Guild Wars 2

Josh Davis.6015:

We’ve been talking about personal score a bit. I’m personally of the opinion that it isn’t representative of a player’s effort in a given match, and it also can be incredibly misleading and potentially lead to bad gameplay habits (5-capping home).

If you were to redesign personal score, what would you do? Does it track different types of stats? Would you want your personal stats displayed to other players?

A lot of personal scoring that is tracked has value, it just doesn’t account for the numbers of people involved. If it did it might more closely match participation value. If you consider the number of people involved and then divided the points by those players it might better reflect what happened. Another way to translate this would be the target of the action would define the total point pool divided by the number of people participating. In the end what is more valuable, 3 people killing 1 or 1 person killing 1, 2 people capping or 1?

So example changes:

• Today 3 people cap home, each player earns 10. Instead should it be 10/3 (rounding down in all cases) so each earn 3. There was no advantage for 3 standing there so why not move along. Point itself was worth 10, the more people involved in the capture should degrade its value for each individual but should never be worth more than its total value.
• Today 2 versus 1 on a kill would be 5 each. Instead award 2 each.
• Today 3 Rez one person would be 10 each, instead award 3 to each one.
• 3 vs 2 and the 3 win, each player would get 3 * 2, 6 each total for the win
• 3 vs 2 and 2 win, each would get 5 per kill which would mean 15 each total
• Off point fighting, stays the same but increase points for on point kills by 5.
  There are times when fighting off point has value, and therefore I wouldn’t penalize people for fighting off point but I would increase the points for kills on points more to offset the differences. I understand that there is the defender and assaulter points but a 5 point increase would help define the value in fighting off versus on. This would still be subject to the total value rewards above. An example of when fighting off point might have value is when a person can distract and hold off larger numbers from reaching the objectives and or blocking them from reaching a taken one. Though they are off point they allowed their other members to take other objectives uncontested or prevented back capping without having to fall back to do so. There is no good way to award them for this which is why I wouldn’t penalize them for doing so. If the player is killed before healing up they should be included in the kill bonus though since they were included in the take down of the player.
• Bunkering, stays the same, paying people to stand on a uncontested point makes no sense if it causes their team to fight outnumbered elsewhere. To offset I would further increase the objective defender bonus by 5 though since holding a point while its under assault does have value.
• I was going to add an additional point for a spike over a cleave but that might encourage bad habits as multiple people go for a spike when they should be moving on or cleaving.
• Bonus points for spiking while enemy is being revived. This I would grant an additional 2 personal points to though if it blocks the revive.

Just the change to the points by dividing the number of players I think would change up the numbers we see at times and may better define personal play which might open up more options.

As far as displaying personal stats to other players, not sure there. Opens up a lot of for interpretation. High damage may look good, but it if also means you died 5 times and awarded the other team 25 team points does it tell a different story. If you got a lot of kills but didn’t flip an objective did that have value. How can you tell your point value of your caps and control over time versus your kills to deaths. Still a lot to store and see before just the base stats fill in the picture.

Just some quick thoughts, will ponder this one more.

Edits below: Re-reading this I don’t want to imply +1ing doesn’t have value, it does, but if a team mate required aid it still doesn’t increase the value of the objective or action that occurred, more that value should be shared. Now the counter argument to this might be does this cause ill-will, why did you bud in and take my points. Still think that’s better than awarding people for being on one point when they could be better served elsewhere.

In order to define when that makes sense you would maybe need to add a savior qualifier, a player coming in after a team player is down and prevents them from dying. Or a negative qualifier for dying. Personal score in the latter example should never go below 0.

In a more complicated system rewards the points for a kill could be a measure of the total damage received from each enemy before being downed and divided up that way. So if 90% is done by 1 player they receive 4 and the person that came in an did a couple of shots that was 10% of the down player would get 1. Same could be applied for capturing a point or other objectives.

Some of the ideas might depend on understanding what data can/is captured while in combat today and understanding that.

lol, nice

First concern is lag. Information to understand what happened goes a long way, but would trade that for overall performance. In a lot of games logging has played a large factor in skill delay and processing.

Still wouldn’t mind a poll about home BLs and three-sided maps. Long time believer that EBG’s draw is from its design and equal footing concepts. Believe that most BL home defenders view EBG’s home third as an area to protect and fortify as well.

Had a blast on the DBL last night. Ran into everything from solo roamers, havocs, and warbands. Have to shout out to YB, saw a guild group run a rather tight formation on some of the stairs that did a number on our Pugs even after we had routed another of theirs in open field. The chance to get knocked off and killed from the heights made the fight all the more fun since had to watch what your back was up against. Was also nice since when running havoc we were able to escape some warbands by breaking up and weaving in and out of the crevices till we lost them. Different tactics work differently in the varying areas of the map which makes it fun.

Jayne.9251:

Nope. Big giant 100-step tower with a WP at top, and broken, open walls along the way up.

Although I like this idea too as it would encourage community/sport.

Their coliseum and the tower/WP could work well together. And agree a WP that is terribad to defend but may still be worth it if you are zoning into middle of map.

OP what time zone are you? Because I am paired with you and we were encountering full warbands in their north towers and air keep. Likewise saw both YB and SOS groups and their were 3 way dust ups. Not to mention the massive fights right at spawn in early evening.

What you missed by logging in late was some PUG warbands getting killed by more organized guild groups which triggers what BLs fights always trigger, people jumping map. Even after that were finding plenty of fights in their north. And BTW, no queues on ABL but normal queues on EBG. If you don’t like the map, you have 3 other choices.

That our give us an objective in the middle. There are a number of options here.

A quick one might be a keep/tower/camp, something we are used to.

An alternate idea might be an open Asuran gate with extra guards that acts like a waypoint that is open on capture. It would be worth zero points to keep the various BLs scoring in line. It could then act like a quick jump point to whatever side controlled it. Again, idea being something of value to be controlled. Which was the original concept, just the mechanic didn’t quite work.

This idea could also work with the big open idea that others had above.

T3, EB queues on par as they were last week. No queues on ABLs. DBL, not queued but large scale fighting. Found solo, roamers, havocs and map zergs on the map during the play time and this was post restore.

Not hating OP but will disagree here. I have played multiple games in the past that were subscription based that required full server stops during updates that resulted in extended down times. And then after that there might be additional outages over the next few days as additional issues were uncovered.

Compared to that, and that this isn’t subscription based, and the fact that normally there aren’t even shutdowns while updates are applied and I admit, I thought they did a good job. Here is what I thought worked based on appearances from the forum side:

• Forum posts appeared indicating what could be a serious issue
• Potentially internal resources might have seen the same issue or responded to posting, some posters posting code snipets they thought odd
• ANet acknowledged potential issue
• Issue confirmed and possible solutions reviewed and communicated
• Server brought down to limit further loss
• Communication cycle started on forum (thank you), twitter, facebook, not sure reddit
• Rollback deemed required
• Data restored with limited loss
• Impacts of restore shared via forums pre-empting some questions that might rise
• System restored, and patch that was expected that day applied with corrected code

Was there some time lost in gaming, yes. Did some people lose some progress, yes but limited. To me that was a better call then now taking weeks/months to try and correct peoples accounts that were impacted. I am pretty much full ascended as well but there are a lot of people that aren’t which would not have been able to play.

In regards to removing the concept of Soulbound, I think that also would have been a much bigger rework then people expect even if its only a flag on a item. In a down situation you don’t want to try second guess a game concepts versus ID and correct the code change that caused the bug.

Again, if this was an ongoing issue or a sub-based game, might be a different story, but neither are the case.

2 cents.

Xillllix.3485:

Personally I would love EotM added to the mix as a second central map. It would bring all the EotM population back into WvW.

Since we would have complete variety now when the next map is released everyone could just play what they like but contribute to the same server score.

This, would be awesome. Of course I am also for finding ways to tie it into existing scoring as well even if not brought into the map group.

Thanks for the additions!

More color are a plus. I wonder if additional shapes might also be available in the future as well.

They announced this and they have said it numerous times in the past that when maps change they have to do a reset. That was one of the issues that were raised with map rotations as well. This shouldn’t be a surprise at this point.

mordran.4750:

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

Hey everyone,

The walls not appearing correctly allowing some to walk through is a known bug that will be fixed in the next release.

Also, the Wildcreek and Rogue’s Quarry changes were deliberate.

So is this fixed with todays patch or were you guys to busy with bringing in a BL nobody wanted ?

Orly?

McKenna Berdrow.2759:

The poll has ended! After removing all votes for “Don’t Count My Vote” the final results are:

78.5% Simultaneous Borderlands
21.5% Rotating Borderlands quarterly

This means that the team will add the Desert Borderlands back into play as one of the Borderlands maps and will keep the other two maps as the Alpine Borderlands. Thank you to everyone who voted!

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Poll-27-June-Simultaneous-Borderlands/first

Thanks for sharing! and good suggestion as well.

Have questions as well, but we will probably have to wait for patch notes tomorrow. People will probably be finalizing things with the build today and doing pre-checks. Now granted I hope I am wrong and we can get info today, but I doubt we will see it.

Thanks ANet! Looking forward to the variety. Any word on a third new map?

Pay to win is purchasing something that guarantee’s victory over another that does not purchase the same item.

By nature expansions are not Pay To Win. Players deciding not pay for an expansion are deciding to not utilize content available and are self limiting. Its the same as a player choosing not to play a class to learn how to best defeat a class. Also so far, having an expansion does not guarantee victory when pitting players versus players.

In either case, there are other outlying factors that make the question mote. There will never be a balanced playing field when you factor in all elements outside of the gamer. A faster connection will grant an edge, a stronger/faster PC will also grant an edge. These are factors that players decide upon based on their own life factors.

If people decide that speeding progression is P2W then that would make a player that decides to spend 8 hours in game versus another that does 2 paying to win since they are spending more of their own time to gain an advantage over another. Which is what MMO’s are at their core, time syncs.

So to me, no, so far GW2 is not Pay To Win. Good gaming!

Here is a side question to ponder. Can you tank in a game that does not have collision? To me the answer is no. Just being able to draw aggro is not quite the same, at least to me. Just an idle thought.

Please consider going back to S3 style of match making for S5. S1 created poor match ups and is repeating itself in S4. S3 on comparison created reasonable match ups from the start.

Ardenwolfe.8590:

Lakemine.3014:

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

I’m fairly sure it’s Tyler Durden.

Who is that?

The first rule of Fight Club is we don’t speak about Fight Club.

The Second Rule of Fractals is you don’t talk about doing more Fractals.

Brought this one up a couple of times. Agree. Even if the new precursor journey isn’t put in place go ahead and add the new precusor’s into the loot tables as drops like the current ones are. That would go a long way for a lot of people.

Close to finishing H.O.P.E now and enjoyed the Pre journey but would also have been excited about finding the Pre as a loot drop as well. You always want some rare epic loot out there since that’s a part of fun each time you get a drop, could this be the shinny one!?

Again also depends on where they left off on the artwork and such, but if a bigger piece of coding on the new system was the journey, that can be added later.

2 cents.

fluidmonolith.3584:

I also like stronghold. In fact I only play stronghold for ranked games during the pvp seasons. I don’t think conquest is bad, but I like mobility so I get tired of fighting in tiny circles. I do agree with Xillllix that we need more than one stronghold map.

Looking forward to more Stronghold maps.

Also wouldn’t mind seeing a purely capture the flag style game. Main scoring mechanism would be running the flag from base to base and a secondary point mechanism from killing. Flag bearers would have limited skills and would need protection from their team. Honestly one of the better PvP style capture the flags is the Halo style and I think something similar would translate to GW2 as we have seen in things like Spirit Watch. Instead of one flag though have two, one for each side.

Fluffball.8307:

and we didn’t like it.

Here we go again. Who is this ‘we’?

Enjoy Stronghold quite a bit and it keeps conquest from getting stale. And if the numbers weren’t there for it, they wouldn’t have created a separate queue for it since it wouldn’t have enough people to trigger a match.

If you have suggestions for the game, make them, but don’t decry other game modes people are enjoying. So far from your opening post we are left with things you don’t like and you suggested nothing to counter it with. You have only yourself to blame if ANet is creating content you don’t like since you haven’t stated what you do like.

I admit, I really enjoy things like this. First thoughts as well was is it for LS, Blood and Madness, 2nd Ex-Pac? Like things like this go a long way and also show longevity in a title. +10 from me ANet.

Jourdelune.7456:

1- People would prefer to have same skill level of all players on both team. Not bad playing with good. This was the case before Anet implement Pip-Range to counter SMURFING. Please, undo that. Simply give a PIP malus for the highest divisions players. So, they encourage their team to not smurf.

3- PIPS system of season 1, was appreciated by the player based. Not losing pips for closed match (ie 400+ to 500) was a good incentive for players to continue and not AFK/rage quit. Please, answer your player based about PIPS system of season 1.

4- Divisions or League with grinding WINS is not working to show prestige. Grinding hard or easy game to progress where you should belong to get good matches is counterproductive. We want good matches on the go.

Very valid points here, especially close matches in that 450-500 range should not result in the same type of loss(or any at all) as would something with a wider than 10% percent spread. Also there should be a way for people to fall back in divisions to account for false advancement. At times people might have exceeded where they really should be playing at. Without that, it will remain a grind-based ladder and these pockets of people will naturally form.

akaCryptic.2389:

I’m curious as to what others think of the matchmaking because there were always people complaining every season. I havent seen much difference btw seasons personally and did not complain at all.

Personal opinion, found S1 the worst season and the one most likely to result in bad match ups. Found S3 the best, S2 was an improvement over S1. S1 also seemed to have more issues with handling people that were carried into spots that exceeded their game play creating pockets of people that were stuck resulting in even worse team match ups.

But it is what is, lets try it out and see how the other changes work in conjunction with S1’s style of match making.

-1 here. No, achievements should never be available in hot-join matches. Join un-ranked if you are looking to just works towards the achievements.

Have to say, agree with some of the above this is currently my favorite for conquest maps.

• Bell mechanic. Works as is, I wouldn’t change this. The increasing scale of points awarded is incentive enough to encourage players to fight over it. Side that ignore it do so at a serious risk.
• Size. Scale wise I think it makes sense. If has enough open space and nooks for all sorts of classes.
• Space exits. There isn’t a huge advantage to using one or the other but I don’t think that alone prevents the map from moving to ranked play.

I can appreciate ANet identifying a project that is running long and is more complicated then first imaged. Good on them for seeing this and making a tough call. A lot of ventures will just keeping running along since they have the we can’t turn back now mentality.

That said there is also another avenue that could be taken here under some assumptions and conditions.

If the final Legendary and Pre-Cursor art/animation and such are already done, and the Mystic Forge recipes are in place, just the Precursor journey and crafting are lacking, then go old-school. Allow the Pre-Cursors to be ultra rare drops in the world and have them act like the original Precursors. Allow people to collect and trade them.

This would do a number of things:

• Allow for completed work to be released
• Allow players to appreciate time already spent in development
• Give players new shines to chase and trade
• Give ANet a baseline for how much players are willing to spend on them and therefore help formalize future recipes for the Pre-Cursor crafting
• Give people disenfranchised with the project being terminated something to go after and hope for a one day return
• And this potentially has a low cost of deployment if all the above factors are true on the final state of the new weapons

Game wise this would fit since most players are familiar with Pre-Cursors dropping from loot and the forge. Pattern wise it was also fit since for years players could not craft Precursors so that’s not new. Lore wise it could fit, people would need to find these new ones first before learning how to craft themselves and before the master crafters would be able to educate others on the journey.

Anyway, can only suggest this and wonder for future options. Good gaming!

Same on this one, having the option to stay is a good thing. Being forced to stay starts to sway that to the opposite side of things.

Two fold question to community and to devs. Will/should Capricorn be included in new Ranked Season starting in the upcoming weeks? What are people thoughts.

To me, include it, I think its ready for prime time and will add more variety in the new season.

Thoughts?

Morte de Angelis.7986:

You don’t need Spirit Shards.
If your desperate for shards, Tomes are there for a reason.

Just because you locks yourself to “only” xyz doesn’t mean there aren’t otherways of getting it.
Your just choosing not to get it, just as I’m choosing to better myself to get them.

Agree, and also don’t need spirit shards, have 3.7K of them and 1750 ToK in the bank as well. The point more is the inconsistency. Extremely happy they brought them back between times when people have Masteries to work on. This makes sense. But they said and planned all along that raids weren’t for everyone, so why the block?

Again remove the block or allow people to go ahead and be able to train into those Masteries without the kill the boss with a group requirements. I created this post for myself and others that are non-forum goers since ANet is so close on this feature being spot on.

+100 Again from me for them bringing this back. Its nice to feel like looping 80 has value again, even if its for just collecting a currency for future use.

Good gaming!

Illconceived Was Na.9781:

Isn’t it possible that this is a bug? Has ANet actually said that we have to complete all the raid masteries to start earning spirit shards?

I don’t think its a bug, but could be wrong. Seeing the logic work in Tyria and the pattern between the 2 with the people that tested with us was that we all had all of Tyria done but non of the raid masteries done. In Tyria XP was building and leading to shards, in Mag it was just a blank bar.

Based on orders being filled, I think another influx and therefore reduction in ectos is due to the sudden increase in leather and cloth from the new zone. People are again crafting and selling exotics.

Truncated
Expunged
Outcast
Expelled
Voided
Made Null
Terminated
Persona Non Grata
Uninvited
Shown The Door
Kissed Goodbye

Yes, but the Areodrome is in LA.

Another reason this should be separate is that Masteries are per account, yet these are group only content where as all the rest are solo player content that is made easier with more people.

Raids were also created for a subset of the playerbase, so why should they block progress for people not raiding?

Its a small thing but details are important. Another option would be to allow players to apply EXP to those masteries without restrictions but that seemed a less desirable solution to the issue since the mastery xp were meant to be locked behind the encounter itself.

First off, thank you ANet for re-adding in this feature. With it players once again get the feeling that they are leveling and earning something for leveling. Having the trigger on this being once playes have maxed out Masteries also makes sense. That said, Raid Masteries should not be associated to Heart of Magumma but its own grouping. Testing this myself and guildmates at first thought this was a bug between Tyria and Magumma until we factored in the Raid Masteries. Please consider breaking this into its own grouping since Raids can be accessed via Tyria and Magumma and therefore straddle both zones. Thank you again for re-adding this feature and appreciate your consideration on this.

Yukito.9012:

It’s gotten to the point where I no longer care that I am semi-AFKing the none-Capricorn maps. Like, I don’t even feel bad for the people I end up with anymore.

If the achievements are only limited for a sort time, they should remove the random map selection from the equation. It’s technically possible, however unlikely, that someone never even gets to play the map at all.

Wait… you are semi-afking if the map isn’t capricorn? Because of the APs and out for a limited time? You might want to re-check the wording:

• 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.

That means 3 months since the season runs for 2 months at a time. Just a heads up if that is the case.

You weren’t able to enter the PvP lobby and then exit back into WvW before. This isn’t new. This function does work elsewhere.

I see your point, but didn’t have any games that didn’t vote for it, at least not on the first night. I can also see ANet doing it this way to get metrics on how many people will play it on their own since that would indicate its favor or not. If they made it the only map they wouldn’t know how many are playing it because they like it versus they just want to PvP.

First night impressions:

• Liked it, had fun
• Flowed well, good use of space
• Seem to have a good mix of open space and LoS
• Mechanics made sense by end of first game
• Ring the bell bit took a round to understand but after that not an issue
• Visually rather nice map
• Will probably become a favorite

Tactics, didn’t see just one way to do it, which to me is a good thing, don’t want just 1 path to victory.

A big thank you for this one. It was quite awesome to be able to do other things while waiting on a queue. Guild mates joked me about actually working on map collection and gathering. +100 here. Cheers!

Xenesis.6389:

Kylden Ar.3724:

This so much.

What kind of military planners set up their fortifications in siege range of (potentially enemy) fortifications?

Because it’s a game and the structures are there to promote fighting. If it’s sitting out in the middle of nowhere guarding nothing, where the attackers don’t even want to bother with it because it’s only worth is 4ppt, it might as well be a regular sentry.

If you really want to go with “real life” planning, no one is going to set up fortifications like towers right next to access ways so you can go around them lol, they’ll set it up ON it. That’s the problem of the dbl towers, they did neither of the two.

But they did block the path, with the barricades that the player base asked to have taken down. After they were down they had reduced value since people could then more freely move around them. So now we are back to, what needs to happen to them to increase their value and/or increase their significance. Which is a completely different thread. So leaving that alone for now.

Do WvW and PvP as well and just completed my 2nd map completion after 3 years. That said not sure how this would need to be structured. Potentially add in a way to trade badges and proofs for Hearts like they did HPs and then add a reward track per map. The track would require a compatible amount of time investment though or it wouldn’t make sense.

Only reason I can see this at all is that Legendary weapons should require things from all game modes, but they already removed that. In an ideal world map completion would still require WvW maps and PvP tokens as well as the PvE requirements. But since it doesn’t this would make sense for WvW and PvP players as long as the time requirements were in line.

So before we hit the patch tomorrow and new LS3, did anyone discovery what the rumbling sound in LA was? There was a post a while back ago where someone put in a ticket and it was replied to as not a bug but actually something new story related, but had no luck tracking its source down yet.

Excited. Simply put. Would still love to see more new maps and game modes, but excited to see this one back. Was sad when they removed it. Not to mention it was one of the better test beds they had to test improvements to underwater combat.

Saw the same thing this weekend. It was a funny thing to see, but wasn’t a big deal outside of that. Its not like they have guild buffs others can not get or get a reduction in costs, so no harm no foul.

Thanks for the update. I admit this was disappointing at first but looking at it from another angle at least it gives people time to try the other changes that the patch brings without creating a conflict for time. Really looking forward to more map diversity.

• Sub-squad color. Add a different color for your sub-squad. Run a havoc and one of the reasons we don’t join squads at times is that you lose the position of your own group in the mass of same colored dots. If the sub-squad was a different color in the squad it would be easier to keep track of your group in the larger squad.

• Guild visible only comm tags. This would make it easier for guilds to run groups and would also remove any question about if visible tags are open or closed groups.

• Reduce player requirements on WvW guild missions. A good number of these are already solo-able and this would help guild mates that play off hours from the rest of the guild.

Off-topic: Would love word that a new map was under way in design. And if its the same resources as some of the other projects then would love to see a vote on these vs new map. Personally map variety (even outside of ABL/DBL) is important for longevity.