How to really fix WvW through game design - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

How to really fix WvW through game design

13>

Comments

  • primatos.5413primatos.5413 Member ✭✭✭

    @ProverbsofHell.2307 said:

    @primatos.5413 said:

    @Sovereign.1093 said:
    just kills. base it on kills. ppt and kills.

    ppt for the land held.

    ppk for the kills of players.

    If so then please somehow scale ppk by numbers of players involved in a kill or idk the ppt based points ? High ppt leads to low ppk ... but pls don´t feed the gankers anymore always trying to chase some down bcz of precious ppk no matter if they do it 5 on 1 .. even @ most 1on1 stomping already is meta where once was to let the defeated opponent rezz up and start again .. these days lot of players don´t even know there once was a fair play behaviour...
    And offtime capping still is an issue .. it shouldn´t be in an competitive gamemode .. kicking the ball in an empty goal and without other players isn´t really competitive

    Edit says: Maybe it´s time for some new WvW polls -real ones this time not reduced to a bunch of needless kitten choices- sorry that i have to say this but the last WvW polls made by anet felt like this to me .. as none of them were in touch with what was really needed

    Seems like a bad reason not to have it. People already gank. Another kill for Ultimate Dominator or whatever. Just pick a better route to avoid people.

    And imo nightcap is no problem. Some people can only play then, don't they deserve the same chance to play?

    Not talking about punishing anyone but creating more equally chances for everyone but i see .. everytime someone brings up what i said about offtime capping -means times when there is little to none players available @ some servers- this accusation is made .. i don´t really understand why to be honest .. whats the challenge in winning matchups by training empty maps and capping everything imo it could lead to more exciting, healthy, fun gameplay ..at least for the ones which are not interested in kicking balls in empty goals :)

  • Feanor.2358Feanor.2358 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Naix.8156 said:

    @Feanor.2358 said:

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    • (Once suggested in the past) Enforce a 2v1 against a winning server by making the two other servers temporary allies.

    There's no need for that, because it usually happens naturally and is a kind of auto-balance. And even better, leaving it to happen naturally also leaves the element of uncertainty. You never know when your supposed "allies" will turn on you.

    Hey, and welcome to Guild Wars 2. You're obviously very new here and I can see how you'd assume that would be the flow of gameplay: for the two trailing servers to gang up on the winning server in a match. Unfortunately, that is extremely rare for the gameplay to progress in this way. What happens is that it's easier to go after the other losing server as their objectives will be less likely to be upgraded, sieged and defended. It's also the a sort of 'prisoners dilemma' situation in that if I'm one of the trailing servers in a match and I commit to hitting the winning server I've opened exposed myself to having you (the other trailing server) attack my objectives while I'm committed elsewhere.

    Correct, I'm very new, only rank ~580.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 10, 2018

    I still believe blowing up, eliminating servers and adapt wvw fractions related designs with inactive pruning are the fundamental way to go.

    But, I guess it might be too hard for some people to accept so I will keep doing my day trading and watch my money goes up while watching the wvw burns instead of giving free solid suggestions. at least i get rewarded big time for correct judgement in trading.

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • Chaba.5410Chaba.5410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Naix.8156 said:

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Introducing annoying mechanics certainly won’t improve the current state of wvw.

    There are annoying mechanics then there are negative feedback mechanics. Annoying mechanics are disincentives that are applied to everyone regardless of their winning status. Negative mechanics, on the other hand, help control the game flow not necessarily through disincentives but through handicaps against the leader. The current state of WvW is a direct result of positive feedback mechanics that reward the leader. Players ask constantly, "What is the point?". What we have is a direct result of too much positive feedback.

    I'm curious, could you define specifically what the positive feedback loop is in WvW?

    Population size differences is the biggest one. Then there's the extra PPT for having upgraded objects, something a larger server will have more of. Tactivators play into increasing the balance of defense over offense. These mechanics are available to everyone but synergize best with the server that has the larger population. WvW is purely a numbers game with no interesting mechanics that upset this synergy.

    If you look back at the original design of WvW, the non-randomized glicko matchmaking was a type of negative feedback that required a leading server to work harder in order to increase their rank and move up a tier because glicko rating increases require performance above expectations. We lost that along the way.

    Servers used to be assigned a color based on their position in the matchup with the weakest server assigned Red as it has a slight terrain advantage in EBG. Is this what you are referring to? Glicko matchmaking or not isn't a negative feedback loop - its matchmaking which exists outside the realm of the game mechanics. An example of a negative feedback loop would be if your server's movement speed increased the further you were behind in score. This is something that is related to the game mechanics and operates regardless of external factors like matchmaking.

    What? Yes, the original system assigned tier and color based on rank. Rank was sorted by raw glicko rating. To increase glicko rating (and thus rank), you have to perform against an opponent better than the system expects you to. There's a post somewhere in the old forum archive detailing the glicko implementation in WvW with an image that shows how the system tended to keep three servers in a tier close in rating, making it more difficult to move. So to move up a tier, say from rank 4 to rank 3, required "extra effort" (really it was buying more players), which is why I said that was a type of negative feedback loop. I see what you are saying about that being external since it wasn't a mechanic directly in a match, yet simply winning a match didn't necessarily cause a change in rank.

    With 1u1d matchmaking, the system no longer has that obscure external obstacle for changing rank, so now is the opportunity to create negative feedback loops internal to a match that don't encourage buying more players.

    BTW, I like your suggestion of movement speed.

  • Dezarys.1372Dezarys.1372 Member ✭✭
    edited February 7, 2018

    I didn't read everything in the thread but I had a few ideas in mind that could potentially be re-invigorating for WvW:

    1. Introduce Guards for Hire Per Objectives

      • Allow players to purchase timed Guards that will assist in defending Keeps, Towers, Camps, etc. These Guards should patrol and be very high level scaling upon the encounter. Some Guards can be stationary and play a specific role such as AoE healing, AoE damage, AoE CC, etc.
    2. Purchasable Mercenaries

      • Mercenaries should be available for hire and should be allowed to follow you on the map as 'Body Guards' or commanded to assist in defending an objective for a set time.
    3. ELIMINATE MULTI-SERVER

      • It would be nice if they could adopt the 3 way world war. Combine the maps all together (like in DAoC) and create an underground labyrinth for players to travel through. If they rework the system to create one giant map.
    4. INTRODUCE PvE TO WvW

      • We all know the PvE base is heavy. If they introduce PvE Bosses, Events, etc. that will yield GREAT benefits to players, this will encourage PvErs to get together for said objectives. By doing so, more people will come into WvW and will bring more action. To avoid 'farming' the PvErs, controlled objectives should grant great benefits to the server that controls the land for that event.
    5. PvE World Boss Completion (Pair with 4)

      • When players slay a boss or world boss, the boss should be compelled to assist their server attacking enemy objectives occasionally or defending objectives for the server. Imagine having to defend your keep against a dragon's siege! That or in the midst of sieging an enemy keep, a Giant swiftly leaps over the walls and charges through your team knocking them back creating a chaotic scene.

    These are but a few ideas I have in mind. I've been looking for a new MMO to take my Guild to as we are growing tiresome of GW2. However, we still continue to play after 5-6 years because we care for it and want it to move forward and succeed. WvW is what we truly live and die for in this game. I hope that they will tend to it and make it even better for the future.

    EDIT: I inserted an image of the map idea. Obv the maps would be connected some way as I don't foresee or recommend water travel in this game.

    https://imgur.com/a/3WIfW

  • the enforced 2v1 and the outnumbered buff I can get behind, but the first two will never fly.

    Te lazla otstra.
    nerf list

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