Jump to content
  • Sign Up

10 reasons to remove desert map


Riba.3271

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's Almost like ANET gave us a vote on it and we chose to remove the map and they gave this. It's almost like ANET asked the community to vote on the length of the linking and we voted on 1 month and they gave us 2. It's almost Like ANET acts like they care but REALLY DON"T CARE. Linking has been in BETA since it was put in but made them money with the bandwagon so they left it. Give them an option to remove it and make money... they may do it. Just Like adding mounts to WvW... something none of the regular wvw'ers cared about but anet put to make money and milk the player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Sylvyn.4750" said:And for reference, here are the DBL voting results...relying on Reddit posts quoting the original forum posts because the forum posts no longer exist: https://reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/4p13ub/desert_borderlands_will_stay/The forums still exist.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Poll-14-June-Desert-Borderlands-Closed/page/4#post6212591

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"Sylvyn.4750" said:And for reference, here are the DBL voting results...relying on Reddit posts quoting the original forum posts because the forum posts no longer exist:
The forums still exist.

Aha! Thanks...neither my google or forum search on it was coming up with any results other than the Reddit posts, and then the forum links in Reddit were broken, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Alpine maps are among the ugliest and most boring and stale maps in the entire game.I'd rather have 3 edge of the mist maps or 3 Desert Borderlands maps than have any duplicates of the Alpine maps.The Desert Borderlands is.. or more accurately was a breath of fresh air when it was released, regardless of it's issues i'm glad it's here and will gladly defend it's existence.

WvW already suffers from an extreme case of tedium and fatigue.. the last thing it needs is less unique maps, if anything it needs more of them.

But here's a simple suggestion, if you don't like the map, don't play on it.. it's that easy and plenty of people do that already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Teratus.2859" said:But here's a simple suggestion, if you don't like the map, don't play on it.. it's that easy and plenty of people do that already.

It is still 1 map less to play. Lets say there would be only 1 map to choose from compared to 3 at the moment, it would be much worse. So the issue of its existance isn't solved by simply "don't play it". You say 3 maps are plenty to choose from? Well frankly it isn't as desert map owner might be the server that can provide you fights in current timezone. 99% of the time if you go to bait them to fight on desert map, they either camp the lord rooms with the overpowered CC lords (sometimes unintentionally because running from spawn is about time it takes to get to lord room from breaching outer and inner walls), don't scout you at all before you manage to flip whole map or don't show up at all cuz they hate the map.

If they really want to keep it, what they should do is redesign desert map as neutral map then throw it alongside EB. And give everyone alpine borderlands as home map. Then you have 5 maps. Alpine/EB likers have 4 to choose from again. Mapcaps will be less meaning less lag and 60 man laggy blob 1 shot fiesta terrible fights won't occur. People can cap things to build numbers easier because its little bit harder to stay active on 5 maps, so less objective camping. And 80% of pop can still dislike desert map or its activity and never go there again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Threather.9354 said:

@"Teratus.2859" said:But here's a simple suggestion, if you don't like the map, don't play on it.. it's that easy and plenty of people do that already.

It is still 1 map less to play. Lets say there would be only 1 map to choose from compared to 3 at the moment, it would be much worse. So the issue of its existance isn't solved by simply "don't play it". You say 3 maps are plenty to choose from? Well frankly it isn't as desert map owner might be the server that can provide you fights in current timezone. 99% of the time if you go to bait them to fight on desert map, they either camp the lord rooms with the overpowered CC lords (sometimes unintentionally because running from spawn is about time it takes to get to lord room from breaching outer and inner walls), don't scout you at all before you manage to flip whole map or don't show up at all cuz they hate the map.

If they really want to keep it, what they should do is redesign desert map as neutral map then throw it alongside EB. And give everyone alpine borderlands as home map. Then you have 5 maps. Alpine/EB likers have 4 to choose from again. Mapcaps will be less meaning less lag and 60 man laggy blob 1 shot fiesta terrible fights won't occur. People can cap things to build numbers easier because its little bit harder to stay active on 5 maps, so less objective camping. And 80% of pop can still dislike desert map or its activity and never go there again.

Popularity of WvW goes against that, there's just not enough people playing most of the time to justify the server requirements for a 5th map, hell some could argue there isn't enough to justify 4..Or even 3 if you want to cut the dupe Alpine.I'm not going to claim Desert is perfect or anything though, it certainly has issues like any other map but at least it's different from the bland and boring Alpine maps.

You'll never get rid of the blob mentality in WvW though, that's never going away because people like it and it's easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Threather.9354" said:If they really want to keep it, what they should do is redesign desert map as neutral map then throw it alongside EB.Mother: "I want an abortion!"Doctor: "Uhm... You're not pregnant?"Mother: "My son is 6 years old but I want an abortion!!!"

"If they want to keep it" isnt really a thing 6 years down the line and multiple fixed versions later that barely resemble original DBL. Whether they should have done so from the start and kept even 3-ways - or not done it at all, just remade ABL into desert version to keep borders uniform - is another argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sviel.7493 said:How are you going to accuse me of using selective stats?

Actually, nvm, this is clearly pointless...I don't know why I keep doing this to myself, lol.

gotta say, i also avoid desert border when we have no people overall to fill the maps. if its HBL, obviously playing there... it's still the place where the most ganks happen, aside from EBG maybe since eb attracts noobies like light pulls moths.

Desolation: 0,99 K/D (23.174/23.395, 17% PPK) | 0,92 K/D (9.450/10.305, 16% PPK) @EBG | 1,05 K/D (7.504/7.154, 14% PPK) @GBL | 1,19 K/D (4.524/3.799, 27% PPK) @BBL | 0,79 K/D (1.696/2.137, 15% PPK) @RBL

stats from gw2mists site.

this here was our activity count , we have overall ~7k serverdeaths less than both other servers in our matchup. that does indeed prove size of the server. smallest server just won't go to red border, it's too big and unhandy to walk around.

but desert would really need a re-design. flattening out terrain, moving spawn for red color into the mid etc.

the way its now it is objectively not good. many people get even lost there after years (oddly, but i kinda understand that). i'd prefer to have the EotM as regular map over desert border, because it has way less moving space. red border could work better if it was WAY smaller than all other maps.

the distances there really kill any sense in defending stuff, hence why only the high populated server does defend it longterm effectively.

and that's not argumentable from a roamers perspective. u guys have barely effect on the capture game on anything above a tower (unless it's not defended at all, yeah. i took an air keep yet with 2 others and also saw other tiny groups doing that. pvE in Wvw is just absurdly easy - obviously since it has never been adapted to the broken elite specs, but was built for the core class power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"kamikharzeeh.8016"

There are definitely some servers where the organized core does not run RBL, and also some guilds that won't run it scattered on random servers. That's why I prefer to look at multiple tiers at once: I want to see if the map itself leads to activity differences rather than if players avoiding the map does so. If the map changes activity, that could be a good or bad thing depending on how it does it. If players boycott a map, that doesn't tell me anything about the map itself. Still, if players dislike a map in large numbers, it's worth checking out why.

To that end, I've already measured how long it takes to run from one objective to another in both ABL and DBL*. Most of the times are very similar, though running from home spawn or Middle Keep to the Side Keeps is a bit longer on DBL. However, since the side keeps have no double siege spots, it takes longer to break in as well. There is also much more opportunity for scouts to delay assaults. Meanwhile, running from the Northern towers to their respective camps is actually shorter on DBL with no cliffs to carefully jump down like on Alpine. The short version is that it isn't objectively harder to defend stuff on Desert, nor is it harder to reach places nor does it take longer across the board. I think that's why we don't see significant differences in map activity when players actually play all of the maps.

If people are still getting lost despite roads between objectives being clearly marked...I don't think that's the map's fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@God.2708 said:There are two flaws with desert BL[..]

  1. The lords incorporate to many uncounterable/obnoxious PvE elements. A single strong element that defenders might take advantage of is fine (Stonemists Lord with his multiple AoE KDs, Alpine Keep lords and their single huge AoE burst), but the desert BL lords, especially keeps, are a constant string of problematic attacks and it makes it frustrating for an attacker to fight around.

I disagree completely.

It's the Lord CC that makes fighting in the Lord room such a rewarding last-stand experience.Small groups (but not too much smaller) finally have a CHANCE against larger ones (but not too much larger). The Lord's CC makes a world of difference and if I had to make one WvW improvement it would be to put CC on Alpine and EB Lords.

@God.2708 said:

  1. The two northern towers are 'lonely' and should be moved close enough that if an enemy takes them they can impact stoic rampart (objective hopping).Indeed, the remote nature of these towers lends one to feeling a lack of purpose when defending/capturing them. Why bother? It feels like a routine to complete with your karma train rather than something with any strategic elements.

@God.2708 said:Most other flaws people find with the maps are simply an element of the lack of population and interest in PPT scoring mattering. The original design was to give small parties a better edge when trying to havoc around a single large zerg, and it does actually do that. The motivation for trying to 'play' the map as is intended though isn't there. And, I don't think the map should be dumped because of problems that are not actually with the map.

I feel like the map could certainly do with something more interesting in it. It is huge and intimidating and it's got some very fun elements, but the Stoic Rampart needs an invulnerable wall so the enemy can't go through two walls with one set of catapults (same on hills and bay on alpine map).

The developers have tweaked the shrine bonuses many times but they could do to address things such as;

  • the travel powers are nearly impossible to get and maintain
  • nobody uses the fire portals because they're not reliably available

Also, the little step (mini jumping puzzle) on your way from Stoic to Air keep could do to be a ramp instead.

These are but few examples - so the map is great but needs lots of tweaking. It's wrong to say there are only two problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sviel.7493 said:@"kamikharzeeh.8016"

There are definitely some servers where the organized core does not run RBL, and also some guilds that won't run it scattered on random servers. That's why I prefer to look at multiple tiers at once: I want to see if the map itself leads to activity differences rather than if players avoiding the map does so. If the map changes activity, that could be a good or bad thing depending on how it does it. If players boycott a map, that doesn't tell me anything about the map itself. Still, if players dislike a map in large numbers, it's worth checking out why.

To that end, I've already measured how long it takes to run from one objective to another in both ABL and DBL*. Most of the times are very similar, though running from home spawn or Middle Keep to the Side Keeps is a bit longer on DBL. However, since the side keeps have no double siege spots, it takes longer to break in as well. There is also much more opportunity for scouts to delay assaults. Meanwhile, running from the Northern towers to their respective camps is actually shorter on DBL with no cliffs to carefully jump down like on Alpine. The short version is that it isn't objectively harder to defend stuff on Desert, nor is it harder to reach places nor does it take longer across the board. I think that's why we don't see significant differences in map activity when players actually play all of the maps.

If people are still getting lost despite roads between objectives being clearly marked...I don't think that's the map's fault.

However, the intra-tower and intra-keep travel times in DBL are larger, which does make an impact on defense. If you're on either the north or south wall defending against an attack, you can't even see if another group is hitting the opposite wall. Both northern towers and the keeps have large central structures/mounds that hinder mobility and line of sight between walls. It's like they built DBL keeps and towers expecting a much larger influx of WvW players, as you would need multiple guards standing post to have eyes in every direction, where one would suffice on ABL. They could also tone down the rocks and low shrubs that I often seem to get hung up on in mid-fight..:P Other than that, I think DBL is worth keeping...good for roaming, and I do enjoy the diversity in terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sylvyn.4750 said:

However, the intra-tower and intra-keep travel times in DBL are larger, which does make an impact on defense. If you're on either the north or south wall defending against an attack, you can't even see if another group is hitting the opposite wall. Both northern towers and the keeps have large central structures/mounds that hinder mobility and line of sight between walls. It's like they built DBL keeps and towers expecting a much larger influx of WvW players, as you would need multiple guards standing post to have eyes in every direction, where one would suffice on ABL. They could also tone down the rocks and low shrubs that I often seem to get hung up on in mid-fight..:P Other than that, I think DBL is worth keeping...good for roaming, and I do enjoy the diversity in terrain.

I also measured these, but I don't think I ever graphed them. If I recall, it takes ~20-30s to check every entry point in both Fire and Air on DBL whereas on Alpine you can basically stand in one spot and see everything. For towers, while there is more space, you're still able to check every entry point by spinning in a circle.

The impact this has on defense is probably offset by the opportunity this gives to actually stage a defense. It is because of this larger size that it is not possible to siege outer and inner keeps in one go. It also allows for covert anti-siege plays (like overhang ballistae at Fire). That said, I don't think this was the point of the change. Rather, the lower visibility makes it much easier for havoc or small-teams to harass and whittle down a keep or build siege that requires a re-supply run. On Alpine, a catapult set up on Bay is visible from half the map away. It must also be built in high-traffic areas and is instantly revealed to anyone inside the keep as soon as you hit once. This makes it nearly impossible to harass. Hills has much the same problem, though perhaps even worse as there are so few places a catapult can hit from. Anyone online, regardless of whether they have any inclination to scout, will spot you. Meanwhile, on DBL, both Fire and Air have several options where you can build siege away from high traffic areas and actually deal meaningful damage if no one actually checks for you. Since the advantage is in detection time, it helps smaller groups much more than larger groups as they are still easy to detect due to their size.

In short, intra-keep times do make a difference in how defense works against nimble groups, but there's not much difference against zergs. The biggest change is that scouts have to move around in the keep instead of standing in one place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good points...I just hate it when you're focused on defending one wall against blue team and green team is on another wall out of sight and you don't know it until they're spilling into the keep behind you...at least Fire only has one inner wall to guard if two teams break in through outer, but Air still has two approaches on inner. Doesn't happen often, but it happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sylvyn.4750 said:Good points...I just hate it when you're focused on defending one wall against blue team and green team is on another wall out of sight and you don't know it until they're spilling into the keep behind you...at least Fire only has one inner wall to guard if two teams break in through outer, but Air still has two approaches on inner. Doesn't happen often, but it happens.

I also hate that--got a knot in my stomach just reading about it. I mean, I like that it's possible for that to happen but I hate when it happens to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

@Garrus.7403 said:

@Sylvyn.4750 said:Just remember that we voted on the official Anet poll on this topic several years back and it was made clear that if DBL was voted out of the rotation entirely, Anet would not put any resources to making new WvW maps in the future, so we voted to keep DBL in the rotation, and for some it was a bitter pill, but they swallowed it to have any hope at all for new maps in WvW. However, we're still waiting for those resources to come to fruition as we still haven't seen a new map, but perhaps it is just taking a backseat to class balancing and server/alliance restructuring.

Always nice to have a gun pointed towards your head in a discussion.

ROFL!Don't be silly - wvw does not exist, it will not even get a mention in next expansion pack and they certainly will not do anything that thye have promised, balancing?? They were going to do it every few weeks, think they said that about a year ago? They would be shooting themselves in the head to make alliances about guilds - they need gem cash!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's far too big with too many empty areas of zero utility. Meaning zero point in going there. The "fast travel" pads and whatnot are just an admission the map was badly designed for wvw, or more likely, was never really designed for wvw but was a left over map from PvE shoe horned into wvw.

The terrain means traversal is a real annoyance - and gets in the way of the entire point of wvw. That's all there really is to say about it. Without mounts you'd be running for 3-4 mins just to get to an enemy when they were spotted by a guard point in the south of the map. Genius.

Are they passing up top or down below (when searching for a player) - who knows, and the distance to traverse from one to other means... they've long gone.

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...