Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Things that 100% make WvW unfun atm


Riba.3271

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 and 5. This is true, no matter how you try to spin it around. Defenders advantage is overtuned. Those who played pre-HoT know it exactly. You already have siege, positioning, respawn. If you can't win the fight with these massive advantages in addition to tactics, gliding, homelands, maybe you just deserve to lose the keep?

And don't tell me that you haven't seen a clowny group of random players of random builds drive away an organised group from a keep even without siege. That's the effect of the increased stats; anyone who has ever created a build or swapped amulets in PvP, knows the effect of gaining 200 power, precision, toughness, vitality.

Also don't forget that while I am suggesting to bring defenders down to similar level as attackers regarding stats, I am suggesting to nerf siege gens, offensive siege that blocks pretty much all siege from being used to defense. And no, disablers don't counter them because you're forced to run some bad stealth build and even then you need 3-5 people coordinate with disablers that might still get reflects. To spin the downtalkers around; If the stats don't matter to defenders at all, why do you even care if half of them are removed?

What I am suggesting is gameplay that promotes brains and equality of stats. There are both nerfs to attacking to defending in my suggestions so you have no need to get overly defensive in fear of losing your homeland keeps. What I am offering defenders is more tools to defend and attackers more incentive to attack while bringing back decisionmaking of using different siegeweapons and positioning to breach an objective while having peace of mind over "too many defenders" showing up and farming you because their increased stats.

2, The healbuilds are currently braindead, theres overcap of cleanse, boons and heals. Something needs to be done. During fights you should have to pay close care to which boons your party needs and which conditions need to be cleansed. And if your zerg gets low there should be a way to coordinate heal everyone up, which would be waterfield blasting in the past. Now my suggestion was to nerf boon duration and access to full support builds to return to HoTish meta where no1 was that tanky and party still had to work together but there are plenty of things anet can do to bring back both non-abusive-conditions and cooldown management.

3, I know there are people here that don't mind or started to like the desert map, but that isn't argument against what I am saying. Lot more people prefer alpine map massively. So you don't mind alpine map meaning if theres 3 alpine maps instead of 2 alpine maps and 1 desert, it doesn't really matter to you. But to those lot of people it matters and 3 alpines will make the gamemode more enjoyable in general.

Also you didn't respond to my MAIN argument about desert map making lot of matchups completely irrelevant regarding points because some servers ignore desert map completely. This is not okay, it makes WvW 2-server game. You should be able to log in any week and able to enjoy both sides of the gamemode, points and fights.

Now to bring up a thought, there should be either 3 desert maps or 3 alpine maps to reduce the variance of people not defending homemap 1 week and defending the next. Obviously alpine was the better option for my suggestion because it has way more popularity. I myself don't mind desert map that much but I mind what it does to the strategic side of winning matchups reducing it to dust some weeks.

4, I already responded regarding watchtower arguments in above comments but in summary it killed/kills scouting (relevance) and roaming (area/options available). Reasoning in other comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people take WvW way too seriously. The key to be successful is to (1) bring more people and (2) spam the hell outta aoe condis. Loose rule of thumb is, the team with the most firebrands/scourges wins 90% of the time. You can dress it up however you want, but at the end of the day, if you put a dress on a pig, it is still a pig.

Until they break up the holy-trinity that 80% of a zerg is made of scourges, firebrands and maybe revs, there is no competitiveness out there. All it is nowadays it is folks spammnig AoEs, preferrably condi aoes as there is no skill with applying condi pressure and running away letting dots do their thing. Yes, you'll see some hard-liners on other classes, but they are the exception rather than the rule nowadays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@mulzi.8273 said:people take WvW way too seriously. The key to be successful is to (1) bring more people and (2) spam the hell outta aoe condis. Loose rule of thumb is, the team with the most firebrands/scourges wins 90% of the time. You can dress it up however you want, but at the end of the day, if you put a dress on a pig, it is still a pig.

Until they break up the holy-trinity that 80% of a zerg is made of scourges, firebrands and maybe revs, there is no competitiveness out there. All it is nowadays it is folks spammnig AoEs, preferrably condi aoes as there is no skill with applying condi pressure and running away letting dots do their thing. Yes, you'll see some hard-liners on other classes, but they are the exception rather than the rule nowadays.

True, I agree, AoE spam is way too strong in the current meta and skill of picking people off in fights has been reduced to none with increased heals, perma stab/superspeed.Single targeting and crippling conditions should have a space in this meta so 1 player outplaying another actually has some relevance. There is no choosing between how much single-targeting and AoE spam you should do to maximize your effectiveness now, correct solution is just AoE spam always.

Anyways it seems you have misunderstood meta, condis don't really exist in this meta as long as you have meta party with antitoxin scrapper converting them all to boons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:

Tbf I just believe minstrel stats are the main issue of the sucky meta. If you want to make any healer/support build, it just automatically becomes minstrel once you optimize it. I have 2 sets of legendary armor, soon 3, myself as well.

You can make the same arguments against Trailblazer and Marauder, but as has already been stated, the amount of time and effort WvW'ers have put into their gear makes it highly unlikely that ANET would launch an update replacing all of that with an amulet system, especially as some players don't even PvE, so if they can't use that armor in WvW, it effectively becomes worthless.

Its ok, my heart knows that amulet system would take them 2 years to implement anyways. I just thought it was most reasonable solution to removal of Minstrel stats that don't fit any PvP mode.

Well considering it's been 2 years since Alliances were announced, and still nothing, your timeline might be optimistic. But that wasn't my point. WvW players have spent huge amounts of resources on gearing up their characters, even if we are just talking about ascended gear and/or infusions. This is something you never had to do with Conquest mode (sPvP) as at worst you had to pay a few silver for 'white' quality weapons.

No developer would ever seriously consider such a sweeping change as to make the hundreds/thousands of gold worth of gear that WvW players posses worthless. It just wouldn't happen.

I play PvX, but I have several characters that I play solely in WvW. Still, if they did implement that change, I could use those characters and gear in PvE. But what about those players who only play WvW? All the resources they spent on gear would be in the bin.

It just would never happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Turkeyspit.3965 said:

Tbf I just believe minstrel stats are the main issue of the sucky meta. If you want to make any healer/support build, it just automatically becomes minstrel once you optimize it. I have 2 sets of legendary armor, soon 3, myself as well.

You can make the same arguments against Trailblazer and Marauder, but as has already been stated, the amount of time and effort WvW'ers have put into their gear makes it highly unlikely that ANET would launch an update replacing all of that with an amulet system, especially as some players don't even PvE, so if they can't use that armor in WvW, it effectively becomes worthless.

Its ok, my heart knows that amulet system would take them 2 years to implement anyways. I just thought it was most reasonable solution to removal of Minstrel stats that don't fit any PvP mode.

Well considering it's been 2 years since Alliances were announced, and still nothing, your timeline might be optimistic. But that wasn't my point. WvW players have spent huge amounts of resources on gearing up their characters, even if we are just talking about ascended gear and/or infusions. This is something you never had to do with Conquest mode (sPvP) as at worst you had to pay a few silver for 'white' quality weapons.

No developer would ever seriously consider such a sweeping change as to make the hundreds/thousands of gold worth of gear that WvW players posses worthless. It just wouldn't happen.

I play PvX, but I have several characters that I play solely in WvW. Still, if they did implement that change, I could use those characters and gear in PvE. But what about those players who only play WvW? All the resources they spent on gear would be in the bin.

It just would never happen.

I believe with reasonable timeframe of warning (lets say like 4 months) provided the gamemode meta would be better, people wouldn't mind it too much if it would allow WvW balance to be truly separated from PvE. I find it hard to believe anet would be held back by thought of a few people getting butthurt if it would truly make the gamemode better place. But yeah I forgot about existance of WvW legendary armor when writing about it so it obviously the amulet system wouldn't work because it would make existing system obsolete.

You must understand that thinking that other competitive people gaining stat selection is something away from you (note; if WvW legendary armor didn't exist), is shallow and selfish way of thinking which people would come around after a good nights sleep. its like PvE raiders complaining about PvP/WvW getting legendary armor.

But yea you guys have convinced me that amulet system wouldn't work but I still believe the meta is boring and we need some serious balance changes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Samug.6512 said:I definitely prefer desert map over alpine.

Well you're in [NUKE] so what is your opinion about some servers not playing desert map at all?

WSR, old vabbi? Doesn't it make some matchups completely irrelevant? Like currently WSR goes T1, gets red map doesn't play, drops to T2 and farms enemies and goes back to T1. Is that good for sake of WvW competitiveness? It makes half the matchups in both T1 and T2 completely meaningless.

I play desert map a lot too but I believe the downside of it birthing attitude like this is not worth its existance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Karnasis.6892 said:

@"Timelord.8190" said:WvW went downhill with HoT, no doubt. The WvW team is clueless.

I just want to remove all the unbalanced defender's advantage garbage they added with HoT and the game would be much better. Keep aura buff and bloodlust buff. It's a very bad game design which leads to stale boring scenarios where people don't even try taking keeps anymore. Roaming is now pretty much dead because of all the sensor towers and mounts that make the enemy blob able to react faster and avoid fights.

I have NO idea when you are actually playing, but yeah..... that's not true. Taking keeps is attempted or happens all the time. I spent like an hour and half the other night defending a keep on an enemy bl that we managed to t3 up AND was being hit from the other two servers. And we fought in it with multiple walls down, no supply coming in. And held it for a long time until the multiple guilds defending just gave up.

So yeah, for "No one" trying to take keeps anymore, you might want to get your facts straight.

Also, roaming isn't dead because of sensor towers and mounts. Roaming still happens even with those things. But it's seen as less necessary because every server ignores the towers until they are t3 or have been claimed long enough to HAVE a watchtower tactic placed in it to allow a quick response. If you deal with the problem of the tower being claimed long enough, you deal with quick response.

I didn't say that people never take keeps anymore. I said that the defender's advantage stops people from trying to take keeps in some scenarios they otherwise would have if the defender's advantage wasn't so big.Pretty much the only chance to take a keep is when the enemy is giving up cause of the overpowered defender's advantage lets you be able to defend with a much weaker force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Gop.8713 said:OP is a list of an individual's preferences and not an objective assessment of the state of the game mode, and it's not clear it was meant to be taken as such. So read the title as 'Things that would make wvw more fun for the OP' and it all makes sense . . .

Objectively, most of OP's suggestions would just be change for the sake of change, not better or worse, just different. And that would be fine, just another set of parameters to adapt to. But there are a few exceptions . . :

1) OP seems to underestimate the effect recent defensive nerfs. Structures are no longer worth tiering for their defensive advantages, further nerfs seem superfluous . . .

If you see I suggest both nerfs to defense (claim buff) and offense (shield gens) to promote more equal and skillful fight/siegeplay. You can't say it is unreasonable to ask for more equal stats near objectives (that cover pretty much whole map) and other offense strategies than shield-gen cheese being viable.

3) Many ppl love desert. Taking desert from those who enjoy it and reverting it to alpine so the ppl who enjoy alpine can have a third copy to play on would reduce rather than increase the total number of ppl enjoying the game . . .

Removal of desert map would remove the inequality within scoring system of WvW because some servers refuse to play Desert map. As I said, I don't mind desert map, I just believe it is eyesore for both people who play for both points and/or fights. It breaks too many matchups.

4) I only roam and the watchtower tactic does not affect me in any way. I do not believe I am special in this regard . . .

There are different forms of roaming. For example during offtime you will have better luck in EB where watchtowers cover most camps. There are some that like to sneak north towers for small skirmishes during off hours leaving them only 1 option for siege (catas at NW tower), not very creative is it.

Maybe for your type of roaming it doesn't matter but you can't say that defending and taking camps/towers isn't part of roam life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@zinkz.7045 said:

@Threather.9354 said:No smart guild will fight another guild within enemy keep.

Only kitten PvE guilds, made up of kitten players won't fight another guild in a keep. (which granted is all of them that still play the game, unless things have miraculously improved),

Have you played PvP? And do you understand importance of 800 stats within amulet? Do you understand how much difference food/stones/oils make in your build and how much stat they're worth?

800 stats is basically difference of running ascended with foods over running exotics without foods. Now put a decent guild with exotic gear and no foods vs a-little-worse guild that has ascended and foods. Who wins? Its gonna be crushing victory for the worse guild.

I am sorry I have to be so rude but math and experience both say 800 stats is way too much. Now compare it fighting in your keep compared to fighting in enemy keep. Its 1600 stats in total, defending is just overpowered... Why attack if you can afk and wait for enemy to come to you when they get bored? Fights are decided by location, not by how you use your skills, that's why there's no competitive guilds left in the game, just GvG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defenders of a high tier keep should have the advantage. Getting a keep to T2-T3 requires often hours of commitment while an enemy team can bring about a blob to try to zerg it down once a prime time hits. But defenders don't have as huge of an advantage as people QQ about (come on, get a few healers and most ACs are rendered useless. 1 scrapper can outheal several ACs at once, but less fbs) . In many keeps and towers, most places to put ACs are in ample range of AoE from the ground. Defenders cannot stand on the walls without lots of stab, not only because of the previously mentioned AoEs but the sheer number of pulls. Defenders typically have to rely on grouping up and leaving the walls (which is counter intuitive) to try to attack the attackers. The problem is all zergs want to try the same things. Take Hills for instance: more often than not, large zergs will try one of two things: either concentrate all their numbers and try to cata at the cata spot and stay there to break through inner, which leaves them in a choke point. Or they try to go to south gate, leaving them in an open environment. But defenders should have the advantage there, they've had time to prepare the keep. IF they haven't, then it is likely lost anyways. People who seem to QQ about how defenders have it too easy seem to just wait to ktrain or bag farm in keeps. In fact, defenders probably have it worse off now than how it was pre-HoT. If you want to take a T3 keep, you should have to put similar effort to take it as it was to build up. If anything needs to be toned down, its the stats buff, but given how many defense-based mechanics are useless (i.e. firing from walls, which has horrible obstruction and LoS problems) or heavily nerfed (e.g. ACs), it only needs to be toned down a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Handin.4032 said:Defenders of a high tier keep should have the advantage. Getting a keep to T2-T3 requires often hours of commitment while an enemy team can bring about a blob to try to zerg it down once a prime time hits. But defenders don't have as huge of an advantage as people QQ about (come on, get a few healers and most ACs are rendered useless. 1 scrapper can outheal several ACs at once, but less fbs) . In many keeps and towers, most places to put ACs are in ample range of AoE from the ground. Defenders cannot stand on the walls without lots of stab, not only because of the previously mentioned AoEs but the sheer number of pulls. Defenders typically have to rely on grouping up and leaving the walls (which is counter intuitive) to try to attack the attackers. The problem is all zergs want to try the same things. Take Hills for instance: more often than not, large zergs will try one of two things: either concentrate all their numbers and try to cata at the cata spot and stay there to break through inner, which leaves them in a choke point. Or they try to go to south gate, leaving them in an open environment. But defenders should have the advantage there, they've had time to prepare the keep. IF they haven't, then it is likely lost anyways. People who seem to QQ about how defenders have it too easy seem to just wait to ktrain or bag farm in keeps. In fact, defenders probably have it worse off now than how it was pre-HoT. If you want to take a T3 keep, you should have to put similar effort to take it as it was to build up. If anything needs to be toned down, its the stats buff, but given how many defense-based mechanics are useless (i.e. firing from walls, which has horrible obstruction and LoS problems) or heavily nerfed (e.g. ACs), it only needs to be toned down a bit.

Let me quote my earlier replies

@Threather.9354 said:800 stats is basically difference of running ascended with foods over running exotics without foods. Now put a decent guild with exotic gear and no foods vs a-little-worse guild that has ascended and foods. Who wins? Its gonna be crushing victory for the worse guild.

I am sorry I have to be so rude but math and experience both say 800 stats is way too much. Now compare it fighting in your keep compared to fighting in enemy keep. Its 1600 stats in total, defending is just overpowered... Why attack if you can afk and wait for enemy to come to you when they get bored? Fights are decided by location, not by how you use your skills, that's why there's no competitive guilds left in the game, just GvG.

@Threather.9354 said:If you see I suggest both nerfs to defense (claim buff) and offense (shield gens) to promote more equal and skillful fight/siegeplay. You can't say it is unreasonable to ask for more equal stats near objectives (that cover pretty much whole map) and other offense strategies than shield-gen cheese being viable.

As you see, I am not asking to nerf just defense so you don't need to worry about your happy life within a keep! I am just wanting to give you guys your treb and ballista defenses back while taking some stats away!

And you already have tactics, respawn, stats, gliding, positioning, siege. And you're worried about little bit of stats and offensive nerfs?Don't forget that post-HoT keeps and towers upgrade 3 times faster and get supply. There's no way defenders have it worse than pre-HoT.

All I am asking is a stat nerf for defenders, more equal fighting ground. Surely your spirit of a warrior can agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Threather.9354" said:If you see I suggest both nerfs to defense (claim buff) and offense (shield gens) to promote more equal and skillful fight/siegeplay. You can't say it is unreasonable to ask for more equal stats near objectives (that cover pretty much whole map) and other offense strategies than shield-gen cheese being viable.

As you see, I am not asking to nerf just defense so you don't need to worry about your happy life within a keep! I am just wanting to give you guys your treb and ballista defenses back while taking some stats away!

And you already have tactics, respawn, stats, gliding, positioning, siege. And you're worried about little bit of stats and offensive nerfs?Don't forget that post-HoT keeps and towers upgrade 3 times faster and get supply. There's no way defenders have it worse than pre-HoT.

All I am asking is a stat nerf for defenders, more equal fighting ground. Surely your spirit of a warrior can agree with that.

I'm not actually typically a big keep defender, but thanks for the whole "happy life within a keep" ;). Respawn - what?? If you're attacking a keep you don't have way point. Gliding is an advantage - again, home field advantage makes sense. Tactics are 75% laughable: at least on my server, more often than not they get pulled by trolls or alt-accounts. I agree the stat change, but all the QQ about keep defense being "too hard" is because big blobs want to just be able to ktrain or bag farm with very little effort. I've been in zergs that come to a T3, throw down 8 catas in a super open obvious spot, and when they fail they give up and go take a T1 tower. I've also seen numerous zerg groups from T1 - T4 do that: they poke a T3 keep in an obvious way, it won't "give them the fights", so they go poke a T1 tower. If you want higher tiered objectives, it SHOULD take work and dedication. Defenders SHOULD have the advantage: it's their objective and their time to upgrade it and siege it up. Their time SHOULD lead to some advantage. That being said, attackers who actually spend 1/2 a minute to think and prepare can bypass a lot of the defense - but as I said, most big groups I see or have been in typically just pull up next to a keep door or wall with all their numbers and try to brute force it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of reasons people might not be seeing as many scouts. As someone that used to scout more I can only list my own reasons and one of them is that defending has been a losing ordeal with the various nerfs to defense options people can make. If you don't have a chance to hold a larger force back while you call for help, what is the point in defensive scouting, its always been and always will be easier to counter attack since your best option is choosing when and where to fight. So the more you nerf defending the closer and closer we come to just k-trains. Objectives need to be defendable with less against more, you need to be able to upgrade them, they need to act like little choke points, and they need to be worth more the longer they are held.

If anything I would like to see more options for keeps, towers, camps and even sentries. The more options we have the more tactics are available which also means a changing landscape which is what keeps things fresh. The more diversity the more it keeps people engaged.

As far the OP's original statement, no I would say I disagree with most of the points raised, outside of never asked for shield generators. But having them just means people need to use different tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@TheGrimm.5624 said:There are a lot of reasons people might not be seeing as many scouts. As someone that used to scout more I can only list my own reasons and one of them is that defending has been a losing ordeal with the various nerfs to defense options people can make. If you don't have a chance to hold a larger force back while you call for help, what is the point in defensive scouting, its always been and always will be easier to counter attack since your best option is choosing when and where to fight. So the more you nerf defending the closer and closer we come to just k-trains. Objectives need to be defendable with less against more, you need to be able to upgrade them, they need to act like little choke points, and they need to be worth more the longer they are held.

If anything I would like to see more options for keeps, towers, camps and even sentries. The more options we have the more tactics are available which also means a changing landscape which is what keeps things fresh. The more diversity the more it keeps people engaged.

As far the OP's original statement, no I would say I disagree with most of the points raised, outside of never asked for shield generators. But having them just means people need to use different tactics.

I used to roam and scout, but I don't any more for a few reasons:

  • roaming isn't much fun thanks to mounts - can't initiate a fight unless the opponent chooses to engage as well - especially in enemy territory. Most players just run away even when they outnumber me. This is a waste of my time and is boring, so I tend to log off and play other games if I can't get some 1v1 or 1vX action. The alternative is taking camps and waiting for someone to show up, but generally they just sit and wait until they outnumber me 5 to 1 and then attack. Also boring.
  • rest of the server can't or won't help - there's no point in scouting if your server can't muster a large enough force to deal with the attackers you report. There's also no point if they won't leave other maps (eg. large queue on ebg) to come help. In fairness, most players in this game (except maybe BG players) aren't playing to win either.
  • no point in caring about score - related to the above two points: scouting can be a lot of work. It takes time to run around keeps and check all the walls, read the map and figure out where the enemy probably is, tail them to provide info, etc. If you do it well, the end result is: your server gets a few more points? You might go up a tier?

.. but I don't agree that objectives should be more defensible. That's partly why people hate T1 and BG so much. Attacking a sieged up structure with ACs and counter-siege is ridiculously time consuming, costly, and not much fun. I don't know what solves these problems, but more defense probably isn't it.

I think the alliances system (really doubt that's ever coming at this point) would help, and some incentive to win (so more servers would actually try) might also be a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  1. Go ahead and change this, but only after you remove the ability to use ground target AOE spells/attacks on the tops of walls from below. Because any realm making an actual effort to take an objective this way doesn't need to worry about defenders as much if they have superiour numbers. If they're taking an objective at prime time with equal numbers then it's more a matter of who brought more healing and more scourges to the fight for when they eventually break through.

  2. No, don't get started on Scrapper because they have next to no role outside of this any more. Core Engineer isn't an option anymore and, believe it or not, some people don't want to play Holosmith, thanks. Oh, and there's no such thing as a "good zerg." Just my opinion though.

  3. Desert map? Get rid of it. If they'd wanted desert elements the answer should have been obvious- expand the three non-EB maps and do Biome by corner for each. Alpine/Snow for Citadel, Temperate/forest for Hills, and Desert/Seaside for Bay. Do the same for EB -Alpine/Snow for Overlook, Temperate/Forest for Valley, Desert/Seaside for Lowlands. And on each map with the exception of EB and SM, have a forest or jungle where the biomes meet. There were a lot of missed opportunities - especially racially themed biomes such as Sylvari-styled maps which could have incorporated elements from Tolkien's Lorien, high trees topped with flets with connecting bridges to fight from etc. We needn't have a single map dedicated to any one biome.

  4. Or we could actually have more rewards for small group activity. Do away with the watchtower tactic and also the automatic crossed swords when under attack. Instead have defence return to being an active role for roamers. Build a proper, higher tower roof on each tower's lord bastion. On top of this tower have a signal fire that needs to be lit by players in order for the crossed swords to be seen over an objective. Remove monuments and bloodlust. Replace them with additional signal fires spaced between the towers and the garrison/keeps. Have a timered event linked to this where if all fires are lit there's support sent from the keep/garrison in the form of elite NPC responders or - if the objectives are upgraded somewhat, the automatic activation of an emergency waypoint in the tower/keep.

  5. I say the problem isn't only siege generators. It's bad objective design. Keep and tower wall defence should favour defenders. If it wasn't so damnably easy for attacking players to cover the top of a wall with ground target AOE spam then you'd have plenty of defending players able to actually shoot siege generators, golems, rams and their operators etc. The strongest element of any attacking force against an objective in WvW has been the players and not the siege. On some of the more terrible battles I've played in - where the sides were terribly miss-matched we had attacking forces who, after having their engines destroyed on the inner garrison door -either by catapults from behind doors or other methods- simply kept the wall tops cleared with ground target aoe spam and then PvD'd their way into the objective just to spite us. There should be an advantage to standing on top of a wall. Right now, between ground target aoe damage or just being lifted/pulled down off the wall there isn't one. A keep/garrison/tower etc -anything with walls shouldn't require equal or greater numbers to defend. But this is what we're seeing. it isn't fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@coro.3176 said:

  • roaming isn't much fun thanks to mounts - can't initiate a fight unless the opponent chooses to engage as well - especially in enemy territory. Most players just run away even when they outnumber me. This is a waste of my time and is boring, so I tend to log off and play other games if I can't get some 1v1 or 1vX action. The alternative is taking camps and waiting for someone to show up, but generally they just sit and wait until they outnumber me 5 to 1 and then attack. Also boring.

Frankly, those people who run away most likely are poorly performing builds against which you might have just steam rolled them, and for most people it's boring when the mode isn't much of a challenge.

On the other hand, it's true that mounts change the way people have to approach encounters. The roamers I run into mostly are nearby (but generally out of sight), waiting for an unsuspecting foe to attempt to take the camp (or whatever), and then they jump on you while still in combat. Unless the build has good disengage ability, that forces an encounter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:

@Gop.8713 said:OP is a list of an individual's preferences and not an objective assessment of the state of the game mode, and it's not clear it was meant to be taken as such. So read the title as 'Things that would make wvw more fun for the OP' and it all makes sense . . .

Objectively, most of OP's suggestions would just be change for the sake of change, not better or worse, just different. And that would be fine, just another set of parameters to adapt to. But there are a few exceptions . . :

1) OP seems to underestimate the effect recent defensive nerfs. Structures are no longer worth tiering for their defensive advantages, further nerfs seem superfluous . . .

If you see I suggest both nerfs to defense (claim buff) and offense (shield gens) to promote more equal and skillful fight/siegeplay. You can't say it is unreasonable to ask for more equal stats near objectives (that cover pretty much whole map) and other offense strategies than shield-gen cheese being viable.And as I said, taken as your personal preference that's fine. But it wouldn't make wvw objectively better. I enjoyed wvw more back when tiering and defending objectives was more worthwhile. That's not a good reason for them to change it back, however . . .

3) Many ppl love desert. Taking desert from those who enjoy it and reverting it to alpine so the ppl who enjoy alpine can have a third copy to play on would reduce rather than increase the total number of ppl enjoying the game . . .

Removal of desert map would remove the inequality within scoring system of WvW because some servers refuse to play Desert map. As I said, I don't mind desert map, I just believe it is eyesore for both people who play for both points and/or fights. It breaks too many matchups.There are a lot of classes I refuse to play even though they would make winning fights easier. That's not a good reason to take them away from ppl who are willing to play them . . .

4) I only roam and the watchtower tactic does not affect me in any way. I do not believe I am special in this regard . . .

There are different forms of roaming. For example during offtime you will have better luck in EB where watchtowers cover most camps. There are some that like to sneak north towers for small skirmishes during off hours leaving them only 1 option for siege (catas at NW tower), not very creative is it.

Maybe for your type of roaming it doesn't matter but you can't say that defending and taking camps/towers isn't part of roam life.Oh I'm certain the watchtowers affect someone, or ppl wouldn't bother slotting them. But they do not 'kill roaming' as you claimed . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Skotlex.7580 said:

  • roaming isn't much fun thanks to mounts
    - can't initiate a fight unless the opponent chooses to engage as well - especially in enemy territory. Most players just run away even when they outnumber me. This is a waste of my time and is boring, so I tend to log off and play other games if I can't get some 1v1 or 1vX action. The alternative is taking camps and waiting for someone to show up, but generally they just sit and wait until they outnumber me 5 to 1 and then attack. Also boring.

Frankly, those people who run away most likely are poorly performing builds against which you might have just steam rolled them, and for most people it's boring when the mode isn't much of a challenge.Thank you. But the sad truth is a lot of ppl who bemoan the lack of fights in wvw aren't actually looking for fights . . .On the other hand, it's true that mounts change the way people have to approach encounters. The roamers I run into mostly are nearby (but generally out of sight), waiting for an unsuspecting foe to attempt to take the camp (or whatever), and then they jump on you while still in combat. Unless the build has good disengage ability, that forces an encounter.Like these ppl, for example . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...