Guild Wars 2

Dawdler.8521:

coglin.1867:

The maps are equivalent size.

You keep saying that but it doesnt make it true.
If you put the main combat area (ie below citadel) of alpine on top of desert border, you will see just how much narrower and more compact alpine is.

No, but the fact that multiple posters have posted videos with time comparisons side by side to their videos of the old maps to prove the time it takes to traverse that map is literally with in seconds of each other.

And why does the photo you provided show some od the supply camps and spawn areas cropped our, while not doing the same for the new maps? That sure appears shady and dishonest in my opinion.

atheria.2837:

Tzozef.9841:

Yea…THIS ^

Simply for the survival of smaller servers, (kaineng, Eredon Terrace, and Devona’s Rest) For example.

ET is barren, any server match up against it is a free map to cap.

If you aren’t gonna merge servers like ET with another, you gotta give those lower Bronze Tier at least Alphine back. Desert is just incapable.

No, I want them back too and I am in T1.

Our Alpine maps are what make WvW so amazing, not the dry, nasty, no WP, totally automated mess they call WvW.

Yet there were threads almost daily, demanding new maps, some of which had thousands of post support the demand for new maps, changes to the upgrade system, and changes to the supply system to counter supply trolls.

Sich.7103:

the old map with the new mechanic will be the same problem…. It’s not only the map… It’s all around…

How so?

I have seen no real evidence of any issue with the maps that would cause this, other then players feeding on one another fear and refusal to accept something new.

The maps are equivalent size.

They added varying aspects to each keep as was overwhelmingly demanded.

They changed the upgrade system to prevent the excessive supply trolls, as was a very popularly demanded.

They added an important event in the middle to draw all 3 sides into 3 way battles away from keeps.

They made it more difficult to turtle down and treb keeps from inside the safety of another keep, that was also strongly demanded to have done. Meaning you have to expose yourself more in order to attack and start a siege against another keep.

All changes that satiated the overwhelming demands of the public here on the forums.

Okay, I get your point there. I guess I am baffled why you what them to make a change in order to

standing around the upgrading keeps, towers, and camps.

I just do not understand wanting a game change so anyone can “stand around”. That seems counter productive and counterintuitive to the game mode itself.

Kitiara.2706:

It helped fights! I mean, come on. Its completely boring with auto upgrades.

No, not really. I would be interested to hear how you feel it does help fights though. It helps defenders, it prevents the supply trolls and spies, but I see no evidence that it helps fights.

All we will see with a change like this is multiple threads making various demands and arguments as to who should and should not have the right to chose which upgrade, and in what order. We had hundreds of threads complaining about this before, and demanding it be changed.

By the way, you never answered the question of why you didn’t support not changing it, when it was a hot topic and over discussed, in multiple threads?

And replace it with what?

They changed it from the old system because they were demanded to do so by posters here. Before, it could be trolled by supply trolls.

I am not certain why so many posters are in favor of a system that was heavily trolled.

Why were you not championing the cause when we had multiple threads spammed with demands to change the system to prevent those game breaking trolls?

Straegen.2938:

Chaba.5410:

You gotta wonder how Alliances would work with regards to the casual and solo player who remains on the server they are on because they enjoy the community of that server and has a reasonable expectation that they will always be a member of that community without having to join WvW all the time.

In a true Guild Alliance system, they would ally themselves with guilds they enjoy playing with. Each week when the guilds are shuffled into factions for a matchup, players/guilds that are allies will likely be sorted together.

Anything that, at best “will likely” put me with my friends acquaintances I have played with for 3 years is garbage. Unless you can suggest a system that “will certainly”, I will argue against it. But “will certainly” would more likely get my vote.

Straegen.2938:

Players that choose to remain unaligned will be slotted into whichever matchups need them. These players would effectively be mercenaries and most likely players just looking for a good fight but again that is a choice. Players that want to defend an alliance would join one.

Thus destroying all the relationships they have had for 3 years. In essence, punishing them for not being in a large guild. Major strike 2 in this bad idea.

Swagger.1459:

Shadow.3475:

Dont get why you want rewards, for me its enough off a reward to kill enemy players, manage to defend building against bigger number off attackers and so on, the problem as it is now it’s even worse than it was on old map for defending.

Rewards provide more incentive and draw people in like lemmings…

You may want lemmings. I want players who desire to play WvW.

I love EIB. I have been a strong proponent for it since it’s demise.

Having said that, I do not support the approach of the thread title off all caps and the “riot” comment. It automatically turns the idea from a discussion and into bad comic relief.

morrolan.9608:

coglin.1867:

morrolan.9608:

Chaba.5410:

coglin.1867:

I think the point was to prevent players from free trebing from the safety of keeps. At least that was a complaint often laid forward about the old BLs. I got the impression, the idea there was to for e people out of keeps in order to siege another keep. Thus creating more organic open field fights.

The more I read threads complaining about the new borderland, the more funny in an ironic sort of way it gets. Anet should just stop listening to players because clearly the new map does some things that attentive readers remember players asking for, such as breaking up zergs, encouraging fights in open field, and an end to upgrade costs.

It hasn’t done either of those thing in T1. As has been mentioned before the multiple paths make it very easy for groups to bypass one another.

I played many hours Sunday and Monday night (I am in T1 myself) and my experience is different then your. After a large fight on the event in the middle, we had to set trebs and rams out to attack the walls. Thier options were let us get the walls down or come out and fight. Where as before, we could bunker in a keep in safety while doing those siege attacks. Which offers both sides to bunker, or one or the other to bunker while trebing. This options offers a better value in drawing both sides out into the open . Both in the event, and the siege attacking.

I’m on JQBL same as you but play during ocx. In your example yes you literally have an open field fight but as a replacement for 1 that would occur at NE or NW tower on Alpine BL. Except now the strategic importance of NE or NW as an objective is gone.

It isn’t an open field fight if it is at a keep. Because one side is fighting from behind walls. That was the point I was trying to make.

I play during your schedule at least half the time, because I am on a swing shift schedule.

I do not see how the tower is relentless different in time zone references. As a rule of thumb, the other servers have less players in off peak hours as well.

@Sich
troll supply use doesn’t specifically break rules that allow for banning. The issue is that changes of this nature were demanded in many post, in many threads, for that reason. The provlem is That so many changes we got with HoT were strongly demanded in the past. Yet now everyone decides to talk about them as bad ideas after they are implemented. My question now, is why we’re folks not arguing againstst these ideas when they were presented and repeatedly cclamored for in the first place.

They added WvW guild missions.

In my opinion, if the +5 aspect you could apply to a depot will make or break your guild, then your guild wasn’t a good one to begin with.

How are they too big? Multiple discussions have already point Ted out that they are the same siz to the point that they take equivalent time to traverse. This has been established by video comparison of traversal times.

What “gimmicks” are you refering to? The term “gimmick” doesn’t tell anyone what your taking umbridge with.

if your refering to the oisis event, I ha e found d that the desire to prevent one of the other two servers from getting the benefits of it, has created some great three way battles for us in the last couple of days of play.

Straegen.2938:

Someone pointed out in another thread that no game expansion should remove players earned capabilities.

HoT not only fouled up the BLs but basically killed the guild system for all but the most dedicated large guilds. Our small guild will never get back what we had.

How so?

When you make a complaint like that with no real reason to justify it, then the counter argument is a simple, “no it does’t”.

NiloyBardhan.9170:

coglin.1867:

Why give the alpine e map back?

So we can get more threads complaining about how folks cannot upgrade keeps due to supply trolls? Because that was a spammed forums complaint before. Now it has mutated to the same posters complaining about auto upgrades.

What OP prolly means is that giving alpine BL back with the automatic upgrade system (not without it) and I fully agree with him except for the fact that it should be done in higher tiers as well.

Okay, but why? Unless they have some actual reasons to offer, it is simply a point t less demand, in my opinion.

The new maps take just as long to traverse. They limit se ure trebing from behind the safety of walls, thus creating more open field fights. The event in the middle draws all 3 sides to try to complete it first, to keep the other side from getting g, creating great 3 way battles.

I have had a great many more open field and 3 way battles this week, due to those map features, then I did in the last 3 months of the old BLs.

I think some of you are confusing a “free transfer”, with the idea of a free opportunity to bypass the full server status. Those are two very very different issues.

I agree that I dislike not being able to use the WPs. But I see no evidence that it takes any more real world time to run there as it did in the old BLs. I have looked at my videos from the old maps, and when I do not ha e any encounters, it is very similar in time to travers. Do you have evidence that suggest my findings are inaccurate?

Brighteluden.2974:

I’ve done WvW from the start and I’ve given the new BL maps the chance to draw me in but no matter how much I play on the new BL maps there is nothing wanting me to come back and play on them. It’s just to much of a pain to navigate around and way to much verticality for my taste for a PvP map.

How so?

What makes the maps harder to navigate?

Why give the alpine e map back?

So we can get more threads complaining about how folks cannot upgrade keeps due to supply trolls? Because that was a spammed forums complaint before. Now it has mutated to the same posters complaining about auto upgrades.

Swagger.1459:

I keep popping in and not seeing a commander tag…

Then put up your own tag. In my opinion, that isn’t a very good argument. In my experience, My fun is not exclusively commander tag dependant.

morrolan.9608:

Chaba.5410:

coglin.1867:

I think the point was to prevent players from free trebing from the safety of keeps. At least that was a complaint often laid forward about the old BLs. I got the impression, the idea there was to for e people out of keeps in order to siege another keep. Thus creating more organic open field fights.

The more I read threads complaining about the new borderland, the more funny in an ironic sort of way it gets. Anet should just stop listening to players because clearly the new map does some things that attentive readers remember players asking for, such as breaking up zergs, encouraging fights in open field, and an end to upgrade costs.

It hasn’t done either of those thing in T1. As has been mentioned before the multiple paths make it very easy for groups to bypass one another.

I played many hours Sunday and Monday night (I am in T1 myself) and my experience is different then your. After a large fight on the event in the middle, we had to set trebs and rams out to attack the walls. Thier options were let us get the walls down or come out and fight. Where as before, we could bunker in a keep in safety while doing those siege attacks. Which offers both sides to bunker, or one or the other to bunker while trebing. This options offers a better value in drawing both sides out into the open . Both in the event, and the siege attacking.

Grendels Mother.5713:

coglin.1867:

Grendels Mother.5713:

d) objectives with no strategic meaning lowering the maps offensive and defensive value

What does that mean precisely?

I assume you have locations in mind, but which ones? How did you determine their strategic value?

Read “Recommendation 1” I think that answers this question.

Okay, I see what you meant now. I am not entirely certain I agree, but I get your logic there now.

I think the point was to prevent players from free trebing from the safety of keeps. At least that was a complaint often laid forward about the old BLs. I got the impression, the idea there was to for e people out of keeps in order to siege another keep. Thus creating more organic open field fights.

As others have pointed out, I think the auto upgrade system is a catch 22. On o e hand, players claim they hate it. On the other hand, they hated siege and supply trolls, and this was designed to prevent that. So do we prefer the option we have now, or the easy to troll option that we know happens as well, and was strongly demanded to have changes to prevent?

Grendels Mother.5713:

d) objectives with no strategic meaning lowering the maps offensive and defensive value

What does that mean precisely?

I assume you have locations in mind, but which ones? How did you determine their strategic value?

Straegen.2938:

50+ man Q in T1 for EBG during NA Prime… no Qs in BLs. I Q up and then head to a BL until EBG comes up. Reset is the only time I see a Q on the BLs and that is a very recent occurrence.

9:00 PM central time had 18 queue on EBG, 9 man Queue on YBBL and 21 man Queue on JQBL tonight. Not sure what prime time is to you though.

Dovienya.6597:

Ardid.7203:

The problem was not to add Gyros, but to decide they should think. Gyros don’t needed AI to work. They could have been passive boosters, re-locable objects, projectiles, tethered entities, a different way to visualize direct attacks or effects, etc.

I was almost convinced they were going to be the Engie’s version of signets. There were so many possibilities!

But no. They have to make them Turrets 2.0. Bookahs…

agreed.

also, as the present iteration of stealth gyro- why can the cloaking machine not also cloak itself from enemies? needs a rework. (ally stealth view to allies with nameplate.)

I disagree. I think that would cause a real justification for a nerf on the duration of its uptime and cool down duration.

As it is now, the fact that you can use the gyro to create counter play is the only argument helping beat back some of the out rage post. If they do as you suggest, I can guarantee you that due to PvP, it will be nerfed.

lorddarkflare.9186:

Allie.4925:

Do you have to use kit swapping? No.

Do you have to use kit swapping if you want to be on par with every other class? Yes.

If you want to avoid it, I suggest you make a revenant and keep to it.

This is incorrect. To be on par with other classes, you need to Camp a Kit and your main weapon.

Rifle + Grenades for example.

If you want to exceed the other classes, you needs to start cycling through additional kits.

This is incorrect. Camping in a kit is no more optimal then camping in your original weapon set.

Is this just an EU server issue possibly? I just finished this event, and had no trouble at all. We had large forces from all 3 sides there. We had no issues yesterday either. I dunno, are all you guys on EU servers?

PauloJr.6410:

This game has three modes: pvp, wvw, pve. I see devs addressing the concerns of players from both pve and pvp. Since launch hero pints have been reworked, pvp stronghold bugs addressed, balance patch for pvp performed. However, with respect to wvw, no devs seems to care about the feedback given on this game mode or bother to properly address them, simply put no responses are given to the problems pointed out. If there is any dev out there, do you guys realize that the wvw players pays the same amount for this game as everyone else? With that said, please give us some respect and properly address our concerns in the wvw section. It is starting to become really frustrating to see hundreds of post with concerns and no responses ever given. Since hot release, we have been having issues with population on the new bls, skill lags, heavy pve farm to get wvw upgrades, cannon laser event unplayable and so many more. Now, I ask which of those have you guys bothered to take a look at or answer our concerns? This silence is making players like who have supported this game for 3 years now to start giving up on it. Show us some respect and at least give us some answers.

In my opinion, this is precisely the kind of uninformative complaint pot that got use here in the first place.

If your are going to make several broad complaints, unless you offer reasonable suggestions that a large portion of the community can agree too, all your doing is aimlessly demanding changes to things. That is what got us the changes we have now, that posters are unhappy with. Unless you detail how you want them to change, then in my opinion, you are literally being part of the problem, and not the solution, while potentially making things worse.

RodOfDeath.5247:

It’s a bit concerning and as time goes on I’m just not buying this “people are pveing and guilds are building up their halls” Any true wvwer pukes at the thought of pveing.

Well I enjoy some of the world events and bosses. I believe you are being very dishonest to claim to speak for those who play WvW.

I spend 90% of my time in WvW, but I do not hate PvW,as well, I enjoy PvP.

Sich.7103:

I have explain a multiple time now why wvw is going to die, but no answer.
Maybe if anet can explain the new choice, maybe we can understand why they have made that… But nop… We see no one…

You appear to confuse subjective opinion with actual objective fact.

You have simply explained what you think in why WvW is dying. Whether or not it is dying is up for debate for that matter. I do not blame devs for not making post, when posters actually think their opinions are fact, and demand a response.

Nonvo.3429:

pve gets new maps and good rewards (new legendaries)
oh yea they did nerf dungeon rewards (balancing wooo)

Are those legendaries somehow banned from WvW?

Nonvo.3429:

wvw gets a new map no one wants to actually play on and oh yea salvageable badge equipments and removes the benefits of playing in wvw, i almost forgot now we can farm mats in wvw for pve items again(much luv)

If no body wants new maps, then why were there so many threads demanding new, larger maps?

Had some great 3 way battle on the BLs last night when everyone was fighting over the event. It was a pretty good time.

It seems that event can draw everyone to the center of the map for a good fight. Then you see the 2 sides that didn’t win the event, rush back to defend the keeps for even more fights.

It was kind of nice to see 2 BLs full to a queue last night at 10:00 pm.

One complaint I see a lot that I do agree with completely, is that I dislike the auto upgrade system. Rather then delete the idea completely though, I would prefer to see the yak dependence severely increased.

Alex.8630:

He is nor verry good 4 wvw ?

Great for WvW in my opinion.

I have spent years as a map or guild pin running front line, and occasionally a mid line support. It is really good for roaming especially.

Firelysm.4967:

It was promised after HoT release, what happened to that?

Your being dishonest here.

I do not see the word “promise” or any indication of a promise or garuntee. This type of word twisting, in my opinion, is precisely why they post as little as possible, when it comes to WvW. All they did was state an intended desire to try to focus on WvW.

lmperdigao.2567:

Every 6 months they make a WvW blog post/announcement, and nothing comes.

You mean like new maps, new keep mechanics, new upgrade mechanics, new events, guild arenas, and new upgrade mechanics?

I think it is because there were a lot of post over the years asking for variations in keeps, new maps, and making it easier for defenders and harder on attackers.

The problem is that most of those were demanding and random complaint threads thay only made those demands, while avoiding ever going into any explanation as to how to accomplish it. When they get spammed with angry complaints that have no real substance on how to solve what they are complaining about, then you get whatever solutions they dream up.

This is why you see a lot of posters now, starting to get onto random complainers, demanding that they elaborate on issues and discussion on what changes to make. Because random complaining with no comprehensive solution creates this type of issues.

I suggested making a necro and go into the PvP lobby and play it. That is how I learned to play against builds that I had difficulty with.

coro.3176:

• plague signet is anti-fun – Obviously, the solution to some of these problems is to kite from a distance and take them down with ranged damage. However, most of my ranged damage (grenades, mortar) also apply conditions, and this does more harm to me than them, because they immediately plague signet them off at instant speed once I land my attacks. Now I have to disengage again because of chill, poison, bleed, etc.

Any advice would be appreciated. I just can’t fight them at all.

Not sure the point of calling it “anti-fun”. I doubt they fill the conditions you put on them in the first place was any fun for them either.

Basically, This is an animation you should make an effort to learn, and focus on dodging it, in my opinion.

Also, if you looked before you made this thread, there is a thread titled ‘reaper’ a few threads down, it discusses this issue also.

I would swap backpack regenerator out for inversion enzymes, I find that more beneficial for survivability as well as boon building. Just a suggestion.

Although I see where your comming from, I feel it is a bad idea. It is already too valuable for grenades, bombs, and mortar kit. I would prefer not to put all of our eggs in one basket, so to speak. I do not like trait lines thay feel like “must haves” because they support too many skills. I would prefer traits that support them, in the tools or inventions line.

No.

I despise the need for gliding in PvE. In no way do I want it in WvW.

Stark.1350:

Detonating gyros should be explosives. Shredder gyro and it’s toolbelt should be instant cast.

Why “should” they be explosives?

I have seen this claimed a time or two, yet no one making this claim offers a reason or logic behind it.

GROMIT.7829:

Not a single person on my server (Piken Square) is even remotely intrested in the Desert Borderlands maps, the moment someone suggests we move from EB to a DB it’s just a collective groan followed by chuckles.

You get the odd commander trying to make something of it but 30 minutes later they just give up and requeue for EB because of how tedious traversing the map, the silly PvE mechanics and the complete lack of involvement in upgrades and upkeep of the keeps which we had scouts for, who by the way have all just disappeared.

If your aim was to make the desert borderlands a baron and unpopulated wasteland like a desert is in real life then you succeeded, if your intention was to bring about diversity then you failed so hilariously it’s untrue.

I have an issue with this simply because I feel it is irrational for someone to claim to know how easy or tedious a map is to traverse is a very short 30 minutes.

Seems to me that they must have entered it with a preconceived dislike, and may have been making every effort to find reasons to be unhappy. I do not feel anyone claiming to make a detemenation in 30 minutes to have been reasonable about it.

Offair.2563:

That does not justify projectiles and such going THROUGH the walls. Ofcourse you need to get of it and push but this is not something that should be around.

I agree that projectiles should not go through walls or gates.

Ivarr Wolfsong.2986:

I totally agree with the OP ( Percival <3 <3 <3 ).

The BLs are terrible. I actually like PvE events in WvW as it gets some other portions of the community to join in. It should NOT however be a map changing event.

Yes, there are chokepoints and narrow passages which are great for tactical use. However, they are EVERYWHERE. Fighting a larger force in a choke point isn’t smart use of the terrain when you have no choice.

All the cheesy “gimmicks” (perfect word for it, Selwynn!) are just silly. The shrine buffs seemed ok, but the jumping puzzles, gusts of wind, crazy “PvE boss” lord abilities and the like are misplaced in WvW.

The guild claiming, upgrades and stronger camps all really hurt the lower population servers right in the gonads. When your prime time zerg is 15-20, not being able to count on a solo here and there working camps is a real blow. They could at least scale things for server size.

I think your absolutely incorrect about choke points. Funneling a large force into them is precisely where you want to fight against st a large force. Which is why very many were demanding more choke point ts when new maps were comming.

Luna Aldara.3451:

Give us back the old borders and rotate one of the new borders, let’s see which borders are more popular…. the new lay-out is just a huge failure.

I do not desire the old BLS back unless the fix the areas siege can be dropped in and not reached by the opponent. I do not desire them back until they fix the small areas that exploited can run to and be invulnerable once they leave the safety of thier spawn area.

Diku.2546:

Sometimes people just want to express their sadness…and not have to explain it. This thread allows them to. If people have solid details…let them come forward. If some just want to express their feelings…let them.

This is similar to a funeral of sorts…the death of our Old Alpine Map…let’s give folks space to grieve.

There’s lots of other threads that have detailed feedback that offers solutions to fix everything in WvW.

Peace

And that mentality is what got us in this situation. Your supporting the bahavior that worsened the problem. I am suggesting that we change some of those bad habits so that they know where everyone stands on thier view of the solution.

Ellington them there is a problem, while making an effort not to tell them why, only offers the potential to make future changes worse. You may support that concept, but I do not.

Trepidation Lost.3469:

So, ive noticed a lot of attacks now go through walls, pretty much making it impossioble to defend stuff :/

I do not believe impossible means what you thank it means.

You can treb their siege.

You can exit the secluded safety of your keep and fight, and destroy the seige. This is why players attack walls in this manner. To force you to counter term siege, or draw you out to fight. You have auto upgrades, you do not require yaks to make it in, walls take longer to go down. Defending is much easier and limits options for attackers. Go out and do something about it.

C E J O.1752:

I saw the title, and I figured that was me too.

Anet, it was too late, but I tried at least telling you how bad your new maps were. Yes, they are beautiful. I respect the effort you put into making them look nice.

….That’s it.

They are just about unplayable. I’m glad I’m on a mid-tier server. The rush to EB is going to be insane on high-pop maps. I mean, NSP already queues it, but it’s not terrible.

Actually, once people get everything from HoT, what will you do?

This kind of lack of feedback kind of reenforces what was mentioned earlier in the thread. All you really say is that “the maps are unplayable”. Thay doesn’t mean anything really.

Why do you feel they are unplayable? That is a question that needs a bit of detail, so that your feedback has value.

I posted a fair amount of argument some time ago because people were demanding new maps, larger maps, and the concept of wanting to make it easier to defende. I repeatedly mentioned the need for detail in how to accomplish that. Most posters simply made broad demands of those aspects with no detail. Now Anet offered new maps and systems in an attempt to fill those demands. It seems many who demanded changes, are unhappy with them. Personally I feel the lack of detailed feedback is precisely what got us to this point.

C E J O.1752:

I saw the title, and I figured that was me too.

Anet, it was too late, but I tried at least telling you how bad your new maps were. Yes, they are beautiful. I respect the effort you put into making them look nice.

….That’s it.

They are just about unplayable. I’m glad I’m on a mid-tier server. The rush to EB is going to be insane on high-pop maps. I mean, NSP already queues it, but it’s not terrible.

Actually, once people get everything from HoT, what will you do?

This kind of lack of feedback kind of reenforces what was mentioned earlier in the thread. All you really say is that “the maps are unplayable”. Thay doesn’t mean anything really.

Why do you feel they are unplayable? That is a question that needs a bit of detail, so that your feedback has value.

I posted a fair amount of argument some time ago because people were demanding new maps, larger maps, and the concept of wanting to make it easier to defende. I repeatedly mentioned the need for detail in how to accomplish that. Most posters simply made broad demands of those aspects with no detail. Now Anet offered new maps and systems in an attempt to fill those demands. It seems many who demanded changes, are unhappy with them. Personally I feel the lack of detailed feedback is precisely what got us to this point.

If it out grew being useful, wouldn’t everyone simply not use it?

briggah.7910:

Have you been to every server to come up with your fact? Yeah didn’t think so.. :P

I was thinking the same thing. I do not think “fact” means what they think it means. I suspect it is based on anticdotale evidence of a specific match up. Fact requires unequivocal proof, not anticdotale evidence.

gennyt.3428:

Cogbyrn.7283:

Thank you for posting, I’m going to try it out.

Do you have to take literally every opportunity, even when given something that might help an experience, to take a jab, though? It isn’t like they put this in the PvE forums and say “Check it PvEers, new client!”. It’s in the forum you would expect it.

There are stickies about this in both of the PvE forums so the jab was well deserved in this case lol.

It was on FB, twitter, dulfy, and the Anet blog all within minutes of one another as well.

BrickFurious.7169:

DeceiverX.8361:

My biggest gripes with the new BL’s are the absolutely ridiculous buffs given to defenders through auto-upgrade being solely time-based and not even coming close to how slow or difficult the process was. Defense has turned into a “set and forget” process, for the objectives will upgrade quickly enough to largely defend themselves.

This is actually my biggest gripe too, though it isn’t related just to the new BLs. As you suggested, auto-upgrading is fine, but inevitable upgrading is not. There needs to be some way for enemy players to prevent an upgrade from happening besides just capturing the objective. I think the most obvious and easy change is to make it so that a certain amount of yaks are required to reach an objective before it upgrades (in addition to the timer), similar to how upgrades were gated by the number of yaks that reached them prior to HoT.

I completely agree with this sentiment. The problem is that there were many many threads, with many many post, clamoring for an easier time defending. As much as I do not like it, there was a vast amount of post demanding a change to help defenders. Now guess what we have?

zhonnika.1784:

On JQ, BL maps usually empty and can be k-trained. EB will have a queue. You’ll often be outmanned on the borderland maps, and I’d wager that the same is true for YB/BG.

I dunno, I am on JQ and we have had some solid 3 way battles in the borderlands on 3 seperated nights this week.

It seems to me that as players are starting to finish their PvE stuff for GHs and ESs, the BLSs are starting to compile a decent amount of players from both us, and the competitive servers.

I downloaded it yesterday.

I worked great in WvW last night. So far I have been lucky enough not to encounter any bugs.

Insane Pancakez.9182:

I’m surprised how many people still think anyone from Anet will do anything to help out WvW. They haven’t made a good change that I can remember since they’ve released GW2 in 2012. Good luck getting any sort of replies from them, and if a legendary reply does happen be ready for a solid “We’re working on it”.

That being said, if you’re new to WvW, refer to this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezVy-zLUq6g

You appear to confuse your subjective opinion with that of actual objective fact. They have mad a vast amount of positive changes and improvements.

We are seeing 20 man queues on the BLs that everyone is swearing do not have queues.
http://imgur.com/cdF7q2n

No, it only trigger “on heal” stuff in the case of the “heal kit”, because its main heal is on the tool belt. Everything else is based off the heal skill itself.