? As soon as they announced the stupid thing everyone knew it would be abused this way. It’s a terrible upgrade that only benefits the strongest server. I’m on mag by the way. .

That’s not really due to the linking though. That’s a problem with their servers (or game engine?).

Some of the linking problems are:
Smaller servers being absorbed/not being represented.
Lack of game play variety due to elimination of tiers (small group fights harder to find).
Smaller servers not currently receiving glicko (how will they progress).

The biggest problem was the server pairings didn’t seem to be thought out very well. SoS should have been paired with a server that increased their NA presence, the biggest T1 server (BG) was paired with the biggest T8 server (ET). On the flip side they paired YB, who just lost a bunch of guilds, with AR who is without a doubt the smallest NA server.

Some of this could be fixed by simply changing the way character and bl names appear. An example would be red bronze soldier AR, or red borderland AR/BG. That would help servers maintain their identities.

They could open another tier (or just bring back alpine)to spread the population a bit and help bring back small scale fights. They could also change the reward system so you get 1% less xp/chance at a better reward for each player around you. This way smaller groups have a higher chance of getting better rewards.

When they change the scoring system they could reduce the impact of PPT and increase PPK, which would help determine how much each server is contributing to their partnership, and help the server progress.

As for the pairings themselves… they just need to take a better look at the actual numbers and coverage. Some servers like TC and BG would be fine on their own, others could probably use 2 other servers.

Sungtaro.6493:

Puck.9612:

Sungtaro.6493:

I play T2 NA. I can’t remember the last time I saw an actual 1 v 1.

I found plenty of them last week in EBG. Might have had to do with low pop servers being thrown in the mix.
Funny thing was 1v1’s were non existent on my T3 account, I don’t remember seeing FA run any small groups at all, and I’d watch their blob turn from smaller guild groups to chase down solo roamers.

Late NA to clarify. Queues are massive for EB. I like the borderlands well enough and burned out majorly on EB during my brief T5 stint.

Yeah you won’t find many on the bl until the alpine returns. That map is made for zergs. I’m not an EBG fan either but you are ten times as likely to find 1v1’s and small group fights there, even when it’s queued.

Sungtaro.6493:

I play T2 NA. I can’t remember the last time I saw an actual 1 v 1.

I found plenty of them last week in EBG. Might have had to do with low pop servers being thrown in the mix.
Funny thing was 1v1’s were non existent on my T3 account, I don’t remember seeing FA run any small groups at all, and I’d watch their blob turn from smaller guild groups to chase down solo roamers.

Jong.5937:

So anything before last week is meaningless. You need to try the DBls now to judge them and on our server, as clearly on many others, the last week has been great.

Already have, they still suck.

melee rangers are one of the toughest things to fight in a 1v1, especially now that druid increased their sustain. The only reason a warrior is a tough fight at the moment is because of the axe bug that let’s decapitate hit through evade frames.

This is in WvW where gear and food allow for more build variety.

FrownyClown.8402:

If you don’t want to go greatsword go sw/d. Offhand axe 4 skill is too difficult to land esp vs fast moving targets like thief or mesmer. Keep in mind sw/d is mostly going to be an evade/disengage until you can get back into your other weapon.

It’s really not as bad as you’d expect since a lot of the time they are running directly away from you, straight at you, or towards a choke like a tower door. I ran it today and completely blew up a few people by taunting them with “protect me” and hitting them with smoke assault and whirling defense.

Murphys Law.8561:

That’s Cuz ur a ranger

Dusting off the 2012 WvW insult! kitten that was clever.

Kylden Ar.3724:

Oh no, they fought over towers, but at least where I played, we always choked off supply first so they could not easily do treb to attack keep and arrow carts to defend the tower. Simple tactics.

I’ve always been in Kaineng, however, and our smaller numbers meant you had to do that before throwing your blob at a tower or all you did was feed them bags. In higher pop servers, that may have been different in ABLs.

But really, logically, while it might be fun for a game, it makes no sense that the towers can treb keep and vice versa. Course, the fact that any of us can survive a hit from a treb is also silly.

That’s all the sense it needs to make. It was fun and promoted fights. A threat to the keep made the tower important and the camp important. To protect the one you were fighting over all 3. The dbl doesn’t have this and that’s why it fails as a WvW map.