Legacy of the Foefire Potential Changes — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Legacy of the Foefire Potential Changes

We're considering a few potential changes to Legacy of the Foefire in the future to help reduce the "snowbally" nature of the map. We wanted to get your thoughts before we start work to see what people think. This isn't a promise or a guarantee of changes. We're just doing a bit of "thinking out loud."

Reduce the size of mid
Mid is really big, compared to other points. This makes kiting particularly effective, since you can kite a lot and remain in the point. This makes easier to defend in comparison to other points.

Reduce runtimes to home
Runtime to home on Foefire is the longest of all conquest maps. It's difficult to regroup at home after a lost fight to the point where it's likely to get decapped.

Ben Phongluangtham
Game Designer
Reddit: ANET_BenP
Twitch: AnetBenP

Tagged:
<13

Comments

  • kKagari.6804kKagari.6804 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I think mid could do with a few more pillars that you can line of sight ranged attacks with, if the point gets smaller. Like Temple's mid point.

  • Daharahj.1325Daharahj.1325 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2017

    People have been complaining about point size being too small which allows specs like Scourge to sweep through teams like nothing and you're considering aggravating the problem even further?

    I was expecting some sensible changes like reducing point contribution for PvE objectives.

    @kKagari.6804 said:
    I think mid could do with a few more pillars that you can line of sight ranged attacks with, if the point gets smaller. Like Temple's mid point.

    The only thing heavy LoSing does is push ranged builds out of viability, which is something we can't afford right now given the current meta.

  • Hana.8143Hana.8143 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2017

    I have an Idea.
    What about the spawns of each teams were in front of each other, and when you jump down, you're in water with a lot of legendary sharks called "Better Version Of The Scourge"
    Well, it was a good idea but... then it's not PvP anymore !

    Now about the size, you really need to do something about that. Too small means some classes will be overpowered, and too big means others will be too.
    I hate being unable to go on a point because small aoes are enough to cover it. And I'll hate to chase classes with too much sustain in a larger point.

  • Vagrant.7206Vagrant.7206 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2017

    Don't shrink the point. If anything, you should consider implementing a dynamically-adjusted cap size -- where the longer individuals are in it, the smaller the cap point gets (to a limit, of course). Dynamically-adjusted cap points would allow for varied combat but would also prevent high sustain classes from continually running away to keep the point uncapped.

    I'm ok with the second idea though.

    The great god Lagki demands sacrifice!

  • Ivantreil.3092Ivantreil.3092 Member ✭✭✭

    People. try to see this changes as the best for the future and not for the best right now.

    Scourge can't go untouched next patch, everyone agrees that a serious hammer nerf will hit them next patch.

    See the cap point change if its healthy for the long run, not for the current meta.

  • @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:
    We're considering a few potential changes to Legacy of the Foefire in the future to help reduce the "snowbally" nature of the map. We wanted to get your thoughts...

    From my experience, one of the largest issues is that people tend to push lord at inopportune times, either because of lack of experience, frustration, or even sabotage.The lords can no longer be effectively soloed by most players. I think that requiring two people to be at the doors in order to damage them would force it to be much more of a team decision.

  • Interpretor.3091Interpretor.3091 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2017

    What about making it so that on all maps there is no "Neutral." Only Red and Blue caps. Would make fighting on the point all that more important, make rotations really matter and make objectives a strategic choice to go after and consider.
    The reason Foefire in particular (and maps like Capricorn) are so "snow-bally" and frustrating for teams to play on, is that spawn points are too close to objectives, especially the middle point. It's so hard to cap the center point because you are trying so hard to keep re-spawning enemies from jumping into the circle to keep it from being capped. Tanky bunker guardians/ventari revs are particularly good at kiting and surviving on point. Instead of regrouping and fighting as a team, players will continuously run into the neutral point to keep it from being capped.
    Making the switch away from Neutral points will push players into playing more of a team game instead of running around and Neutralizing points. Destiny 2 made this switch and it's a great format, maybe something to consider?

  • TexZero.7910TexZero.7910 Member ✭✭✭✭

    If you're trying to reduce snowball, i don't think shrinking a cap is the way to do it.

    Try lowering the reward for getting Lord as a starter.

    Not sure how you plan to remedy the home being farther than mid situation. I think it's placement offers a unique strategy component that can shake things up so i'm not sure i'd bring it closer. For fixing the regrouping issue, look to change some geometry. I'd say the biggest problem is that mobility is almost too strong in assisting the snowball so removing the varied high grounds and adding more flat terrain to home/more direct routes might assist.

  • @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:
    Reduce the size of mid
    Mid is really big, compared to other points. This makes kiting particularly effective, since you can kite a lot and remain in the point. This makes easier to defend in comparison to other points.

    I like how Foefire has this as a unique feature - no other map has such a large control point. Reducing it is like shaving a Viking's beard - it wouldn't be Foefire anymore.

    @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:
    Reduce runtimes to home
    Runtime to home on Foefire is the longest of all conquest maps. It's difficult to regroup at home after a lost fight to the point where it's likely to get decapped.

    You'd have to move spawns rather than the home point itself, otherwise lord rushing becomes too easy. This could also work for making it take longer for a defending team to get to their own lord so they can't trickle in to keep it alive.

  • Loboling.5293Loboling.5293 Member ✭✭✭

    Not a fan of these suggested changes. Foefire is original in it's large mid point. Nothing wrong with having different strategies on different maps. It's one of my favorite maps, I think it is for a lot of people too. Don't ruin it please, just add new maps. Maybe new modes?

  • kKagari.6804kKagari.6804 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Daharahj.1325 said:
    People have been complaining about point size being too small which allows specs like Scourge to sweep through teams like nothing and you're considering aggravating the problem even further?

    I was expecting some sensible changes like reducing point contribution for PvE objectives.

    @kKagari.6804 said:
    I think mid could do with a few more pillars that you can line of sight ranged attacks with, if the point gets smaller. Like Temple's mid point.

    The only thing heavy LoSing does is push ranged builds out of viability, which is something we can't afford right now given the current meta.

    Temple's pillars are located outside the point, which I think is fine. To make use of them, you need to be outside the point to get some reprieve.

  • Aktium.9506Aktium.9506 Member ✭✭✭

    If anything I'd say make all Mid capture points on all maps bigger than the side nodes. As annoying as kiting is, I feel it would be beneficial for the game to have larger mid nodes and smaller side nodes.

    On another note, make the gates to the Lords take condition damage. It feels pretty restrictive being on a condi build and knowing it will take far too long to bust the gate down thus denying a clutch Lord rush as an option.

  • Maybe instead of focusing on minor things that have been in the game from launch you can perhaps discuss your thoughts (if any) on the balance ATM. Granted, the meta is developing, but scourge (and to a smaller extent, spellbreaker) are terrorizing the villagers.

    I'm not really ready to scream "OP, nerf into the ground", but I am interested in hearing what you have to say about possible changes/directions you are considering for pvp and the hypothetical time frame involved.

    The main issue for spellbreaker, in my eyes, is that it currently has too few windows to be killed by marauder's ammy classes, while requiring very little effort to kill the aforementioned. I wouldn't necessarily point my finger at full counter, but I do believe that in conjunction with low cooldown on endure pain (+ traits), over saturation of stability, and a 16 second shield block is perhaps too potent a combination given all of their other strengths. Losing 1 source of stability will allow more counterplay but preserve the warriors niche of being a frontliner. Despite the obvious strengths, spellbreaker suffers from lack of condition removal, smart necros/condi mesmers can easily capitalize on this by stripping resistance, and keeping cripple/chill/weakness up.

    I wouldn't say spellbreaker is too scary. It is strong in 1v1s but a good dragonhunter can dance with it, effective kiting greatly reduces it's damage. Not something to engage on Power ranger or thief.

    Scourge. What to say, it's not fun to be melee vs. It has too much damage and control (blind/cripple/weakness) over too wide an area, melee can't really compete. This problem is greatly exacerbated, when you add support like firebrand and/or another scourge into the mix. At that point, melee cannot exist in the vicinity, and ranged damage is really well mitigated by guardian bubbles. This makes it mandatory, to have at the barest of minimums 1 scourge, and for melee, a ranged weapon. I wouldn't use the word broken, it can be countered, but it will shift the game away from what it currently is: contesting points by standing on points.

    Adding a 2 second delay before sand shades activate could make things interesting. Similarly, you can also mix things up by adding a life force cost to summoning the actual shade and increasing the cast time/shared cooldown for shade abilities/shades get destroyed by each ability.

  • Malediktus.9250Malediktus.9250 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Both changes sound horrible to me, sorry

    First person to reach 35,000 and 36,000 AP.
    killproof.me/proof/kEyr

  • Kuya.6495Kuya.6495 Member ✭✭✭

    I'd be more interested in changing lord mechanics so it actually benefits the team with less caps. A good example is capricorn and skyhammer. Would be nice to decrease points received for lord from 150 to 100, and have it so killing lord caps all points in your favor and gives your team a buff.

    Also consider raising lord hp so it cannot be solo'd.

  • @Kata.6795 said:
    Maybe instead of focusing on minor things that have been in the game from launch you can perhaps discuss your thoughts (if any) on the balance ATM. Granted, the meta is developing, but scourge (and to a smaller extent, spellbreaker) are terrorizing the villagers.

    I'm not really ready to scream "OP, nerf into the ground", but I am interested in hearing what you have to say about possible changes/directions you are considering for pvp and the hypothetical time frame involved.

    The main issue for spellbreaker, in my eyes, is that it currently has too few windows to be killed by marauder's ammy classes, while requiring very little effort to kill the aforementioned. I wouldn't necessarily point my finger at full counter, but I do believe that in conjunction with low cooldown on endure pain (+ traits), over saturation of stability, and a 16 second shield block is perhaps too potent a combination given all of their other strengths. Losing 1 source of stability will allow more counterplay but preserve the warriors niche of being a frontliner. Despite the obvious strengths, spellbreaker suffers from lack of condition removal, smart necros/condi mesmers can easily capitalize on this by stripping resistance, and keeping cripple/chill/weakness up.

    I wouldn't say spellbreaker is too scary. It is strong in 1v1s but a good dragonhunter can dance with it, effective kiting greatly reduces it's damage. Not something to engage on Power ranger or thief.

    Scourge. What to say, it's not fun to be melee vs. It has too much damage and control (blind/cripple/weakness) over too wide an area, melee can't really compete. This problem is greatly exacerbated, when you add support like firebrand and/or another scourge into the mix. At that point, melee cannot exist in the vicinity, and ranged damage is really well mitigated by guardian bubbles. This makes it mandatory, to have at the barest of minimums 1 scourge, and for melee, a ranged weapon. I wouldn't use the word broken, it can be countered, but it will shift the game away from what it currently is: contesting points by standing on points.

    Adding a 2 second delay before sand shades activate could make things interesting. Similarly, you can also mix things up by adding a life force cost to summoning the actual shade and increasing the cast time/shared cooldown for shade abilities/shades get destroyed by each ability.

    This is a good and constructive comment.

  • Kaga.7629Kaga.7629 Member ✭✭✭

    @Xolas.9781 said:
    To sum it up Anet's thoughts-
    Players were also abusing the spellbreaker's sole weakness of being attacked at range, which isn't fair for our warrior-playing devs. Now, in order to contest the point, everyone else must be within hardcounter/melee range so that the spellbreaker isn't punished for running two melee sets."

    rofl anet's wardevs don't exist. Just like the cake.

    -- Kaga Konikora, The infamous Frostkeep Defense Commander, A SoloQ hero hailing from the glorious land of Maguuma.

  • Idk, perhaps these people already lost their wits. Seriously, am not questioning the Design team but may be we could start designing more Armor Skin thru Gemstore instead of all these crappy Costume that every cosplayer has.

    Urge

  • Crinn.7864Crinn.7864 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I honestly like both of the proposed changes. The mid node is too easy to hold, and the inline layout means whoever holds mid can dominate the entire map.

    Sanity is for the weak minded
    YouTube

  • Hanth.2978Hanth.2978 Member ✭✭

    Shrinking mid might not be a bad idea, I cannot stress how easy it is to hold that point as an ele. Someone suggested maybe some pillars? I don't know if that's the right way to go but I do like the idea of introducing some LoS mechanics.

  • Saiyan.1704Saiyan.1704 Member ✭✭✭

    Oh dear Ben.... Don't reduce the point on Foefire, ever. In fact, add a few more maps with the same large Radius.

    • The reduced run-time to home would be a nice QoL change.
  • Ohoni.6057Ohoni.6057 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Now that you guys mention it, I don't think this would be the best solution for Foefire, but maybe when planning future maps, have it so that mid is very small, but have both Homes be as big as Forefire's Mid. That, I think, would be a more interesting dynamic, since Mid would be very hard to hold, but the wing nodes would be very defensible.

  • I like how anet is focuses on a perfectly good map rather than a kitten map like skyhammer. Or rather focus on the disaster that spvp currently is.

  • masskillerxploit.2165masskillerxploit.2165 Member ✭✭✭
    edited October 3, 2017

    @Interpretor.3091 said:
    What about making it so that on all maps there is no "Neutral." Only Red and Blue caps. Would make fighting on the point all that more important, make rotations really matter and make objectives a strategic choice to go after and consider.
    The reason Foefire in particular (and maps like Capricorn) are so "snow-bally" and frustrating for teams to play on, is that spawn points are too close to objectives, especially the middle point. It's so hard to cap the center point because you are trying so hard to keep re-spawning enemies from jumping into the circle to keep it from being capped. Tanky bunker guardians/ventari revs are particularly good at kiting and surviving on point. Instead of regrouping and fighting as a team, players will continuously run into the neutral point to keep it from being capped.
    Making the switch away from Neutral points will push players into playing more of a team game instead of running around and Neutralizing points. Destiny 2 made this switch and it's a great format, maybe something to consider?

    I like this idea. But its too bold for anet:/ srsly when has anet ever made a change like that? Never sadly... but thats fine, everyone that could leave has already left.. its just the few that cant let go.. xd

  • No please don't make legacy mid size smaller. It is the one map where scourge doesn't have 100% node control just off shades. Legacy is fine as it is.

  • EnderzShadow.2506EnderzShadow.2506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ivantreil.3092 said:
    People. try to see this changes as the best for the future and not for the best right now.

    Scourge can't go untouched next patch, everyone agrees that a serious hammer nerf will hit them next patch.

    See the cap point change if its healthy for the long run, not for the current meta.

    The small caps have always been overly good for condi classes.
    Smaller caps reduces counterplay. They will never be better for spvp.

    Look to the future? Man, cmon. You'd make a good lawyer or a politician.

    mhm, ok, sure, whatever you say, no after you, I insist, no really, please, be my guest,

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I have no problems with aoe spamming classes because a well directed ranged burst can quickly bring them on their knee, a simple strategy that hardly get utilised . Yes please @Ben Phongluangtham.1065 please! Reduce the size of the mid point....god.... foefire get chosen like 70% of the time and with 2-3 bunkers in the opposite team it becomes impossible to capture mid and your team most times than not will keep feeding the enemy .

    -I see people asking to have larger points on other maps also....kitten?! Do you want to bring infinite kiting on all maps? like what? We want to reduce snowballing which is very asy with this random group system and you want to increase it?...oh god
    - Deathmatch with the current balance in game?....madness...

<13
©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.