Stack Wars — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Stack Wars

I think GW2 shines the most in groups of 5-10 players. That's why I think objectives and encounters should be designed in a way that it makes little sense to allocate more than 10 players for each objective. I'd say if we could split up champs in Open World into champ groups spread around a bit, and change WvW so there are more smaller objectives on the map we could reduce visual noise, reduce importance of zergs and flatten the learning curve between low-end and high-end pvx.

Note: I am not opposed to champ farming or huge open world bosses, but think both could be expanded and improved upon given this game's popularity.

What do you think?

Comments

  • sokeenoppa.5384sokeenoppa.5384 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 26, 2020

    But we have instanced pve content and pvp because of those reasons. Players who think that gw2 shines in group of 5-10 are most likely playing those modes.
    I think that whole point of meta events is to be these massive fights and thats why I personally dont like them but I know that many do.

    I'll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

  • AliamRationem.5172AliamRationem.5172 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Pawlegance.7012 said:
    I think GW2 shines the most in groups of 5-10 players. That's why I think objectives and encounters should be designed in a way that it makes little sense to allocate more than 10 players for each objective. I'd say if we could split up champs in Open World into champ groups spread around a bit, and change WvW so there are more smaller objectives on the map we could reduce visual noise, reduce importance of zergs and flatten the learning curve between low-end and high-end pvx.

    Note: I am not opposed to champ farming or huge open world bosses, but think both could be expanded and improved upon given this game's popularity.

    What do you think?

    Not everyone agrees with you. But even if they did, best intentions don't always produce the desired outcome. Take the Verdant Brink meta, for example. It requires players to spread out and cover many objectives in small groups of 1-5 players for best effect. Unfortunately, this meta isn't very popular because this "split up" phase necessarily lasts for a long time (or else players wouldn't have time to spread out and cover positions all over the map!).

    What you find is that it's the 5 big bosses that spawn at the end of the meta that players enjoy fighting. Splitting up and defending camps is something most players don't bother with. As a result, the VB meta is one of the more difficult events to gain the full reward from, even though it really just involves players doing relatively easy events all over the map.

    Don't get me wrong. I'm glad we have different types of events like this, but making them all this way would not produce the desired effect.

  • I do think WvW needs things to shake it up a bit. Currently the "big zerg battles" spoken about don't happen that often. Most of the time you're in a zerg re-capping nodes for an hour. The enemy zerg is supposed to be the exciting content in WvW but more often than not they are also running around re-capping nodes.
    Throw a wandering giant legendary npc in there every once in a while, that spawns veteran enemies, that creates real damage and losses for whoever encounters it, with an impactful reward like an elite node , that would be amazing.

  • Khisanth.2948Khisanth.2948 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @AliamRationem.5172 said:

    @Pawlegance.7012 said:
    I think GW2 shines the most in groups of 5-10 players. That's why I think objectives and encounters should be designed in a way that it makes little sense to allocate more than 10 players for each objective. I'd say if we could split up champs in Open World into champ groups spread around a bit, and change WvW so there are more smaller objectives on the map we could reduce visual noise, reduce importance of zergs and flatten the learning curve between low-end and high-end pvx.

    Note: I am not opposed to champ farming or huge open world bosses, but think both could be expanded and improved upon given this game's popularity.

    What do you think?

    Not everyone agrees with you. But even if they did, best intentions don't always produce the desired outcome. Take the Verdant Brink meta, for example. It requires players to spread out and cover many objectives in small groups of 1-5 players for best effect. Unfortunately, this meta isn't very popular because this "split up" phase necessarily lasts for a long time (or else players wouldn't have time to spread out and cover positions all over the map!).

    It also gives mediocre rewards considering the 40+ minutes required.

    Oh and speaking unpopular things that require people to split up .... anyone want yet another thread about Serpent's Ire?

  • Aridon.8362Aridon.8362 Member ✭✭✭

    Or or they could make world bosses three times harder, that'd be epic, they did it with the Shatterer and Tequatl, the issue or quarrel with it is that the rewards suck. I don't see why ANET simply can't just give us gold as a reward for our efforts.

    You get some rares and a stupid spoon for all the effort. So if they in contrast up the ante, maybe. But you know we're going to keep getting a paper clip and some lint at the end of the day.

  • Terra.9506Terra.9506 Member ✭✭

    I like 5 people group content than 10 player (Except Steel&Fire where 10 player fit the most) my problem with group content is when the battle begun it spray effect all over the place and hard to keep track what going on in screen include terrible FPS drop, Lag.

    For Steel & Fire it work because the map is quite large but the problem appear in Boss fight where too thing happen at same time.

  • Zet.9130Zet.9130 Member ✭✭

    Spoons AND lint? OMG I love this game!!11!