Guild Wars 2

This isn’t as much of an example of DH working together as it is an example of NSP and SF giving up.

If they were canned messages and each character had to enable to see them then Anet may allow this.

Maybe you could buy a one-time use “legendary warhorn” with badges that would only be able to be used through the commander squad UI.

bckerr.4798:

A ranger can roam with impunity. I have permanent 33% swiftness and regen. Regen is 4,500 and lasts 14 seconds, is castable every 12 along with swiftness which lasts 14 seconds and castable every 12. Like I said, permaregen/swiftness.

Every tic heals me for 500, I heal very very fast. You also have your main heal which is 7K+ and regens for 7K per 3 seconds, usuable every 30seconds. Great sword in main hand with GS cooldown and you can “swoop” away so far from opponents they cry. Use your elite skill so you can’t be stunned, feared etc for 20+ seconds. Attack is 3000, toughness is high and armor is 3,400. Plus you have a pet. You have pet taking 3 conditions from you every 10 seconds, you can’t be conditioned down, trust me. I roam all day without fear and take camps, kill ugly yaks, solo towers and harass everyone. Oh, and when they think they have backup. “Swoop” away with your 33% perma swiftness. Live to roam another day.

Idk man vs my condi warrior still you don’t have enough stability and leaps to truly “get away” unless you can get into a tower or some safe area.

You have swiftness fine but I have nearly permanent swiftness as well PLUS sword #2 long leap skill on a short CD and it cripples, plus I have 2 long immobilizes and a stun. You can remove some condis but you can’t keep them off of you because I apply average 3-4 stacks of bleeding per second, and it’s not even really those that get you, it’s the short duration high-damage burns from LB #2 and F1 that will really get you faster than you can clear them.

And if you try to kill me I have roughly 10 seconds of complete invincibility with 3 stances and shield, during which time I will regen nearly 1/2 my HP back.

You sound talented I’m just saying condi warrior is OP compared to any ranger build. It’s just the state of balance in this game right now.

We all know defending isn’t rewarding enough for people to care about doing it, and Anet agrees the reward need re-worked. The challenge is appropriately rewarding someone for effort and not just standing around.

What are your ideas to make defending more rewarding without rewarding people for nothing? I thought it would be nice to have a ‘tiered’ defense event system, with higher tiers having higher rewards based on the level of threat posed.

Tiered defense events:

1st tier – “Secure the tower/keep/camp”
Initiated by any damage to a gate, wall, guards, or siege upgrades.
Gray swords on map.
Lasts 30 seconds.
Does not contest WP’s.
Low reward.
This is the only defense event a camp has.

2nd tier – “Repel the enemy attackers!”
Initiated by a wall or gate taking more than 1,000 damage in a single attack (in other words, from siege).
White swords on map.
Lasts 2 minutes.
Contests WP’s.
Standard (current) reward + bonus WXP/Karma/XP for any enemy siege killed within range

3rd tier – “Save the tower/keep!”
Initiated when a gate or wall is destroyed.
Red swords on map.
Lasts 5 minutes.
Contests WP’s.
Increased magic find from enemies killed. Extra reward for successful event

Each tier event is cancelled out or “failed” when the next tier is activated, with a 5 second gap in between. Example the “Repel the attackers” event is active and the gate gets destroyed. “Repel the attackers” was failed, for 5 seconds the structure un-contests, and then “Save the tower/keep!” begins.

Dasenthal.6520:

I like the original idea, especially because it doesn’t have to change anything. You could add the wheels and without drastically changing the current meta you could introduce a new strategy.

Although I disagree with the idea about earning “Siege or supply rights??”. While I think it was well intended it would also create a serious break between new players/new characters and older players/characters who have been in WvW for a while. If you are a new player who joined because of wvw and you get in, and literally all you can do is run around and PvD so you can pick up siege it could easily create tension between players.

Although maybe only the person who throws down the siege can move it? We can mail each other siege now a days, so if you wanted to let a small group move around siege they could easily just share it amongst themselves, build wherever, and then off they go!

I was thinking earning the rights would be for example each capture or stomp gives you the right to throw a piece of siege, maxing out around 20. You could cap a few camps or run with the zerg a cap a few towers and you would already be able to throw siege, but you would have to continuously earn this. This means you can’t just walk into WvW and throw 30 trebs, you’d first have to get 30 stomps + captures if you wanted to do that. So if you want to troll, you’d also have to help in order to do it.

Straegen.2938:

Seems reasonable but could allow trolls to quickly drain supply from a keep that is being actively trebbed.

I wouldn’t mind seeing an option for workers to refresh all ranged siege.

lol dude. so trolls can do the same thing they do today with his idea, no change, but with your idea useless siege built by trolls would now stay there forever. genius.

I think it largely depends on how easy it will be for coordinated groups to end up in the same overflow. This will be the determining factor on whether WvW players or PvE players dominate the flow of this map, and who dominates the flow of this map is what will determine who stays around and for how long.

It may end up that several instances of the map are WvW dominated while the rest are uncoordinated PvE’ers, and the play will be hugely different depending on which one you land in.

Straegen.2938:

warriorjrd.8695:

Rangers are only hard mode in large groups because of the pet and lack of AOE. However small scale they really shine, I wouldn’t say ranger is hard mode for roaming, takes skill, but then again every profession does if you want to be effective.

Agree to disagree. The number of times a skilled roamer worries about dying to a Ranger is extremely limited. When fighting one nobody I know wonders if they can kill them but when.

When I roam on warrior and see a ranger I feel aggressive with no fear at all. I don’t care if I’m in the middle of solo’ing a camp I will turn and fight the ranger with the guards hitting me in the back and still not be afraid. I don’t know if “skilled” rangers are just very rare or if condi warrior is just too tough for rangers or more likely, both are true.

Hills is easy to do because you can kite around the upper level.

It wasn’t even really the lord that was giving me trouble it was those kitten Cabalists when they would respawn.

On warrior I hid by the supply depot when it got capped, killed the 2 players that found me afterwards, and hid in the back of the lord’s room. Nobody showed up so what the hell, started solo’ing the lord.

Got him down to about 30% health too before 20 or so enemies found me and killed me. Unfortunately they could see his health bar if they were anywhere near hills…..

But I never really thought to “hide” when I wasn’t on mesmer until this happened.

SilverWF.4789:

Solstice.1097:

It would be nice to have an “Anonymous” option, as in you default show your toon name to the enemy, but clicking Anonymous just shows your rank.

Are you afraid that everyone will see you are bad? Are you afraid that your name will be in the some1’s movie?
Do not afraid – there is alot of bad players.
Also, just learn to play and afraid nothing! ^^

the anonymous option is just good to have in case you are getting trolled or people keep whispering you etc.

i would have my name show but some wouldn’t want to.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

Solstice.1097:

There would certainly be some balancing involved, but the speed, HP, and capacity of dolyaks would likely be the only balancing needed.

Perhaps I didn’t make it clear: currently, each of the towers/keeps receive supplies at different rates. this is based on the length of each yak’s path(and on how many yaks deliver to a given objective).

making yaks go faster won’t change the relative difference in supply rate between objectives.

Solstice.1097:

I think balancing the game around griefing is a mistake. To combat griefing there could be better reporting options and actual actions taken against known griefers, not changing the way you look at designing the game.

I strongly disagree. being aware of potential exploits is a key element of proper design.

You were clear. For a longer path, that yak could move a little faster, so that all the paths took the same time. OR you could argue it already is imbalanced this way and intended so why would this be a new imbalance?

Being aware of potential exploits and preventing them is smart, but limiting your developmental creative options due to they would not fix already existing exploits is not logic. People already waste supplies so what you’re saying is it doesn’t make sense to make any changes to what supplies are used for because they’re currently being abused??

Faux Sheaux.6179:

This would make it virtually impossible to hold keeps for lower tier servers where a group of 5 oceanic players can already devastate a BL during the right hours of the “night”.

If you have a group against an empty BL, straight up capping them is still going to be the same.

Starving the enemy of supply would be the really “slow” way to siege them. You’d first have to take the camps, then defend and hold the camps for quite a long time until the tower/keep supply drops to 0, then keep holding the supply until upgrades decay, then siege it.

If they chose this method, it would GREATLY slow them down compared to what they’re doing today.

GrandmaFunk.3052:

Since all the towers/keeps receive supplies at different rates, it seems like another balancing problem waiting to happen.

Also, doesn’t this give griefers even more reason to use up supplies? not only would they be burning off your supplies, they’ve be actively degrading your defenses.

I think balancing the game around griefing is a mistake. To combat griefing there could be better reporting options and actual actions taken against known griefers, not changing the way you look at designing the game.

There would certainly be some balancing involved, but the speed, HP, and capacity of dolyaks would likely be the only balancing needed. Also we could potentially remove enemy dolyaks from displaying on the map.

Upgrades should have a continuous maintenance cost to upkeep them. A fully upgraded structure, denied supply, would slowly tick to 0 supply, and if it stays at 0 it will start losing upgrades. Waypoints will disappear, walls and doors will turn to paper, cannons/oil/mortars will vanish, workers and services gone into thin air, guards quit and leave their posts, etc.

This creates a new battle strategy for attacking fully sieged opponents. You take their supply camps and interrupt their supply lines and “starve” them out of the keep or tower. Eventually they have to come out and fight you to reclaim their supply lines. If they don’t, well you get the idea.

—It reduces the virtually unlimited supply that ‘winning’ servers have
—It creates new strategic options
—It adds a new level of depth
—It encourages more open field fighting over camps and supply lines
—It makes small groups and roamers a more important part of the game
—It’s new
—It’s not that hard to do – the only challenges I really see are:
A) Do all upgrades have an upkeep or are some basic ones free?
How much and how often is the cost?
C) What order do the upgrades decay in?
D) What happens if a damaged wall/gate un-reinforces? Back full?

Andrew Clear.1750:

Solstice.1097:

We do not need to nerf “coverage”

We need to BUFF player impact.

I’ve already said it about 25x but I’ll say it 10,000 and it will be no less true.

MOAR POINTS FOR KILLS!!!

So, what will more points for kills accomplish? If server A has better offtime coverage, then server A will have more kills than server B and server C.

Also, the people who hate zergs will not agree with this as well.

It will accomplish making the off-hours less of a contributing factor to overall score. Meaning more points will be scored when more people are playing. I don’t see how this is confusing.

It would be nice to have an “Anonymous” option, as in you default show your toon name to the enemy, but clicking Anonymous just shows your rank.

We do not need to nerf “coverage”

We need to BUFF player impact.

I’ve already said it about 25x but I’ll say it 10,000 and it will be no less true.

MOAR POINTS FOR KILLS!!!

Maybe a person should have to continuously “earn” siege or supply rights??

Each time you cap something or kill an enemy you get some arbitrary “points” that are required as a pre-requisite for taking supply or dropping siege.

At least would force the trolls to play with the team for awhile in between trolling sessions >.<

The upcoming changes to crit damage prove that PvP balance does not have to carry over into WvW/PvE and vice-versa.

That being said, a lot of things have always been balanced for PvP and have never been redesigned to appropriately fit WvW. Downed state, stealth, immobilize stacking, etc

Yea they won’t be “merging” the looks like OP stated.

But maybe making appearances more accessible to carry-over, or possibly the ability to put PvP runes on your PvE armor.

But still, in PvP I change weapons a lot. I use a lot of weapons in PvP that I don’t even HAVE a PvE version of, so they’ll always be separate from what I can imagine.

I really doubt it. The gear kind of has to stay separate due to the runes, sigils, stats are completely different. So it has to remain separate pieces of gear, so having some pvp set of gear that consistently changes to match your PvE appearance sounds like a ridiculous concept.

Example: being in a small party, building 4-5 catas behind a small hill, then rolling them to the top of the hill and start melting the wall.

I was imagining more ninja ops if we could move our siege.

And making it harder to troll as a bonus.

moca.5129:

What if the scoreboard was changed somewhat? Instead of seeing only the score from map objectives, you would see an overall score for that particular 15-minute period, including dolyak kills and points gained through the bloodlust buff, and at the end of the tick each side would get 3, 2 or 1 point based on their score during those 15 minutes. The ultimate result of the match would be the sum of only those points given at the end of each 15-minute period. You would basically have a separate score for the whole match and the one for the current tick. It would keep WvW a 24/7 war where coverage and numbers matter, but it would make it impossible for off-peak forces to dictate the match by accumulating a huge advantage when there’s little opposition.

your whole post sounds like just a change to how the score is displayed, until the last sentence then you lost me.

We need to tweak these mechanics in WvW.

1. Auto-respawn timer when dead, stops when being hard-rezzed
2. Hard res’ing can only be done OOC and only be 1 person
3. Rallying – as far as the stomping topic goes, that just makes it the new job of warriors – pop stances, stomp stomp stomp. “Timewarps on the stompers!” If we’re going to have rallying it needs to be on a 1 to 1 ratio. If I die completely, the enemy downed player that did the most damage to me can be rallied.
4. No rallying off of ambient creatures please for the love of all that is sacred

5-for-1 rallying is fine as a PvP mechanic but really has no place in WvW.

I’ll say it agaiiiiiiin:

Make kills a bigger part of the score!!!!

Then high-pop times contribute more score. More people playing = more points flying up to the scoreboard. 50% of the score is now kills. 10-15% is dolyaks and sentries. the other 35-40% is PPT so if someone is night-capping your PPT it doesn’t mean it’s going to win them the match. It might, though

not new. i like them on my mesmer. they’re not cheap though

insanemaniac.2456:

siege limit of 5 non-rams within 1000 radius is immediately broken

so change it to limiting the amount of siege within a structure. if it’s full nothing can be dropped there and no siege can be moved into the portal unless something is first moved out.

and maybe reduce the overall map cap for total siege.

i don’t understand the specific reasoning behind the current rule.

The T6 and T7 matchups are the same as last week.

Which is odd, because they are not in order or the most probable matches.

TeamBattleAxe.3901:

Flame rams don’t have wheels… they actually LEVITATE. We should be able to push them around like air hockey discs.

Coincidentally, this could lead to a fun new mini-game for whenever asuraball isn’t in season.

i didn’t notice they levitate. even better. thx asuras

True, trebuchets really don’t need to be mobile, but the ability to move them would help a lot to counter the current state of griefing. Griefing would still be very possible, but it would take longer and be less effective and that is a welcome step in the right direction.

Dayra.7405:

Solstice.1097:

I’m pretty sure it’s currently based on stomp because it was easier to figure out who gets the point, and has nothing to do with stomps actually meaning more than a DPS kill.

Lol, I think there is only one reasons to base it on stomp: It generates a better market for more expensive stomping animations

i don’t think the animations market has anything to do with getting a world point when you stomp.

it’s just easy to tell who stomped whom, instead of a 3 way battle where you died and got hit by 15 people from each other server. who gets the credit then? with a stomp it’s easy to tell, but that severely limits the points that it’s contributing.

in PvP its easy, if you die the other team gets +5 points, but in WvW there are 2 other teams so who gets the +5? That’s the part they need to figure out and then kills can go from 15-20% or whatever % of the score to more like ~50% If a server PvD’s all night they may get a ton of PPT, but the winners of the large NA prime fights could potentially out-score that PPT.

It could be as simple as whoever does that final hit of damage that finishes the person off gets credit for their server as a kill.

shogei.8015:

I don’t see why it can’t be reset similar to trait points – by paying money to a trainer.

with a limit of 1 character per week, per account, so it can’t be abused.

or at the cost of 5 rank points, so if you continuously use it you will have less and less points.

So let us move them, and rams, and catas, and trebs, and ballistas.

Done right, it would be useless for zergs but very useful for small groups, and would even help against trolling a little bit.

When you get on siege, a new option “Move” comes up. Click Move, and up comes a target that works exactly like Mesmer Blink – you click somewhere within range, and it must be somewhere that you can walk to without jumping. If you click somewhere that requires jumping, it will go nowhere. Otherwise, it starts moving!

It moves 1/2 the speed of a golem.
It cannot be teleported by mesmers
It cannot be rolled up the stairs at your spawn
It cannot be given swiftness or invisibility or any boons at all
If you leave the siege or get placed in combat, it stops moving

Zergs would not use this because it would be too slow and they can already build siege on demand with their supply.

Small groups could become much more effective with sneak attacks, i.e. building 3-4 rams or catas at a camp and then rolling them to their objective.

Bad siege placement from newbs or trolls? Move it! Sure trolls can still build trebs on top of a supply depot and you can’t move it off the depot, but A) it will take them longer to use the supply if they have to run up there each time, it won’t be in the way of people grabbing supply from the depot, C) it’s more likely to have effective uses up there than under the depot. So of course it’s not a permanent solution but it’s much more bearable.

If a large zerg wants to build a large mobile siege army, well the siege moves SO slow that you could see where they are going well in advance and just build a treb or 2 to start hitting them as soon as they get in range. The siege can’t dodge out of the way, so the only viable strategy for this would be in a small/ninja group who can move it unseen. Those groups could use more effectiveness to counter the zerg meta.

I’ve posted this in several threads and forgive me if it’s already in this one, but:

Anet needs to find a way to award points on KILL instead of on STOMP This would greatly increase the points that kills contribute to the score, which would also greatly increase the points generated at peak play times, by default making the off-hours capping less of an overall impact.

I’m pretty sure it’s currently based on stomp because it was easier to figure out who gets the point, and has nothing to do with stomps actually meaning more than a DPS kill.

you had 2 thieves and 2 mesmers.

kinda hard to hold a point with all dat invis.

gg

WvW is not getting “too much” attention. PvE is.

The main reason they are pushing EoTM is because they are going to launch in China where WvW queues will make NA tier 1 look like a ghost town.

Show me where they are “supposed to reset” the ranks when it becomes account bound? Let’s not start rumors – link please

we need a “bronze” league championship. Now that FC is top of ‘bronze’ and DH is trending to take that spot this week, FC and DH need to fight it out since it’s been several weeks. But we need NSP or another competitive server in the match for it to be worthwhile.

the thing about rangers is…. they can be built to be effective in a zerg, but there’s nothing they contribute that a G, W, E, or N can’t do better.

This isn’t PvP. The classes are balanced around 5v5 so when you get above that, class balance is not equal.

Example thief stealth works perfectly fine in PvP. It’s annoying but they cannot capture a point or hold one to save their lives. Same with PU mesmers. They can win most duels against most any build, but if that fight is on-point in PvP, the enemy will get that point.

Arius.7031:

Oh man I want to face FC again… They may be the only ones to match our coverage. GoM/AR are cool servers too, would love to fight them. SF PLEASE NOOOOOOOOOOOO

I don’t think we can match your late night crew, based on the score trends I’ve seen in your recent matches.

But i’d like to face DH again and find out. As long as the 3rd server is a 3rd contender and not a point feeder

You only have to be verified ONE time and its permanent so considering how many hours you probably play this game, and that you can keep playing while waiting to be verified, I would say the only time you wasted in this process was forming this complaint post.

Best bet is condi+cc warrior with your necro and knowing which enemy to target and kill first.

but there are many viable other options.

sure reset them, but first un-link them from PvE servers and give the WvW ‘worlds’ new names, maybe even reduce the # of them by a tier or two, and create a separate transfer option for WvW than from PvE where the cost is based on world rank and not population.

To make kills a big part of the score ALL they need to do is figure out how to attribute points on KILL instead of on STOMP. Immediately a lot of problems fixed imho

Was it decided to award +1 point for a stomp instead of a kill because it’s just easier to attribute a stomp to the correct server? If yes, is there any possibility of taking this to the next level and finding a way to attribute the point to kills and not just stomps?

(Stomps are only a fraction of WvW kills. Making kills a bigger portion of the score would effectively weight the score based on active, current population, reducing the impact off-hours PvD’ing currently has)

Kills need to be a bigger portion of the score, not necessarily to promote fights, but so that PvD’ing an empty server is worth less points than winning epic fights in prime time. Player skill becomes more represented in the score, and coverage less.

Stop giving PPT for enemy objectives. It’s enough that you are denying them the PPT, but squashing server A shouldn’t give you the lead over server B. Also, if all your points come from your own stuff, then it becomes more important to defend! Lastly, the actual score differences created by coverage gaps will at the very least appear less drastic and demoralizing.

sins? “glichly” teleports? more and more less?

wot?

jokes on you for chasing those “sins” and mesmers around for 10+ minutes.

Pretty sure it was balanced around PvP where stealth is perfectly fine since it doesn’t contribute to point capture. Played against a team of 5 thieves rank ~50 yesterday and won like 500-125 because thieves can’t hold a point to save their lives.

As far as WvW goes, the only thieves that actually annoy me are GOOD thieves. Most thieves are baaad and I melt them in like 2 seconds flat. Play dumb for a sec so they get lured into bursting you, then counter-burst them, put some condis at the end of the burst, and save your CC/AoE for when they use shadow refuge.

AFAIK we are only able to deduce how many points came from PPT, and how many did not. As far as non-PPT points, I am not aware of any way to tell how many are from kills vs. dolyaks vs. sentries.

Any devs have a ballpark on this? I’m sure it varies from match to match and kills make a higher percent of points in upper tiers, but the reason I am asking is because I strongly feel that kills need to be a bigger part of the score, including listing some sort of stat(s) on the scoreboard in-game.

Why? Because PPT is very misleading and not an accurate representation of a server’s skill or effort. You can have 400v400v400 all day, but if it’s 1v0v0 at night that one player is going to outscore all the 1,200 daytime players combined. This is an extreme example but you get the point. You should definitely get points for structures, but you should get a lot more points if you had to kill 100 players to get that keep than if you just had to kill some doors and a lord, right?

I’m pretty certain that Anet recognizes this and the Bloodlust buff was a step in that direction. There was a lot of backlash about it’s original form, but please do not get confused. The backlash was about the stat boosts and mechanics of it, not about the points on kill.

I’m also pretty certain that the points are awarded on-stomp because it’s the best way to tell who and when to award the credit. There can only be one stomp, whereas 20 people may get credit for the actual kill. I think this should somehow be re-looked at as a mechanic, because stomping does not = kills. Actually, once you get groups bigger than 5-10 people, most kills are not from stomps. Stomps may be the most straightforward way to count credit coding-wise, but it is far from the most accurate and it’s really a lazy solution imho for such an important mechanic.

In short, the majority of players in WvW play for the fights but their efforts represent the minority portion of the score.