Poor Map Design is the Real Problem

While still strong in more open areas and still overturned in some ways - Scourge and Spellbreaker are very beatable in more open areas. It's when you get forced into small areas and are constantly getting your boons corrupted or dazed because someone else triggered Full Counter that things become terrible. Fight them in an area the size of the arena and they are much easier to out play.

Fights on Graveyard feel fine, sometimes even fun. Meanwhile maps with smaller points are exercises in patience and encourage boring gameplay. I've said this a million times but I won't stop saying it until it stops being a problem:

1. We need larger points across almost all of the maps.
2. The team with the most players on point should start capturing the point at a decreased rate just like Battlefield.
3. Decapping a point should not take only 5 second, this encourages AVOIDING FIGHTS which is absurd.

These changes would make the mode feel much better, and would make more builds viable. The current mechanics will ensure that the meta will always be mass AoE, bunking, and sneaky decaps. Judging by the current PvP population - players don't find this enjoyable. I'm sure some do, but there will always be those that like easily abused mechanics.

I'm on the fence about suggestions 2 and 3. I feel like it will be a double edged sword and snowball even more. Bad players will tunnel vision more than now and you won't even be able to cheese players better than you with bunker builds.

Suggestions 3 is a great idea.

in neverwinter the maps are bit more larger, points to cap larger, and u get extra points for decap from enemy, cuz of this, thievs decap rule was very important. Battles strategy prevails over the class stacking, cuz wrong movement to a wrong point will cost more. Team toxicity was very rare.

Poor map design is the problem? & your solution is we need larger maps so that cap points are harder to get around? i dont agree. First of all if that was the case all classes with mobility starting with thieves would have map advantage. Then you have immortal classes that would just camp 2 caps & stay there. Witch would make decaping next to impossible. Problems for now is balance, build diversity-(Viable ones & none meta) & game mods other then conquest.

@Vieux P.1238 said:Poor map design is the problem? & your solution is we need larger maps so that cap points are harder to get around? i dont agree. First of all if that was the case all classes with mobility starting with thieves would have map advantage. Then you have immortal classes that would just camp 2 caps & stay there. Witch would make decaping next to impossible. Problems for now is balance, build diversity-(Viable ones & none meta) & game mods other then conquest.

You apparently ignored point 2. If two players of one team are on point and only one of the other the team with two players will begin to cap. The most the thief could do is delay the cap,they could not deny it. Most games would probably go like this:

1. Everyone besides the player getting home will go mid. Pushing far will make the other team start to cap mid.
2. Players will want to get the first kill in order to begin capping. This makes support important.
3. Once the first kill is confirmed the team down a man will probably try and push far. This will force at least one of the other team to pursue them.

The only real difference is that pushing far at the start is now way more risky because you put the mid fight in the enemy's favor right away. One the other hand the larger points means AoE is way easier to avoid and one tank can't deny the mid cap for ages. This makes trickling in to delay the cap impossible and will hopefully force players to regroup more. You can't increase build variety if certain builds just don't work on small circles.suggestion 3 means that going of to decap mid fight isn't worth it because someone should be able to get there and deny it.

This system forces players to actually fight each other instead of trying to just go wherever the enemy isn't.

One thing all maps need is more cover. Boulders, pillars, crates, etc. There's many of these, but they appear sparingly or in places where they are mostly useless.

Of course we can't have them right inside the capture points unless they are very large points like Legacy of the Foefire graveyard (middle), but we could use more scenarios like the pillars at Henge in Forest. Not on every single point, just on more points.

We have lots of ranged attacks, but without cover we got too much ranged spam shooting fish in a barrel and too many people trying to run behind each other as if they were the weirdo obsessed with "slap-ass"

Using the terrain is a basic part of action-style combat, but not all maps give you enough to work with. If I wanted "walk to enemy press buttons" style of combat I would not be playing action combat games in which you can avoid projectiles by side-stepping or moving behind a wall. I prefer maps with good combinations of open spaces, obstacle 'forests', and cramped tunnels.

@MithranArkanere.8957 said:One thing all maps need is more cover. Boulders, pillars, crates, etc. There's many of these, but they appear sparingly or in places where they are mostly useless.

Of course we can't have them right inside the capture points unless they are very large points like Legacy of the Foefire graveyard (middle), but we could use more scenarios like the pillars at Henge in Forest. Not on every single point, just on more points.

We have lots of ranged attacks, but without cover we got too much ranged spam shooting fish in a barrel and too many people trying to run behind each other as if they were the weirdo obsessed with "slap-kitten"

.

Using the terrain is a basic part of action-style combat, but not all maps give you enough to work with. If I wanted "walk to enemy press buttons" style of combat I would not be playing action combat games in which you can avoid projectiles by side-stepping or moving behind a wall. I prefer maps with good combinations of open spaces, obstacle 'forests', and cramped tunnels.

It's be nice to see larger points with some terrain variance and cover included within the point itself. On a point as big as Foefire mid, a few symmetrically placed pillars would do the trick. Add a few boxes or hills around them to all people to climb up or jump off for extra terrain play. It doesn't have to be much; even just a little will make a world of difference.

In addition to the first poet's suggestions, I'd add:

• Your team respawns 3s faster for every node that you don't own.

to give teams on the back foot a better chance to rebound. It keeps matches from being too pre-determined by one misplay.

It's worth trying, isn't it? What else to lose?

Am I the only one who's hoping for any kind of instanced pvp that isn't on a tiny map fighting in tiny circles? Come on.

@Kraitan.8476 said:Am I the only one who's hoping for any kind of instanced pvp that isn't on a tiny map fighting in tiny circles? Come on.

I've pretty much gave up on hope, for it happening in GW2. And currently playing other games that not only have that. But are fully supporting it as well. Whenever I have the need to instanced pvp that's not circle dancing.

@ugrakarma.9416 said:in neverwinter the maps are bit more larger, points to cap larger, and u get extra points for decap from enemy, cuz of this, thievs decap rule was very important. Battles strategy prevails over the class stacking, cuz wrong movement to a wrong point will cost more. Team toxicity was very rare.

Neverwinter? The game where people would afk regularly whenever someone's gearscore was under a certain amount?I saw more afks and dcs from neverwinter than any other mmo, moba, or even fps game in my life. I frequently had games where it was 4v4 or 2v3 because of the rampant dcs and afks.I actually had a game one time where I was literally the only person there.

Maybe things changed since I last played?? But honestly... that game had a myriad of problems that didn't start or end at pvp and unless several things changed fundamentally the game likely has the same toxicity and acrid stink as you'd expect in hot, slightly radioactive garbage... where as GW2's toxicity is still only at "rotten egg" in comparison.

Here's hoping for bigger contesting nodes. If it can't be done on all of them, at least let it happen at MID nodes.

By far the worst offender of map design is Khylo's mid node. The only point in the game where you have only 2 possible ways to approach it, making it extremely easy to bombard it with aoes, or to force you outside of it, needing to initiate the painful climb to it all over again.

@Reaper Alim.4176 said:

@Kraitan.8476 said:Am I the only one who's hoping for any kind of instanced pvp that isn't on a tiny map fighting in tiny circles? Come on.

Yeah sometimes I feel like going back to WoW just for some warsong gulch/arathi basin games, sadly I never do it because the rest of the game doesn't appeal to me anymore and its such a geargrind :/

@BurrTheKing.8571 said:While still strong in more open areas and still overturned in some ways - Scourge and Spellbreaker are very beatable in more open areas. It's when you get forced into small areas and are constantly getting your boons corrupted or dazed because someone else triggered Full Counter that things become terrible. Fight them in an area the size of the arena and they are much easier to out play.

Fights on Graveyard feel fine, sometimes even fun. Meanwhile maps with smaller points are exercises in patience and encourage boring gameplay. I've said this a million times but I won't stop saying it until it stops being a problem:

1. We need larger points across almost all of the maps.
2. The team with the most players on point should start capturing the point at a decreased rate just like Battlefield.
3. Decapping a point should not take only 5 second, this encourages AVOIDING FIGHTS which is absurd.

These changes would make the mode feel much better, and would make more builds viable. The current mechanics will ensure that the meta will always be mass AoE, bunking, and sneaky decaps. Judging by the current PvP population - players don't find this enjoyable. I'm sure some do, but there will always be those that like easily abused mechanics.

I really like your first point, IF the second point is implemented. Otherwise, I don't see much point to it (hah).

I think the second point is the strongest, it would kill the bunker meta and greatly nerf the Spellbreakers ability to 2v1 so easily. It would change a pointless stalling tactic into a waste of time for the bunker player, which I completely welcome.

For your third point, I disagree. The quick decap adds a lot of the viability to Thief to be a decapper role. Sneaky decaps are part of the skill in the game.

@Murdock.6547 said:

@ugrakarma.9416 said:in neverwinter the maps are bit more larger, points to cap larger, and u get extra points for decap from enemy, cuz of this, thievs decap rule was very important. Battles strategy prevails over the class stacking, cuz wrong movement to a wrong point will cost more.

Team toxicity was very rare.

it was around 3 years ago before IceWind Dale expansion. Before it, large playerbase have near same average gearscore, and its was rarely a issue. Yeah things becomes worsen later, after this expansion PWE (Pay to win Entertainment) intensified the gear race grind, launching many expansions after another(i counted here like 5 or more in less 3 years) increasing the abyss of gearscore among players. While their business model sucks, technically they had good programming staff. The UI was flawless, if we had just they life bar here in GW2, it would be an abysmal difference in pvp.

@shippage.1983 said:

For your third point, I disagree. The quick decap adds a lot of the viability to Thief to be a decapper role. Sneaky decaps are part of the skill in the game.

There is very little skill involved in glancing at a minimap followed by mashing dodge and 5. Slower decaps would encourage more teamfights. Teamfights on points that dynamically decap based on active team presence would force a lot more player consideration into how to approach and sustain a teamfight. Points 2 and 3 greatly benefit from each other.

@Kraitan.8476 said:Am I the only one who's hoping for any kind of instanced pvp that isn't on a tiny map fighting in tiny circles? Come on.

I call conq. Concrud or circle dancing. it's too hard to enjoy a uncompetitive map where 1 class rules the mode and all maps in it. Having a super speedster class in a speed game isn't good lol. i was main Thief at gw2 drop and he has my account name. Got so bored of being the little run boy every map. Easy wins but zzzZZZzzz.

WTB TDM queable with a few maps. Rip conq and then change them to TDM maps with power ups big enough to want to go for.

@Ziggityzog.7389 said:

@Kraitan.8476 said:Am I the only one who's hoping for any kind of instanced pvp that isn't on a tiny map fighting in tiny circles? Come on.

Yeah, a straight TDM would not be good for certain professions. There needs to be some reward for mobility.

Actually i think conquest is fine. The real problem is that class balance team completely ignores the facts that we fight in confined areas (circles) and balances around non-class stacking when class stacking is allowed in ranked matches which leads to issues when one semi-broken class stacks way too good and becomes even bigger issue (e.g. DHs in HoT).