Guild Wars 2

Ranc.7192:

so it would be like any other mmorpg then…..

Ohhh no…….. there is enemy players over there I cant complete my quest right now..

or

I need to kill ten npc………ok ill go over here ohh nOooo……there is a bunch of enemy players over there I cant complete my quest…..

you know the event circle that tells you where events are on the map, just make it where the enemy player cant enter the event while its happening

Except “enemy players” = all other players

This game is not WoW, and does not have factions. There wouldn’t be any players on your team, and thus dynamic events would basically never be completed.

Although I am generally inclined to agree with you, I need to say: correlation does not imply causation.

A ballista covering a choke point can sometimes be multiple kills per shot.

I wonder what’s going to happen when these spawn camped servers have all three of their exits blocked by treb fire and arrow carts.

“Night” capping will never be solved, because people can just log on and play when they want.

When school lets out for the summer, the problem will return because some people’s play schedules will change.

The PROBLEM to me seems to be a combination of the Orb bonuses + score bonuses + plenty of free time to upgrade and setup siege for future defense.

Okay so we can’t do much about the free time issue… there will simply be certain times when a server can’t field a force to resist another server. Some servers might fix this problem, but some (maybe most) will not.

What I think can be fixed is the overwhelming effect of the orb bonuses + the bonuses from having your score 100k higher than others.

For example: a server that managed a “night” cap of the entire map now has all three orbs (+15% all stats), and begins to outpace it’s opponents (VERY QUICKLY) on building the other upgrades. These boosted stats combined with the control they have on the map and the length of time they’ve had to sit and upgrade (without much resistance) basically means the game is over. On the second day of the match if you don’t manage to get an orb back, take and secure some objectives – you’ll likely never have another chance.

It’s fine to be the underdog in a match. It’s not particularly fun to have basically two days to fight an uphill battle before the numbers and bonuses are so stacked against them that there is just no chance of recovery.

tarnin.1690:

These are the same arguments that DAoC had but instead of aussies it was mandarins playing and capping at night. Guess what, that got fixed when they merged the servers into clusters (and now i guess its one big cluster) and relics could be taken right back. The only real issue we had in DAoC was low population, at this time there really isn’t much of a population issue as the game is so new. The issue here is people looking at the WvW score and just not even queueing up. They are beaten before they even start. This isn’t a game issue, its a player mentality issue. So many players coming from games that hand them everything on a silver platter that when they actually have to work for something against non scripted encounters, they wont.

Before the current clustering on Yak’s Bend, we were getting our butts handed to us on every 24hr roll over. So many people just did not queue. Now that we are top dogs in this pairing, all the people sitting around LA spamming /map saying how it sucks are now out there. Most people just want the ezmode win and thats it. Look at DAoC, albs were top for so long because of the ezmode classes originally and massive population. Anet tried to do away with that with all the classes being the same, just server v server and STILL people complain that its “unbalanced”.

What is this “merged the servers into clusters” thing?

I think implementing some sort of “comeback mechanic” that would give trashed servers HOPE that they could maybe make a comeback would help solve the un-fun psychological issue while not taking away the unbalanced, unfair, no holds barred environment that W3 is.

Just something that gives a trashed server a chance to get a temporary but important buff of something – if of course they manage to complete some objective that doesn’t involve trying to break through the siege contain at their gate.

Just a thought.

midnight in which time zone?

And we’re saying there does NOT need to be a limit on how much more a server has in WvW compared to the others.

This is a bad solution, Bellok. People have tried to explain why but you just dismiss us out of hand. Please re-read some of the posts here.

The “problem” isn’t even well defined yet. We can’t begin to discuss a solution when we still don’t truly know if there IS a problem.

The fact is, we won’t know for a while to come. Right now everything is unstable and chaotic, and collected data is going to be very unreliable.

Dethwar.1768:

@Sky.9347

Agree, losing progress in the guild buffs is a critical factor.

Your second point I disagree with. If person wants no queues during NA Prime AND also wants night capping coverage – there are several viable options. So far I’ve heard the following servers have “night capper” coverage:

1. Island of Janthir – no queues during NA prime
2. Sea of Sorrows – no queues during NA prime
3. Yaks Bend – dunno about NA prime queues

So I guess it depends on what assurances you need. The only one so far is guilds not wanting to lose their progress. But if you want to play without NA prime time queues and also have night coverage – the solution and perfect servers for these problems are there. But when I see a thread complaining about night capping the only viable suggestion has been – guild buffs lost. However, launch of this game was 3 weeks ago – so I doubt 2 or 3 weeks of guild progress is seen as an impossible barrier to help your own situation.

Yes, well I mean the two things are related. The question people ask themselves is this:

“okay so if we switch servers and lose all of our progress, how do we know the new server won’t end up being popular like this one and have the samekittenqueue length?!”

And I think until transfers are locked down somewhat, most people aren’t willing to take that risk without some kind of assurance (reasonably) that the new server is going to be better in some way.

Bellok.4180:

It’s not preventing people from playing for one thing. If someone wants to play in WvWvW and they have long queue times due to the fact they moved to a higher ranking server they have just as much ability to transfer to server that is less busy. There is generally wrong when you have only a few servers fielding the bulk of international players, it needs to be evened out. You’ll find that there will be much more competition amongst the servers this way, and probably a lot more fun to boot. However I have a feeling you are afraid of competition, that is why you greatly oppose this idea.

Every 2 weeks three servers will fight one another. Anytime their schedules don’t line up, queue times will go haywire. Server changes won’t matter, because in 2 weeks it will shuffle up again.

This idea is predicated on the false belief that server transfers will always be free and limitless. It just won’t work.

Lappdancer.4857:

Sky.9347:

Okay, so let’s leave the “demoralizing” out of my post.

Instead, let’s just call it “going to sleep”. My point stands. You are locking anyone who plays during off peak hours into long ques (possibly endlessly), and giving power to the tactic of “we’ll cap and then everyone leaves in order to prevent them from fielding much resistance”.

Why would you incentivize such behavior?

If they have a very large population advantages, yes there will be queues. Server transfers are free.

I think the leaving issue is solved solved by setting a floor that is enough that people can easily take unguarded points. Plus if you have enough people to cap a significant portion of a map due to population discrepancy, I don’t think it would be very easy to prevent everyone from joining wvw.

Server transfers are free right now, but what happens when they aren’t free and the server matches are reshuffled every 2 weeks?

What I mean is… say I am playing on my server today and I have a decent queue time. Tomorrow the match resets, pitting us against 2 new servers with new and different schedules, and all of a sudden I am stuck with 4 hour queues. Should I just transfer? What if it costs money, and I have a guild, and not everyone wants to pay money every 2 weeks to find a new server that fits their schedule?

Mara,

I used to argue for solutions to this problem. After reading carefully and thinking critically, I’m honestly not sure if there IS a problem.

I would like to see how things shake out when the queue system is fixed + transfers are closed + rankings are stable. Those three things together might actually solve this “problem”.

IF NOT – then I am now of the belief that it is going to require a change in the way the points are amassed and how the buffs they build up are built. The problem isn’t so much the nightcapping, but rather the snow ball effect that comes from one 6-8 hour period of an all-cap.

I think:
Nobody should have their play time diminished by any system.
Nobody should have less access to W3 than anyone else, especially not based on time zone.
All caps (near 100% map control) SHOULD be very valuable.
All caps should be very difficult to maintain for long periods of time.
The system should offer variable (increasing) resistance to a server as it goes from 100% to 300% of their original holdings.

Rodarin.6058:

Sky.9347:

In addition to the points YPC brings up, also you have this glaring problem:

Say one server is getting trounced. They lose morale, and stop playing. This now punishes the other two servers (who are now forbidden from entering the zone) for simply winning the game.

ANET needs to look at how match ups go when all 3 servers are relatively close in numbers. I imagine they would find there is a back and forth and all servers are doing something positive. Therefore all these arguments that servers will get demoralized are hogwash. They get demoralized already because the score is out of hand within 10 hours of reset. Because it reset when they were all sleeping and the dominant server went in and took everything while the maps were empty.

I think people would find more people would actually log in and build the caps right up to max once they saw they could actually compete.

No one is going to go into WvW and spend what little bit of money they can scrape together in a completely futile effort. Beyond repair costs you have updates and buying siege weapons and various other things to spend coin on. If you know that once you go to sleep or leave it will be ‘wasted’ money why bother? But if you server at least held its own stuff for the vast majority of the time and the original ‘conflicted’ areas were actually in conflict the attitude might change. If one server takes everything and then holds Stonemist for 160 of the 168 hours of the weekly match up what is the point? especially if your server cant come close to even threatening it let alone taking it?

The irony is what everyone describes as what ‘could’ happen is already happening, and then some.

Okay, so let’s leave the “demoralizing” out of my post.

Instead, let’s just call it “going to sleep”. My point stands. You are locking anyone who plays during off peak hours into long ques (possibly endlessly), and giving power to the tactic of “we’ll cap and then everyone leaves in order to prevent them from fielding much resistance”.

Why would you incentivize such behavior?

I agree that the reward for contribution system needs to be looked at.

Regarding those who try to dismiss this with “no holy trinity, learn to play” – I am afraid you do not know the width and breadth of viable builds in this game.

Nobody wants a DPS/Tank/Heal setup, and that isn’t what we are doing. We are playing SUPPORT, which is a different thing entirely. We are enabling our teammates to reach their maximum potential by ensuring that they are cleansed, buffed, and unafraid to push forward.

I play a support Guardian. Most of the time I play Staff/Hammer. Obviously, Guardian players will tell you that we switch weapons to meet the event pretty often.

Some times I use the Staff to control the battlefield. I can do this from mid-range, but it doesn’t include much damage. I earn basically no reward for this.

Other times I use the Hammer to hold the front line of battle. I am up there, keeping my allies alive and kicking. Giving AoE Protection and Retaliation to everyone, AoE Cleansing, spreading some Burns, AoE Might, and if I can find a water field some nice AoE Healing too. I also USE my virtues (especially if I am about to back up to mid-range). I earn some rewards here, usually only if I catch some moron trying to break our frontline and show him an up close and personal view of my Hammer.

Support is not Healing. Support is not Tanking. Support & Control are a little bit of both of those.

In addition to the points YPC brings up, also you have this glaring problem:

Say one server is getting trounced. They lose morale, and stop playing. This now punishes the other two servers (who are now forbidden from entering the zone) for simply winning the game.

I think it is a combination of two main factors:

1) Lose all progress in the guild.
2) No assurance that switching will solve ANYTHING.

Bellok,

Proposing a solution that doesn’t account for many things (such as one of the three servers simply not fielding anyone, thus preventing the other two from even PLAYING), and then insulting the intelligence of anyone who doesn’t agree with you isn’t a very good way to convince anyone you’re right.

This is a bad idea. I am wholeheartedly against this idea.

Wow, such elitist pride.

We have a term for people like this where I come from… “over-compensating”.

Narathkor.8541:

Yes there is, because it is war not pve, so WvW playstyle should most certainly be enforced in WvW

It would seem that the developers disagree with you. The W3 maps are a blend of PvE and PvP.

For what it’s worth, here are my thoughts:

Crossing realms to recruit is a temporary thing. Once transfers cost gems, I am certain this will be a far less common thing.

Crossing realms to purposefully deny your opponent a Trebuchet that they paid for with coin, time, and supply is not only wrong, but should be a rewarded with a temporary ban from the game and the forums.

A guild that specializes in “unsavory” tactics is entirely valid, and even important in the grand scheme of things. From an in-character perspective: bad guys have guilds too. From an out-of-character perspective: you can’t call your guild honorable unless these things are possible and purposefully NOT done by your guild – no light without darkness.

The game has been out what… a month?

Of all the things that may or may not need fixing, I for one do not want them to spend much time on “extra skins” right now. I am sure in a year or two there will be so many types of armor skins that no two players will look alike.

Dynamic event based on a keep/tower/castle -

Escort Dolyaks until this objective has X supply delivered.

Reward

Have the event bounce around based on whatever… most recently captured objectives should have somewhat higher priority or frequency.

I think the dynamic event idea is great… but check this out.

Instead of spawning some big mean monster to distract the winners, why not have “rebellions” where one of the NPC camps goes neutral and wages a small scale invasion of a nearby supply depot or keep or something. If it isn’t dealt with those objectives will eventually go neutral too.

This way, owning all of the map comes with the natural problems of owning vast lands – continuous management.

Logan,

I actually like that idea, as someone who has seen both sides of the lopsided battle.

Keelin,

It probably has something to do with the Virtues, self-combos, AND utility skills you mentioned.

And if you want to do “primarily damage”, then your survivability and support would naturally be a little lackluster.

Now on to the point…

I want to use the Scepter, really I do. I haven’t tried a high crit build with it, so there is that.

That being said… it seems to just lack punch. I’ve tried to use it several times in WvW and I just can’t do much with it.

Small changes can have big impacts if designed correctly.

I think W3 needs a half dozen or fewer well designed small changes. Maybe one or two at a time for the next 2-4 weeks.

But I HOPE they at least talk to us soon about what they are thinking.

Aletheides.5693:

The funny thing is that ArNet labeled sPvP hardcore and WvW casual PvP.

No they didn’t.

tbox:

I might! I do what I want, I do what I want… ;-)

maximumpanda.5178:

oh dont get me wrong. there are many things very much wrong with the current state of wvw. its unfortunate that there is such a massive difference between the servers that have spent the last 3 years waiting for a WVW game to come out. and those just piecing the monumental task ahead of you, its absolutely daunting. unfortunately i do not sympathize with servers who are demanding that they get some sort of handicap because they dont have the same organization, all these things come with time. and ultimately will happen on every server. the major thing holding communities back right now is the constant free transfers. people dont stay in place long enough to create these server organizations.

i believe most issues will be solved with time. unfortunately with the mmo market being the way it is. time is a luxury most games cant afford.

The top three servers being leaps and bounds ahead is fine. That isn’t the issue.

The issue is that W3 is only “fun” for most people during the first day. About when the second day comes around one server is at roughly 75-80% of everything, acquiring boosts and stuff at such a high speed that before the 3rd day rolls around its 95%+ vs spawn camping.

Some people ask for huge buffs or something, but I am not.

I believe ANet should help the community solve this problem. There are many ways to do it, but a combination of selectively locking transfers + allowing guilds to keep their influence when transferring to certain servers + perhaps some kind of mechanism that allows an opportunity of SOME SORT for a server to get back in the game.

As it stands, once one server has all the orbs and most of the map, there is no way to change that. They will have buffs, supply surplus, time to setup, full map control for easy movement, and be gaining more buffs at an amazing rate.

Sometimes you lose games. That’s cool. As it stands right now W3 is unplayable for 5/7ths of the week in anyway more than “ok guys, let’s see if we can break through this siege line before we run out of money for repairs” – and people don’t even queue in for that.

This actually makes me want to transfer to Kaineng just for the permanently instant queues.

Xia.3485:

I found this thread here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Let-s-see-how-badly-the-1-week-matchmaking-is-going-post-your-server

Some of the screen caps appear to be close. So that answers that question.

The only screen shots that are close are either Before pictures, or pictures of the #1, #2, #3 match.

maximumpanda.5178:

Sky.9347:

Kodiak.3281:

Sky.9347:

But this isn’t just happening with that second group that has 1 of the top servers in it.

This is happening all the way down the rank charts, including the last three.

Obviously, something is wrong with the system.

Ever hear the expression “!@#$ rolls down hill?” So now next week IoJ or SoS will go back down a tier to the 3rd tier and presumably crush anyone who’s still there.

Match ups simply will never be fair because servers aren’t equal. SoS and IoJ are Oceanic servers with different play times than ET. There’s no way to ensure a good competition there. Match making systems will very rarely if ever take that into account. The fact Anet is taking literally zero steps to ensure servers are even remotely equal certainly isn’t helping matters. This isn’t also necessarily a bad call for them because they could be waiting to see what effect that Panda expansion will have on their population/numbers.

You’re going to have to just decide how do you want to deal with it.

Okay well what you are saying here is that every 3 servers there is such a massive jump in participation/skill/organization – whatever – that warrants them taking 100% of the map from their opponents on day 2, and holding it till the end.

The ability gap between servers is THAT huge? It is SO HUGE that there will ever only be 1 match worth playing, and every other match is screwed because there are only 3 servers in each identifiable tier of skill…

Am I understanding this correctly?

participation is the key word in your statement. most servers dont like the idea of losing, and when they already have a significant advantage people get demoralized. when they get demoralized, they dont want to fight. the lack of willing to fight causes an even further point disparity. which ultimately leads to these horrific 1 sided battles across the board.

I basically agree with this last analysis of yours, except one thing: People don’t like helplessness.

Losing is one thing, being siege camped at your spawn is another.

Having it happen on the second day of a 7 (or 14!) day match is demoralizing.

But your position is that this is okay, and the system is perfect as is. People need to put on their big boy britches and fling themselves at the wall of ballista until they break through and recap enough of the map to set their overlords back far enough too… hold their keep?

Yes, I am well aware that an organized force can break through these lines, and even gain some ground. I am also aware that the chance of that force actually sustaining any of their gains is practically zero.

I love W3. I queue up as soon as I log on, win or lose, spawn camped or not.

But I also want to have great matches that are close and contested. The current system is not giving us that.

You can retreat to your “we’re just better at it than you, and you deserve to have unfun games until you get on our level” argument if you like… the fact is right now (I stand ready to be corrected here) only ONE out of SIXTEEN matches is anything resembling close or contested, and were not even at 3 full days into the match.

Something is wrong with that picture! If it isn’t addressed, these “elite WvW alliances” are going to be all that’s left playing WvW. I don’t want to see that happen.

Kodiak.3281:

Sky.9347:

But this isn’t just happening with that second group that has 1 of the top servers in it.

This is happening all the way down the rank charts, including the last three.

Obviously, something is wrong with the system.

Ever hear the expression “!@#$ rolls down hill?” So now next week IoJ or SoS will go back down a tier to the 3rd tier and presumably crush anyone who’s still there.

Match ups simply will never be fair because servers aren’t equal. SoS and IoJ are Oceanic servers with different play times than ET. There’s no way to ensure a good competition there. Match making systems will very rarely if ever take that into account. The fact Anet is taking literally zero steps to ensure servers are even remotely equal certainly isn’t helping matters. This isn’t also necessarily a bad call for them because they could be waiting to see what effect that Panda expansion will have on their population/numbers.

You’re going to have to just decide how do you want to deal with it.

Okay well what you are saying here is that every 3 servers there is such a massive jump in participation/skill/organization – whatever – that warrants them taking 100% of the map from their opponents on day 2, and holding it till the end.

The ability gap between servers is THAT huge? It is SO HUGE that there will ever only be 1 match worth playing, and every other match is screwed because there are only 3 servers in each identifiable tier of skill…

Am I understanding this correctly?

Tobias Knight.2637:

Perhaps make the Orbs reset after a time? Or if a team has all 3 then they reset after 24hrs or something?

I don’t even want to go into WvWvW anymore because it’s always a sad state.

That wouldn’t matter because with the dominance 1 server has, they would just go get them and bring them back again.

It would just be a periodic point boost for the winners.

I’ve been asking in several posts, and I haven’t heard of one yet.

Strike that – I THINK the top 3 NA servers are having a decent match. I know the top 3 EU servers are not.

So thats what, 1 game out of 16?

Divinorium.8952:

@Melphina and Sky.
When we talk about WvWvW Arena.net looks like dont care at all.

These “problems” were there when the WvWvW was 1 day long, it happened and YET they made it 1 week long without fixing it.

When people came and pointed the problem we got a "Well it’s not our fault if players make “mobs” in one server"
So turn the free transfer offkitten

While i belive it’s true that to a server succeed, it should have players from all around the world.

IT’S very obvious for me that 70~80% of the players are in a time zone. So it’s IMPOSSIBLE to every server get a “night squad”.

I’m not saying to block/cap others timezones, but something need to be done to mitigate the damage done by that.
And even when i, you, everyone said that Arena.net was silence.

So yeah at least in my point of view. Arena.net don’t care about WvWvW, sadly, because it’s what make GW2 different of others games.

Anyway sorry my bad english but i think people will get the idea.

I understand your frustration.

I suppose my supply of hope and goodwill just haven’t run out yet. If nothing has changed or at least been commented on by ANet before the next match starts on Friday, then perhaps I will be saying the same thing.

I sure hope that doesn’t happen!

Kodiak.3281:

You all can keep going on about Eredon Terrace, but the reality is you could insert any server out of the top 4 and the results will be the same. The simple break down is:

1 EXTREME server who has 24/7 organization and players (HoD)
3 Highly Active servers who have great organization and coverage during NA prime time and good coverage in the off hours (ET/SBI/JQ)

Someone is going to have to go down each week. ET was actually poised to go back up for the 1 week matches but got held back. If it wasn’t ET, it would have been JQ and the results would be the same.

The same thing is going to continue to happen until:

1. Another server steps into the Highly active server bunch crowd (such as people xferring to or from the Oceanic servers)
2. One of the top 4 servers tumbles down due to a mass transfer, people quitting, etc.

Just the way it is.

But this isn’t just happening with that second group that has 1 of the top servers in it.

This is happening all the way down the rank charts, including the last three.

Obviously, something is wrong with the system.

ET vs. IoJ vs. SoS

ET – 100%
IoJ – 0%
SoS – 0%

buzzkapow.8465:

I think the fact that there has been no response from Anet thus far, with the situation as it is on so many servers, is what concerns people. Up until now, Anet has been topnotch when it comes to informing their players.

That is true, but last time we had this discussion (which we called “night capping” at the time) their response wasn’t exactly… satisfying. The thread was later removed altogether.

Perhaps this time they will take a little more time and review some data before saying anything publicly. It’s only Monday now, I say we all take a deep breath, calm down, and wait to see what they have to say about it before jumping to any judgements.

Divinorium.8952:

When i say that the WvWvW map is poorly designed people complain. But lets face it. IT’s one of the Worst pvp maps ever.
You cant put sieges in your respawn, but the enemy can put in places close of your respawn.

And what turns all worse. Arena net just dont care about it.

Of course they care. That’s not helpful, and a little bit childish.

ANet isn’t going to take drastic action quickly. Especially not when there is a possibility that fixing the queue (which they admit is broken) and allowing server ranking to work a little while longer (still very volatile due to server transfers & its a new game) will fix, or at least mitigate, the worst of the problems that currently exist.

Going “chicken little” here isn’t going to help anything. I am just wondering if there are any of the W3 match ups that are playing out as most of us hoped they all would.

From what I can tell right now, it seems each match has 1 dominate server which would seem to indicate a systemic problem instead of a community problem.

Are there any matchups that are currently relatively even in points and map control?

Xia.3485:

Good question Sky.

From my perspective on Emhry Bay it seems the two other servers aren’t organized at all. There was one night where the blue server (forgot its name) manage to retake a large portion of the map when they got organized. We even lost the Garrison. We took it all back later in the evening. I guess they only have one PvP guild or something.

Is there a thread were people are posting their WvW standing?

That may be your perspective, and it may even be accurate.

Every single matchup I have read about thus far seems to have 1 dominant server and 2 spawn camped (or close to it) servers.

So saying “we are just better WvWers than they are” might be plausible in one or two matchups, but when it is every single matchup across all ranks… then it is a system problem.

I think the real question here should be: are there any matches that are staying relatively even?

Is this snowball issue because the servers are wildly mismatched, or is it because of the nature of supply dynamics + human psychology.

If it is because the servers are mismatched, eventually high pop servers will rise in the ranks and fight each other. The problem might just solve itself.

If however this is going on in every match, it may be a sign that the game design needs some work.

Zorkinian.7389:

To be honest, the most successful defenses we have had didn’t use the ramparts. As you point out, right now standing on a wall shooting down (by yourself or with siege equipment) doesn’t really work – you get wrecked by AoE’s and scorpion wires.

The reason it doesn’t really work is because you (the defender) are forced into a small area, and they (the attackers) have a wide area. Mechanically they are going to focus you better.

However, there is one place where this role is reversed – the door itself. If you place all that shiny siege equipment inside the walls (on the ground even) facing the door, when they inevitably crack it open they are in for a world of pain. Now the relationship is reversed – the defenders have the wide area (the entire inner courtyard) and the attackers are being funneled into a deathtrap.

Long story short – build your siege to handle the inevitable door break, not to push them off from the walls.

Brilliant, +1 for the true solution.

Hsinimod.5784:

Sky.9347:

That sounds great, but honestly… it also sounds like your enemy wasn’t fielding much of an army either.

I temporarily switched to Eredon Terrace this weekend (to join a friend who couldn’t get on my server yet), and in their WvW maps they had 20 or so people at each spawn camping, and everyone else ran around the map doing whatever – but also recapping any stray supply camps and wiping out enemy zergs before they were able to even put a dent in the massively upgraded keeps.

I’m glad your guild managed to get a large enough group to make some headway during your enemies downtime – but how are those captured objectives looking now? What if you had not been able to clean up the “small group” camping your server’s spawn? What if that group had been 70 players with siege machines?

Your experience is not the most common. Perhaps eventually the server rankings will sort this out, but the fact remains that 6 or 8 hours of dominance is practically impossible to undo.

I think the most simple solution is some kind of mechanic that allows a server a chance at a comeback.

Eredon is doing exactly what Xia is saying. And they are the one with a massive lead over IoJ and SoS. 180k to 40k and 40k.

If IoJ or SoS do the same, they still must deal with ET always coming back to reclaim anything. It is not a battle of organization. It is a battle of numbers, still, even when organized groups enter.

ET is able to move around the map. They have a huge lead, so it is exciting to hear which place on which map to go to, to get some free kills. If they need to work for it, great! More fun for them. They been winning, so a good fight is thrilling.

For IoJ or SoS? Not so fun. They finally started having balance, only to now fight an uphill battle for hours straight, just to forcibly reclaim their sections of the map. To them, it is about wasted upgrades (tons of gold funneled away into an Abyss of losing), repair bills, needing to split members to fight multiple fronts, needing to pool members to fight any front….

Meanwhile, the ET server is having totally full numbers. The others? They’re waiting until this week is done and hoping the match making works, just once.

From my perspective, it isn’t fun on ET either. It was cool for a little while to explore the map without any chance of reprisal. At one point, standing OUTSIDE of one of the opponent’s main keep (which ET owned), I got up and went to make myself a whiskey. Came back and still lived. Very peaceful and all that.

But when I realized I was in a group that was covering the same 100 yards back and forth – right outside their spawn – I quickly got bored. There was nothing to do except these two large field fights where we would push them back to their stairs, they would rally up and push us back to the stairs of their main keep (where we had siege set up), back and forth.

I can’t imagine this is fun for anyone. I will be heading back to my server soon, where we get stomped a lot but usually we can hold 1 keep and fight over a supply camp.

People can say this is all about organization and skill and whatever, but the longer the matches go on the worse this gets, and the less motivation people have to go play WvW.

We had a multiple hundred post thread about point scaling that was removed (not closed, just removed) late last week. People do not want to discuss that or consider it anymore.

Queue suggestions are supposed to be contained in the single official thread on the matter.

I believe on Friday, roughly 7PM EST I think.

Yes, right now we are in 1 week long matches. Eventually they will be 2 weeks long, but not until the server rankings are more stable.

Xia.3485:

Sky.9347:

1) Because they have no supply, they can not construct siege equipment.
2) Because the dominator has ALL supply, they fully upgrade all objectives and start building siege to further clamp down on the spawn camp. Their keeps and castles fill up with supply, so if they needed in the future they would have massive stores.
3) Because the dominator has such map control, they have full participation and queues.
4) Because the losers have such a pitiful fight, they quit playing altogether.

Lets begin with an IRL example. I get home from work, we are getting steamrolled in WvW. Guild chat is all a flutter about it, there is a guildie in the spawn of each map giving us the scoop. We wait for more members before joining so I continue my story quest. Once we have a sizable mob we join an enemy server’s borderlands. there is no queue since the lone wolves can’t survive in WvW. We form up at the gates then cream the small group that were camping the solo players. We bypass the first tower and head for supply. Steal the supply depot, deplete it of supply then run back to the tower. It doesn’t last long. If the gate is reinforced we use a ram, if not we burn it ourselves. We leave a small number to build up the tower and the zerg heads north towards the first keep. Taking back the orb is more difficult, but with an organized army its hella fun.

Now do we want WvW to be about mindless zergs and lone wolfs with all sorts of balance buffs, balancing queues and weirdness like wintergrasp in WoW? Or do we want to get organized, GET SOCIAL in a social game? You tell me.

That sounds great, but honestly… it also sounds like your enemy wasn’t fielding much of an army either.

I temporarily switched to Eredon Terrace this weekend (to join a friend who couldn’t get on my server yet), and in their WvW maps they had 20 or so people at each spawn camping, and everyone else ran around the map doing whatever – but also recapping any stray supply camps and wiping out enemy zergs before they were able to even put a dent in the massively upgraded keeps.

I’m glad your guild managed to get a large enough group to make some headway during your enemies downtime – but how are those captured objectives looking now? What if you had not been able to clean up the “small group” camping your server’s spawn? What if that group had been 70 players with siege machines?

Your experience is not the most common. Perhaps eventually the server rankings will sort this out, but the fact remains that 6 or 8 hours of dominance is practically impossible to undo.

I think the most simple solution is some kind of mechanic that allows a server a chance at a comeback.