Showing Posts For warspite.2735:

WvW Incentive?

in WvW

Posted by: warspite.2735

warspite.2735

WVW IS NOT PVE, GO AWAY PLEASE. This mentality is what’s ruining WvW, It’s a PvP zone for people who wanna fight the other servers on a large scale, I would even go as far as to have them remove the majority of the Keeps and Towers so we can have less PvEers like yourself. Go back to your boring PvE. You don’t like WvW? Fine, stay away, like I do with PvE. You PvEers are the ones who are bringing about this zerg mentality because the vast majority of you are so afraid to fight someone that you do what all scaredy-cats do and group up until you completely outnumber the opponent to the point they have no chance and then turn and run from anyone not afraid to steamroll you. Once again, WVW IS NOT PVE, GO AWAY PLEASE.

WvW is NOT PvP, it is NOT PvE either. It is BOTH!!!!!!! Stop trying to convince people that your kitten is bigger because you can gank people or have more kills. The intent of WvW is territorial control NOT open field gank fests. You want to see how big your ekitten is, go to sPvP. There is a reason kills net you no points but holding towers and such do. Wake up to reality.

quoted for being bang on! Nice one Catista.

Parktou – really? you went with a carebear slur as your primary argument? Did you even read the OP?

The point isn’t that the OP wants more PvE in WvW… the point is that if all you have on a map is a bunch of objectives that a zerg runs around and takes without any kind of check in place that makes this a bad idea, then the meta game of WvW is BROKEN.

WvW, like Catista points out… is a GAME. It’s a week long competition to have the highest score. In between, it’s a bunch of smaller games to have the highest PPT while your group is active, and within that it is a series of skirmish games, generally over an objective (like a keep). Yes, it’s against other players, rather than NPCs (mostly). But, again as Catista points out, standing in a field slugging it out with your opponents is of ZERO VALUE to winning the game.

ANet, you need to add a component to the meta game that makes 70 person zergs the WORST thing you could possibly do because that 10-15 man group from an opposition server is doing something away from your zerg that will make you regret forming that big, useless murderball. Orbs may be it, or maybe it’s something else. But without incentive to WvW has devolved into a mindless WXP train.

Speaking of WXP, please, please, please rethink how this is allocated. For those that took part in the first year of Warhammer Online, you know what I am talking about. 24/7 RP Trains traveling from lake to lake taking objectives uncontested (worse than uncontested, deals were brokered with the other faction to NOT be on the same lake as the RP Train) simply for the sake of ranking up in RR. You can’t even say that this was because the rewards were too tempting. In the very early days, they weren’t… people did it simply because they wanted to rank up faster than the other guy and show their big eKitten.

WXP, in its current form is looking to be exactly the same. I have already heard people on TS say “let them have it, we’ll just flip it back for WXP” and these have been at winnable fights.

Warhammer eventually addressed the RP Train issue… a year too late and by that time it didn’t matter as they had shed any amount of success they had achieved.

I cannot believe ANet would want GW2 to face the same fate as Warhammer Online.

What if culling is unfixable?

in WvW

Posted by: warspite.2735

warspite.2735

I’m glad we have all these experts to tell us what’s gonna happen/not happen…

On a game they didn’t program
On a system they didn’t build
On servers they didn’t install

I have a programming degree and I’m not arrogant enough to assume what is/is not going to happen here.

^^ this

On the topic of performance in WAR… the Fort fights in the first 6 months of the game were not even playable. “lag” doesn’t even begin to describe having your character respond every 15-20 seconds and Mythic claimed they weren’t even aware of these problems when they first started… meaning they hadn’t even play-tested a fort siege with anything close to real numbers of participants.

Let’s let ANet address this and we can let them know after the patch if it’s working or not. Pre-supposing solutions and potential problems is useless.