Guild Wars 2

Draeyon.4392:

Server imbalances still exist. A bandaid fix could be to lockout all servers a week before server linkings change, try to aquire a rough idea of server populations as well as recent transfers and link accordingly.

Makes no difference, people transfer after the links are done. Doubt that many would even transfer a week before unless they’re going to a stable host server, basically any of the t1-3 hosts.

2, 1, 1.
Shove the double team onto the team leading.

I think the skill needs a buff and the range should be increased to trebuchet range, would save us the cost of trebuchet blueprints. Plus if we are able to hit the lord from outside with it, it would save us the trouble of having to break into structures, all we would need someone inside to cap the ring after.

So maybe they can make warriors be able to punt asurans over walls, I was thinking maybe using wild blow to launch them upwards at a 45 degree angle inside of straight backwards, or maybe if they’re using rampage the number 3 skill in the chain of attack 1 which is an uppercut.

Now if they were to use rampage uppercut, the warrior would have to a char in order to have enough power to punt someone that far, so they would have to lay out a guild banquet table and have the target stand on it before being uppercutted. Guardians of course should also be able to do this with hammer number 4.

That would solve the issue with hitting people through walls with coalescence of ruin, because they wouldn’t need to bother to.

There are some guilds that run events that have part of this idea, run nekkid and you can only equip whatever drops you get. It’s fine and fun in short burst, but don’t think it would be for a week long event.

Straegen.2938:

Hmmm… figured some might want to try something different after 200+ weeks of the same ole thing especially with some WvW populations getting close to a collapse.

I guess those scoring changes the base voted for were a better use of developer time.

I’m all for theme weeks, if they do it right. Stripping players of gear when we know balance is out of whack in this game? lol like I mentioned it’ll turn into thief week, hell thief mesmer ranger, just because of stealth and range will have a huge advantage.

Players abused golem week with the dupes and exploits, it got worse over the week with players even coming on in here bragging about doing so and nothing was done to them. Anything that gives certain players the advantage will end up badly.

What if?
Thief wars?

Even playing field my kittenss.

Glouryian.3765:

Its impossible to do anything, without about ten FSP showing up and hunting you down.

Are you like the only one on the borderland or something? Do you expect to be able to take back stuff at any time and no matter how many you have on your side? If they got ten holding you back at your spawn, which is wide open, multiple exits, you ain’t got enough to take your keep anyways.

You’re in a bad matchup this week, the 7th and 8th ranked servers fighting the 1st ranked server in t2, bad roll, suck it up and try and find your fun elsewhere till friday. Everyone has gone through matches like these.

Liston.9708:

Links will never work as long as people mass migrate after the links are posted.

Link 2, YB lost a couple of guilds when we had no link and couldn’t compete with T1 (or T2).
Link 3, YB (+ link) now has WAY more people then we did before. Problem is we are in T3 (and had an rng T4 match roll). So more people in T3 than we had in T1/T2 doesn’t make sense….
I will concede some of new pop is old pop that didn’t play the last set of links….

In the end, links don’t make sense unless they try to make all links as equal as possible.

Drop tiers altogether
Make a set of round robin matches
Go down to 3 matches NA if needed.

its not like we will have more blowouts than now….

Isn’t YB more of a case of their celebrity commander DK wasn’t on while it dropped from t1-t4? Now he’s back, you got a link again and people are playing again.

Not something to even consider or discuss since it will never happen. It’s one of the big features for the expansion, why would they even take it out of a part of the game.

Ezekiel.7619:

It’s September 12th, 2016 and the skirmishes are not working for me.

We’re outnumbered on all BL and our scores will never catch up to the other BL simply because our server(s) do not have enough population to make up against the other servers. As a matter of fact our score has never been able to catch up to anything since day one.

Unless we are given super-powers on our BL so we can stand a chance to cap a single thing I don’t see the point otherwise. Forget about the new point system.

You weren’t going to be better off in the old system if you’re outnumbered in every map, that’s a server population issue, not a scoring one.

Maybe it’ll be different with the catch up mechanics in place, if they intend to implement it still anyways.

Heimlich.3065:

With that principle in mind, I’d propose dynamic handicapping of combat capabilities. When a server is on the back foot, make their players more effective fighters and territory-capturers.

The simplest incarnation of this would be to grant bonus combat stats when in the northern zone of your home borderland (e.g. north of the line between NE and NW camps).

Alternatively, strengthen the NPCs at Garrison/Earth Keep when it is held by the home server and weaken them when it is held by another server.

Interesting ideas.

There have been some suggestions on the stat boost on players instead for when they’re under the outnumbered effect, but not many seem interested in that either, the limitation you propose also seems fair to keep it to the north of the map.

Not sure if it would make a difference buffing the npcs, it would delay the larger side from capping sure, but there’s no point to that if the defenders cannot muster enough players to counter them, unless of course you double it up with the stat boost for players. You could also buff the walls and gates instead so that you delay the larger force from entering in the first place. If they bring a large force, make them work harder for the capture.

Heimlich.3065:

The jury is still out on skirmishes. They don’t seem to have made much difference so far. At best they limit the scoring impact when one server has pathetic coverage during one time period.

Regardless of that, scoring cannot make gameplay itself interesting or fun.

That was the point to it, to limit the amount of runaway points during terrible coverage times for servers. most NA servers tend to field a good number of players during NA, it’s pst, ocx, sea, eu times that tend to be mid to no coverage and a few with too much in those times.

It isn’t the complete answer to imbalanced scoring, just one solution to one of the problems.

Heimlich.3065:

I disagree. ANet could address population imbalance if they weren’t hell-bent on keeping gameplay and rewards that give advantages to over-stacked servers.

What plan or strategy exactly would you suggest they worked on to fix the population imbalance, if you don’t mind me asking.

Heimlich.3065:

Additionally (former) WvW Developer Tyler Bearce noted the option of improving rewards as one of the 4 motivators for changing scoring:

That’s news to me that I guess I missed, care to share where you saw the news of that?

Heimlich.3065:

I’d note that skirmishes have not changed that situation very much. The distribution of first, second, and third place finishes in a skirmish is largely decided before the skirmish begins, and so is ranking at the end of the week.

Skirmishes were never suppose to fully fix scoring, it was suppose to fix one of the big problems with it. They have other mechanics planned that could help with scoring, the end of week catchup mechanics and high activity times earning more points. These all need to be done one step at a time, as painful as it is to wait on changes.

Coverage is always going to be the factor that decides wins, that’s never going to change with a points system that runs a week long, they need to place mechanics in the game that can counter it. If you can’t get population to be balanced(which they can’t) then you can get the sides to play off/with each other in order to counter the side with the greatest numbers. You either start giving out bonus points to the 2nd 3rd place teams, or promote 2nd and 3rd to go after 1st constantly.

EDIT: Nevermind found the news on Tyler B, yet another wvw dev moved. Oh well, good luck to McKenna.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4zrrpn/what_happend_to_tyler_bearce_uanettylerb/

They already mentioned something like this could be implemented, but their version would be bonus points during more active periods, which is determined by how many are on from all sides, and also the catchup mechanics.

Your idea is to give bonus points to outnumbered sides, and cut the points from the side that has the most on. Instead of going 0.5x should just leave it at 1x, and give a straight bonus to the outnumbered side 2x or 3×.

I already mentioned this some time ago in another post about outmanned and bloodlust buff, to add 2x bonus to 2nd place and 3x bonus to 3rd place while under these affects, to help keep the matches closer and fix some of the bad coverage scoring.

It really would be no different than lets say in hockey when one side as “too many men on the ice”, they take a penalty and the other side has a better chance to score for 2mins, or basketball, you foul someone they get free throws which gives them points with the clock stopped.

I don’t think we will ever get close to balance for population or coverage for most servers, but you can still give out bonus points for certain situations, players would still need to actively take and kill in order to earn those bonus points.

Kaiser.9873:

I’m not seeing where a hard cap on boon length couldn’t be implemented. Hard cap would be more fair anyway than nerf nerf nerf.

Besides, metas always change and the boonshare meta will change too as something new comes along. Remember when everyone complained about the hammer meta? ANet came along and changed stab and we had a mass exodus of players. What replaced hammer? Pirate ship! Anyone want to go back to pirate ship?

Obviously melee don’t want pirate ship, but the boons meta is worse than hammer meta ever was. But whatever, y’all melee can run around in circles through everything till everyone gets bored and leaves.

mordran.4750:

And another completely kittened matchup proudly presented by Arenanet. A 3 World int. server against 2 national servers. I can even safe call now who will win this. It´s ridiculous what they are doing, they really have no clue whats going on. They are destroying national servers in the long run if they don´t stop this bullkitten and actually create matches where you don´t know the winner 1 minute after reset.

Sorry to say, I don’t think anything short of having no points for a matchup will satisfy EU at this point. I mean even down to complaining about losing a matchup first hour into it. You guys need to relax more and stop worrying about what rank your server should be at, and how you should be in the perfect dream matchup, cause it won’t happen.

TheBladeRoden.4571:

Why not make it so score builds up more slowly during dead pop and faster during high pop?

That’s the controversial change they mentioned, where higher activity time periods will gain more points. It won’t be implemented unless they feel there’s a need to.

imlooney.1938:

where do i go to leave feedback on how bad this skirmish system is? there is literally ten people in my server walking around being productive while the others have around 30 or so players each. How will this skirmish system prevent this from getting out of hand?

What does that have to do with the skirmish mode? That happens every hour of every day already. The skirmish mode is going to help make sure the 30 on the other sides are not running up scores for 2 hours at a time. They may cap everything and tick up 10k score to your 1k but they will only be getting 3 victory points out of it and not a 9k lead.

Cerby you’re making it complicated.

• Everything is the same, you cap stuff, you keep it, you upgrade it, yadda yadda yadda.

• Warscore = Points tallied the usual ways by kills, capping places, 5min ppt etc.

• Victory Points = At the end of 2 hours they check the warscore from all 3 sides, then they award victory points 3, 2, 1 for 1st, 2nd, 3rd.

• Warscore is reset for the next period, but everything is still the same.

Everything continues this way until end of the match and the server with the most Victory points wins.

The system is only meant to prevent overrun scores in dead times for servers. It wasn’t meant to be the end all be all fix for populations or coverage or scoring.

puts fingers in ears
LALALALALALALALALALALALALALALALA
WHAT?
CAN’T HEAR YOU!

Has there been statements from DB ocx that they want to stay in t1? or are the t1 servers just assuming and talking on their behalf?

Cause they have been on DB all this time from when it was riding from t5-2-5-1. If they really wanted to be in t1 like all the other current t1 ocx populations I’m sure they would have moved long ago. It’s the same thing with SoS and their crew, the people who wanted to moved did so already, the ones who are left are happy where they are no matter where the server went.

If it’s a case that they do want to stay in t1 they have choices, move to another t1 mainstay server, or recruit more NA guilds who want to be in t1. The NA guilds leaving are the ones that run 15-25 and want to fight 15-25’s not 40-50.

You’re asking them to nerf one of the selling points of the expansion…. maybe by the time the next expansion comes out they’ll think about it.

Diku.2546:

Xenesis.6389:

Snip 8<
Everyone keeps focusing on population balance, it’s something that will never be achieved, never, ever, ever. But you can do other things in order make population numbers matter less, aka the skirmish scoring changes.
Snip 8<

Can I offer you a cucumber?

Manipulating Score Mechanics shouldn’t be the Primary fix to Population In-balance.

World Ranking becomes meaningless when you have to rely on Manipulating the Score for this purpose.

They’re already manipulating ranks by having to stick inflated glicko to help a server get out of a tier, and they have full control over who gets links with whom, so they have the power to either sink or raise a server every two months, like the 4 headed monster they had created. The ranks are already meaningless, they have been from day one, the number 1 server is the one that has the most population, the most coverage, and blobs the most. Ranks are only there to match you with servers at your ppt level that’s it.

Keep your cucumber.

fishball.7204:

-snip-

That might be true for BG TC JQ who stocked up on all their timezones over the years. Except DB’s ocx/sea crew didn’t transfer on the way up, they’ve been riding that server up and down since the beginning, and for the most part stuck to the middle tiers. Sure some guilds have moved over the years but for the most part their crew stuck around on DB for whatever reasons, while their NA constantly came in and out with the implosions. I’m sure the ocx/sea people who were really interested in fights were up in t1 way before DB got to t1 anyways. All servers have been open at some point and I’m sure will be open again in the future.

DB’s NA guilds weren’t interested in ppting for the most part, they wanted the smaller fights for their smaller sized guilds, that’s why a chunk of them moved from kitten t2 then off t2 to DB when they were like t4/5. They didn’t go to DB with the intention to bringing it to t1. But clearly t1 servers are not interested in those type of fights, so DB guilds will move to more proper settings for their guilds.

I know BG would like to have DB stay up, but sorry players are not going to be BG and TC blob playthings. If DB ocx/sea are serious about staying up in t1 now, either move to one of the actual t1 servers, or get some actual NA ppt guilds in.

Ghanto.9784:

Maybe they could also award more points for taking objectives from 1st place, although then of course there would be outcry about the possibility of 2nd and 3rd too often teaming up against 1st. We’ll see.

No matter what they do, it will never ever be perfect, and there will always be people complaining about it, but we’ll just have to hope they can come up with something that at least makes a majority of people mostly happy.

It looks like they will also be trying out giving more points for upgraded structures at some point in the future, which a 1st place team would most likely mostly be holding more often than the other two.

Meh let them cry about being 2v1, truth is they will be getting much more activity/fights out of it from the opposing teams, only people who will be crying are the ktrainers who want an easy ride with a blob around them.

Really the only servers who seem to want to be t1 and enjoy it’s blob play style is BG TC JQ, and really after spending so much time up there by themselves building for that style of blob play it’s to be expected for other servers to falter after a while, YB and DB. Can JQ rebuild their NA to stay up there? they’re open again, or will Mag push up there by default when DB drops.

Diku.2546:

Xenesis.6389:

Snip 8<
One of the intentions of a three way battle is to keep moving the lines of pressure
Snip 8<

Since when has the Fixed 3 Way Fight Model consistently promoted Fights that are supposed to lead to “Balanced” Match-Ups?

Why do the Match-Ups end up the way it does now?

Population In-Balance.

More times that naught…it’s ended up like the proverbial 800 Pound Gorilla in the room with the 2 Smaller Chimps fighting over the scraps…imho

You’re above post is spot on…describing the 800 Pound Gorilla.

---

Because other games that use the 3 sided model don’t use points as the goal, it’s mostly I’ll take this side of stuff and lock it from the enemy for a period of time, so it promotes moving fights to other areas. This game also does not promote 2v1 in the right direction, it just hammers the last place team even more, and throws in the outnumbered buff as an extra joke. Why do you think every competitive point scoring sport requires even teams.

A points system does not work in a massive environment like wvw where you cannot control the population, it works for arena type models because it’s smaller and controlled and comes down to skills and teamwork of 5 players rather than 50 players rampaging through a borderland and the other two sides scrambling to try and fight that.

If you cannot control the population and coverage, control the points and how you distribute it, and try not to make the situation so kitten terrible for the players who started the match at a disadvantage.

Everyone keeps focusing on population balance, it’s something that will never be achieved, never, ever, ever. But you can do other things in order make population numbers matter less, aka the skirmish scoring changes.

Ghanto.9784:

Johje Holan.4607:

Xenesis.6389:

Could always change the points to 2, 1, 1 from 3, 2, 1.
In a way that could also force the 2nd and 3rd place teams to focus on the 1st place team, rather than the usual 1st and 2nd focusing on 3rd so they don’t give away “free points” to either.

This is one thing that I see could ruin the skirmishes for me. When I log in and see my server attacking the weaker server I just go to another map or log right back out. Even though I think its a great change, if it causes people to play for second and attack the weak then I will consider it a failure.

If it does turn into that Anet please be open to changing it to 2, 1, 1.

Well, isn’t that basically what was already happening with off-hour coverage? So next time you’re thinking about the unfairness of it all, ask yourself if the opposition ever showed mercy because they knew that you had to sleep sometimes.

Yeah but what mostly happens in off hours is someone takes a zerg and runs around and takes everything they can, not really playing for second. The skirmish scoring will help cap the points gained during those times to two hours at a time. But the problem will still remain for any time throughout the match, the 2nd place team will attack the weaker 3rd place team because it’s easier points to get and they’re “ok” with being in second than third.

Rest of this is a general reply.
One of the intentions of a three way battle is to keep moving the lines of pressure, if team 1 is hitting team 2, team 3 may go hit team 1 stuff or even intervene in the battle between 1 and 3, this is so that one team isn’t totally dominating and runs off an entire side (it still happens in eotm but barely anyone cares about scoring in there they just don’t want to put up with a blob).

The above happens right now, but when it comes down to points the second place team mostly thinks about taking 3rd’s points to keep it from 1st because it’s easier, because hey while they’re busy, we’ll sneak a tower from 1st, oops they responding now lets go after 3rd, meanwhile 3rd hunkers down, 1st follows 2nd into 3rds area cause orange swords, they will either get a fight from 2nd or take another paper tower from 3rd. 2nd gets wiped, 3rd loses another tower, 2nd thinks about what to do next… take something from 1st… or.. yeah lets go take the other tower from 3rd instead cause free points for 2nd….

3rd is already in a bad position, they usually have the least population, or least coverage, or least commanders, or gets double teamed, or their players get demoralized for the week and leave, or all of the above, they don’t need two teams fighting over splitting their points too. Their only hope for the week sometimes is trying for second if the score remains close enough.

Well what if playing for second was as good as getting third’s points? If they really wanted to win they would be forced to try and hamper 1st in that skirmish period. In this way you can also get around some of the population differences with the double team going in the proper direction, after the 1st place team not the 3rd place team.

Fighting over 3rd’s points probably isn’t going to cut it in getting you to the highest points for the skirmish, sure it’s free points, but 1st will probably have been taking points from 2nd as well. If 2nd was hitting 1st constantly it would take pressure off and make 1st go more defensive which opens up for 3rd to also come in and help put pressure on them as well.

That t4 monster that was around for the last link period, think they would have had an easy time if the SF and DH links had went after them instead of SF hitting on DH?

Could always change the points to 2, 1, 1 from 3, 2, 1.
In a way that could also force the 2nd and 3rd place teams to focus on the 1st place team, rather than the usual 1st and 2nd focusing on 3rd so they don’t give away “free points” to either.

BG starts losing – Dey hibernating!
TC starts losing – Dey hibernating! (at a good time too since they got a link)
DB starts losing – Dey imploding! call the rescue pound the cats and dogs are jumping ship! Dey the next YB!

Maybe the smaller DB guilds are tired of running into t1 blobs and having to voltron to counter it, hell I heard DN moved to t3 SoS. T2 will be a better place for DB, maybe it’s time Mag went for first lol rotate the dream!

Aeolus.3615:

SO what a servers need to do is ktrain the most empty BL and expect at that momment to score war points faster than the other 2 server?

And that doesn’t already happen? The point of the skirmish scoring is to stop the 10-15k overnight scoring that ruins matches even on the first night. So you got 10k in score the other two servers only got 4k and 2k, here’s your 3, 2, 1 points.

Also now commanders can take a 2 hr slot and try to make a push for points which can make a difference.

Also if anyone decides to give up playing because they’re going to lose a 2hr skirmish you might as well give up on the game, plus they’re a bunch of underdunders since matches right now have servers that are determined to be last from the start of reset and yet you still play.

Lastly, while it’s nice to finally have this out…. wake me up when combat becomes fun again.

Zanjii.8214:

Korgov.7645:

PvE players can easily afford to pay the 500 gems to transfer to a medium population server.

this sir , is bullkitten just saying ^^

Go sell your tradeskill mats, you’d be surprise how much gold you can make off that. Stop buying every piece of junk off the gem store can save you quite a bit as well. If players were serious about playing together as a guild, 500 gems is not hard to get, especially if they have been pveing all this time.

swellercross.3974:

What if outmann servers have a 8-10 npc legends to join the fight on a small zergs,will this be possible ,to make the outmann servers to compete against big blob servers

That’ll be the next step to cover the loss of population, hire mercenary npcs to run with you in wvw XD
Dibs on Barney Ross! I mean Rarney Boss!

EremiteAngel.9765:

For NA for example, BG has been king in terms of coverage for a long time.
I think it might be good to forcibly transfer a group of players to other worlds so that it becomes more competitive in the top tier.
I know forcibly transferring sounds like a bad idea to all of us, but how about we offer a carrot for transferring?

Block people from tranferring to BG, but allow people to transfer out of BG.
And each person who chooses to transfer out of BG gets free transfer to any world of his/her choice and maybe 2000 gems as a carrot.

We could do this for EU’s dominant server too.

Cosidering BG was open for transfers couple weeks ago, this isn’t going to happen.

TW doesn’t gvg, they don’t have the right comp on… at any time.
Dods will do pugblob vs pugblob if you want tho.
Also if you want gvg probably should look at GS instead.

apharma.3741:

Sure mesmer and necros are the only ones favoring damage conditions but I’m not talking about only damaging conditions, power builds got a lot more control conditions. Think about druids, they boon spam but they also apply a lot of immobilise and taunt too which makes fighting them without decent condi cleanse/stunbreaks annoying. DH have more cripple, blind and added daze doesn’t help.

Chill, immobilise, taunt, cripple and weakness are very strong for power builds especially those with good kiting/stealth potential. This is what makes druid so imbalanced in small scale coupled with them having stealth on par with most stealth classes, high health regen and plenty of gap openers/evade frames.

10-20s cooldowns are spammable?

Johje Holan.4607:

Xenesis.6389:

Well that clears up something to their thinking. Should probably be trying to make links more balanced over two tiers and not just to the tier they’re in, that way you could have 6 servers that could possibly rotate in matchup, and not have one tier of servers railroaded when they jump a tier for a matchup.

If you’re going to just balance servers to the tiers themselves, why bother having glicko anymore and why bother have random matchups, because the matches will probably always be a blowout of some sort if a server gets placed in the tier it doesn’t belong in. Players hate stale matches but they sure as heck hate blowouts even more.

Need a better strategy on balancing populations, for NA anyways, not sure what can be done with EU since they intent to keep the language barrier in linkings.

I think this is the route Anet should go – at least for NA. Can’t speak of EU (maybe just get rid of linkings for EU).

Balance it so kitten have six servers that can somewhat reasonably match up with each other. And T3 & T4 have six servers that match up. Then reset Glicko within each tier grouping so that all six servers rotate each week. But set the Glicko so that there is an impenetrable wall between T2 and T3.

Their almost at that point now. All that’s needed is for the HoD and NSP linkings to get another server. And it doesn’t look like TC or Mag need links so there you go. Heck, YB may not need a link to be competitive either.

Pretty much, YB probably the only server that could go back up into t2 if it was linked with another t3, but they’re not going to do that, so… might as well set up the wall between t2 and t3 instead of the semi high wall between every tier.

Well that clears up something to their thinking. Should probably be trying to make links more balanced over two tiers and not just to the tier they’re in, that way you could have 6 servers that could possibly rotate in matchup, and not have one tier of servers railroaded when they jump a tier for a matchup.

If you’re going to just balance servers to the tiers themselves, why bother having glicko anymore and why bother have random matchups, because the matches will probably always be a blowout of some sort if a server gets placed in the tier it doesn’t belong in. Players hate stale matches but they sure as heck hate blowouts even more.

Need a better strategy on balancing populations, for NA anyways, not sure what can be done with EU since they intent to keep the language barrier in linkings.

I think if condition damage was affected by toughness just as power is, you wouldn’t see as many complaints. But conditions are treated as a separate area of damage where you have to build to counter it which usually means swapping out an important utility slot, or putting on certain traits which means you have to run the entire trait line, or changing sigils or runes. Sure the same goes for condition users, tho in some cases like necro they welcome condis, but not every class has equal access to removals and resistance.

Not to mention the crappy rules of removal on those skills, the fact that condition users can use dire and also counter damage from power users at the same time, the increased spamming of conditions through various methods, in which some cases it’s possible to condition bomb and kill you just as well if not better than a power build. They also don’t have to heavily rely on two other stats, precision and ferocity, to be effective while power does.

Play a condition build if you want to if you think it’s more powerful than your power build, makes no difference these days as every other joe mac and harry are using it, especially the roamers.

apharma.3741:

As for Jim’s exaggeration of thief burst, it’s been a long time since I was hit with a backstab for even 14k, most come out at 10k if they have a pair and 7-8k if they’re running some pansy SA stealth and evade spamming build, on a zerk cloth character too.

I got hit with 7.8k cnd followed by a 13k backstab just last week with near 1600 toughness, and I bet that wasn’t even their highest bs hit of the night.

apharma.3741:

None of that matters if you’re fighting a PVT durability, concentration sigil druid who can literally tank your burst, heal to full and wear you down while making sure burst very rarely takes off half your health even if you face tank it. You’d have to be comatose to be killed in a 1v1 on that druid.

Take the advice of thieves when you face their cheese builds, run away.

Aeolus.3615:

Chaba.5410:

CommonSense.4697:

What im suggesting is why doesnt ANET do some calculation and how you get rewarded base on participation why not do that for overall score.

Because players can simply transfer to the highest population server to get rewarded for coming in first. That’s why it isn’t done.

That is what was happening for WvW tournaments, players stacked on specific servers to make shure they would end in 1st.

It’s why we can’t have nice things.

Supreme.3164:

Justine.6351:

There really isn’t a build, people are pretty much crying over ancestral grace (staff 3), celestial shadow, ancient seeds and still smokescale.

I guess the build would be anything with staff and shouts. The last 2 items are probably BiS for any druid build in wvw.

So people are whining about mobility, dmg, disengage and CC?
Can I exactly know which profession shows a balanced version of these 4 elements?
-Herald, Chronomancer, Daredevil,Scrapper?

No matter what people try to say..you all run cheesy kitten in the end of the day, low CD spammable dmg/CC

Only thing that matters in wvw roaming is mobility/disengage and damage. Mesmer, Elementalist, Thief, Warriors all have it and still do, for years. Well except elementalist now, cause their kit went to more support instead. Who needs cc when you can blow up people instead, while the druid still needs long drawn out fights.

apharma.3741:

Question to those that have been here for 4 years, are you happy with the way WvW has changed over the years? What went well and what went poorly?

H
E
Double hockey sticks
No.

I came to gw2 solely for wvw, it’s my favorite game mode out of any game, they didn’t take care of it and it’s dying. Not going to bother rehashing the good and the bad because it’s been sayed over and over in many threads for years now.

Sammyjoe.4271:

1) WvW server merges: I have had at least 50 people from my server who have called it quits after the server merges. It totally defeats the purpose of one server working together and eliminates what that server did as one. For example, my server would do “Theme nights” and reset parties at north camp before the WvW matchup reset. All of that stuff is eliminated when you have 2 other servers with you. Server merges completely destroyed my super friendly, super close server community.

Wvw servers were linked not merged, the links change every two months, some servers like the t1 servers may gain or lose a link server depending on their population growth or decline, others t2 and below will probably always have links to them now. There’s nothing stopping your server from running theme nights and reset parties, in fact with the two other servers you have more players to partake in them.

Your server community is still there, it’s not like they got split and put on another server, the real problem here is your server has most likely lost players over the past year, there’s probably a lot less logging into server team speak and forums much less gw2. Players are losing interest in wvw and gw2, lots of reason for that, all of which, and the rest of your post has been discussed in the wvw section of the forums for some time now.

tron.1438:

I can forgive the game feeling like it sides more with the PVP/WVW players.

You know nothing Jon Snow, because it sure as winter is coming, doesn’t.

Ballistic.2570:

Additional:
1: Get rid of desert borderland; it’s too big.
2: Get rid of reward tracks: they draw in PvE players
3: Make gift of battle easier to get.. The reward track again draws in PvE players.
4. Stop putting in incentives for PvE players…. Seriously, they just want to karma train and I suspect they are not geared properly for WvW.

Anyway that’s what I would do. Would it work? probably not but it would be a step in the right direction I think.

Wondering where you expect to get new players for wvw if you want to keep pve players out. If you expect players who only wvw to walk off the street and into wvw good luck with that, that obviously didn’t help wvw population in the last 4 years, even before your 1 2 3 4 list. Pve players are the least of wvw problems.

Eotm doesn’t have balance issues? Hmm coulda swore green was rampaging through there for a few months.

3) I’m confused, you say 3 maps no more, 1 of each that’s it, but then you will be going eotm way and spawning more if there’s a queue no? If you meant no 4th map, then well no point in saying 1 each… You’re going to have multiple instances of each one because wvw population size is still pretty big when you combine the servers.

You allow map hopping thus enabling teams to leave and creating unbalanced maps. Are you going to allow server/team switching too so that sides can be bandwagoned?

I assume no longer has weekly matches, cut down map times so people not going to care to defend much, you know, like eotm. Especially when a map will decide to close with as many as 30/80 still in there.

Not exactly addressing balance, you’re just giving maps a bigger pool of players to access it, instead of one server trying to fill 4 maps at a time. But having maps which may or may not close at whatever time depending on who’s left instead of the standard 4 hr eotm timer, will annoy players if the map shuffling becomes excessive.

This eotm idea has been brought up more than a dozen times already, a lot don’t want it. It could work if done properly, but not strictly the eotm way.

Considering none of the serious wvw guilds and players wants them on squads much less on the map, or that the other op bunker builds for other classes were around for “years” before they got toned down, and that rangers were always the kid in the corner spam 2 bowbear with broken pets from day one, I think they deserve a little op’ness for a change. They’re still not as bad as bunker eles were. Now as thieves would say, it’s fine learn to play.

Reaven.3958:

The alpha stuff so far looks kinda lame. Unfortunately.

I wouldn’t exactly expect much out of an alpha, where a lot of stuff will still need to be implemented, tested, changed, reimplemented or scrapped etc.

The wvw maps are not set up like megaservers in which multiple versions of each are created as the map gets full. The 3 servers in the matchup have their own “home” borderland to defend, eternal battlegrounds is where all 3 meet on pretty equal terms, so 4 maps in total.

There are many reasons to switch maps, attack enemy structures whether to draw them out for fights, just sneak capping, or trying to distract them and pull them from other borderlands that may be getting pressured, going back to home borderland to defend from enemy attacks, and yes even supplying up, etc.

Ruine.3519:

If Anet came up with a system to monetize WvW (gems or sub) while giving it more attention. Would you pay for it? Discuss.

Oh, so we gotta pay money separately for them to give notice to the section of the game they released along with the other parts of the game that received more treatment? Meanwhile they threw 200k+ into spvp, balances the game around spvp, heavily markets that game mode, developed seasons and leader boards for spvp, while also handing it all out to free accounts?

Why pay extra money to a company that has proven to not be reliable in fixing issues, not reliable in implementing proper systems, not giving a care to balance population or class, destroying guilds with guildhalls, and combat at the sake of selling the shiny expansion, which they’re not even reliable to deliver all of it’s content.

Sure, I’ll buy 10k gems, sounds good, does it come with the bonus bridge and swampland?

SkyShroud.2865:

The popularity will is engineered, nothing is real, wvw continue to bleed.

It was bleeding well before that map. But y’all like to blame the map for people leaving, the map wasn’t the only thing wrong with the expansion, many other things dealt a blow to wvw players especially the small groups, offered nothing to gvg groups except the “too small” arena which no one uses.

Not even bringing back the savior alpine map could save wvw from the bleeding, which now obviously points to other problems with wvw other than the maps.

Keep blaming the map tho.