10 reasons to remove desert map — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home WvW

10 reasons to remove desert map

Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited December 19, 2020 in WvW
  1. It is too hot for warclaw and camel skin is missing
  2. It gives unfair advantage/disadvantage (competitiveness)
  3. Its half as popular as one alpine map
  4. The keeps and towers are too large
  5. The lords have too much CC
  6. The siege spots are too high
  7. It has ton of bugs (falling through gates, leaping past walls)
  8. Lord rooms are designed for clouding and everything else is 1000 chokepoints
  9. Scouting it is impossible with every keep and tower having multiple cata/treb spots that can't be countered with siege in combination with 100 hiding spots
  10. It takes spot of a real map

The map need some serious fixing and holding onto it is just failure to admit it isn't what the playerbase wants. Replace desert with 3rd alpine map. Design a new EB with different middle castle and throw it in, so we can have 5 maps instead of 4. Reduce map cap by like 15 as 60 man fights are much less fun than 45 ones

Ri Ba - Charr of logic
~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

<1

Comments

  • God.2708God.2708 Member ✭✭✭

    There are two flaws with desert BL

    1. The two northern towers are 'lonely' and should be moved close enough that if an enemy takes them they can impact stoic rampart (objective hopping). The southern towers don't leap either, but that's less problematic from an overall map strategy view since borderlands are meant to be 2v1 situations and it's expected the defenders have to hop from one side of the map to the other and one keep will eventually fall.
    2. The lords incorporate to many uncounterable/obnoxious PvE elements. A single strong element that defenders might take advantage of is fine (Stonemists Lord with his multiple AoE KDs, Alpine Keep lords and their single huge AoE burst), but the desert BL lords, especially keeps, are a constant string of problematic attacks and it makes it frustrating for an attacker to fight around.

    Most other flaws people find with the maps are simply an element of the lack of population and interest in PPT scoring mattering. The original design was to give small parties a better edge when trying to havoc around a single large zerg, and it does actually do that. The motivation for trying to 'play' the map as is intended though isn't there. And, I don't think the map should be dumped because of problems that are not actually with the map.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭

    probably; EBG and alpine borders have the same amount of "bad terrain" as in buggy spots, we're just way more used to them.

    but yeah, it'd need a proper workover. i'm highly against removing it completely. Anet would just party if they could present another cutting of content as a "world restructure balance update"... and the alpine borders are rather boring by now. just work better, because the core settlements are closer together.

    the lords are rather just fine. all lords should be stronger, not as useless as they currently are. would be nice if the scaling works differently. like outnumbered should buff players stat and make lords way stronger for example.

    the siege spots are silly, because too many abusable spots exist. towers of keeps in all maps should have higher spots, so treb VS treb works better and doesn't stay completely one-sided.

    also, everything is too large in desert border, not only the keeps. it needs to get way more even ground simply, and the size would play less role. too many spots where the camera bugs out, and the ways between tower-keep-spawn is just far too long.

  • Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    probably; EBG and alpine borders have the same amount of "bad terrain" as in buggy spots, we're just way more used to them.

    but yeah, it'd need a proper workover. i'm highly against removing it completely. Anet would just party if they could present another cutting of content as a "world restructure balance update"... and the alpine borders are rather boring by now. just work better, because the core settlements are closer together.

    the lords are rather just fine. all lords should be stronger, not as useless as they currently are. would be nice if the scaling works differently. like outnumbered should buff players stat and make lords way stronger for example.

    the siege spots are silly, because too many abusable spots exist. towers of keeps in all maps should have higher spots, so treb VS treb works better and doesn't stay completely one-sided.

    also, everything is too large in desert border, not only the keeps. it needs to get way more even ground simply, and the size would play less role. too many spots where the camera bugs out, and the ways between tower-keep-spawn is just far too long.

    Issue is that they reworked desert bl multiple times already and it is better but the timeline for good reception is way past. Many people wouldn't step into the map even if it was fixed. You have only so many shots to make things work.

    Only way to fix map is add big castle in the middle, move the side keeps around and make it neutral map similar to eb instead of home borderland. This map just wasn't designed for small amount of players, you need all 3 servers on the map.

    Ri Ba - Charr of logic
    ~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 19, 2020

    My biggest gripe with the map is that so little of it is commonly used for the day-to-day content, leaving alot of dead spots and just transversal areas.

    The map is like a broken donut with very little ever taking place in the middle. The sides with the fire and air keeps are also mostly only played around when necessary. The vast majority of content, regardless of scale, takes place in the south with the towers and camps or the north with the backtowers and garri. North-south is very dominant whether we talk about roamers, closed squads or pickups.

    Then add to that alot of stuff that has already been mentioned, that the size of the keeps also means that alot of the map is just swallowed by the structure interiors and those fights are rarely fun and just gives both defensive advantages ( that has worse class-class [weight] balance than open field) and rewards heavier composed groups who can just constrain space and leverage mass. That is not unique for DBL, that is any objective or structure fight but as they take up so much space on DBL that such fights are usually prolonged on DBL and take up more of the content relative the other maps' spread of content.

    While the map was certainly improved with the changes that came some time after its inception, it still suffers the same kind of issues, it's just the same problems light. I also still maintain that I believe most people who say that they prefer that map do not actually prefer the map and rather prefer that it tends to be less populated or that it attracts their peers to find matched up content at smaller scale. That is supported by the above since while people claim they prefer the map they rarely create content in the areas of the map that contrasts it from the other maps. Whether we're on EBG, ABL or DBL flat surfaces with possible slight terrain shifts seem preferred by everyone.

    As for changing the map. I don't know. I don't necessarily see a removal of DBL and a return to all ABL borders as a step forward anymore. I'm far more in favour of moving away from borders completely and using overflow technology to do away with queues and enable rotating map variations with EBG as the blueprint for variations. I've toted that for a while now, that EotM should just be reskinned and/or that overflow tech should come to WvW so we can have map carousels like WoT has and then use the overflows and outnumbered to change the scoring to enable on-map scoring balance and do away with queues so friends can actually get on the same map or enemies can get on the same map to match up without having to go through the hoops of socially engineering around the kitten queues.

    At the end of the day, the two biggest problems these days are that servers are full and maps are full. Population balance has fallen to a close second or overlaps since it is kind of the same issues bundled together. That kinda goes for map design too. Finding a system around the full maps like the one described would also provide a better overall strategy for map design, variation and replayability.

  • len.7809len.7809 Member ✭✭✭

    I liked the map when the air keep "bird statues" actually blows wind when 2 shrines are captured.
    But people kitten about it and it got removed. Shrugs

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I actually like DBL's different strategies and approaches.

    It's more wild and refreshing.

    If anything I want one of the Alpines replaced with something new, or replaced with EotM.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 20, 2020

    yeah EotM is so nice, yet so dead. the now-and-then happening GvGs or BvBs often go unannounced so idk much about that. my server lost all real fighting guilds, cannot really participate in that kind of content therefore anyways.

    desert border still has a ton of flaws. what has been said is correct, the amount of content not used there, bc it's just on the very edges of the map or has too difficult terrain for fights, is quite a problem. or think about all the boss mobs that only camp the most isolated spots of the maps (desert border Great Wyvern, EBG the arboreal spirit etc), where the little pests like brakish scales tag keep you 100% in combat for minutes, till the unfriendly nearby gankerpack of 5 glasscannons has the nice option to jump you.

    also the alpines could use minor reworks. like, all maps need updates with the mercanaries outside of EBG. the skritt and centaurs of alpine borders are pretty much good for nothing. also the ruins and the borderlands bloodlust are not really a good thing. the most numerous servers usually cap them, and then even get buffs for that? while the [Outnumbered] only gives u what, magic find%? great.

  • Seconded, I would maybe not quit GW2 (though I understand if someone just plays WvW) but that'd be the end for my roaming. Fortunately, it's not gonna happen, Anet is not that stupid.

  • Skada.1362Skada.1362 Member ✭✭✭

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    I actually like DBL's different strategies and approaches.

    It's more wild and refreshing.

    If anything I want one of the Alpines replaced with something new, or replaced with EotM.

    100% agree. why the F do we have 2 identical alpine maps? never made sense to me. also EOTM is one of the coolest maps, such a shame it got neglected like that

  • aspirine.6852aspirine.6852 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I hate it. Good enough reason for me to remove it, but I dont get to decide :(

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 20, 2020

    @Skada.1362 said:

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    I actually like DBL's different strategies and approaches.

    It's more wild and refreshing.

    If anything I want one of the Alpines replaced with something new, or replaced with EotM.

    100% agree. why the F do we have 2 identical alpine maps? never made sense to me. also EOTM is one of the coolest maps, such a shame it got neglected like that

    Remember when Anet said that if the community didnt vote to delete DBL and instead voted to keep it, they would do more maps?

    Not even Pepperidge Farms remembers.

    I will reiterate my stance since its launch - DBL fails because it doesnt follow the most basic rule of WvW. Towers threaten keeps, keeps threaten towers. Commanders can yell bUt mAh FiGGiTs! and scoff at PPT all day long but this is the way of WvW and what drives it. Not all maps does it the same way - EB does it best, ABL varies it a little but DBL just ignore it completely. EoTM isnt any better than DBL last I looked.

    This doesnt mean I dont like playing on it. I do. Its playable. I have fun on it. They improved it 10x from the horrible original iteration. But it still fails and nothing going to change that because the locations of objectives is simply a part of the map. They cant improve.

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"

  • It's meh, I wouldn't care if it was removed. But it is a change of environment compared to the stale, dead, boring alpine BL with the depressing (as someone said in the forums) Soule music from 10 years ago. I at least dig the soundtracks used as ambience in the desert bl. But the lords need a nerf. they serve no purpose being unique. We are there to cap the thing, not stare at it. the structures already look different, no need for the lords to be so different either. Especially with those god awful skills, looking at you birdman and hammer kitten.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 20, 2020

    @Grand Marshal.4098 said:
    Especially with those god awful skills, looking at you birdman and hammer kitten.

    Would you like to have them replaced with a much tougher, much faster keep lord version of Grella?

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"

  • @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Grand Marshal.4098 said:
    Especially with those god awful skills, looking at you birdman and hammer kitten.

    Would you like to have them replaced with a much tougher, much faster keep lord version of Grella?

    Nah all lords suck. Standard keep and tower lords will suffice. Still require effort to be killed, but without being so troubling. i'n not talking about making this easy or anything, but you don't pay and don't want to pay attention to lords when you fight zergs. You capture objectives guarded by players not NPC bosses. Raids have a spot for those.

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭

    The purpose of unique keep lords isn't to turn caps into mini-raids, but to change the tactical landscape for each fight. The lords themselves aren't hard to bring down unopposed, but if a defending zerg is present then they can, ideally, tailor their tactics to take advantage of what the lord is throwing out.

    Practically speaking...I'm not sure it's actually working out so well. I'd be down for a redesign to better chase that dream.

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020

    @Sviel.7493 said:
    It's so wild to me that people don't realize EBG and the borderlands are essentially two different games. You really can't just interchange them.

    It's not like we haven't understood that EBG is map-control and ABL was designed to be home-defense. However, most of us also realized that home-defense is pretty pointless when PPT/scoring is out of whack. Some of us also see throwing ABL out with the garbage as a worthy sacrifice if that can ultimately lead to EBG getting many more maps, no queues and scoring that works. That is worth infinately more than clinging to an idea of defending a map that most players do not really view as a defense/attack map anyway and do not care about the PPT outcome of.

    In fact, ABL have some of those issues that EotM or DBL has too if you just look at common behaviour patterns. Many k-trainers on old EotM did not really like EotM when organized squads came and farmed them. Roamers on DBL finds DBL far less entertaining when there are blobs filling up the map. The people who who still play home defense on ABL tend to be pretty defeated if a competent raiding squad comes around and takes all their upgraded stuff.

    That's not to say I am against all those players preferred content. I roam and have friends who roam on DBL alot. I occassionally cloud ABL and have friends who do that alot. However, I've played this game long enough to see how the enjoyment is pretty hollow and often hinges on how content commonly is, rather than how content easily can be. It is relatively easy to break the spirit of alot of those players by just moving the apex-content into their content zone.

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020

    @subversiontwo.7501
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're saying that the borderlands aren't 'real' fun, as defined by you, so they should be replaced by a drastically different form of gameplay that you do consider to be legit?

    Anyway, it's obvious that WvW as a whole is pointless because it doesn't have any lasting effect once the week ends. That part is fact. However, a bunch of us continue playing it for various reasons that, while not objectively meaningful, are meaningful to us individually. It sounds like you find meaning in some forms of roaming and...clouding? That's cool. And pointless. I find meaning in securing PPT, but only when it's actually a challenge to do so. That means when the 'apex-content' is in my 'content zone,' I'm having the most fun provided I can meaningfully interact with said content which is only true on DBL. Of course, PPT is pointless too, but I still enjoy it.

    For example, today I scouted a mid-size group setting up to attack SE firekeep. They flash-built 4 catapults but, since I had been tracking them, I managed to disable all 4 catas before they fired a single rock. I called out their location in team chat and a tag confirmed. Up to that point, I was having fun--they made a risky play bunching all of their catapults up and failed to realize they were being tailed (due to the less open map). But then, they simply ported away; abandoning their catas. That wasn't much fun at all. All of that was technically pointless, but it was still fun. It was fun not because of a high PPT, but because of a conflict borne of PPT. When the enemy squad left, they took the fun with them. Thankfully, several other squads showed up so it was still a fun night.

    That said, I definitely do not enjoy playing on ABL because, outside of a cloud, my contributions are nigh worthless. It's cloud or bust and I don't much enjoy clouds. I also do not enjoy playing on EBG for similar reasons.

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020

    @Sviel.7493 said:
    @subversiontwo.7501
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you're saying that the borderlands aren't 'real' fun, as defined by you, so they should be replaced by a drastically different form of gameplay that you do consider to be legit?

    No no, not at all. I like the typical borderlands content too. I'm just saying that ABL and DBL to some degree have the same issues as EotM had in that many of the players who prefer those maps prefer them from a perspective of the biggest blobs or strongest groups not being there. They like that content but have no control over it and it is pretty volatile as other players can just take that content away from them.

    However, a system more akin to the original vision of EotM (ie., a system with world-restructured overflows) and a scoring system built for that has so much more potential to let the developer build more map variation (within the frames of a blueprint) and deal with some of the age-old problems we have, like queues. Even if it isn't completely unavoidable, the whole idea of Borderlands somewhat stand in the way of making such changes that could open up the game mode simply by the nature of what they are. The slightly different mode as you called it. I am definately willing to sacrifice that. Part of the reason I am willing to do that has to do with the paragraph above: If people's enjoyment of the borders can be stifled by players simply chosing to blob there.

    In fact, already today on a number of servers that relationship between the borders and EBG has been swapped. The nomad communities in EU tend to use the borders for organized play and keep EBG for clouding and defense as some sort of overflow map. Other servers in EU use DBL and (if on an ABL) their HBL for that. The difference of course lie in those servers' balance between pickups and closed squads. The root behaviour is not entirely different since many guilds prefer to run closed on ABL. That too however has less to do with the map and more to do with queues and propensity among the populace.

    That too has the ability to change if there are no queues. Think about it as the lab farm. During Halloween you will see many overflows of the same map but they are all designated in different ways (mounts or not, all bosses or not, some bosses or none etc.). A similar system for WvW could let pickups match pickups, guilds match guilds and roamers match roamers etc. However, such a system is best managed with one type of map for the developer to balance. Alternate modes within such a mode quickly becomes complex and perhaps that is not something for Anet. That is what EotM was a beta of and still is. As the players did not like the "PvE map" that it got, Anet just abadoned the project in typical Anet fashion and it has been in forever beta ever since, with only some minor experiments being tried on the map.

    It is the potential to build something better using only the even 3-way system that has appeal. It has little else to do with the maps and I certainly wouldn't want ABL to be replaced with EBG under the existing system, for the same reason I see little point in removing DBL under the existing system. However, if they are to build a better system then the core idea of WvWvW combined with overflows is best done on an even 3-way and not on attack-defense maps.

    Overall, this has been my spiel for a while now: That we have alot of unfinished systems that were all once good ideas but were never fully implemented and Anet only seemed to get scared when they dipped their toes in. Those systems were not well-received as they were never fully sampled or explored. There are many mechanics and systems that have plenty of good sides to them that could be salvaged and combined whether we talk about EotM, Outnumbered, Guild Upgrades or something else. There are also many flaws to them that obscure the good stuff or the good stuff may just be so pre-nerfed that it has never been visible. If I was Anet and had to start somewhere that is where I would start: I would reskin EotM with EBG, I would finish the Outnumbered scoring components, find some way to create a leaderboard from that score (eg., a guild leaderboard) and I would make sure the overflows were more visible and informative - informing players on using the LFG system to denote map content. Those are all relatively small changes with existing tech even if there is pasta code and should be implementable within a couple of months. That's a foundation to work from if they can not deliver on Alliances.

    Let's end this behemoth of a post on a different perspective to serve as an example: Let's assume that we had an overflow system (so people could just see the numbers/scale and pick any map they wanted to) and we had a scoring system adapted to that (so uneven maps gave no score). Then, even if ABL's and DBL's were kept around, do you think they would be played? It's not like they have to be deleted. However, it's pretty likely that alot of the content on them today would choose to move elsewhere if the queues were gone and maps were chosen on the merits of the maps themselves or the scoring would make holding onto a dead map pretty pointless. Guilds and pickups don't play attack/defense much there anyway. It's not like it would be in the way of anything but I'm just not sure if it is worth keeping around or at least not developing for. It wouldn't hurt me though if we had 20+ maps and maps 18, 19 and 20 were ABL's or DBL's. If people choose to play those maps then score could be attributed and it would be easy for Anet to just follow demand and slot maps.

  • lare.5129lare.5129 Member ✭✭✭✭

    don't like - don't join that specific map. It should not be likely for everyone.

    want solid balance ? - play chess.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 21, 2020

    I spend 99.9% of my time in WvW and i will drop from squad as soon as Tag ports to RBL. That map makes me want to uninstall the game.

    if you dont like map, easy dont go.

  • Gorani.7205Gorani.7205 Member ✭✭✭

    @Sviel.7493 summed it up pretty nicely, why DBL is different to Alpine. I like the DBL a lot for roaming around and scouting for my side. It turned into my favourite map, after the removal of the lag inducing laser event (which I agree, left the central area of the map too empty for any reasonably good action).
    @Threather.9354 should take a look at his own poll, that gave the DBL a 33% approval, before he claims the playerbase doe snot want the DBL. :tongue:

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭

    @subversiontwo.7501
    While I more or less follow your logic, it seems like there are some prior assumptions that maybe we don't share. As such, it feels like something is missing from your argument.

    For starters, you say that "players who prefer those maps prefer them from a perspective of the biggest blobs or strongest groups not being there." Where is that coming from? It is precisely the opposite of my own experience, though I realize my personal experience doesn't speak for everyone.

    Later, you reference Halloween maps. That's pretty much lost on me as I haven't ever bothered with holiday events, but mainly this line caught my attention: "A similar system for WvW could let pickups match pickups, guilds match guilds and roamers match roamers etc. " I don't understand why you want such a thing. Perhaps a server of guilds or a server of PUGs could make sense as they could encompass both zergs and roamers--but a server of nothing but roamers? How does that work? Why would roamers only want to face other roamers in WvW?

    A potentially revealing remark was "the core idea of WvWvW combined with overflows is best done on an even 3-way and not on attack-defense maps." Here, it sounds like your aversion to keeping the borderlands in an idealized WvW is only because they provide uneven advantages among the teams. While I'm not totally on board there, an even 3-way map built to promote the same things as DBL (scouting, havoc, defense) would probably be cool with me. If such a map existed, I'd be open to trying a no-border concept.

    If the borders were simply replaced with multiple even 3-way maps, not much would change. Assuming EBG is considered an even 3-way, these maps would still have areas of relative advantage like the 3 corners of EBG. Servers would guard their personal corners more jealously than they sought to hold enemy territory--as it is now. There would be a bit of a shift in PPT gain when everyone held their own corners, but that's it.

    But, if you wish to drastically change the system, are you suggesting that matches have a dynamic number of even 3-way maps depending on population? I could see this potentially working as long as the number of maps changed based on time-of-day rather than actual population. It would be dumb if folks could game the system by just logging off en masse. I could enjoy that so long as that fictional, non-EBG 3-way map became a thing. I would not consider it worthwhile if it meant everyone had to play EBG-style WvW.

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gorani.7205 said:
    @Sviel.7493 summed it up pretty nicely, why DBL is different to Alpine. I like the DBL a lot for roaming around and scouting for my side. It turned into my favourite map, after the removal of the lag inducing laser event (which I agree, left the central area of the map too empty for any reasonably good action).
    @Threather.9354 should take a look at his own poll, that gave the DBL a 33% approval, before he claims the playerbase doe snot want the DBL. :tongue:

    Aha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!

    His own poll disagrees with him. I love it!

    How many times we gotta tell you GRIND IS NOT CONTENT there ANet?

    Leader of Tyrian Adventure Corp [TACO], member of [RaW][TACO][Owls][HELL] Alliance, Kaineng.

  • Justine.6351Justine.6351 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The stigma from its original release hurt it pretty bad for years. The new stigma continues to hurt it, nobody plays there because nobody plays there except for pve karma train / veteran people told me its a bad map so I think its a bad map too.

    Another thing holding it down is the fact the alpine borderlands were made by a genius. And there are two of those.

    Then there is the location issue. Its a desert.

    Anet buff me :-(
    Make me good at game!

  • ollbirtan.2915ollbirtan.2915 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Best map ever foe me. Perfect for roaming. Good that it's not frequented by zerglings often. As soon as a tag shows up on RBL, I port away to Alpine just go get away from the zerg stealing my fun.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 23, 2020

    @Justine.6351 said:
    Another thing holding it down is the fact the alpine borderlands were made by a genius. And there are two of those.

    Well if DBL was made by a genius, we wouldnt be having this discussion. If they had just stuck with the border basics - DBL consisting of 3 main fighting areas where objectives threaten the nearby objectives (they could even have improved one of the flaws of ABL, that the SE tower cannot hit hills) it would been all dandy. Hell they could even have made it an ABL/EB hybrid by fully utilizing the size and adding 1 extra tower to each keep (ie sides would get 2 towers within siege range and garri would have had 3 towers). But nooooooooo... I wish it was made by a genius.

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"

  • Gorani.7205Gorani.7205 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    they could even have improved one of the flaws of ABL, that the SE tower cannot hit hills) it would been all dandy.

    When we had three ABL, that was a perfectly balanced map design choice and no flaw, because everyone had a tower that could threaten Bay and was threatened by Hills. The flaw only manifested when DBL was introduced.
    Concerning DBL, I really wonder (today) whether the ruins laser tower was such a bad idea, would it have worked on a technical level (not creating huge lag on the whole map). With the Warclaw being able to deal siege damage via the chain pull, the initial barricades would not be a big problem too.

    Nevertheless, DBL is a map which offers far more tactical and strategical choices for roamers and small parties and should not be downgraded to a ABL again.

  • Greg.7086Greg.7086 Member ✭✭✭

    @Threather.9354 said:
    Replace desert with 3rd alpine map.

    ^^ Omg not this! We don't need even more Alpine maps in game !

    I'd personally prefer it they change one of the copy-cat Alpine maps to something like: Dragonfall, Drizzlewood or even Grothmar, or a Volcanic map (quadrant of Dragonfall, Mount Maelstrom Volcanic area etc. ) Desert map does have its flaws, many points you state i agree with but the terrain is more interesting than the mundaneness of the Alpine Maps which i find very boring in their design. But this is all nothing but PIPE-DREAMS......

    .....lets be realistic here this is Anet we're talking about, and am sure on forum over the years there has been many ideas for new maps but the probable chances of Anet actually putting any resources into this: Between Extremely Slim ( < 0.00001% ) and None.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 23, 2020

    @Gorani.7205 said:
    Concerning DBL, I really wonder (today) whether the ruins laser tower was such a bad idea, would it have worked on a technical level (not creating huge lag on the whole map).

    But it did work on a technical level. And it was absolute garbage. It would still be absolute garbage today. All it did was create a cycle where you where forced to come to DBL at a certain time because if you didnt, the enemy did and reset all your objectives. There was zero defense against an organized zerg doing the event, they could have it done literally before you could spawn at garri and run to the ruins.

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"

  • Aeolus.3615Aeolus.3615 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 23, 2020

    EB and Alpine are actually way more lamer and noob friendly and run and hide than desert bl where players have to comit.

    I rather see EB and alpine removed...

    The travel time between portals is slightly more than EB as well.

    Slayers [XD] NSP Guild
    Yao Chen Herald/Ventari
    Ying Wuxian Renegade/Demon

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @LucianTheAngelic.7054 said:
    WvW needs more maps, not less. Sorry, more diversity of environments is ideal here. Removing the map would be a huge mistake

    Yep. I want Desert to be shrunk down just a bit, and them to make a new 3rd borderland type. Like Jungle. Or forest.

    How many times we gotta tell you GRIND IS NOT CONTENT there ANet?

    Leader of Tyrian Adventure Corp [TACO], member of [RaW][TACO][Owls][HELL] Alliance, Kaineng.

  • @gert.7698 said:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/110052/which-map-do-you-prefer#latest

    Seems that a lot of players don’t agree with removing the map

    and yet it is the least populated map anytime of the day.

  • Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 30, 2020

    Guys, the old poll doesn't matter. All it says is that highly intellectual personalities that like to discuss things on forums like desert map. Naturally if you use brain, you have more creativity in how to find your fun. Yes, sometimes desert map is playable.

    But numbers don't lie, Desert map has half activity of one alpine map. There are 2 alpine maps to choose from. So it is not even half as popular as alpine map. And tbf, Id say lot of people just trolled the poll as desert map is just a widespread meme at this point.

    Add to that the facts that just existance different borderlands often decides outcome of matchup against fighting servers that dislike desert map and that all its reworks have been received so badly that there is no salvaging image of it even with another rework.

    Yes I am not saying 3 alpine maps and 1 EB is the perfect system, but considering the resources Anet has for WvW, it would be large improvement. Id actually prefer 5 map system with 2 EBs (with different middle castles) and 3 rotating borderlands (all sides will have same) with lower mapcaps but it wouldn't get much support as playerbase of older games always dislike changes they can't fathom.

    Too many people focus too much on the non-existant negatives instead of using their cognitive capabilities towards personal experiences, is my analysis. Like reading 2 steps is too hard for some people: Yes less people will fit on the map so you will sit in queue sometimes more but commanders will also have more fun and there will be more tags and thus fights will be better on multiple maps. Most people can't even do simple reasoning, they just say "oh we have only 1 commander usually, more queues, bad idea, hurrdurr" and never get to the point that gameplay will be more enjoyable thus leading to more players and commanders.

    Ri Ba - Charr of logic
    ~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

  • kash.9213kash.9213 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2020

    They can take out Desert BL and put in a water world with huge ships with massive platforms to board and fight on. Then, update the tone of that map with whatever the current or latest story or expansion came out. I like Desert and I'd like traveling if this were open world pvp but with this structure Desert is too much running for normally nothing to do or you're too late.

    Northern Shiverpeaks [EL] & [SD]

  • my opinions:

    EBG is fun with the objective hopping (being able to siege objectives from the safety of other objectives) because there are so many objectives plus mercenaries.

    ALL maps should have mercenaries.

    Alpine is boring because objective hopping exists when there's not enough objectives. and the northern third of the map is wasted space. there needs to be more non-PPT objectives for roamers. there also needs to be expansionesque updates to the map (like adding jump pads, portals, fast-travel shrines). even mercenaries would make the map more fun. Alpine just feels so outdated, seeing as how it's never been updated with anything that was introduced in either expansion.

    Desert is my favorite map, because it offers different strategies and more ROAMING (non-PPT) objectives (shrines), though to be honest, i'd like to see more non-PPT objectives here too. even mercenaries would be cool.

    i would personally prefer to either
    ~ replace an alpine map with something new, OR
    ~ give each team a second borderland map (so there would be EBG and 2 borderlands per side, an Alpine AND Desert to defend)

    PS: i'm actually in TWO WvW guilds who prefer to run on Desert, and i'm aware of several other guilds on other servers that also prefer Desert.

    "Bacon Defeciency DIsorder Sux"
    ~ The Baconnaire

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭

    @Threather.9354 said:
    Guys, the old poll doesn't matter. All it says is that highly intellectual personalities that like to discuss things on forums like desert map. Naturally if you use brain, you have more creativity in how to find your fun. Yes, sometimes desert map is playable.

    But numbers don't lie, Desert map has half activity of one alpine map. There are 2 alpine maps to choose from. So it is not even half as popular as alpine map. And tbf, Id say lot of people just trolled the poll as desert map is just a widespread meme at this point.

    Just for fun, how are you measuring activity?

  • radda.8920radda.8920 Member ✭✭✭

    so we have absolutely no mcm contents for years and you want to delete the only map added since the start of the game
    this community is very special sometimes....

  • KrHome.1920KrHome.1920 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2020

    Desert map is too big. The centre is useless, so the map becomes a donut and traveling becomes even worse than it already is because of the size.

    It's still better than alpine borderlands, which is boring and has ugly 2012 visuals with eye cancer causing post processing glow effects at night.

    The only really good map is EBG, which is also outdated in graphics, but has a solid design and lacks the ugly postprocessing effects.

    Queues on my server (incl. linked servers) support this opinion. We 've a 20+ queue all day for EBG and not a queue at all for every other map.

  • Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @radda.8920 said:
    so we have absolutely no mcm contents for years and you want to delete the only map added since the start of the game
    this community is very special sometimes....

    Not relevant argument. Imagine you have a village where no one has moved into for 3 years but someone moves into and is a bad person. Of course chasing him out is natural. That is what desert map is, bad for the gamemode.

    It isn't about it being most frequent thing around, that has absolutely nothing to do with it being good or bad.

    Ri Ba - Charr of logic
    ~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

  • Threather.9354Threather.9354 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 31, 2020

    @KrHome.1920 said:
    Queues on my server (incl. linked servers) support this opinion. We 've a 20+ queue all day for EBG and not a queue at all for every other map.

    Yea they definitely need to add another EB in the game. Maybe lower map caps a bit to remove the unplayable 60v60 fights. So if the mapcap is 70 people right now, make it 55 but add another EB, then we can fit 110 people in EBs but 15 less on each borderland.

    Issue with borderlands is that they are usually 1 server vs 1 server which often becomes faceroll for one side. Whereas EB usually has activity from 3 sides. They should even look into making another neutral map if they have the resources.

    Ri Ba - Charr of logic
    ~Key to fixing WvW with minimal effort resides in my post history~

  • @KrHome.1920 said:
    Desert map is too big. The centre is useless, so the map becomes a donut and traveling becomes even worse than it already is because of the size.

    It's still better than alpine borderlands, which is boring and has ugly 2012 visuals with eye cancer causing post processing glow effects at night.

    The only really good map is EBG, which is also outdated in graphics, but has a solid design and lacks the ugly postprocessing effects.

    Queues on my server (incl. linked servers) support this opinion. We 've a 20+ queue all day for EBG and not a queue at all for every other map.

    For me it is the exact opposite. EGB is too small and cramped with objectives, so it is pretty much impossible to get a fight without getting pew pewed from a wall, have guards interfere, marked debuff on you and zergs popping out of nowhere (= from behind a wall/corner where you couldn't see them coming). And if you happen to kill someone, they are back within seconds. Also smc often leading to big 3-way fights hurts performance. Desert border is ok, not as bad as it used to be, but still a bit too tangled and unclear, making it harder to find enemies and shrine mechanics can be annoying. Alpine borders are by far my most favourite maps to play on. Not too big and not too small, good mixture of open space, more confined places and actual objectives. Oh, and water <3.

    I also can't confirm your experience with queues. Queues are where the public commander(s) is/are - and that can be any map. Somestimes EBG has a queue and borders have none, sometimes it is the exact opposite. Desert borderland has a tendency to be less popular, but i can't say the same about the other borders.

  • I have a better idea; why not get rid of those PLAIN JANE "alpine borderlands" maps, and make ALL borderlands, again, the desert BL maps!

    Sorry, NOT sorry; when they first came out [panzies] that didn't wanna learn the new maps QQ'd so hard - and I cannot believe ANet gave in, and got us to the situation we're in now. Where we have ONE DBL and two ABL

    The first and best solution IMHO would be to ditch all those old ABL's and MAKE ALL THREE desert BL's... And if people don't wanna play on em, too kitten bad! Next best or followup solution IMHO would be to ditch one MORE ABL, and have them design yet one more "new" map, so that ALL of the borderlands are unique...

    Sorry again not sorry, I can't believe so many people slapped ANet in the face like that when they put so much time and effort into giving us a new map... All a LOT of the playerbase did was INSULT them... YET WE WONDER WHY MANY OF US FEEL THIS GAME MODE IS NEGLECTED... Would you wanna work on something so hard only to have LAZY people that don't want to bother learning new things (because they hold an advantage on maps they already know [which is what it's REALLY about and we all know it]) INSULT you!!!??? Hell no I wouldn't ~ I'd give up on ya too! Then of course these are probably the same people that turn right around and complain "WvW doesn't get [enough/any] attention"; GEE I WONDER WHY... It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that when they tried, a great percentage of the player-base insulted them and or their "work"!

    "Bu bu but, the new maps are HARD mmkay"; GOOD - NEW content SHOULD be HARD/difficult/challenging...! I do not play games because they're easy... If I wanted easy mode I'd go play doom and IDDQD that ****! Games SHOULD be challenging...

    Funny I just got done explaining to a friend (who has never played an MMO) about how just about ANY/EVERY MMO is MOST fun when they first launch. Because nobody has yet figured out how to "abuse" anything in it! When it's CHALLENGING to EVERYONE...! Then of course they dwindle over time because people start to abuse whatever they can! Even if it's something as simple as knowing a map like the back of their own hands!

    If they REALLY wanted to spice it up, they could come out with ALL new maps every X duration (year or two or so or whatever they decided)! THAT would be really interesting! But also, a LOT of WORK!

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sparc.3649 said:
    I have a better idea; why not get rid of those PLAIN JANE "alpine borderlands" maps, and make ALL borderlands, again, the desert BL maps!

    Sorry, NOT sorry; when they first came out [panzies] that didn't wanna learn the new maps QQ'd so hard - and I cannot believe ANet gave in, and got us to the situation we're in now. Where we have ONE DBL and two ABL

    The first and best solution IMHO would be to ditch all those old ABL's and MAKE ALL THREE desert BL's... And if people don't wanna play on em, too kitten bad! Next best or followup solution IMHO would be to ditch one MORE ABL, and have them design yet one more "new" map, so that ALL of the borderlands are unique...

    Sorry again not sorry, I can't believe so many people slapped ANet in the face like that when they put so much time and effort into giving us a new map... All a LOT of the playerbase did was INSULT them... YET WE WONDER WHY MANY OF US FEEL THIS GAME MODE IS NEGLECTED... Would you wanna work on something so hard only to have LAZY people that don't want to bother learning new things (because they hold an advantage on maps they already know [which is what it's REALLY about and we all know it]) INSULT you!!!??? Hell no I wouldn't ~ I'd give up on ya too! Then of course these are probably the same people that turn right around and complain "WvW doesn't get [enough/any] attention"; GEE I WONDER WHY... It couldn't have anything to do with the fact that when they tried, a great percentage of the player-base insulted them and or their "work"!

    "Bu bu but, the new maps are HARD mmkay"; GOOD - NEW content SHOULD be HARD/difficult/challenging...! I do not play games because they're easy... If I wanted easy mode I'd go play doom and IDDQD that ****! Games SHOULD be challenging...

    Funny I just got done explaining to a friend (who has never played an MMO) about how just about ANY/EVERY MMO is MOST fun when they first launch. Because nobody has yet figured out how to "abuse" anything in it! When it's CHALLENGING to EVERYONE...! Then of course they dwindle over time because people start to abuse whatever they can! Even if it's something as simple as knowing a map like the back of their own hands!

    If they REALLY wanted to spice it up, they could come out with ALL new maps every X duration (year or two or so or whatever they decided)! THAT would be really interesting! But also, a LOT of WORK!

    No thanks mister caps.

    gaggle - /ˈɡaɡ(ə)l/ - noun
    A disorderly group of Asura.
    "The gaggle of Asura tried to agree on whether a phase-shifted thermonuclear energy matrix was sufficiently powerful for a device capable of heating bread"