What QoL / smaller updates would you like to see in WvW?

[jpsssss.7530]

I just wan to not have to spend 200-300 supplies to make arrow carts not awful (you need 4-6 to do anything). Since they got nerfed they've been pretty terrible. This is compounded on desert BL as the cannon placement in keeps and towers is absolute garbage.

[Shroud.2307]

@aspirine.6852 said:Anza is not worse off than Durios or Klovan, so I dont see how that should change.

Anz has 3 walls that can be destroyed, Durios and Klovan have 2.

The only spot Durios cannot defend against is catas/trebs built high on the hill in Ogre camp. Klovan can defend from all angles and can also get treb support from both keep and Jerrifer's. Anz can get treb + mortar support from keep and Mendon's as well, but only for the gate and close to the wall on Dredge camp side.

Anz can be hit from every side, sits in the bottom of a valley with hills on all sides of it so players can reach further on to the walls with AOE's making it more difficult to build defensive siege, it can be hit from the top floor of SMC which cannot be countered unless outer SMC is open, and it can be hit from the field on the west side of SMC in a spot that siege cannot hit (it can be countered if there are enough players to go outside to kill the catas, but it cannot be countered from inside the tower or if there aren't enough players)

Siege can be built in Anz but compared to most other towers it can be destroyed a lot more easily. You can even go up on the hill with the Vista to hit everything inside with a Ballista or Catapult.

The whole tower needs a rework. Making one of the walls indestructible would help a lot, but I think the easiest solution would just be to raise the entire tower so that it sits on higher ground rather than on lower ground like it is currently.

[Baldrick.8967]

@Yasai.3549 said:Not really QoL but a change which would be great is ig they can make Siege Disablers depend on the target being disabled for cooldown rather than the player Disabler cooldown.

So rather than a small group of defenders being unable to disable sieges due to massive wall of Anti projectiles protecting their Siege, each Siege equipment has an icd where it cannot be disabled again.

If yu manage to shield yur siege from being disabled, good, because the defenders just wasted precious supply.

If yu missed yur disabled, no worries either because as long as yu have supply yu are free to try again immediately.

I can see that being exploited to run down supplies very quickly in any structure as it's currently stupidly easy to anti-projectile...

[Yasai.3549]

@"Baldrick.8967" said:

I can see that being exploited to run down supplies very quickly in any structure as it's currently stupidly easy to anti-projectile...

There is nothing to be "exploited", but there will be cases where stupid players who don't know how anti projectile works, or even if people are looking to sabotage, they already do so by building 10 flame rams.

As yu said, it's already easy to anti projectile, but the cooldown prevents defenders who failed to disable on outer to be unable to attempt a disable on inner.

At least the defenders have a chance to pull the disable off instead of being essentially shafted when they fail the disable and twiddle their thumbs trying to, again, use siege on anti projectiles or waiting for reinforcements.

[Halbarz.3854]

@"SpellOfIniquity.1780" said:

@aspirine.6852 said:Anza is not worse off than Durios or Klovan, so I dont see how that should change.

Anz has 3 walls that can be destroyed, Durios and Klovan have 2.

The only spot Durios cannot defend against is catas/trebs built high on the hill in Ogre camp. Klovan can defend from all angles and can also get treb support from both keep and Jerrifer's. Anz can get treb + mortar support from keep and Mendon's as well, but only for the gate and close to the wall on Dredge camp side.

Anz can be hit from every side, sits in the bottom of a valley with hills on all sides of it so players can reach further on to the walls with AOE's making it more difficult to build defensive siege, it can be hit from the top floor of SMC which cannot be countered unless outer SMC is open, and it can be hit from the field on the west side of SMC in a spot that siege cannot hit

(it can be countered if there are enough players to go outside to kill the catas, but it cannot be countered from inside the tower or if there aren't enough players)

Siege can be built in Anz but compared to most other towers it can be destroyed a lot more easily. You can even go up on the hill with the Vista to hit everything inside with a Ballista or Catapult.

The whole tower needs a rework. Making one of the walls indestructible would help a lot, but I think the easiest solution would just be to raise the entire tower so that it sits on higher ground rather than on lower ground like it is currently.

Very true, I also tested the time it takes for dollies to travel (in EBG) from all the towers Anza is the tower that takes the longest to receive 1 dolyak, also the supply camp is further away from the keep than the other sup camps on blue or green so it is more difficult to defend.

[Aeolus.3615]

Just do a nerf into rubs to rez heal to become almost useless and rmeove rally from kill..,, with this downstate can stay since theres already classes that help resing players in downstate and finishiing them, if players dont want to use them that up with them....

Downstate should be the time window to use some skills and save your alies or finish your target,

[Archangel.3508]

Friendly fire!

[DemonSeed.3528]

@Yasai.3549 said:If yu missed yur disabled, no worries either because as long as yu have supply yu are free to try again immediately.Speaking of disablers, I kinda want some kinda title or achievement for certain number of successful disables. I seen people do some amazing disables, and are really good at it.

[Kylden Ar.3724]

Collision Detection so that tanks can actually hold the line.

Either gib Alliances or stop lying to us that it's still on the table.

[DemonSeed.3528]

Not a QOL, but when will WvW get their own aura infusion? I would like to see one like when lord is on RI and dyeable. That blue flame from head to toe looks crazy.

[Jilora.9524]

Except for owner of siege allow a player fully specced in siege to be able to bump a non-specced player off. Watching 2 percent per hit when others can do 4 percent wastes time

[archmagus.7249]

-No downstate-Add glider skills like bloodstone fen so we can do bombing runs on enemy players, or heal allies.-balli shots at flying targets ground them and prevent them from gliding for 3s, and hitting mounts dismounts them and prevents them from mounting for 5s. Also puts them in combat.-skills which block or reflect projectiles also block or reflect projectiles from seige.-add +10% wxp to the badges of honor and make them level 80 food. Increase the price to 10 badges.

[Kylden Ar.3724]

What are updates for WvW?

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

@"Halbarz.3854" said:Title says it all:

For me it would be:

• Anza wall facing the dredge can no longer be destroyed (Anza is the most useless tower on the map currently)
• Arrow carts and Bali's should get a perk that they ignore all skills that reflect or neutralize projectiles. + make both siege weapons more durable
• No downstate - should be permanent
• AoE's should not be able to cover the whole wall, make AoE's either smaller, or make walls a bit higher to combat this.

I am curious to see what the more seasoned WvW players would like to see :)

edit: updated title :P added smaller*

-i don't care about anza, its the same as all the towers. every single of the "far" towers on EBG can be hit be safe place SM© trebs... which makes these outer towers barely defendable in many cases.

-just no. siege is strong enough yet. siege dps did not get nerfed, while literally everything else did get nerfed.

-i don't care about downstate, i think in the end it doesn't matter, only fights get faster with it, which is kinda fine for me, but it works now as well.

-u have to limit freecasting from walls then as well. i don't think that AoEs should get smaller fields, otherwise it encourages people to play the bad roaming sets even more than this yet happens.

@Kylden Ar.3724 said:What are updates for WvW?he means acutal updates. u know, the stuff that happens once a year, like christmas.

---

@ OP / ontopic

i'd like:

• EotM update
• new stuff to spend WxP levels on (i made like 800 ranks in 4 months lately and ur maxed out currently at 12xx or so)
• terrain updates, many terrains are not allowing proper movement, or u get stuck on it. on every border.
• avoid possiblity to get stuck inside walls just bc someone repairs it
• remove 80% of the pointless red or yellow hostility mode NPCs of all maps; they stuck u in battle, takes your aim, mess up your stealth, can steal target cap dmg, avoids mounting up etc. removing most and making bunch of them green would be fine as well. just exclude them of battle.( i would be okay with some strong ones, those could really be crossing camps randomly as well, like the big blue astral tree thingy @ EBG, or the boss dragon mob @ RBL... but the small useless NPCs that are just "decoration" and literally on every other corner are annoying)
• buff all lords on the two Alpine borders and on EBG
• new siege and tactics

... all the above are simple "quality of life" updates that should have happened one ice age earlier!

[archmagus.7249]

@Kylden Ar.3724 said:What are updates for WvW?

We should give this guy a mic and put him on a stage with a spot light on him. He's a regular stand up comedian.

[Solanum.6983]

Rewards being on par with other game modes.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

no trebs, press button kill wall with zero interaction such skill much wow

[Archangel.3508]

@Kylden Ar.3724 said:What are updates for WvW?

It's when Arenanet takes the Borderlands that everyone likes (the regular winter one) and pulls it entirely dumping three rounds of the truly awful Desert Borderlands on us instead. It ensures that all players migrate to EBG and only tryhards remain in the BLs

[anduriell.6280]

• remove tactics banners from the game
• make the 50 target cap for arrow carts much smaller. once you reduce the target cap reduce it again.
• limit the amount of defensive siege you can build in a building to a much smaller number.
• increase the mount speed, remove the evades.
• remove the damage from the mount attack and instead give 1s evade.
• increase the damage done to gates with the mount skill#4
• remove damage from CC attacks from tactics or lords.
• Show the camp as contested as soon as an enemy enters the area.
• make AC carts so they can only be built as defensive tool withing structures.
• increase the cap time of structures. increase a very small amount by player in the circle but still increase the time needed to cap a target.
• establish different cap times for different structures from camps as the fastest to garrisons as the slowest.
• remove SM in EB and create three towers or garrisons in the middle.
• make dessert map much smaller, reduce the empty spaces.

I'm pretty sure there is more but this all I got right now,

[Korgov.7645]

Repeatable currency only reward track.

That would do away inventory micromanagement and clean up the user interface. It is a drag opening those boxes, some containing even more boxes, ultimately containing meaningless items that end up being salvaged or sold to get to the currency. Those dancing boxes and popups in the UI are pointless - not even PvE players would be excited about them.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

The idea of players being sorted by server vs. server needs to be entirely removed. Even the alliance system should be removed, scrap it.

WvW should work like EOTM where players from all servers, regardless of what server, are queued into wvw depending on some kind of criteria "whatever that ends up being" so that we can fill population to the brim again, for everyone. If there is a map queue then there is a map queue, deal with it. I'd rather wait awhile while I ran a dungeon or something, to be able to get into a completely full map, than to load into maps that had only 5 or 6 guys running around on each server.

The criteria for who goes where, could be somewhat server based let's say. So that way we have a week or something to play with the same people and organize a bit. But I cannot stress enough that every server should be being crammed someone into the same mists map so that EVERYONE is playing in the same 3 red/blue/green teams. We just need highly & densely populated maps again.

^ This would be the healthiest possible thing for wvw right now.

[subversiontwo.7501]

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:WvW should work like EOTM where players from all servers, regardless of what server, are queued into wvw depending on some kind of criteria "whatever that ends up being" so that we can fill population to the brim again, for everyone. If there is a map queue then there is a map queue, deal with it. I'd rather wait awhile while I ran a dungeon or something, to be able to get into a completely full map, than to load into maps that had only 5 or 6 guys running around on each server.

I've spoken about this at length before: Once they have Alliances in place, have fixed scoring (eg., with outnumbered freezing maps) and done away with the border system in favour of a WoT-style map carousel with variations of the triangular (corner-middle) EBG map... (or EotM but landmass and no fluff)

If that is done

Then they can choose to go the Battlegroup system they have in place in order to preserve the the perception of "servers" and "ladder". However, they could then also easily put all of those concepts onto an EotM system with only 3 colors and overflow generation, so groups (who are in a guild, apart of an alliance) could easily pick different overflows throughout a matchup to vary their fights and pull score to their color (and/or their alliance, for future matchup/coloring purposes, if something like that was implemented). There are multiple ways iteration on these three systems could take when fixed.

The biggest indirect upside of that is that they can also do away with the queue system. It doesn't need queues since score is fixed. You could just have a multitude of overflows that either attribute score or not, based on who decides to port onto that flow, like any PvE taxi.

If they run into problems

If programming for battlegroups is an issue or if the playerbase is currently too small to solidly fill out enough alliances and battlegroups, they could easily put the concept of a ladder on ice and just go with colors and the code for the guild changes. They could slap the EBG map onto the EotM system, let players choose a WvW guild and use the guilds as shuffle pieces for the colors - if they then want to seed strong guilds over different colors they could add a guild score component later on, if they want a ladder they could make a guild ladder later on or if they want battlegroups they could add that later on.

Fundaments, steps, priorities, right? Even the ongoing Alliance project is modular in that sense, different parts of the system are more or less important (eg., the guild portion is more important than the battlegroup portion) and could be shipped one by one in a priority if they had something to thread it onto whether that is servers or colors or w/e. It could easily start off as a 100% dice roll shuffle and be iterated upon. The more strapped for resources they are, the more something like that would make sense.

For example: They could probably do that step by step and get step 1 done in a week's work. Step 1 could just be to skin EBG's map onto EotM, remove SMC in favour of a big field with the lord and just see if people gravitate towards the map for different kinds of content (GvG, BvB etc.,) and if it depopulates the standard mode and tickles those who prefer PPT that isn't necessarily a bad thing as you can just shift the scoring components over as the next step. That really is the simple piece-by-piece approach that was promised in 2016.

The more I think about it the more it itches me that it just is not being done, or has not been done already. Even if it is ad hoc and a compromise and even if you have a poor track record with that (links, auto upgrades etc.). The risk of it hurting something isn't that big and as long as you iterate things can be rolled back. Even the history suggests that the ad hoc approach wasn't the problem and rather the lack of iteration. Links, for example, have done what they were meant to do, now they're just doing things that they were never meant to do or be around to be able to do. Trevor is right here, just use the EotM system as live proto and show something, especially if there are issues with delivery. Even with EotM itself the main issue was always the map, not the mode.

Scratching, tech, legacy code and futures

That's the beauty of fixing those three things: That really does lay the foundation for doing other modular things later on, at least on a design level. What they can do with the noodles in the code is another question. However, if the code is such an issue, they have a solid design right there and they could probably recode such a system from the ground up in less time than they have wasted on different population balance projects so far.

The constant reminder: DaoC was made by 25 people in 18 months, the entire game. The whole "this is difficult and will take time" does not fly. It may be true from a lone employee's or understaffed team's perspective, but not from a credible and reputable company. If the code is in the way, scratch the code. The design is here, it is solid and for a company building those systems should, looking at what they are at their core, not be difficult.

Either way, so many of these needed changes already have tech developed. I've said that so many times as well by now. The tech is here already, they're not just using their own tech in a smart way to render quality results. EBG is here, outnumbered is here, megaservers are here, the color system is here, or alternatively, the ladder system is here etc.

That itself is pretty funny looking at all these competitors that has been in alpha and beta for years. All of them are trying to bite off more than they can chew and try to add another dimension to the RvR concept while, arguably, GW2 has proven that a very meat-and-potatoes 100v100v100 design remains very solid and feels very "massive" still in 2020. The game is pretty lucky that no competitor seems to have figured that out and slapped their prototype onto any such basic maps, even as a side-game. The prototypes are far off along to showcase 3RvR and GvG on placeholder maps.

So, to end on a summative note that is a bit more on-topic in general: I pretty much agree with Kylden. The "small" update I want is delivery on those 3 systems fixes. They are relatively small for a 150-man company even if they are relatively large for a lone Ray with the morale support of Cal and Ben or even SCW if he's still around in some capacity. Nothing else matters until they can land because they are the only things that will unlock future possible changes that can make a change and there is no point polishing a turd. If the code is pasta, rebuild the sandbox and iterate. If it works but the moduling is daunting, prioritize and piecemeal, thread onto existing tech and iterate. Use existing tech in the design, subvert.