Guild Wars 2

In PVP the class isn’t bad, its the players. A good number of the players think that by spec’ing high DPS they are an asset. Which unless they are also good at +1ing and/or good at mobility and/or are good at rotating isn’t true. If you can 1v1 or 1v2 then nice. If you can’t and go full squish and can’t do one of the other things that make the class shine, then not so much. And that’s where it becomes an issue. That said I admit I view staff DD more like melee ranger than thief. But when you get two on the same team that can’t hold a fight alone, that where it hurts. Good hunting.

I run with chat on, but sorry OP but will have to disagree on forcing people to do so.

There are too many variables out there. Since you can’t standardize people’s ability to send or reply to chat, nor control the use or intent of chat I don’t think this is a good idea. Not everyone finds the same value in chat as well. Even if someone is thick skinned chat may be more of a distraction at times since people may feel the need to reply to biased comments or correct incorrect assumptions or information. People are rarely succinct in their texting as well, and between messaging and rotating, would prefer to see more people spending time rotating. Nothing worse then when you get someone standing around in an uncontested area texting while their team is fighting outnumbered else where. For too many players its a time waster than saver.

A poll we will never see that would be interesting is how often people see chat being used as a positive tool in game versus as someone’s rant fest. Yes, you can block, but reactions to actions are in either case time that could have been spent on the real goal of winning.

Nothing wrong with encouraging people to communicate, best thing you can do is try to encourage it and practice good habits to prompt people to do the same but we are not at the point where I can say forcing it is a good idea. Too many things that need addressing from available tools to abuse. I admit I more concerned with how little people use the mini-map and the team windows to get a read on what’s going on versus team chat. That’s without even mentioning how quickly chat information is outdated in a fight where people are rotating as they should. There are additional reasons as well but these alone are enough that I think I would favor forcing team chat off before I could say force it on, so leave it as something each player can choose to use for now.

I like Open world PvP in other games, but that doesn’t fit GW2 so I would have to say no on this one.

Play all classes, but do go thru cycles of preference with different ones. Also have a HoT and Non-HoT account so coming from that angle. Prefer the smaller cap points. Have noted that it changes the dynamic of the fight. If you want the point you will be in a more condensed spot and it does intensify the fights. Risk=reward. It also means I need to weigh and measure my build versus what’s going on more. Can I hold, do I have CC to clear them off point, do I need to range and rotate, am I running interference for those capping. Smaller cap points makes people think versus stack on the point.

As far as the borderland concept, would prefer to see that idea removed and move more towards all maps being 3-sided without advantage to anyone one side.

Jeknar.6184:

SMC always will be T3 if there is one server that completely dominate a timezone. Even in the old upgrade method, it was true.

Have to agree here. This isn’t an auto-upgrade issue, this is a coverage issue and or/zergs stealing supplies from supply count in the past. The core differences in the current and old system was supply could be drained blocking advancement and or/someone whiling to pay the coin and kick off the upgrade. Now upgrade supply and advancement are not linked, but can be halted by stopping yaks and no one has to pay the coin to upgrade.

Have to agree, the Halloween event is one of the best ones out there and is something to look forward to every year. Hope there are some resources being utilized for changes to the events.

Gryphon.2875:

Would love to have a Halloween event as awesome as the very first one in GW2. It’s my favorite holiday, and Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 have always had a tradition of playing it up for sheer awesomeness.

(I just wish the new LA looked as good creepified as the pre-Scarlet one did.)

This is Halloween…. https://youtu.be/gQJbZOldFSw

That one is a lot of fun.

Have to agree with the above, they posted this a couple of ways. Here is one in particular:

"
STRUCTURED PLAYER VS. PLAYER
New Conquest Map: Revenge of the Capricorn
The Capricorn returns! And this time it’s out for vengeance! Join your teammates to protect the town from the ship’s onslaught while simultaneously defending your territory from the enemy team.
This new map features the traditional Conquest 3-point gameplay along with a secondary mechanic that centers around a periodically available fourth capture point located in the middle of the map. Capturing the fourth point earns points for your team and also helps defend the town from the Capricorn.
Revenge of the Capricorn is currently available to play in Unranked and Custom Arenas.
The map will be pinned to the Unranked Map Selection Screen for the duration of this off season.
Have any thoughts on the map? Perhaps you have some suggestions for improvements, or maybe you’d like to see it added to the Ranked rotation? Head on over to the PvP Forums and let us know what you think!
*New Limited-Time PvP Achievements: Revenge of the *_Capricorn_
Complete a new series of limited-time, Capricorn-specific achievements to celebrate the release of the map.
These achievements will only be available from now until the end of the next PvP League season.
These achievements can only be completed in rated matches (currently only Unranked Arena—not in Custom Arenas)."

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-July-26-2016-1/first#post6270415

It should also be noted that they are following this same pattern for the new map too, just a heads up.

I admit I wouldn’t change Capricorn. The bell is on a fixed timer which makes sense and the increasing points makes it an objective you can’t ignore focusing the fight. It also creates a decision point for various roles. Mobility can be used to back cap while bell is up, range can be used to clear out bunkers, melee and bunkers have to hold the point and so fourth.

As far as changing it to a commune, if you are running into extended fights already that the bell is coming back around to another capture time this will just get worse with a commune and become a warrior/rampage issue versus an AOE issue.

Based on the number of times its voted in, I would leave this one alone and address issues on other maps or work on more maps. This one is pretty solid.

tobascodagama.2961:

Kuya.6495:

Also, stronghold is popular? Could have fooled me with the feedback that map receives in this forun.

It’s a classic catch-22 scenario. The PvP community as a whole doesn’t like it because there’s not an established meta like for Conquest. There isn’t an established meta because no tournaments are played on Stronghold. No tournaments are played on Stronghold because the PvP community as a whole doesn’t like it…

Queue both Stronghold and Conquest. During play times get a regular pop on both. There’s not much feedback on SH because the people playing it, are well, playing it versus posting. Those don’t like it don’t have to set a foot in it. The check boxes worked rather well, no since in making people play a mode they don’t like. Hope if we get other modes in the future the check box options are expanded on.

Shaogin.2679:

TheGrimm.5624:

The map looks interesting. It also looks like it would make a good capture the flag map.

Love to see a dual capture the flag mode, 2 flags, one on each side. Flag carriers have limited skills and no speed boosts. Need to capture the enemy flag and run it back to your base to score, multiple caps required to win. If yours is stolen kill the carrier and run it back to your base. Points for flag captures and kills. With having dual flags players need to be decide attack or defend. Players that like the objective style games have something to focus on, people that are in it for the kills also have a role, and people that like to take/hold or defend have a bit for them as well.

So WoW capture the flag style? Yeah, I miss those matches too sometimes.

Didn’t play WoW but yes if its like that. I enjoyed this style of game mode from the Halo series and as a youth in RL (without the killing part of course).

The map looks interesting. It also looks like it would make a good capture the flag map.

Love to see a dual capture the flag mode, 2 flags, one on each side. Flag carriers have limited skills and no speed boosts. Need to capture the enemy flag and run it back to your base to score, multiple caps required to win. If yours is stolen kill the carrier and run it back to your base. Points for flag captures and kills. With having dual flags players need to be decide attack or defend. Players that like the objective style games have something to focus on, people that are in it for the kills also have a role, and people that like to take/hold or defend have a bit for them as well.

Ithilwen.1529:

They tried it. Courtyard really didn’t work.

Deathmatch as a mode is still feasible, that map wasn’t the best setup for it, or at least to me it seemed too small for that game mode. Double its size and that might have changed it up.

I am usually quite defensive of the coding in place for various reasons. That said I have seen more and more players leave due to match making and I can’t fault them.

A serious review needs to be done against queuing and either force all players to be solo or move to equal number of pre-mades to be grouped together and warn of extra wait times.

That said, there also needs to be logic in place to prevent class stacking above 2. Some balance changes we have seen over time has been due to compounding benefits of classes when grouped together. By themselves they may not warrant a change but in a PvP environment of 5 people teams they have.

Food for thought.

Actually I think you might be better to compare the SW chest farm with the multi-map. And its been brought up a number of times that if the chests were only available during the period after VW then it would remove that issue.

The difference here is that the chests in SW do not get you the shovels you need to find the chest and then you need the key. Where as in AB, the chests are tied to the event and the currency for the keys are tied into the chests. That’s where I think its been getting on peoples underside, if I understand their positions correctly. So if they removed the keys from the vendor and added the keys to the events, then issue clears up. That’s kind of the balancing factor in SW, don’t do events no shovels, except for the chest farm, but even then I think there is reduced key currency in the SW chests compared to the AB chests, and all the chests are the same size.

2 cents.

Jim Hunter.6821:

I feel like it would need to be such a massive bonus that it would still leave people shouting for others to get off their map.

And I kind of thought my ideas were leveling the playing field lol. If you outnumber the enemy you have more supply (so siege is easy to build), and more people to scout the area/your stuff (so you don’t need all the passive crap telling you where people are).

This forces the blob to split up or risk having all their crap ninja’d. Which in turn encourages small groups to play because instead of running into 40+ guys everywhere they go they will run into numbers a little closer to their own.

I wonder from a code perspective if they could do the supply boost since they would need to decrease the amount being carried if the ratio changed. I like the idea of being able to carry more supply but worry about it being gamed as well if not coded with care. Agree though, things to draw people to less populated maps is never a bad thing. Less blobbing = bonus.

Jim Hunter.6821:

4 years in and I still haven’t gotten a precursor

People are always going to kitten about something, at least this gives outnumbered players incentive to keep trying instead of just logging off.

Could be worse, the one you found could have been an underwater one for 40 gold.

I admit I like seeing outnumbered but hear you about incentive for other players. I wonder about a bonus for on capture. Would leave a level playing field as far as ability but pay more for outnumbered people. Was going to say on kill, but that again leads to get off my map syndrome. Capture still would only pay once per objective regardless of player counts.

+1, I like the scaling thought. I wouldn’t want the information on when the buffs trigger be published since I wouldn’t want the buff to be used as a scouting tool in of itself.

Also agree personal buffs are fine. I likewise fear if we add strategic buffs (+5 supply cap, no swords) then we might run into people saying, hey get off my map. I like that idea but think that the potential for it to be a negative influence outweighs the buff.

Only addition I can see is adding in coin and/or harvesting boons. Yes I said harvesting, helps pay for other things like gear and consumables don’t you know.

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Regardless, this thread is about mystic coins, not clover. My point (quoted above) is that the lack of clover farmability in PvE is an issue that can be entirely separated from mystic coin supply. As a result, it’s not an effective argument to use to support the theory that there’s a problem in the supply of mystic coins.

Agree, I think people inter-mix these too much. If the issue with the coins is for conversion to clovers, there are other sources, or additional sources should be requested.

sophiewhite.3149:

TheGrimm.5624:

sophiewhite.3149:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

MC’s have had a stable price for 5 months. There does not seem to be any measurable imbalance. Please provide evidence for this “imbalance” or shut down this thread please.

what are you talking about? they use to sell for only 30 silver recently they got as high as 80 silver.

Showing an increase since June 3 and about the same rate since. Slight dip when they introduced them in the event rewards. See 30 silver back on Feb 14th.

https://www.gw2spidy.com/item/19976

that link shows its been going up and up and up and up.it never stopped going up except for the dips. which is normal for a graph to have however those dips never go back down to the original price.sure it was a slow increase until it spiked. but a increase is a increase no matter what.

Correct, price went up based on various factors such as supply, demand, liquid currency in the market, speculators, people finishing precursor journeys, and various things. But there was a 4-5 months of a stable price and then another 3 months (of a higher price) after that. And what was original price? You can’t count the regular price as the price when there was little demand for the item. Silk had value and is now junk loot, leather was junk and now has value. What is regular in this case?

A lot of times groups will decide not to join larger squads since they then will lose their group in the larger squad when trying to orientate themselves to each other. In different parts of the game that will then have varying levels of impact on any sort of organized play. It would be helpful to allow a sub-group to have a different color designation from the overall squad color to allow them to still see the squad but have their group members stand out from the bigger squad.

Appreciate your time.

sophiewhite.3149:

ZudetGambeous.9573:

MC’s have had a stable price for 5 months. There does not seem to be any measurable imbalance. Please provide evidence for this “imbalance” or shut down this thread please.

what are you talking about? they use to sell for only 30 silver recently they got as high as 80 silver.

Showing an increase since June 3 and about the same rate since. Slight dip when they introduced them in the event rewards. See 30 silver back on Feb 14th.

https://www.gw2spidy.com/item/19976

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

• Mystic Clovers represent an exception to this — there’s no other mechanic in PvE to farm clover, aside from buying m-coins off the TP and forging.

However, if that’s the argument, then ANet could offer alternative PvE sources of clover. (There are already WvW and PvP sources, including the Gift of Battle reward track, which is required.)

This is the part I don’t get, why would you use your mystic coins for clovers, the PvP and WvW reward tracks are a pretty consistent path to follow. Now maybe there needs to be reward tracks in other PvE elements as well.

But I think this is more of a mental block for people. I get some people don’t like to PvP or WvW, but legendaries were meant to require all game modes, else why not allow players to bypass map completion with PvP or WvW currencies even further outside of the HPs.

I admit, I like that the coins have value now. Its actually nice to see them in the daily reward, I remember in the day pondering just trashing them when space was low.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see them as additions to the new zones event loots, but I would never want to see them return to junk loot value either.

Having 2 of them in the end reward track chest with the mystic clovers could potentially work but would love to see the stats on how many of those are completed daily before going there. Might lean more toward an RNG bag in the there that could provide 0,1,2,5,10 in the final reward track chest.

And sorry, but I am one of those that like to have items of value in game else what’s the point in having them. Course I just completed H.O.P.E and like how much time/steps/materials it required to make, adds more value to it for me.

+3, wait no I think this game has consumed 4 gaming mice at this point, so
+4 mice from me on this suggestion. This would be a rather nice QoL change.

Not going to agree or disagree yet on the points above. Need to review and ponder that first.

That said a large portion of the problem is the players. Played some unranked to get in some Capricorn and some of the examples of people playing poorly against DHs was amazing. Between people not wearing amulets that match their play style to people not even dodging thru traps. These same people would be dieing to ranger traps. Now I know unranked is not the best example but these are also the vocal people that will blame the class versus their own ability or builds. If two people are hit by the same set of DH traps and one dies and one is barely bothered by the damage…you might consider your build or make sure you are playing to how your build is setup. Anyway 2 cents.

The cut scene selection and add in the WvW bits and you don’t even need to know the guild and that was funny. +1 would watch again.

Josh Davis.6015:

• Implement 1-to-1 rally policy, similar to WvW. This means that only 1 player would rally per enemy killed, rather than up to 5. Would likely be the downed ally closest to the enemy player.

I would start with this one and then take a measure of things.

Rococo.8347:

Thanks all – I think in that case I simply wont be able to do it then as I am definitely understanding the red/blue/green distance thing its just that I for example -= follow a blue – it turns to red – I have no idea ( really!) which way to turn next to back track and find other options…at least not quickly enough – the amount of times ive followed a red across an entire map made me think I was doing it wrong but maybe im just not quick enough to try all the options

If there was no timer I would be perfectly happy to take an alt there that hasn’t been to the map before and just amble around but 30 minutes is just not doable for me it seems – oh well I wasn’t relishing the collection I had to do to get the staff so I will just call it a day – thanks for trying to help though

On another note Anet – Dyslexics/Dyspraxics really DO have trouble with this sort of thing a lot of the time – so maybe don’t put it on a kitten timer OK?!

Djinn linked the Dulfy guide above, would take a quick look there to see if that helps any more or not. Rule of thumb I used was if the symbol was the one tick mark then it it was very close (within 30-60 seconds travel in the direction it pointed. If it was two marks then might jump to the next waypoint and get a new read. If the Y or three mark symbol then would jump 2-3 waypoints in the directions of the mark and get a new read. Camera angel, would look down and over a shoulder. Also used the furthest out setting (due to WvW) so if you have your FoV in close you might want to pull it back some for this event. Good hunting!

T3, off night late NA, post EST (GMT-5) time, prime time PST (GMT-8). DBL quite busy. And yes EBG forces responding to enemy map queue attacking a T3 keep. So, no one attacks and defends DBL, well not quite the story in T3.

Rotteny.8743:

The problem with barricades is that they were completely worthless in barring zergs as they would just melt in seconds while making harder to small groups to go around because they would take forever to go down by just attacking them. And they would only take 10 supplies to be repaired to full (so if there was an enemy player behind it you could forget going throught for a while since he would problably be able to repair once, maybe twice).

We don’t need more stuff delaying small group play. It’s already almost impossible to take a upgraded structure that have ONE player defending with a small group. Thus why we asked the barricades to go.

I’m all in favor of adding a WP to all the towers in DBL as T3 upgrade (like it is on keeps). It give them some strategic value and is a much better concept than the treb wars concept we have in ABL and EBG.

Sorry, I think I mis-implied something there. I agree, the barricades where more harmful to the smaller force and the zergs would mow through them. I was in favor or removing them and in favor that the towers should be points of control.

I go round and round on waypoints in towers. On one side I agree that would significantly increase their value. But does that remove value from the keep and remove the amount of fighting found in the open fields since people can blink forward to next area.

What if the the T3 towers added more roaming partols that had both a snare and the ability to detect/report like the sentries that extended the range of the tower detection by another 50-100% coverage? They could then act as bigger blocks to yaks, alert your side to enemy presence and slow but not stop enemy forces. That way the towers could then return to their role as a slow down to be bypassed, addressed or act as a hindrance if not assaulted. Thoughts?

Johje Holan.4607:

In the original design of DBL, towers did have a purpose. They had the waypoints. And there were the barricades. But the waypoints in the towers instead of the keeps made people feel like the keeps didn’t have enough purpose; a high score wasn’t enough. So the waypoints moved to the keeps and now the towers feel like they don’t have a purpose.

I think you hit it here. There were posts during the design of this map asking that the towers be more of a roadblock since on ABL you could just ignore them and go right around. They were good for placing siege in, but they didn’t block an approach. That’s where the barricades came in. Now you could still bypass, but at a price of having to go much further around. But once those barricades were removed from the DBL towers to allow people quicker movement it now removed the tower’s role as a road block.

Dawdler.8521:

Well you see the problem here is that you’re not supposed to have that kind of variety and options in the same game mode. We have sPvP, thats an option for those wanting small scale PvP. We have EoTM, thats variety under a different set of rules than WvW.

WvW is supposed to follow the same basic rules. EB is the gold standard – keeps protected by towers (and towers protected by the keeps). ABL trim down the scale and split the map into a defender area (garri+its two towers) and attacker area (keeps+their single tower) but it still follows the exact same mantra of connected objectives. That thin red thread that make you see the logic of the design.

DBL… well we dont even know wtf kind of rules it follows because it sure isnt WvW. None of the objectives are connected and its like a kitten 3-way split that doesnt give defenders any advantage.

I thought you were joking with the first bit but after re-reading your not.

I am not sure I have every seen any official rules for WvW.

That said the only rules I would have assumed were that there is a weekly score that is made up of points for your side capturing and controlling objectives over time in addition to points for killing things like players and some npcs. That score is compiled from the score on 4 maps but could one day include more or less. Once upon a time that would have also implied that there were 3 servers in that fight, but that definition would now no longer be true but instead may need to be stated as 3 opposing sides of servers.

But I wouldn’t have assumed that any WvW rules included anything in relation to how a map was laid out apart from each side having a way to gain access to the map.

As far as EoTM, ANet just doesn’t have an answer they like on how to deal with the fact that the map has overflows and that the sides are mixed and therefore there is more of a challenge to include it in scoring. But nothing about the design of the map itself prevents it from being defined as WvW. It has scoring for capture & controlling and for killing other players. If the other bit could be worked out it could be added to the weekly scores and would play like EBG/ABL/DBL.

So no, WvW is not defined by where a tower or camp sits in regards to a keep or even if a map has to have a keep versus more towers. But maybe I missed how the game mode was sold to people during beta prior to game launch.

Jana.6831:

TheGrimm.5624:

This was very well said.

I’m still waiting on the explanation why the DBL is strategical after all though.

That’s quite easy.

It has structures that provide the major basis for scoring for the game mode that can be controlled by any side. It has camps that provide supply, it has towers that can be used as bases to cut off that supply, it has keeps that control large areas of the map and provide the most points. Earth keep allows quicker access to either of the other two keeps. Air/fire allow quicker access to east/west sides of map. South side of map is more exposed, but that like ABL, is part of the design.

This thread I think is showing the different mindsets.

Some people are fixated on how the towers interact with the keeps and others are looking at that regardless of their interaction they have value to be controlled because of scoring. You don’t have to control a tower to attack a keep in ABL, it just makes it easier if you want to attack from inside a fortified position. But that doesn’t mean you can’t also do that from atop a hill or in an open field surrounded by a zerg or against a wall.

The other purpose of towers in both ABL and DBL is a fall back point, somewhere to put your back against if you need it. Some where to stage or rally from. They have more value then camps so that also makes them more valuable.

Camps act like camps on both maps.

Even if the towers were used as a siege placement point the DBL keeps are large enough that even when you thru the outer you still have another layer. The outer and inner walls are more like the tower to keep relationship in ABL. A map v map zerg fight in Air this weekend showed that. If the enemy controls your outer wall it can be hard to dislodge them from pushing from inner. But controlling outer will allow you to siege inner.

DBL’s tower to keep relationship is closer to EoTM. I think that people that played EoTM in the past are less tied up with the concept that the towers are more distant to the keep. That relationship is not what defines WvW. WvW is about controlling the map and that is defined by the control of the structures on the map. Its not defined by where something is located on a map.

So…I think your biggest issue is you can’t use the towers to place siege in to attack a keep. There are 100 other ways to attack the larger DBL keeps at any way so……choose a different direction of attack.

Rashagar.8349:

Ok Jana, not trying to get between whatever’s going on here with you and Sarss but you did ask so I’m going to attempt to answer coherently, I’d appreciate it if you put similar effort into trying to understand what I’m saying and where I’m coming from.

You equated “I like having multiple coordinated small groups being capable of outmaneuvering a blob” with “I want a 5v5 pvp map”, where it would be literally impossible on a 5v5 pvp map to have more than two tiny groups vs one slightly larger group. So no, they’re not the same.

The bolded bit, however, is the part I find most disagreeable.
The way I see it:
Alpine borderlands have been essentially “solved” for a very long time, by which I mean people know the most optimal ways to do most things.
A certain play style has arisen around this solution. Not just where to place siege and routes between objectives but encompassing everything from zergs to havoc to solo roamers, where they act and what they do.
The desert borderlands are a different map, ie a different puzzle, with a slightly different solution.
Where I disagree with some people is when they say dbl is unsuitable for “wvw play”, because invariably what they mean is that the alpine borderland solution isn’t the most optimal solution there, but that’s a good thing! I know that the alpine solution is comfortable and widely understood and has the weight of nostalgia behind it, but that’s not enough in the long term for a lot of people. Variety and options are needed.

“DBL is not a strategic map”. If by that you mean that the strategies that are most optimal on alpine aren’t most optimal on desert then we agree, but you seem to be saying that the strategies that are most optimal on desert aren’t strategies and don’t belong in wvw as an equally valid play style, which is where I disagree. Strongly.

Apologies if this still isn’t as clear as I would have liked, it’s the first thing in the morning here.

This was very well said.

dzeRnumbrd.6129:

I think every server is going defend their home BL.

So having DBL is a huge advantage because guilds that want fights are going to choose alpine and pugs will follow them.

I can only speak for T3, but I would ask you not to imply that CD or SoS are slack. They have been quite diligent in their attacks on the DBL and there have been some good fights. Hats off off to both of them. SBI is also working to retain our home BL which is red this week. But no, it hasn’t been any sort of free ride any more than having an ABL is.

In either case, if DBL was an issue (no one on it), then that should mean more activity on other maps. Some of us are seeing plenty of activity on DBL so how is the mixed borderlands not working out for people?

Leaa.2943:

Ben K.6238:

Leaa.2943:

I still ask were all those voters are, because i never see them on a dbl map. And i have accounts in both EU and NA and every server that have dbl are struggling to get people on it. So were are you voters? You have your chance to really shine now and pick up dbl and make new tactics, tag up and run your thing and enjoy your map. But i never see you, i only see the outnumbered buff on each server i check.
So were are you?

The outmanned icon should have given it away. We’re on the other servers.

Well that means you are on the alpine map, so ofc you have more players on it, that is the whole point of the post -.-

Mind sharing what servers you are playing on? As I said, SBI T3 NA have seen full queues over the weekend on DBL and also saw what looked like a full enemy queue of CD on Sunday and large numbers from SoS at various times. Have seen 0 queues on ABL but a normal sized queue for EBG over the same period.

Hexinx.1872:

It was only a matter of time that this thread would pop up. What’s DBL been back in for less than 1 week?

I wouldn’t hold your breath for a new map anytime soon. Personally I don’t care because i will be on DBL learning the things for a good while.

Having a blast on DBL right now. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want development in works so that we can have a third distinctive map also added. Especially if it does require a significant time investment. And can also hope for a map that 95% of the people want to play on (not sure if that’s possible though).

misterman.1530:

As smart people mentioned before, if you do not have the numbers, there’s no way you can successfully defend/take the DBL. My server has it this week. We aren’t doing well. We can’t. We are habitually outnumbered on any BL we enter. It’s doubly bad on the DBL.

DBL is more like a game of tug of war. You have to fortify your north and keeps and then once you have that then work south bound. Waypoints have an even higher value on DBL. It will be harder to hold the south on DBL but it means that’s the area you have to patrol. And I say this after defending DBL while being outnumbered at times on it this weekend. Sentries are also of more value, at least until people avoid them more so the warnings on the map go a long way. The bigger keeps also mean more warning and a better chance of blocking an assault. Long story short, yes its a longer area to run but that also means you might have a better chance of finding people for open field fights if they are moving to attack your objectives.

Jim Hunter.6821:

I suggested eotm because it’s original purpose was to be a testing ground for WvW and a place to play while waiting on queues…. but you guys are right, there are way too many PvE players in there to use it as a testing ground anymore.

I’m just hesitant to have them test it in WvW unless they are going to replace the dbl for a week or 2. I’m already getting both alpine bl’s queued on a regular basis thanks to the return of the desrted bl, I don’t want to be down to 1 alpine with a 60+ man queue if they screw up the new bl.

Agree, don’t want to disrupt anyone’s fun and having some queues is good, having to many in queue is bad. But I think they could test a new map beside the other 3 BLs and EBG. I am worried though if they don’t have it score with regular scoring people will not test since they might see it as a waste of time. Most people will say they will test, until you get to the testing and then they get to, what’s in it for me and does this help my server. So due to that, to me in needs to include some in line testing.

Not to mention, WvWers for the most part are slow to adapt, since they haven’t had to and without needing to that makes them slower to change which will turn most away until something has been out there for a bit. Even if the new map had been 100% liked by all it would be slow to pick up people since people would lean towards what they know. A lot of the player base that would try new things, are in other games trying new things after all.

Good hunting!

Xenesis.6389:

TheGrimm.5624:

Do hope that a third map is under way. As stated before in an ideal world would love to see 2 additional maps per year added and then they could be rotated weekly or some how linked.

It’s most likely not, and won’t be until it’s selected as the priority choice, which won’t be until we get the next priority poll after the scoring changes are done. Also keep in mind, if they go into developing another map and your expectations is 2 per year, expect no other developments from wvw. Eotm took over a year to develop, I expect dbl took almost just as long.

Agree here, but can still hope. Again, last WvW style game (Warhammer Online) had 27+3 maps to fight over. Needless to say there were die-hards fighting till the day the lights went out and that was 5 years of 7 days a week WvW fighting.

Voted for DBL and so did people I know. And they are playing on it.

EBG was king of the hill during ABL and during DBL and still after ABL was back and is still while 2 ABL/DBL. So something to ask ourselves. Why EBG remains king of the hill and think about that for new maps. Maybe its time to consider more 3-Way maps versus BL ideas.

Johje Holan.4607:

Whatever it is, Anet, please take into account all the complaints about the DBl. Basically, make it the opposite of the DBL.

• Little to no verticality
• No maze like structure
• Structures must be able to be distinguished from the background
• Structures should be simple, obvious, a tower should look like a tower
• Easy navigation
• No gimmicks, i.e. no stealth fog, no jumping puzzles, nothing popping up in front of you, no lava, no quicksand, etcetera
• Little to no PvE
• Structures must serve a purpose besides simply PPT

Build it and they will come. (As long as you remember KISS)

About the design or theme. ABL is reminiscent of Prophecies. DBL of Nightfall. Hmm, what’s missing? That’s right, the next BL should be inspired by Cantha!

Disagree on some here. Look back at older posts pre-DBL and you will see that players were asking for maps more complex then ABL and bigger to combat zergs. Agree players weren’t asking for sky lasers but they were asking for objectives that were worth fighting over (aka had value or buffs), more paths and bottlenecks, varying terrain and more complex objectives. Other complaints were that a small amount of siege could cover an entire objective, sentries had no value and defenders couldn’t defend from atop walls. They were also asking for terrain that favored havoc over zerg and maps that required players to break into smaller groups to cover. And they were asking for more vertical maps, even if not in the sense that DBL delivered.

We do agree, more maps though mean more options and keeps the game fresher which will retain people.

Jim Hunter.6821:

If they make a 3rd bl it needs to be live tested in eotm before being added to WvW. We don’t need the dbl situation all over again.

They can test a new map in tandem. There are enough people that enjoy EoTM as is that it wouldn’t make sense to disrupt EoTM players game play if this is for the BLs. Besides based on forum posters there are different people that EoTM so wouldn’t you want BLers testing instead? ANet has shown with the mixed borderlands that they can add mixed maps. That said we also saw where limited testing did not meet various players expectations so how can you expect good tests without full player base access.

Do hope that a third map is under way. As stated before in an ideal world would love to see 2 additional maps per year added and then they could be rotated weekly or some how linked.

Avit.3165:

Who voted for DBL?
All the pvers, pvers who only play wvw on friday night, with the only hope for profitable karma train.

But i’m sure, you are very much aware what i am talking about.

So people that play Friday night are K-Trainers to you? Even though its the night that draws the most players. And if there are more players, there should be less empty strucutures and less K-Training yes? More players should mean more people that run into each other, which usually triggers fights, yes? Your concepts conflict.

Now if you want to say it draws more PvXers ok, but part of that x is that they WvW when there are the most fights to be had. So wouldn’t the people that play when there are less players on more likely match your description since they would have more empty strucutures to K-Train? Sorry but calling out people that play Friday reset night is silly when that’s when we have the most people to fight. And I think most people that enjoy WvW like the fights. Just a thought regardless of if you like ABL/DBL or EBG.

DBL. T3. SBI.

Photobucket doesn’t want to play right now.

Friday 11:20 PM EDT Queue DBL: 7, ABLs: 0 (was on EB at time of check)
Sat 12:51 AM EDT Queue: EB: 1. DBL: 16, ABLs: 0
Sat 10:02 PM EDT Queue: EB: 19, DBL: 3, ABLs: 0
Sun 12:15 AM EDT Queue: EB: 6, DBL: 5, ABLs: 0

Also SBI/CD had some awesome fights in SBI’s Air/Fire keeps last night with what seemed like full map queues on both sides. The Air keep shined with fights in the various passage ways and walls. Really showed how awesome fights can be inside the inner and outer walls. +10 to CD was great times.

Fought mostly in DBL over weekend, found activity the full time by all three sides. Found fights of all sizes, solo, group, warband and full map zergs. Curious to hear numbers from other tiers.

Lets say this together again.

Delete Season 1 PvP logic and never use it again.
Delete Season 1 PvP logic and never use it again.
Delete Season 1 PvP logic and never use it again.
..
..
..
Delete Season 1 PvP logic and never use it again.
Delete Season 1 PvP logic and never use it again.