Guild Wars 2

Filovirus.6258:

I don’t see how there can be ANY enjoyment in …

Highlighted the relevant part of your post for you. You are not the litmus test for whether something is good or enjoyable for other people. If you don’t like where you are, go elsewhere. Do not tell the rest of us what is good for us and what isn’t. You have zero credibility and zero say in what we do.

Now recognize that, buy some gems, and go somewhere that you prefer playing. If you’re already there, stop slagging the neighbourhood.

Filovirus.6258:

~~~ snipped to remove blah blah blah ~~~

The lower tiers don’t want to be merged. That the lower tiers don’t run like the upper tiers doesn’t make them any less worth preserving.

Even more so, the lower tiers are dynamic while the upper tiers are static – very little changes in gold. If you’re going to change something, change the servers where people get stuck until they leave the game forever. That’s the top tiers, not the lower ones.

Or, you know, leave the lower tiers alone. Anybody who isn’t currently in a bronze tier but is advocating that they should be merged because the upper tiers are better should transfer down and prove their worth by riding that server up to the top. Otherwise they’re just being condescending jerks who are apparently threatened by people playing differently than they do.

QED, and put a fork in this.

People who don’t read the instructions, don’t read the emails sent by ANet to indicate that their rewards are now available to be picked up and must be picked up before the end of the following week likely aren’t “customers” who can work out the complex task of purchasing gems with real money.

Sorry boss, but mailing rewards screwed up in the past so they’re doing something different that requires a tiny bit of effort on your part. If you went into WvW during the tournament at any point, you always had the historian with your prizes right in front of you when you signed in. You losing your rewards is on you.

Lower population caps and the people that still want to play will distribute themselves amongst the servers. People stacking servers caused this, so remove it as an option. Simples.

Visirale.6097:

I have made every effort possible to get out of my tier. But when the entire population trying to transfer has to resort to autoclicking to transfer, it becomes an RNG game of beating out the other 500 people trying to transfer with you. I don’t mind queues, I do mind not being able to get on the same server as my guild no matter what lengths I go to to get there.

Not including the effort the raise your server’s Glicko rating, I assume.

Keira Ferland.5619:

Still not as good as the guy that landed a treb shot through hills oil spot

That was an epic shot, and I’m glad they were able to reproduce it for a screenshot.

~~~~~

As for the rest, there is no focus on SF from Ehmry Bay. As has been said on the matchup thread (which is where this kind of talk belongs, but amusing barbeque picture nonetheless) EBay has spent more time hitting FC than SF. If SF made it to second place, that would certainly change.

Two reasons for hitting FC over SF: first, they own more stuff than you do. In EBG, they are what we see first so it gets hit first. Easy, right? Second, they have more people on than you – it’s FC that brings more fights this week. SF fights too, don’t get me wrong, but you’re lighter on population than FC is. So…

But before this thread gets locked and you suspect an alliance between Ehmry Bay and ANet, take your musings to this weeks matchup thread:

http://www.gw2wvw.net/topic/ebay-fc-sf-s3-w4

Mixistrike.7840:

and there is another problem, lots of ppl just don’t speak another language, even if english is the most popular language in the planet. and I CAN tell you, every game could be played without understand whats going on around you.

But aka Dunning–Kruger effect.

I’m done with this post.

have fun!

Well, you clearly read english just fine and yet you still ignored the instructions that so many people, including ones that are probably of lower intelligence than you, managed to follow. All of the information you needed was available and practically shoved into your face, and you had a week to take sixty seconds to go and retrieve your reward.

If, despite all of that, you didn’t bother or forgot or whatever… then too bad. You haven’t done it for all four matches, so you still get some of your reward and you’ve learned something. As a result, you’re now a more enlighted corporeal entity. Ommmmmmmmm.

Mixistrike.7840:

nobody is blame anyone. but rewards like that, should send for emails. I came here, I play the game, have fun, and no rewards because I just didn’t go to the npc. just sux and easy to fix. that’s all.

if you want to compare, if I kill a boss I receive a chest, If I kill a world boss I can see a big chest, If I came and play wxw like this one, I didn’t receive anything when there is rewards do receive.

You’re kind of shooting your comparison in the foot there – you kill a world boss you see a big chest; you sign in to WvW and you see the historian. In both cases, you have to go over and interact with them to get your reward.

People who are upset that they have to go talk to someone that’s right in front of them when they sign in to WvW once during the week to get their rewards… how much hand holding do people need?

Jim Hunter.6821:

babazhook.6805:

Jezynka.2651:

Visirale.6097:

I hope ANET ignores this with the same intensity as anything to do with gvg/fights that was ever suggested. Sorry something got in the way of your pvdoor guys! Maybe try fighting now?

You haven’t read my posts at all, have you? I would like to fight but enemies are hiding behind walls and ain’t going out to fight… And I need to get through walls/gates to them to fight them. This disabler is what allows avoiding fights and makes wvw boring. Show us something what will convince all to fight instead of hiding. I would like to hear that and have it implemented in game…

Why would two people holding a keep or tower want to come out and fight 30 peoples attacking it?

The reason for keeps and towers is so that an outnumbered force can hold off a larger one.

Siege disablers are fine. Towers and keeps are still getting flipped on a regular basis in spite of them. Maybe people would get more fights if they did not travel in zergs of 40 with 5 golems on a map with 10 defenders.

There are other ways of taking out gates then using rams and as to supply, if your team played smartly and cuts the supplies to the enemies keeps and towers it will run out in time even as your larger force has access to the camps that have the supply.

The problem is disablers aren’t stopping groups of 40 with 5 golems. The golems are shut down for less than half the time the other siege is (if you can even get to all of them) and if you do shutdown the golems the 40+ man zerg can pvd the door the rest of the way down.

A pity that you can’t get zerg disablers for a few badges and some silver – I’d buy a stack.

munkiman.3068:

I personally would like to stop thinking terms of imposing limits on an already tightly monitored, fairly unrewarding (besides winning good fights) system. Caps that cause longer queues on highly pop servers, things that focus on high pop servers rewards, in order to “force” balance are simply crappy solutions, they are “one click fixes”. I think most of us are growing tired of those.

Except that this is a thread about population imbalance, and high population servers are one end of that imbalance. And almost nobody complains when they end up against a lower population server. Since the population is a finite resource, methods that spread it out rather than hoarding it in just a few spots are viable to explore, and very much in the spirit of this thread.

PabbyGaul.9682:

Apparently, there aren’t any ecologists that play/program in this game.

The slow polarization of WvW servers is inevitable because the system doesn’t mimic reality and is being played by real people. There is NO incentive to move to lower populated areas because right now More Population = More Kills = More Rewards. Its not rocket science…….its ecology.

Scale Magic Find, Drop Rates and Experience based on simulating a limited resource (Bags) rather than an infinite one (because its computer game) and the problem solves itself.

The result would be that high population servers have a severely impaired Magic Find, Drop rate, and Experience bonus in WvW. WHY?….Because in reality bags don’t drop out of thin air, they are a limited resource. So if there’s only a thousand bags to be had, I would much rather be after them with only 50 ppl rather than 2000. Making these stat bonuses inversely proportional to population mimics the reality that when you have lots and lots of people good stuff is harder to find. Exp would scale also because fighting on lower populations is simply more challenging. If it wasn’t people wouldn’t be leaving. If yer always the underdog why shouldn’t their efforts be considered more difficult? Isnt experience related to the difficulty of the task…ect.

So….the solution is really simple. Limit rewards in a way that mimics the consequences of actual population size.

The details of this idea were already submitted via Adopt-A-Dev. Would welcome some criticism.

This… is an amazing idea. I definitely think that ANet should apply it for a month or so after the tournament and watch their metrics.

Sir Arthur.8905:

As it is now, nobody cares about WvW outside of T1, blobs make the game unplayable for many, and the massive overpopulation makes lower pops not even care about trying. Even if the imbalance could be solved without a cap, I would STILL be in favor of it because more servers blobbing is just as lame.

Speak for yourself, please. We have servers full of people, on all tiers, that care about WvW very much. This isn’t a T1 thread, either.

Despite your ignorance, I’m still in favour (as I’ve said in previous posts) of a lowered map cap and the locking of upward transfers to level out the average population.

The alliance model is an interesting one, and I like the general idea. ANet, would you consider trying some of these ideas between tournaments? Maybe do an alliance type setup for a couple of months and interpret the data, and then play with other things (mechanics, populations, buffs, debuffs, et cetera) and see how people respond? Having some non-speculative data can only help when trying to ultimately decide what to do, and it will also give the players a chance to see what works and what doesn’t. You have a huge population of playtesters here that are eager to try something, anything.

Put us to use.

munkiman.3068:

I still wonder why they thought that wasn’t a good defense mechanic. I think a lot of people even in the lower tiers felt like that was a good thing. Maybe now that they are playing mano e mano it might make a difference? It feels like they take all the good bits out.

No, me and most of the people I talk to (on my server and in my tier) are pretty happy that bannering the lord is gone. Sure, we used it when it was there, but by and large we’re happy that the big pitched battles have been moved out of the lord’s room and over to the walls.

Jeknar.6184:

Wyrden.4713:

it has a guildbanker

As far as I know, it doesn’t… You can access your personal bank via the crafting stations but not guild bank.

No, it’s there. I use the guild bank in garrison all the time when I’m converting Ikea siege into good siege.

Rasudido.6734:

This is sad. Most posts are some made up complaint about how T1 servers should be the ones modified rather than the obvious where lower tier servers are the problem.

All tier 1 servers have a healthy WvW population, all the servers cap their maps, make heavy use of TS, have great organization, play constantly and have map blobs. All of these can be reduced to what people really want : an active server population.

I used to play in Ehmry Bay, moved over to blackgate. The reason I moved was the lack of a population in Ebay, WvW was a ghost town except for a few guilds who would do their private raids in their private TS and not invite people. This is different in Blackgate, guilds do run by themselves privately but they communicate between each other, there usually is a large guild running the “map tag” where any PUG can join in TS and listen. I dont even care about the rewards as I play 3 times a week with my guild JUST FOR FUN something that was impossible in Ebay.

And here is the reality anyone in the lower tier servers SHOULD be forced into a t2 or t3 server to “balance” the population. You want more Blackgates and Jade Quarries (the two t1 servers that have survived this long), you want more servers to get bummped up like TC did. Most people are proposing the inverse where you want to destroy T1 through harsher caps when what you want is to be a T1 server? You could probably shoot SoS into kitten compete with JQ/BG/TC right now just by moving a couple of guilds from the lower tiers into it.

I understand any lower tier server players having pride and not wanting to move, but if your complaint is that population is an issue and you dont want to move to a server with better population? thats all on you guys not the other servers…

I’ve played on Ehmry Bay since launch and you don’t describe the EBay I know. Yes, guilds running guild raids tend to be in their own channels, just like havoc groups tend to pick an empty channel to do their thing in. Always have, still do.

When you talk about “Blackgate does this thing where the guilds communicate to each other”, we do that too. We’ve got our commander whisper lists and can talk to all of them in TS, regardless of channel. You didn’t know that because you weren’t on it is all.

As for a ghost town, maybe if you were still on the server after our double exodus when we dropped from T4 to T8 and were still sorting ourselves out. But it wasn’t a ghost town before that, and it’s not a ghost town now, unless you want to compare raw population between a post-exodus-but-lots-of-people-now server versus a stacked T1 server. Note that we’re T7, not T1. Ask our peers in the same competitive band if we’re a ghost town.

I’m sorry you didn’t have fun when you were on EBay and I’m glad you found a place you prefer to play, but here’s the reality to your reality: all of the servers have been bleeding WvW population. On stacked servers (like your own current server), the effect is much more pronounced. If we have (made up number incoming) 100 people total who play WvW on EBay and we lose 5% of them, that’s five people. If you have 2000 people who play WvW on BG and lose 5% of them, that’s 100 people. It’s bad news at any scale.

Forcing lower tier servers to be merged doesn’t fix the problem of people leaving, it just stripmines (AGAIN!) bronze and some silver to let upper tier servers keep on doing exactly what they’re currently doing, and doesn’t solve any underlying problems. But it’ll let you pretend that things are still good and wonderful for a while, until the population loss gets to be noticeable again. Then where do you get replacement people?

Also, merging the servers only (as has been pointed out numerous times) means queues for people that want to actually play. That’s a losing “solution” right there – a server that queues all of the maps is a server that has people that want to play but can’t. Not a sign of health, but a sign of overpopulation with no room to grow.

Lower map caps, lock upward transfers, let the player base sort out population itself, and lets have matchups where the final scores are closer, because anybody with half a brain knows that a close match is a good match.

Later, if there is an increase in interest in WvW, map caps can be increased since there will already be a better distribution of population.

Maxwell.7843:

Basically, correct me if I’m wrong, you believe that unlocking POIs should be the reward given to those who can not only hold their own, but also can count on the support of their team…? (example: if a guy is going for the vista on the ruins, and the ruins are surrounded by that guy’s team mates, it means he has earned the right to unlock the POI)
Did I understand correctly?

Pretty much, although the tone of how you’re writing this is affected incredulous disbelief.

The second M in MMORPG is for “Multiplayer”, and if you want to circumvent that for some personal solo endeavor (which isn’t required for the game, of course) then it’s on you and not everybody else to make that happen. No consideration of you has to be given, and none should be expected.

You are going into a competition-based area of the game and wanting others to bend that mode so you can treat it as a single-player offline experience… no.

You either learn how to do it alone (swiftness, stealth, gods help you fighting ability), in which case your argument holds no water, or you conform to the game mode and help your server control those areas which will let you get your POIs and skill points.

If you want to treat WvW maps like PvE, then let me throw down siege in PvE and have the npcs ignore me while I’m doing map completion. Let me know when you’ve got that ready for me, and I’ll personally escort you through my server’s map in WvW.

titanlectro.5029:

I did read that post.

I’ve been on GoM since headstart so I’ve pretty much always been a lower tier player.

That said, if my team had a 40 person limit, and so did the enemy, that would suck. It would remove an entire form of play from WvW, which is a HUGE price to pay. Perhaps you do not enjoy playing with more than 40 people, and that is your prerogative. However many people LOVE that kind of play, and that play style would be completely destroyed by this “fix.”

Sacrificing an entire play style for a fix is excessive. That is why I say the cure is worse than the disease.

If you agree that things are looking bad now, like the end of petroleum bad, then best to cut down on our consumption while we find viable large-scale alternatives.

Dropping the cap (and it doesn’t have to be to forty – I was just going along with what previous posters had come up with) temporarily is that consumption reduction. And remember that if the cap is forty people that’s 160 people per server than can play in the four maps at once, with extras able to queue or be in EotM until room is available.

The idea is not to reduce zerging/blobbing, that’s just going to be a side effect (and there’s nothing stopping a server from gathering its forty people together to zerg around) of the population redistribution, which should have an incentive for people to move down. Moving up should be locked for the forseeable future for this to work.

Once the populations have normalized, then caps can be relaxed and that style of play can resume assuming people haven’t found a better way to play in the meantime. And the rapid mix of people from different servers could well spark some innovation which we’ve been missing for a while – to paint it broadly: higher tier “we queue frequently” large scale servers might have something to teach lower tier servers, and lower tier "we are few so we are Swiss army knives of roaming capability small-group “get ’er done” servers might have something to teach the higher tier server people.

Hybridization may occur, and that would be a healthy shot in the arm for WvW at large. But if how things are currently is unsustainable, and the best specific solution anybody can come up with is “collapse the lower tier servers and forcibly relocate their population” to temporarily sustain the way the higher tier servers play… what happens when the player loss already being experienced by higher tier servers drains back down to how things are now again? Then there’ll be no other tiers to pull people from, and we’ll be in the same place.

Better to experiment and try to make something sustainable than run the current model into the ground, I say.

Only read the first page (have to dash), but I think Jim’s suggestion of lowering WvW map caps is a good idea, as it’s clearly only meant as a temporary measure. Couple that with reduced (on a scale) gem prices to transfer downward and a lock on transferring upward, and you may well get some WvW population (because that’s what we’re talking about, isn’kitten Not server population, but WvW population) leveling. Which is definitely a good thing.

What about guilds that can field more people than a given population cap? Split up and go to different maps, you blobby monsters.

Queue times? That’s what EotM is for. Yes, I don’t like playing it either, what with it being the Frostgorge Sound farming train that also gives badges of honour, but it’s your chance to run around killing people until some room on a map opens up. Or, you know, transfer to a lower population server.

“But I want large scale battles!”… yes, you’ll still get those. A cap limit of forty people still means up to 120 people on the map at the same time, and once populations level out somewhat the cap can be raised incrementally (and ideally, secretly – we don’t want selfish stack-oriented people to start imbalancing things deliberately again) and, assuming interest in WvW continues (or increases) the huge battles that some servers have come to know and love will return.

Think of lowering the cap as an austerity measure that nobody likes right now, but clears up a lot of mistakes and bad decisions made by players in the past, and gives us a chance to rebuild into something better. It’s going to be unpleasant for some, great for others, and have little discernible effect for the rest. But once things have settled out… we’ll be in a better place.

Think about it.

Or, let a claim be overridden if the the new party trying to claim has active WvW buffs and the existing claim doesn’t.

Offair.2563:

Rimmy.9217:

They weren’t a mistake, they’re a great addition to the WvW kitten nal, and I’m having trouble figuring out why anybody would have a problem with them unless they’re so tied to the idea of dropping 1-6 rams at a gate and pounding it open surrounded by a sea of k-trainers.

This thing is a boon for defense.

It’s a huge mistake and a waste of resources. I am all for defending boons but this is not the thing.

Come join us in bronze NA – we’re using them like crazy.

McWolfy.5924:

You can place treb, cata behind gates and acs all over the wall. If the atackers diisable all of your def with 1 trick go and farm cof p1.
I think this traps should be single targets.

If attackers disable all of your defensive siege with one trick, then you’re placing it wrong.

People need to stop playing as though wishing will get rid of siege disablers, and start playing like they exist.

sparc.3649:

Maybe you haven’t read any of my posts (I should have plenty on this subject by now as I’ve not been playing /all/ day), I don’t build rams, I am a defender. I don’t see any valid reason to build a ram for defense…

Not a big fan of using fear to keep people off of things, like your lord, eh?

They weren’t a mistake, they’re a great addition to the WvW kitten nal, and I’m having trouble figuring out why anybody would have a problem with them unless they’re so tied to the idea of dropping 1-6 rams at a gate and pounding it open surrounded by a sea of k-trainers.

This thing is a boon for defense.

sparc.3649:

Jeknar.6184:

sparc.3649:

And on the opposite side of that fence the offender can get in that much quicker because they disable your defensive siege. I know personally first-hand because this has happened to me!

And why you didn’t disabled their siege when you had your disabled? Stalemate…

Maybe at this point it would be, but at the time I didn’t even know such a stupid item existed. Yes, some people (like myself) actually just play, rather USED to play, the game without reading the website/patch notes/living on the forums.

That’s like saying you just play and are upset that your walls got knocked down by flaming rocks from the sky, because you didn’t know that trebs existed. Have you never been the victim of a supply trap before?

To be fair, it’s only been a few days so people are still getting used to siege disablers, but on my server at least they’ve been a godsend. It’s changed up the way we break into structures, and it’s certainly changed how we defend.

But if you play as though they don’t exist then yes, you’re probably going to have a bad time.

sparc.3649:

Rimmy.9217:

Why do so many of the complainers about this not realize than the siege disabler means they don’t get to your lord in the first place?!

Now any class can stop a siege for arguably longer than the lord lasts while standing in the middle of a zerg – stop looking at the lord’s room and start playing with the more flexible tool you’ve been given.

And on the opposite side of that fence the offender can get in that much quicker because they disable your defensive siege. I know personally first-hand because this has happened to me!

Are you putting your siege in the same old places, then? Rams are next to useless now, unless it’s an unoccupied structure or there are no supplies inside. So forget those.

Arrowcarts have to be placed further away from the gates, laterally along the wall. Yes, this means that you don’t get as much coverage BUT it means that it either takes more disablers (costing them more supplies, and you DID drop a supply trap by your gate, didn’t you?) or they end up standing in your fire.

Catapults and trebuchets are the order of the day, and if you have built counter catas/trebs inside and you are sending people out to disable theirs in the field, how are they getting your anti-siege disabled?

I wonder if they’re they’re getting inside faster for you because they are dropping rams, you’re throwing the disabler (possibly through the gate), and then going up top to try to destroy the rams while they’re down, and they’re painting the walls with marks and aoe fire.

Why do so many of the complainers about this not realize than the siege disabler means they don’t get to your lord in the first place?!

Now any class can stop a siege for arguably longer than the lord lasts while standing in the middle of a zerg – stop looking at the lord’s room and start playing with the more flexible tool you’ve been given.

McFribble.2349:

Meanwhile, GW1 struggles to keep players, and Quake/Counter Strike continue to be some of the most played games on PC. Changing things for the sake of changing them isn’t a smart idea when things weren’t in need of changing. This is how you BREAK things.

Changes should only be made if they are needed. Doing so to keep player interests only shows that what you had before wasn’t worth playing in the first place, and repeated changes for the same reason proves the devs can’t make a solid online experience to save their lives.

I’m not sure that GW1 is struggling to keep any players, frankly. Is there even a revenue stream from it anymore?

Counter-strike: Global Offensive ranks in at 3.41% of time played in 2014, versus Guild Wars 2 at 1.22%. Quake doesn’t even make the list.

As for “changes should only be made when needed”, this was needed. Bannering a live lord to keep him up, fine. Bannering a dead lord indefinitely, not fine. There’s more than zerg play to this game, unless you prefer stale and predictable.

McFribble.2349:

Did you know rocket jumping and strafe jumping wasn’t an intended feature in the old Quake games? The developers didn’t even know it existed until players found out and it became the meta.

But because the Devs aren’t fickle about their game, they let it stay, since players really liked it. And from that point on, Quake was considered one of the best online multiplayer shooters on the planet.

Take some notes. Unless something is SERIOUSLY breaking the game, you should NEVER take away strategic options in your game. Lord Bannering is stoppable by covering entrances and locking enemy players down. But because that is apparently too hard, just get rid of Lord Rezzing…

Did you know that, in GW1, the devs would regularly change a handful of skills, often without notice?

Sometimes to increase functionality of the lesser used skills, but often specifically to interfere with meta builds or “must have” skills?

Did you know that this actually made the game better, because there was a constant shifting in the way people did things, rather than doing the same thing every single time?

Take some notes: banner your lord BEFORE he goes down – play better and be useful rather than using an OP skill to make up for sloppy scouting, defending, and mobility.

If it takes a group to break through your outer wall and your inner wall, you want to do nothing until they’re in your lord’s room? And then you want ONE GUY to reset things since you couldn’t be bothered to save him before, or convince enough of your other people to come help?

It’s a terrible way to play the game, and as has been noted earlier this is the upper tier servers that are crying about this, not the lower tier servers. Sounds like there’s less flexibility and adaptability in the top half of the game, which is also where so many of the “this game is getting stale” threads come from.

Learn to play in a new way. Or drop down a few tiers and we’ll teach you.

Nikkinella.8254:

This was a bad change that really screws over defenders.

It really isn’t – it just moves the fight from the lord’s room out to where the siege is.

Sorry people, your comfortable ruts have been filled in and graded.

Vermillion.4061:

It should at least have diminishing returns if you continue to use it 1 after another.

That’s fair, if pieces of siege have diminishing returns after each shot.

Banzie.5248:

Rimmy.9217:

Xillllix.3485:

They could have limited it to 3 banners res, instead of breaking the feature.

Nope, this overpowered exploitation of something that should never have worked in the first place is something the game is well rid of. Banner when the lord is low and you’re fine. Bannering something that’s dead back up? No thanks.

And why three? Why not two or five or seven or some other prime number? Zero times if dead, as much as you like while still alive.

Neutral ground, Add a downed state to the lord. We know they have to ability to do it to NPCs. Why not here as well?

No. People talk about WvW being stale and unchanging, and have been for a long time. Time to shake up some of the things that people always do. People have been bannering a dead lord forever now. Let’s try innovating a different way to prevent capture.

Xillllix.3485:

They could have limited it to 3 banners res, instead of breaking the feature.

Nope, this overpowered exploitation of something that should never have worked in the first place is something the game is well rid of. Banner when the lord is low and you’re fine. Bannering something that’s dead back up? No thanks.

And why three? Why not two or five or seven or some other prime number? Zero times if dead, as much as you like while still alive.

Ultimaistanza.4793:

Terrahero.9358:

There is now the Siege Disabler. Take out a cluster of rams on a gate, or a bunch of cata’s hugging the wall. The siege disabler is a great boon to defenders.

I somewhat agree about the banner rezing but not about the siege disabler. While it will help with defense somewhat, it won’t help if you happen to be a vastly smaller force. For example; the offensive group could just use ranged siege, paints the walls with aoes so you can’t get off a siege disabler, and uses disablers on the defensive siege you try and build/use to counter their siege. You simply have to hope the siege out of their range can hit or that you somehow get off an amazing hit.

There’s this cool mechanic called “stealth” that lets some classes get by all of that to fire off a siege disabler.

So now it’s not just all about the warriors being untouchable and bannering a fully dead (and how come it doesn’t work on US when we’re fully dead, hmmm?) claimer, now it’s about multiple classes having a flexible response to a large zerg trying to take their objective.

Here’s flexible for you: a fully upgraded T3 keep holds up to 1700 supplies, which is 170 siege disablers. Cluster of golems hitting you? That’s the better part of an hour’s worth of disabling them. Single cluster of siege (catapults usually, but also trebs) bothering you? You can potentially keep those useless for over two hours.

And while that means the focus has shifted out of the lord’s room, none of this relies on the ‘tactic’ of having five traited warriors using a skill that should have affected npcs the same way it affected players in the first place. Now anybody can immobilize siege, moving the fight for the keep elsewhere. THAT is an improvement.

Warriors, sad from having their OP toy taken away: hustle into the lord’s room and banner the lord when he’s low like how it was supposed to function in the first place, or else get him up the way you’d get up any dead player.

style.6173:

It is a good change for those who dislike strategy.

It’s not ‘strategy’ if the tactic is simply ‘banner the lord’. That’s doing the same monkey thing over and over again. That’s rote, not strategy.

And lord’s room siege.

sirian.4981:

slamb.4781:

SO let me get this straight you would like a Global 24/7 MMO to cater to you and your time zone only?

Not sure if ignorant or arrogant?

Well NA servers are not supposed to be global. They are supposed to be for NA, and possible SA too.

Hey, guess what? Not everybody in the geographical area of a server keeps banker’s hours. Do shift work? Got a baby? Insomnia?

People don’t just play in that space between after high school/work and bedtime-because-I-work-in-the-morning.

Just because you and the people you play with are more active at a particular time doesn’t make that the only valid time to play.

Sorry people, if you want only your wins to count, that’s a PvP match you’re looking for. Twenty four hour play means exactly that – your playtime is just a slice of the day, no different than any other.

johnson.3960:

So how long until asking for my money back because of the coherent crash is viable? Pretty disappointed that something that was working was messed up so bad with an update.

Played the game before? Got a few hours under your belt?

You got your money’s worth, and more besides. This isn’t deliberate on ANet’s part, and the hundreds of thousands of users have a wide variety of different machines, operating systems, and setups. So, it doesn’t work on some of them (including mine). It’s not like they’re calling it a night and saying “Meh, good enough”.

Yeah, you want to play and can’t. But money back? Feel entitled much?

We too have had some discussion about what should signify what, and it’s probably going to come down to the first commander on a map will throw up a colour of their choice. Subsequent commanders will (hopefully) choose different colours, and map chat / voice client will end up saying “Defend garrison on yellow” or “Getting supplies to siege Bay on blue”.

Eventually we assume that certain colours will, by server convention, be used for particular activities enough that most commanders will just switch to that colour automatically, further cementing the notion. But even if commanders don’t, it’s easy enough to say “Supplies needed on purple”.

Notice how the upper tier players don’t like it, and it’s what the lower tier players have been asking for in threads going back over a year?

In before someone says “empty PvDooring servers”.

For the record, it’s a good change.

Nymph of Meliai.6739:

Rimmy.9217:

Can you run to the merchant in the Black Citadel and get me some striped paint?

You can buy some for your guild here…
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/RAINBOW-FACE-PAINT-PAINTING-GAY-PRIDE-FLAG-MULTI-COLOURS-/261523377830?pt=UK_Flags&hash=item3ce4020ea6

I am sure you meant to ask for tartan paint…
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tartan-Paint-Tin-1l-Royal-Stewart-/111202776585?pt=UK_Toys_Games_Games&hash=item19e433b609

However, we all know that the only way to boost the performance of npc guards in towers, camps, etc. is to change their armor from light to heavy… it is all a matter of the weight of their armor… so next time you need to talk to Champion Commander Siegerazer for a long weight which you can then use to boost the armor of your npcs.

Please fetch me some gridpoints from the quartermaster, and bring back the 100 kg bag of puffed wheat for the cafeteria, would you?

gatekeeper.9674:

I was playing in EB today and everyone kept saying if you /cheer @ guards, that it will boost their morale and make them stronger? So I ran around all our towers and keeps cheering the guards but I don’t think it was actually working? Does this actually work?

Can you run to the merchant in the Black Citadel and get me some striped paint?

dandamanno.4136:

Rimmy.9217:

dandamanno.4136:

I refresh siege that I run across. That’s it. Why would I play a game that required me to run around doing something terribly boring for hours a day?

Maybe it helps your team win, maybe not. But at the end of the week it’s not like you get any dazzling rewards (for winning the match or refreshing siege) and no one will remember your work refreshing sieges anyway.

Play for fun and don’t let anyone else tell you how you should be spending your time.

Your “dazzling reward” comes when the siege is available to defend with when your opponents come a-knocking.

The game doesn’t require you to do anything – it’s your choice to refresh siege. If you ‘want to be remembered’ as you say, then do something memorable.

And I say this coming from a server where nobody refreshes siege, so we often don’t bother until our gates are being hit.

I think we agree? Don’t blow your playing time doing things you find to be unfun. Find ways to contribute doing fun things instead.

Yes we agree lol.

I was expanding on what you said, but directing it to the OP. I realize now that I didn’t make that clear, rereading myself.

Dayra.7405:

You are in T6, I bet there aren’t many people playing in T6 at night nor in the early morning.

Get 5 people (at best who knows more about WvW than you) and 2 golem per map meet at 3am and get all you need. And as everyone is sleeping it will be only PvE (or PvDoor)

Maybe you can even do it alone, you don’t have to cap the keeps/towers to get the poi’s and vista’s.

Again, showing your ignorance of NA bronze tiers.

You can start by not treating WvW as the solo exercise that PvE is.

Go into WvW during prime time (for your server) and join one of the WvW-centric guilds. Since you can be in five guilds simultaneously, this shouldn’t negatively impact your game at all.

Rolling with a WvW guild will definitely give you access to objectives of other colours. But do try to not be the kind of selfish user that that pops on to a map and says “Can we take ____?” when nobody knows you – it takes a group of people to take things in WvW, and you showing up as a tourist to see the sights and then leave forever isn’t going to dispose anybody to drop what they’re doing to help you.

So join them and contribute. If you find the group you’re in is close to a place you need, go ahead and suggest it. Give and take, right?

dandamanno.4136:

I refresh siege that I run across. That’s it. Why would I play a game that required me to run around doing something terribly boring for hours a day?

Maybe it helps your team win, maybe not. But at the end of the week it’s not like you get any dazzling rewards (for winning the match or refreshing siege) and no one will remember your work refreshing sieges anyway.

Play for fun and don’t let anyone else tell you how you should be spending your time.

Your “dazzling reward” comes when the siege is available to defend with when your opponents come a-knocking.

The game doesn’t require you to do anything – it’s your choice to refresh siege. If you ‘want to be remembered’ as you say, then do something memorable.

And I say this coming from a server where nobody refreshes siege, so we often don’t bother until our gates are being hit.

Because you’re jaded and a bore.

To the OP: good on both of you for staying with it – a pillow-swinging guardian versus a love-tap thief lol

Patience you have, yessssss.

+1

Telemin.7380:

Marcus Antonius.1904:

Today we celebrate our Eredon Terrace Day!

/cheer

ET FTW

Does this mean I need to start organizing ET offline meet Round three? New York has been done, Las vegas has been done. People have been asking for Canada next.

Let me know if you do this – Jeknar has always wanted to slap my actual face, rather than chasing my rainbows.

Is a PvPer, has a commander tag, wants map completion handed to him so he can make legendaries, can’t afford to simply buy a legendary, claims to have been playing “for years” and going into WvW, and yet claims he “looks in on WvW on Saturdays to see if other people have capped the POIs” he needs, and everyone in every other game mode is a scrub.

Twelve, tops. Probably macros in PvP as well. Probably never occurred to him that most servers will help out someone who needs a bit of WvW map completion, because he doesn’t do anything to contribute to capturing the points he needs himself. And, assuming his trolly post is true, goes into WvW to pull people away from legitimately playing to waste time spawncamping.

Quite a prize you’ve got for yourself, Blackgate.

yanniell.1236:

What difference does it make to lower the population to 50 per side when outside NA prime some servers has 10 people on total and the other has 50 on each map? It wouldn’t even come close to solve the coverage issue.

All this idea does is to generate huge queues on prime times.

Stacked servers with people that want to play WvW would have to redistribute population to other servers.

So instead of stacking specific servers, population gets averaged out somewhat.

It also means that blobing doesn’t remain the be all and end all of things. There’s EotM for people that demand only that.

Jim Hunter.6821:

Rimmy.9217:

Jim Hunter.6821:

Merging servers won’t bring about balance. If you want balanced matches you need to lower the population to 50 per side per map. People can either transfer to balance out the servers or sit in queue while the balanced fights are happening.

Jim’s got it right.

I should probably repeat that when the next” merge the servers” thread comes up a week from now. It seemed to finally shut everyone up.

I was looking in my history of posts the other week (not over this) and I see how many different threads on the exact same subject I’ve posted in, and I see that I tried to make the exact same point in an exciting new way. But the other people who repeat “Melt bronze servers into ____” never return the courtesy.

And from all of those, I only got demerits once! I’m kind of impressed with myself (generally, not just over this). nods