Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Claim buff killed roaming and high-level gameplay


Riba.3271

Recommended Posts

@Threather.9354 said:I do understand though it is hard concept to understandIts not hard to understand. Whats irks people is that you relate two aspects that dont necessarily relate or even need to relate. You say claim buff is too strong and killed roaming/high level gameplay. Many disagree. You could have left it at claim buff is too strong and most would have agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 said:

@melody.2601 said:Yeah, those few Stats are going to be the reason you lose a fight. :#

...20% extra damage and survivability...

20%? LOL Come on man, you can't just pick numbers out of thin air!

Well precision and power have almost equal value in damage output and 200 power is between 6.66%-10% damage increase depending on how much damage you're running (between 2000 and 3000 power). While realistic number is more around 2500 power it would become 8%. So it isn't just pulled out of thin air but 10% is because minstrel players, that are dominant in groups, get way more than 10% from it.

So yea 10% is for 2000 power which is about average of what your blob deals damage which. So total of 20% with precision. Now you can argue it is 15%, because some people tend to ignore the supports damage, but same point stands that is it too much as it varies from side to side. So in one location you have 15% more damage and survivability and in one location the enemy has. Doesn't seem very in line with competitive balancing.

Now this applies fully to roamers but organised groups get little less hurt to it due to high stacks of might upkeep but regardless that might goes up and down due to corrupts and you can't assume the average to be above 14 might which will reduce the percentage from power but not precision.

Of course people tend to go overly crit chance on Necros, weavers and Revs while ignoring things like borderlands bloodlust and claim buff while sacrificing 8% potential damage from their build just to get 100% crit chance while sacrificing lot of average DPS that the 230 potential precision would give you. So one 4th of the stats in claim buff aren't utilized fully by every group due to bad awareness of how frequent these stats are in WvW while being easily replacable by things like ferocity

Now as you see, the numbers weren't pulled out of thin air. And I believe the phrase was UP TO 20% extra damage, which was true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:

@melody.2601 said:Yeah, those few Stats are going to be the reason you lose a fight. :#

...20% extra damage and survivability...

20%? LOL Come on man, you can't just pick numbers out of thin air!

Well precision and power have almost equal value in damage output and 200 power is between 6.66%-10% damage increase depending on how much damage you're running (between 2000 and 3000 power). While realistic number is more around 2500 power it would become 8%. So it isn't just pulled out of thin air but 10% is because minstrel players, that are dominant in groups, get way more than 10% from it.

So yea 10% is for 2000 power which is about average of what your blob deals damage which. Now you can argue it is 15%, because some people tend to ignore the supports damage, but same point stands that is it too much as it varies from side to side. So in one location you have 15% more damage and survivability and in one location the enemy has. Doesn't seem very in line with competitive balancing.

Now this applies fully to roamers but organised groups get little less hurt to it due to high stacks of might upkeep but regardless that might goes up and down due to corrupts and you can't assume the average to be above 14 might.

Of course people tend to go overly crit chance on Necros, weavers and Revs while ignoring things like borderlands bloodlust and claim buff while sacrificing 8% potential damage from their build just to get 100% crit chance while sacrificing lot of average DPS that the 8% more the precision would give you.

That's funny, because the number crunching math academic raid min/maxers seem to think that 90 power from stat infusions only gives 2-3% more damage and (the agony ones) are not even worth getting (due to cost) because that is statistically insignificant unless you are doing perfect rotations on immobile golems, your standard variance will be greater than that. So at absolute most it could be 15% additional damage.

You're also making the assumption that minstrel players are dealing any damage at all. I mean, sure it's theoretically possible that they should be dealing more damage, but in reality they are hitting hardly anyone. I know when I am playing my FB that I get like 10 bags all night and far less XP because I simply am not hitting other players enough for any amount of extra damage to be doing anything at all. Yet I hop on my Weaver and I'll get 5-10x more bags.

I can be convinced otherwise, but just don't see it being that big of an issue.

Also, defenders are already at a huge disadvantage by not being able to even attack from the walls without being nuked or pulled. If ever there was something to assist, a stat bonus is the least that can be done. If you are greatly outnumbered by defenders then the stat bonus is not what's turning the tide against you and if you outnumber the defenders, they need all the help they can get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 said:

@melody.2601 said:Yeah, those few Stats are going to be the reason you lose a fight. :#

...20% extra damage and survivability...

20%? LOL Come on man, you can't just pick numbers out of thin air!

Well precision and power have almost equal value in damage output and 200 power is between 6.66%-10% damage increase depending on how much damage you're running (between 2000 and 3000 power). While realistic number is more around 2500 power it would become 8%. So it isn't just pulled out of thin air but 10% is because minstrel players, that are dominant in groups, get way more than 10% from it.

So yea 10% is for 2000 power which is about average of what your blob deals damage which. Now you can argue it is 15%, because some people tend to ignore the supports damage, but same point stands that is it too much as it varies from side to side. So in one location you have 15% more damage and survivability and in one location the enemy has. Doesn't seem very in line with competitive balancing.

Now this applies fully to roamers but organised groups get little less hurt to it due to high stacks of might upkeep but regardless that might goes up and down due to corrupts and you can't assume the average to be above 14 might.

Of course people tend to go overly crit chance on Necros, weavers and Revs while ignoring things like borderlands bloodlust and claim buff while sacrificing 8% potential damage from their build just to get 100% crit chance while sacrificing lot of average DPS that the 8% more the precision would give you.

That's funny, because the number crunching math academic raid min/maxers seem to think that 90 power from stat infusions only gives 2-3% more damage and (the agony ones) are not even worth getting (due to cost) because that is statistically insignificant unless you are doing perfect rotations on immobile golems, your standard variance will be greater than that. So at absolute most it could be 15% additional damage.

This is because in pve, we assume players have 25 stacks of might with perma fury and warbanners. They also don't have to balance survivability with damage either. Infusions only give 1 stat.

Also in fractals, stats are further inflated due to potions and titles, which are a better investment so +agony/stat infusions come last. But then again most players are not paying 1500 gold for presence of the keep. And of course agony infusions only matter in fractals; if you did raids, you could just use wvw ones. This is why they're generally considered bad investments.

That being said, it's probably not 20%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582 said:

@melody.2601 said:Yeah, those few Stats are going to be the reason you lose a fight. :#

...20% extra damage and survivability...

20%? LOL Come on man, you can't just pick numbers out of thin air!

Well precision and power have almost equal value in damage output and 200 power is between 6.66%-10% damage increase depending on how much damage you're running (between 2000 and 3000 power). While realistic number is more around 2500 power it would become 8%. So it isn't just pulled out of thin air but 10% is because minstrel players, that are dominant in groups, get way more than 10% from it.

So yea 10% is for 2000 power which is about average of what your blob deals damage which. Now you can argue it is 15%, because some people tend to ignore the supports damage, but same point stands that is it too much as it varies from side to side. So in one location you have 15% more damage and survivability and in one location the enemy has. Doesn't seem very in line with competitive balancing.

Now this applies fully to roamers but organised groups get little less hurt to it due to high stacks of might upkeep but regardless that might goes up and down due to corrupts and you can't assume the average to be above 14 might.

Of course people tend to go overly crit chance on Necros, weavers and Revs while ignoring things like borderlands bloodlust and claim buff while sacrificing 8% potential damage from their build just to get 100% crit chance while sacrificing lot of average DPS that the 8% more the precision would give you.

That's funny, because the number crunching math academic raid min/maxers seem to think that 90 power from stat infusions only gives 2-3% more damage and (the agony ones) are not even worth getting (due to cost) because that is statistically insignificant unless you are doing perfect rotations on immobile golems, your standard variance will be greater than that. So at absolute most it could be 15% additional damage.90 power is 2% damage increase if you have 4500 power because 90/4500 = 0.02it is quite simple math, and you don't hit 4500 power in WvW. So if it is 3% increase in damage, 200 power is still at least 6.66% increase in damage, as I did say in my math. And yes, 15% is completely unacceptable if you want to have a competitive scene, even 5% is too much if it reaches outside keeps and towers.

You're also making the assumption that minstrel players are dealing any damage at all. I mean, sure it's
theoretically possible
that they should be dealing more damage, but in reality they are hitting hardly anyone. I know when I am playing my FB that I get like 10 bags all night and far less XP because I simply am not hitting other players enough for any amount of extra damage to be doing anything at all. Yet I hop on my Weaver and I'll get 5-10x more bags.

I
can
be convinced otherwise, but just don't see it being that big of an issue.

Well it is true that minstrel players might deal only 15% of damage (600-800 dps) of very good dps players (5kish dps), however only a few of the DPS players call to that category even in bigger squads.

From my experience Firebrand gets comparable, or even more bags than weaver. Falls short of necro though. You should use F1 tome 3 skill to pull enemies,, mace 3 and shield 4 to apply/remove aegis while applying protection, f3 tome skill 2 skill to taunt enemies and staff 3 to remove aegis while using staff 2 to heal allies that are the most in danger. Also mace 2 applies regen so dropping that symbol will guarantee tagging enemies. And also as you're the most sustainable person in the zerg with most stunbreaks, you should be able to tank something while tagging enemies with retaliation (that scales with power btw).

Also, defenders are already at a huge disadvantage by not being able to even attack from the walls without being nuked or pulled. If ever there was something to assist, a stat bonus is the least that can be done. If you are greatly outnumbered by defenders then the stat bonus is not what's turning the tide against you and if you outnumber the defenders, they need all the help they can get.

Defenders need more tools to take down the siege, not more stats to fight overwhelming numbers. They literally nerfed wall HP and siege damage, while buffing siege health, after HoT. I already suggested multiple options that would help outmanned defenders A LOT more than stats. Do note that Claim buff didn't exist pre-HoT and overall HoT just made both attacking (Stat buffs and upgrade times) and defending (Siege useless against shield gens, rams/catas too sturdy, acs do literally 0 damage and T3 walls are weak) more annoying. Especially since both are so much more rare these days because everyone already knows T3 keeps are just farming spots against pugs these days as you can't really have nice fights there anymore.

My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Threather.9354" said:Hello everyone. Point of this post is to prove following things about claim buff:

  1. Overpowered stats: Gives too many stats thus affects outcome of battles directly. Basis for following arguments.
  2. Players shun attacking: Defending is much easier thus mainstream.
  3. Fights being less epic - Objective fights being reduced to only "points" and "farm" instead of epic largescale battles
  4. Competitive scene suffers Fights between High level guilds, blobs and roamers, even pugs, often end up coming down to the wire. Unseen locational variance kills motivation to become better making them quit the game.
  5. Promoting active defence > passive defence: There are better alternatives to keep attacking in line

I think the overall differences in approaches is that you are coming at these statements as if defenders and attackers are on equal numbers, where as I would I disagree that it might make it to that level given time but will not start that way and the more we reduce time to take, the less likely they will be about equal numbers.

Overpowered stats:First off I will disagree, it's much easier to attack then to defend and defensive upgrades are what allow people even a slight chance to try and defend when faced with more numbers. And again an objective should award some defense where as currently walls do nothing except slow attackers from reaching the lord. The claim buffs themselves award what the walls should be doing. The walls themselves have already faced large nerfs and the Time to Take has already been greatly reduced. The more that you remove defensive options the more you encourage K-Trains. Attackers will always have an upper hand because they will have the option on where to strike. If populations were maxed everywhere and all servers had queues all the time this might be different but in reality defenders will be at a disadvantage since they will more likely not be at a fight when it occurs.

Players shun attacking:I don't see this so this must be a server thing. Defending pays nothing so if people don't attack they gain nothing. Where does this occur? Again I roam/havoc and will sprinkle in some zerg surfing but I don't ever see people forming up just to go defend, they might respond to a defense call but I never see anyone just waiting to defend. They are out attacking and will come to a call to defense but that is not the same thing. They are forming to attack. Even while roaming or with a havoc we will start to weaken a point or outright take down structures if they are defended or not. If the defenders outnumber the attackers than you try and draw out the defenders by moving off and drawing them into the open or you fish them off the walls down to you with pulls and such.

Fights become less epic:The more you nerf defense the less people will defend. A fight will never be epic unless it can be more extensive which it won't be when one side first out numbers the other and then second if the defenders have no gain from already owning something. It just leads to a quick take down because the defending side had no time to react and get to the fight. Again the attacker chooses the time and place to attack. Walls were already weakened which means even less time for people to get there. If you want people to have epic fights you have to give them means to arrive at the fight before it's already over. On top of that we further reduced this likelihood by removing the added speed gain that mounts afforded to allow defenders to get to the fight. So now defenders have to be where they weren't and odds are good they will be strangling in and have better chances of being picked off before even getting to the fight by attacking roamers and havocs shielding the larger force attacking.

Competitive scene suffers:I don't think zerg fights over objectives were ever competitive. Lack of updates removed more players than anything else in the game mode. GvGs shouldn't be done around objectives. If anything this is more a separate topic to ANet about GvG sPvP game modes.

Promoting active defence > passive defence:You won't have anyone defending the more we nerf defense. People already don't want to defend if they have no confidence that they can actually defend. We see less scouts now because it pays nothing and you can't slow down a larger force so it's better to head out and attack then to scout and call for help. Scouts more are out looking for fights and will report on movements when in areas versus just standing around. But those scouts are out looking to attack something.

Further more you have the following from another thread:

@Apokriphos.7042 said:I am currently in a match with a server who is intentionally claiming almost no objectives to prevent their ascent into T1. Their Kill/death ratio is almost 4x the opposing servers, however.

This sort of match manipulation should not be allowed under our current metric system. I propose that Anet take the Kill/Death ratio into significant account when determining future matches, otherwise even with the 'vaulted' alliance system that will likely come out with the expansion, servers that mainly consist of organized guilds will be able to prevent ascension into the tier they belong in by simply avoiding objectives.

If a side wants to game a scoring system so that they face less competition then they should not be rewarded for it by getting easier matches and or fights when they fight a side playing the game mode and ranking up structures. There should be value in holding. A side not building up their objectives should be faced with more challenging fights. An attacker should want to attack an upgraded structure exactly for the reason that they don't want to fight a fortified position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

BloodlustKeep presencePlus warrior banners

that's alot of stats to gain :) worth some ascended pieces.

And only the server that ktrains can maintain this wich even worses the situation of population disparity... since most matches are big omni blob vs small group anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"Threather.9354" said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Yea, they should come back and fix what they broke with and after HoT. This is where they went wrong. For example it is obvious that the keep and SM upgrade times being boosted massively wasn't good for the gamemode. Now this could be simply fixed by increasing amount of dolyaks required for SM and keep, but no apparently having more important objectives requiring equal amount of dolyaks as towers is "easier to understand". Already 6 hours before primetime you can log in and see everyone have T3 borderlands. Then you can spend hour to reset a few objectives and risk getting rekt by ANY guild that raids around that time to defend relying on extra stats instead of siege that used to be necessary before. Overall you often just need to mass 60 people to do anything even during off hours which leads to people not even joining tags unless they already have 30 people in the bank.

But ye, they just need to fix the stuff, simple numerical changes, very simple task.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Offair.2563 said:Roaming got rekt by powercreep - class imbalance - and build diversity been thrown out of the window. Keep stats don't even come close to these.

So this is one of those discussions that are complicated by trying to prove a negative. The reason for this is that is roamers that are no longer with us may no longer be on the forums and those that might be with us on the forums but are no longer playing are not up to date. So what you need is the roamers that are still playing and if they aren't roaming what are they doing, havoc, group, warband, zerging? Hence the trying to prove a negative.

As a roamer/havoc, pre-balance patch roaming was fine. Post patch I would agree we lost a number of builds. But that doesn't mean you can't roam, I would disagree there, but the combat is just less interesting and a number of build aren't as viable as they once were. Now the question is are they all less viable now. And if so that might point to balance but that would mean they were all balanced before if they all took the same nerf hit but are not just less interesting and potentially less challenging to play.

No I would say the balance patch was meant to extend time to kill in larger scale fights so talking about roamers isn't part of that conversation, but again asking roamers post departure will not give you a clear picture at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The buffs in WvW aren't that game ruining. The fact that stats like minstrels, trailblazer, dire etc exist on top of the most mobile class with stealth being the absolute best 1v1er vs any thing not a trailblazer tank makes WvW roaming zero fun until you're at least 5 man roaming.

So I'd say gear stats and class balance is why roaming is dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Shiyo.3578 said:The buffs in WvW aren't that game ruining. The fact that stats like minstrels, trailblazer, dire etc exist on top of the most mobile class with stealth being the absolute best 1v1er vs any thing not a trailblazer tank makes WvW roaming zero fun until you're at least 5 man roaming.

So I'd say gear stats and class balance is why roaming is dead.Dont forget marauders powercreep. Free vitality, pfff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Shiyo.3578 said:The buffs in WvW aren't that game ruining. The fact that stats like minstrels, trailblazer, dire etc exist on top of the most mobile class with stealth being the absolute best 1v1er vs any thing not a trailblazer tank makes WvW roaming zero fun until you're at least 5 man roaming.

So I'd say gear stats and class balance is why roaming is dead.Dont forget marauders powercreep. Free vitality, pfff.

Indeed! Back in MY day we had 11k hp and we LIKED it(*).

(* - complained about it constantly on the forums)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Just playing devil's advocate here, but given old bloodlust used to give 50 power per stack for a max of 150 extra power (if memory serves, do correct me if I'm wrong), if that was too much then I can kinda see where he is going when he says 200 power from keep buff is too strong. Never mind the other stats you get from it.

Edit; I do agree with what others have said tho, that while it is strong, the keep buffs don't really kill roaming. If you are building glassy you will die in seconds anyways, and I think it's foolish to make your build dependant on stats you might not have because a keep flipped under you. If the OP is trying to build his character assuming he will have these buffs as he has said, I can see why he thinks it's such a big deal, but it's actually him making these buffs have such a large effect by trying to build off them instead of seeing them as just icing on the cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ASP.8093 said:

@Shiyo.3578 said:The buffs in WvW aren't that game ruining. The fact that stats like minstrels, trailblazer, dire etc exist on top of the most mobile class with stealth being the absolute best 1v1er vs any thing not a trailblazer tank makes WvW roaming zero fun until you're at least 5 man roaming.

So I'd say gear stats and class balance is why roaming is dead.Dont forget marauders powercreep. Free vitality, pfff.

Indeed! Back in MY day we had 11k hp and we LIKED it(*).

(* - complained about it constantly on the forums)

Didn't we have guard stacks from the defense against guards mastery? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

giving everyone a good ability to cleanse enemy boons would eb a good ,start to counter the boonball meta.

@"Threather.9354"i do have a solution for Promoting active defences over Passive ones and making taking objectives more epic and impactfull.see here:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1250370#Comment_1250370

the maps you will see are old ones.here is the better ones:Wv-W-frontline

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

@"Threather.9354" said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Just playing devil's advocate here, but given old bloodlust used to give 50 power per stack for a max of 150 extra power (if memory serves, do correct me if I'm wrong), if that was too much then I can kinda see where he is going when he says 200 power from keep buff is too strong. Never mind the other stats you get from it.

Edit; I do agree with what others have said tho, that while it is strong, the keep buffs don't really kill roaming. If you are building glassy you will die in seconds anyways, and I think it's foolish to make your build dependant on stats you might not have because a keep flipped under you. If the OP is trying to build his character assuming he will have these buffs as he has said, I can see why he thinks it's such a big deal, but it's actually him making these buffs have such a large effect by trying to build off them instead of seeing them as just icing on the cake.Big difference though, since bloodlust gave everyone on the border that boost. Keep/tower buffs obviously only affect the keep/tower area. Since this was before we had the defensive buffs, it just plain gave one side a constant advantage - including in offense. At the time before all the insane powercreep, that advantage was pretty big too.

Now I would say that if you "need" the defensive buffs, then the enemy is bringing a vastly overwhelming force - a force that cant complain over those defensive buffs when they should easily be able to balance them out (a little) by capping bloodlust.

If they dont want to even attempt to balance out the defensive buffs... well then none of these arguments matter - they dont see them as a threat.

It's sort of the same argument with a 70 man borderzerg attacking a T2 keep with 5 dollys left to T3 and the commander yells at 1 confused roamer to go take that T3 camp defended by 20+ enemies and 5 on each dolly. If the zerg dont see a problem in that, well then the buff of a T3 keep doesnt really matter, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

@"Threather.9354" said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Just playing devil's advocate here, but given old bloodlust used to give 50 power per stack for a max of 150 extra power (if memory serves, do correct me if I'm wrong), if that was too much then I can kinda see where he is going when he says 200 power from keep buff is too strong. Never mind the other stats you get from it.

Edit; I do agree with what others have said tho, that while it is strong, the keep buffs don't really kill roaming. If you are building glassy you will die in seconds anyways, and I think it's foolish to make your build dependant on stats you might not have because a keep flipped under you. If the OP is trying to build his character assuming he will have these buffs as he has said, I can see why he thinks it's such a big deal, but it's actually him making these buffs have such a large effect by trying to build off them instead of seeing them as just icing on the cake.

It killed roaming by indirectly reducing activity roamers can do:

  • They can't fight equally strong players at camps because those players will defeat you, the movement speed boost is especially noticeable (look at sPvP where everyone uses Speed/Lynx runes). I am sure you know from your experience that lot of good roamers are very toxic and don't take losing lightly.
  • Dueling around SM died. Duelers were cream of the crop. Put any top sPvP or dueler against another, the one with 400 extra stats will always win. And no one is interested watching mediocre players duel.
  • No1 threatening attacks keeps thus no1 defends camps and keeps eye on supply routes actively. Same applies to dolyaks. Do note that keep scouts are same people who defend/Keep eye on camps, so they're almost full-time roamers.
  • There is no being "the best" anymore. Most gankers and roamers these days are forced to run in small groups because claim buffs extra runeset already makes massive difference when hitting high gold levels in pvp, that is basically anyone that takes the game seriously.

Basically while soloroaming itself might exist in form of ganking. Other factors are that people aren't pretty much needed to upgrade anymore as it happens so fast and much more passively than before meaning less people care about objectives and camps surrounding them. Overall Soloroaming often resolves around camps/duels, and that scene is dead. And this reduces amount of groups also as groups often form by having friends online at same time.

Creating a build depends, for example it is a waste going 100% crit chance in a build for WvW while often you can replace that precision with ferocity and deal like 1% less damage without claim buff while dealing 5-10% more near friendly objectives (that is active approx ~40% of the time). It is just math and claim buffs extend all the way to open field. So usually on classes like Rev and necro that can easily hit 100%, you often wanna cut back 130 precision (claim buff + borderlands bloodlust) for optimal dps.

My point is: Even moderate amounts of extra passive stats ruin any kind of PvP mode and WvW wasn't balanced around defender having extra passive stats. Instead they nerfed wall HP, tactivators and AC damage but we are still at same state of the game where little bit weaker defender wins always even without utilizing siege, lords, respawns, stealth, clouding and whatever. And no one who takes the game seriously wants to lose against worse players. Attemping to siege a keep one more time and possibly being repelled by enemy outbraining you with siege is much more tolerable than getting destroyed by weaklings that never activated their brain regarding defending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Threather.9354" said:It killed roaming by indirectly reducing activity roamers can do:

  • They can't fight equally strong players at camps because those players will defeat you, the movement speed boost is especially noticeable (look at sPvP where everyone uses Speed/Lynx runes). I am sure you know from your experience that lot of good roamers are very toxic and don't take losing lightly.
  • Dueling around SM died. Duelers were cream of the crop. Put any top sPvP or dueler against another, the one with 400 extra stats will always win. And no one is interested watching mediocre players duel.
  • No1 threatening attacks keeps thus no1 defends camps and keeps eye on supply routes actively. Same applies to dolyaks. Do note that keep scouts are same people who defend/Keep eye on camps, so they're almost full-time roamers.
  • There is no being "the best" anymore. Most gankers and roamers these days are forced to run in small groups because claim buffs extra runeset already makes massive difference when hitting high gold levels in pvp, that is basically anyone that takes the game seriously.Except, well
  • I still see people fight "equally strong" roamers in camps and win - and for myself, I always engage any solo target regardless of them holding the camp, I dont even look if its claimed or not.
  • I rarely visit EB (like once a week) yet there always seem to be solos/small groups clashing at the south duel spot.
  • I often run into camp defenders/attackers and have to fight them over it, while we loose T3 keeps to like 10 attackers because too few is on (well thats mostly DBL).
  • Sometimes I meet enemies that are almost impossible to win over. Not to toot my own horn but I can usually hold my own against dangerous foes and fairly easily tell their threat level. When you fight someone for 60s and both hps bouncing up and down only to ultimately loose, then see that same person kill a... lets say "weaker" target... in 2 seconds then yeah... he's pretty good. When you continously meet them for an hour or two, you know.

So as a roamer, I oddly enough still see all that dead roaming going. Hm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@saerni.2584 said:I’ve been too busy roaming to respond to this thread and I think that is pretty much all I have to say in response.

Have to agree, had to dust off my thief after a half year and have been playing it like my Scrapper, Warrior, Ranger, Rev, Necro, Guard...and though if I was smarter could disengage more appreciate the Thieves ability to catch a target more.

But as far as objective benefits, nope hasn't stopped me from jumping a target on any class, nor entering a breached target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:As soon as groups grow bigger and gets the inevitable pocket healer (ie minstrel scrapper or minstrel firebrand in the current meta), any ideas of casual roaming gets thrown out window because congratulations you're a meta zergling now. Hell even for 2 mans I've seen minstrel fb + dps hammer rev combos run around and roflstomp randoms that cant even touch them.

This right here is why roaming is suffering so much compared to the glory days of WvW. Any small group that isn't braindead and has a healer is nigh impossible to solo even if the solo player is leagues above the small group in skill.

I'm of the opinion that healers are slowly ruining WvW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:

@Threather.9354 said:My personal opinion is that whichever team originally designed WvW obviously put a lot of thought into things like upgrade times, passive stat strength (BL bloodlust), siege damage/health, population status and objective sturdiness, than whoever completely oblirated all that.Hahaha no. Anet got literally everything of that wrong and didnt correct it until we complained. Bloodlust is the best example. Original bloodlust was a disaster that really did add far too much stats.

Just playing devil's advocate here, but given old bloodlust used to give 50 power per stack for a max of 150 extra power (if memory serves, do correct me if I'm wrong), if that was too much then I can kinda see where he is going when he says 200 power from keep buff is too strong. Never mind the other stats you get from it.

Edit; I do agree with what others have said tho, that while it is strong, the keep buffs don't really kill roaming. If you are building glassy you will die in seconds anyways, and I think it's foolish to make your build dependant on stats you might not have because a keep flipped under you. If the OP is trying to build his character assuming he will have these buffs as he has said, I can see why he thinks it's such a big deal, but it's actually him making these buffs have such a large effect by trying to build off them instead of seeing them as just icing on the cake.

It killed roaming by indirectly reducing activity roamers can do:
  • They can't fight equally strong players at camps because those players will defeat you, the movement speed boost is especially noticeable (look at sPvP where everyone uses Speed/Lynx runes). I am sure you know from your experience that lot of good roamers are very toxic and don't take losing lightly.]

You are forgetting that there is already no parity between professions and builds; some classes have inherently better move speed and stat boosts through traits and boons than others do, your statement that the attacker would die simply because of the extra stats from the objective buff assumes that the stat differences between professions and whether you have the camp's guards on your side both have no effect on the outcome of the fight, which is obviously not true. Secondly, all players have access to runes that give 25% move speed, so the movement speed argument is a bit moot really.

  • Dueling around SM died. Duelers were cream of the crop. Put any top sPvP or dueler against another, the one with 400 extra stats will always win. And no one is interested watching mediocre players duel.

See my point above. There is no parity between classes and builds, they have inherent differences in stats because of trait and build choices, so unless we are talking about mirror duels there is very likely an inequality between those roaming builds before the keep buffs are taken into account. A player running a three stat gear set like dire can easily kill a player running a four stat gear set like marauder, despite the 4 stat gear set giving that player a higher stat total. What do we say here, that stat buffs alone are responsible for the outcome of this fight?

Taking your logic at face value, the player with the largest boosts to stats will always win. You're making things waaaaay too simplistic here, and ignoring the fact that duellers were usually great players because of their ability to read and counter their opponents, not because of their build. I used to duel a DH guildmate in HoT and I don't think I ever beat him except when he was intentionally trolling me with hammer, because he read me like a book every time.

  • No1 threatening attacks keeps thus no1 defends camps and keeps eye on supply routes actively. Same applies to dolyaks. Do note that keep scouts are same people who defend/Keep eye on camps, so they're almost full-time roamers.

There are plenty of people running dolyaks and guarding camps. That is more of a server issue than anything, some choose to K-train and some play to defend and scout, some servers have more of one type of player and less of the other.

  • There is no being "the best" anymore. Most gankers and roamers these days are forced to run in small groups because claim buffs extra runeset already makes massive difference when hitting high gold levels in pvp, that is basically anyone that takes the game seriously.

Rank in WvW does not accurately reflect the skill of the opponent in small scale nor does your own rank determine the skill level of players you will meet on the border, claim buffs are applied regardless of rank in WvW and there are no claim buffs in PvP. This argument doesn't make a lot of sense, honestly.

Havok groups and 5 man roaming existed way before claim buffs were introduced, so to claim people are forced to run in groups because of claim buff is just plain wrong. People run in small groups more than they used to for reasons like these;

  • The game was originally designed without healers, but then expansions introduced healers and supports. If you're outnumbered against 2 DPS players and a support player, you either kill the support and let the DPS players freecast or you try to kill the DPS players while the support keeps them alive, both situations do not favour the solo player.
  • Warclaw makes respawn times faster, making it harder to win close to a waypoint while outnumbered. They also make it much harder to win outnumbered as for the most part you cannot outrun a group anymore: if two players attack you while a third stays mounted to keep you in combat, then when you get one guy low he swaps with the mounted player, goes OOC and mounts up, you are going to have a very hard time dealing with them.
  • Down state changes since release make it much, much harder to secure kills when solo, and after the February patch it is harder to cleave while solo because of lower damage.
  • Marked on sentries and towers mean you are passively scouted in certain areas even if nobody is on that part of the map, so fighting in certain areas solo is much more likely to get you swarmed by enemy players than it used to.
  • If you are playing for PPT, ganking lone targets with 5+ players til they get so annoyed they choose to change maps is a valid strategy. A number of servers do this, I won't have to tell you their names.

Basically while soloroaming itself might exist in form of ganking. Other factors are that people aren't pretty much needed to upgrade anymore as it happens so fast and much more passively than before meaning less people care about objectives and camps surrounding them. Overall Soloroaming often resolves around camps/duels, and that scene is dead. And this reduces amount of groups also as groups often form by having friends online at same time.

I actually agree that the system was better when people had to manually upgrade stuff. That said, in vanilla I used to upgrade a camp on a border to T3 then defend it with ballista until the enemy grouped up to deal with me. I still do the same thing today, except now I can't get the camp to T3 without soloing a tower or getting help from allies. From a purely roaming perspective, not much really changed. I used to enjoy duelling, and you still can. A lot of players left because of balance issues, a lot of players will also have left because they plain got bored. 7 years is a long time to be playing the same game.

Creating a build depends, for example it is a waste going 100% crit chance in a build for WvW while often you can replace that precision with ferocity and deal like 1% less damage without claim buff while dealing 5-10% more near friendly objectives (that is active approx ~40% of the time). It is just math and claim buffs extend all the way to open field. So usually on classes like Rev and necro that can easily hit 100%, you often wanna cut back 130 precision (claim buff + borderlands bloodlust) for optimal dps.

If precision is the only thing from the camp buff you're choosing to build around, it's hardly a big deal now is it? With the way group play is now your survival in the boon ball is less determined by stat boosts and more determined by numbers and squad composition. This directly affect your incoming boons, cleanses and heals and your outgoing boon corrupts. In small scale stats do make a larger difference, but when roaming you either invest heavily in defensive stats and sustain or you don't bother and rely on other forms of damage mitigation. So if your opponent is heavily invested you will need to wear them down regardless of camp buffs, and if they aren't heavily invested they are relying on active defenses like stealth, dodges, blocks etc so you need to outplay them. Like I said earlier, there is no parity between builds and professions, so roaming has never been balanced around having the same stat access to all players.

My point is: Even moderate amounts of extra passive stats ruin any kind of PvP mode and WvW wasn't balanced around defender having extra passive stats. Instead they nerfed wall HP, tactivators and AC damage but we are still at same state of the game where little bit weaker defender wins always even without utilizing siege, lords, respawns, stealth, clouding and whatever. And no one who takes the game seriously wants to lose against worse players. Attemping to siege a keep one more time and possibly being repelled by enemy outbraining you with siege is much more tolerable than getting destroyed by weaklings that never activated their brain regarding defending.

Thing is, WvW wasn't balanced around everyone having equal stats, not is it balanced around who is the "better" player, it pretty much comes down to the group with greater numbers win. Frankly you SHOULDN'T expect to win against superior numbers as a matter of course, and if you do they likely played like a bunch of potatoes.

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...