Decrease player damage and health by 50% if 15 or more players in 3600 radius — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Decrease player damage and health by 50% if 15 or more players in 3600 radius

Ruufio.1496Ruufio.1496 Member ✭✭✭

Yeah this is a serious post. It disgusts me to the core seeing entire map blobs stacked with literally every single player on the map in that blob. That is not fun gameplay at all. Anyone who knows what they're talking about knows that fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less.

Discourage the disgusting megablob playstyle that kills the gamemode by making it impossible to megazerg by halving all of those player' health and damage. Then WvW can be fun again.

Comments

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Rather reduce maximum amount of players on any map by at least 20 and potentially add in another borderland to guarantee enough space for those who would fill up the other maps usually.

    Bite me.

  • Liah.8324Liah.8324 Member ✭✭
    edited March 31, 2019

    I gotta admit, I'm with Ruuf. It's a little tiresome....

    Yank out book 3, throw out resistance, put up stab....and then have a beer, and wait 20 minutes for the core 2 duo servers to try and figure out what's happening.

    Total yawner. Though earlier this week I found out that reset night are better with Just Cause 3 on one screen, GW2 in the middle, and Netflix on the other. It's way more tolerable if you fill in the long, repetitious gaps in gameplay with super-important stuff like Doomsday Preppers and rocket launchers.

    F---, I'm awful at this game.

  • Loading.4503Loading.4503 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ansau.7326 said:
    Wut? This is a mmorpg and a rvr style mode, we are here to play with many other people against many other people, not running from our allies to single fight each enemy.

    WORLD v w, REALM v r, when u say it that way it sounds massive, yet all the action mainly happens in one tiny spot in a giant map...

  • Tiny Doom.4380Tiny Doom.4380 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ruufio.1496 said:

    Anyone who knows what they're talking about knows that fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less.

    Tell that to CCP as they work on getting 10,000 players into simultaneous combat, never mind the 4000 plus they already managed in EVE. Or CSE as they work towards 4000 player battles in Camelot Unchained. Or Intrepid, ditto, for Ashes of Creation. Fifteen players a side, wave of the future. Right.

  • MUDse.7623MUDse.7623 Member ✭✭✭✭

    population imbalance => no reward/reason for winning => no reason to play in smaller groups all over the map.
    adding such a drastic stat change at a specific number of players is just a bandaid and a bad one at that, suggest it at least to be scaling a bit slower.

  • spectrito.8513spectrito.8513 Member ✭✭✭

    I sincerely dont understand why people like to play at 15 fps on minimum settings with skill lag.

  • Liah.8324Liah.8324 Member ✭✭

    @ Loading.
    Yup. Gameplay happens at a tiny spot on one map.....which is mental, considering what it could be.

    A debuff would force all the insanely-huge groups into smaller forces, which inevitably are responsible for themselves, and nothing else. Easily met, and easily countered by a equal-ish force of the opposing side. EVERYONE would have to be incredibly mobile - so the overall pace of the game increases...... and while big guilds could simply split into two or three zergs and a havoc team, smaller sources could group to the maximum, and possibly stand on even ground against them - regardless of map queue.

    Less lag and BS = more intriguing, longer-lasting battles that are representative of skill, instead of pure numbers (or willingness to use 3rd party auto-cast). I'll be honest here; I don't mind getting the kitten kicked out of me, if I f--- up during a fight. My bad. But it's been a long time since I had a REALLY epic battle in group form, where the field was mostly even, and we just went back-and-forth fifteen times. That's the kind of stuff that gets the ol' ticker pumpin - not "oh look, I'm standing beside 75 necros--andnowdead".

    So yeah, maybe I'm mad that condi vs. resist is a laughable disaster of 'balance' .......but my (note <- MY) main problem is being in a purely wvw guild that loves fighting - yet runs only 15-20, and consistently beats their head against the wall of 60+ groups in T1.....I mentioned the head vs. wall thing.....right?

    F---, I'm awful at this game.

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭

    @Ruufio.1496 said:
    Yeah this is a serious post. It disgusts me to the core seeing entire map blobs stacked with literally every single player on the map in that blob. That is not fun gameplay at all. Anyone who knows what they're talking about knows that fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less.

    Discourage the disgusting megablob playstyle that kills the gamemode by making it impossible to megazerg by halving all of those player' health and damage. Then WvW can be fun again.

    No Ruufio, what we need is to remove the ability to ress other downed players by pressing F while in combat. If we were to heal 0 points to downed players the blob problem would not be such. And the best thing no other traits/skills would need to be adjusted, they should be able to ress other player like until now.

    Mounts has solved to some degree with the instastomp, but still is a problem as you are not mounted while fighting.

    Downstate has to be nerfed, once the players realize the can not keep going full zerker because they die they will bunker up a bit. Which means more defensive traits and skills :

    • to not die
    • to be able to ressurrect other downed player in combat.

    We had the same issues before with the problem of players ressing defeated (fully dead) colleages in combat. Anet fix didn't go all the way in at the time. Well no down weeked proved the gamemode can be thrilling again, the damage is there we need now to create the need to bunker up a bit.

  • StrawHat.2639StrawHat.2639 Member ✭✭✭

    @Hoon.1524 said:
    Why do most (if not all) the complaining threads about wvw and zerg fights end up being posted by people with a ranger forum icon... :thinking:

    FYI his main is an engy lol not a ranger but anyways

    Sanji
    Lost last glimmer of enthusiasm for WvW

    Anet dragon has finally defeated the
    **WvW WarBorn **
    He's over 7000!
    Havok lover with a sprinkle of Zerging

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Hoon.1524 said:
    Why do most (if not all) the complaining threads about wvw and zerg fights end up being posted by people with a ranger forum icon... :thinking:

    Their main is a Scrapper, just sayin’

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    or limit the amount of incoming damage one player can receive from unlimited to 5.

    Te lazla otstra.
    nerf list

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 31, 2019

    @Ruufio.1496 said:
    Yeah this is a serious post. It disgusts me to the core seeing entire map blobs stacked with literally every single player on the map in that blob. That is not fun gameplay at all. Anyone who knows what they're talking about knows that fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less.

    Discourage the disgusting megablob playstyle that kills the gamemode by making it impossible to megazerg by halving all of those player' health and damage. Then WvW can be fun again.

    I want to be extra helpful to you...

    What is GW2 WvW?

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_versus_World

    “The inspiration for World versus World came from Dark Age of Camelot's realm vs. realm battles."

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Age_of_Camelot

    “The game combines Arthurian lore, Norse mythology and Irish Celtic legends with a dash of high fantasy. It is set in the period after King Arthur's death and his kingdom has split into three parts which are in a constant state of war with each other. DAoC includes both Player versus Environment (PvE) and Realm versus Realm (RvR) combat.”

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realm_versus_Realm

    “In 2001, Mythic Entertainment introduced a new team-based form of PvP combat with the release of Dark Age of Camelot and called it Realm versus Realm. In Realm vs Realm the rules would be similar to PvP combat. Where a single combatant or a group faces one another in PvP. RVR introduces entire Factions fighting each other. RvR was also made more interesting by bypassing the normal "red vs blue" type team battles seen in most games at the time. For RvR, they created a third faction to bring about a large scale "Rock-Paper-Scissors" experience. Last they chose to allow Realm vs Realm to be played out in an open world PvP environment known as the RvR zone. The RvR zone was a free to roam map where players had the choice of where to attack, when to attack, and with how many players. Complete battlefield freedom (even the freedom to not take part) allowed for RvR and DAOC to become one of the most successful MMOs of its time.”

    "fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less."

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/PvP_panel

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Structured_PvP

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Asura_Arena
    "Asura Arena is a structured PvP map. It is the third Team Deathmatch and is designed for a 2v2."

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Courtyard
    "Courtyard is a structured PvP map. It is the first Team Deathmatch map designed for smaller encounters like 2v2 and 3v3 though also possible with standard-size 5 player groups. It has no capture points but a secondary mechanic to earn more team score."

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Hall_of_the_Mists
    "Hall of the Mists is a structured PvP map. It is the second Team Deathmatch map after Courtyard and is designed for a 2v2. It has no capture points and the only focus is about killing the opposing team. Its secondary mechanic acts as a time boundary so that matches come to an end."

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Custom_Arena
    "The number of players allowed on a single team. Min 1 Max 10"

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Guild_Arena

    Good Luck!

  • Captain Dark One.8690Captain Dark One.8690 Member ✭✭
    edited March 31, 2019

    Oh a debuff if there are more than a certain number of players in an area!
    If I recall Anet devs said that they are working on it, but cant talk about it, but it would be ready Soon™.
    That was a couple years ago.......
    Guess all those cancelled projects were more important.

  • DeadlySynz.3471DeadlySynz.3471 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The simplest thing to do is remove downstate. It's not hard to "peel the onion" and kite the groups around picking off their over-extenders which always tend to be scourges and warriors. The main (if not the only problem), a blob poses is the fact they can insta-rez anybody who is downed.

    A ranger could burst someone down, but the group will always rez them. You could run a 5 man hit squad to smoke the back-line, but again, the group will rez them. If downstate is eliminated, blobbing groups down would mostly be eliminated. There are classes that have to rely on other classes for survival. For example, if Anet eliminated downstate tomorrow; that would effectively be a swift kick in the gonads to necros, especially those running scourges, which is the meta for WvW. In order for scourges to be effective, they must run forward with the group and spam. They are so incredibly slow and vulnerable, that if they are targeted by a ranger, thief, engy, or rev, they'd be instantly killed. Scourge players would completely have to change their game play or swap classes; which would be a heavy disruption to the blob meta.

    Even Guardians would be heavily vulnerable if a ranger singled them out with unblockable shots. It's not so much that blobbing is the problem, its downstate thats the problem because it allows people to run forward half asleep mashing the keyboard without fear of repercussion because their group will simply pick them up once they're downed.

    Removing downstate is the best way to kneecap a blob.

  • Spartacus.3192Spartacus.3192 Member ✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    or limit the amount of incoming damage one player can receive from unlimited to 5.

    i actually find this idea interesting.

  • Aeolus.3615Aeolus.3615 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 1, 2019

    Awfull concept.... just reduce the aoe overall and make some classes have Zerg killer skills if they are casted on the right moment, game would require, more skill, more comms, for spikes and ganks.

    Issue is the skills balance and the skill design.

  • Hoon.1524Hoon.1524 Member ✭✭✭

    @StrawHat.2639 said:
    FYI his main is an engy lol not a ranger but anyways

    @Swagger.1459 said:
    Their main is a Scrapper, just sayin’

    Then why is his icon a Soulbeast? This is a serious forum where everything mentioned here is taken with the utmost seriousness. I cannot support opinions when it begins with a lie.

  • joneirikb.7506joneirikb.7506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    or limit the amount of incoming damage one player can receive from unlimited to 5.

    Hehe, I do like this one for a number of reasons, but the main reason against it, is that my Guild Leader would basically be able to surf through a zerg reliably without dying. If you're good enough and have a survivable enough build, you can and will survive 5 players trying to kill you, unless they're equally or better skilled. Most zergers aren't, and their builds are generally focused on other things than gank/kill, as well as with a zerg like that you couldn't control which 5 attacks hit the player.

    Thus, in short, this could actually make it nearly impossible for most un-organized zergs to kill a good havoc squad.

    I'd love it, I'd love it to bits, and all the videos my guild would have made, and all the salt flowing freely from forums, whispers, team chat etc. But I don't think it would be a good thing for the game. Unfortunately.

    Elrik Noj (Norn Guardian, Kaineng [SIN][Owls])
    "Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth." - J. Michael Straczynski
    "GW2 is a MSOFGG: Mass Singleplayer Online Fashion Grinding Game" -me

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 3, 2019

    @joneirikb.7506 said:

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    or limit the amount of incoming damage one player can receive from unlimited to 5.

    Hehe, I do like this one for a number of reasons, but the main reason against it, is that my Guild Leader would basically be able to surf through a zerg reliably without dying. If you're good enough and have a survivable enough build, you can and will survive 5 players trying to kill you, unless they're equally or better skilled. Most zergers aren't, and their builds are generally focused on other things than gank/kill, as well as with a zerg like that you couldn't control which 5 attacks hit the player.

    Thus, in short, this could actually make it nearly impossible for most un-organized zergs to kill a good havoc squad.

    I'd love it, I'd love it to bits, and all the videos my guild would have made, and all the salt flowing freely from forums, whispers, team chat etc. But I don't think it would be a good thing for the game. Unfortunately.

    I think the meta would adapt.

    edit
    the janky thing would be laying down an aoe with people in it, but hitting no one since all their caps have been reached. I think people could eventually get used to this too. it would be rage inducing for some. eventually zergs would have to break up since aoe and stacking numbers would be so weak. I don't how how this would happen since its hard sometimes to just find 1 willing commander. people would have to start to organize themselves. oh no!

    Te lazla otstra.
    nerf list

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:

    @joneirikb.7506 said:

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    or limit the amount of incoming damage one player can receive from unlimited to 5.

    Hehe, I do like this one for a number of reasons, but the main reason against it, is that my Guild Leader would basically be able to surf through a zerg reliably without dying. If you're good enough and have a survivable enough build, you can and will survive 5 players trying to kill you, unless they're equally or better skilled. Most zergers aren't, and their builds are generally focused on other things than gank/kill, as well as with a zerg like that you couldn't control which 5 attacks hit the player.

    Thus, in short, this could actually make it nearly impossible for most un-organized zergs to kill a good havoc squad.

    I'd love it, I'd love it to bits, and all the videos my guild would have made, and all the salt flowing freely from forums, whispers, team chat etc. But I don't think it would be a good thing for the game. Unfortunately.

    I think the meta would adapt.

    edit
    the janky thing would be laying down an aoe with people in it, but hitting no one since all their caps have been reached. I think people could eventually get used to this too. it would be rage inducing for some. eventually zergs would have to break up since aoe and stacking numbers would be so weak. I don't how how this would happen since its hard sometimes to just find 1 willing commander. people would have to start to organize themselves. oh no!

    Long ago (many years) we had discussions about AoE and every time I pointed out that its not the outgoing cap thats the problem, its the incoming damage from an unlimited amount of players. But no one wanted to hear that. They just beat the uncapped AoE drum - which will help small groups, sure... and make zergs obscenely strong. Because anything that make individual players stronger will always make groups of more players even stronger.

    I think that ship sailed looooong ago. Better to just forget about it.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Klypto.1703Klypto.1703 Member ✭✭✭

    It may have sailed but its being towed back in by the H.M.S. Whiner the new gen 2 greatsword weapon. When you pull it out it stealths itself but is quickly marked and revealed and the animation on the ground after you is the animation of a watchtower and some tricks being thrown at you.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    Long ago (many years) we had discussions about AoE and every time I pointed out that its not the outgoing cap thats the problem, its the incoming damage from an unlimited amount of players. But no one wanted to hear that. They just beat the uncapped AoE drum - which will help small groups, sure... and make zergs obscenely strong. Because anything that make individual players stronger will always make groups of more players even stronger.

    I think that ship sailed looooong ago. Better to just forget about it.

    well that's why you los, stealth in, and gank. trying to fight a zerg head on will always be futile regardless of aoe cap.

    Te lazla otstra.
    nerf list

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 3, 2019

    @Ruufio.1496 said:
    Yeah this is a serious post. It disgusts me to the core seeing entire map blobs stacked with literally every single player on the map in that blob. That is not fun gameplay at all. Anyone who knows what they're talking about knows that fights that are actually fun are 15 players or less.

    Discourage the disgusting megablob playstyle that kills the gamemode by making it impossible to megazerg by halving all of those player' health and damage. Then WvW can be fun again.

    @Liah.8324 said:
    @ Loading.
    Yup. Gameplay happens at a tiny spot on one map.....which is mental, considering what it could be.

    A debuff would force all the insanely-huge groups into smaller forces, which inevitably are responsible for themselves, and nothing else. Easily met, and easily countered by a equal-ish force of the opposing side. EVERYONE would have to be incredibly mobile - so the overall pace of the game increases...... and while big guilds could simply split into two or three zergs and a havoc team, smaller sources could group to the maximum, and possibly stand on even ground against them - regardless of map queue.

    Less lag and BS = more intriguing, longer-lasting battles that are representative of skill, instead of pure numbers (or willingness to use 3rd party auto-cast). I'll be honest here; I don't mind getting the kitten kicked out of me, if I f--- up during a fight. My bad. But it's been a long time since I had a REALLY epic battle in group form, where the field was mostly even, and we just went back-and-forth fifteen times. That's the kind of stuff that gets the ol' ticker pumpin - not "oh look, I'm standing beside 75 necros--andnowdead".

    So yeah, maybe I'm mad that condi vs. resist is a laughable disaster of 'balance' .......but my (note <- MY) main problem is being in a purely wvw guild that loves fighting - yet runs only 15-20, and consistently beats their head against the wall of 60+ groups in T1.....I mentioned the head vs. wall thing.....right?

    So let’s talk radius: you chose 3600 range. So.. the people that are in that radius would have less health. But the ‘center’ of that would be constantly shifting.

    So let’s say I am On the fringes... and another toon is outside of it, then I am going to get cut in half by someone that now has effectively 2x my health, and 2x my damage....

    And good luck getting an engine to make those quick shifts and changes to the de-buff. Can you say calculations?

    The game has all of the effective means to do this including multiple objectives spread out over 4 maps.

    People don’t do that because they WANT the massive battles, and those that do don’t particularly care about the PPT and the actual objectives.

    Until objectives become

    • easier to get into,
    • have value to be both flipped AND defended,
    • and there is some true value to ‘winning’ a matchup,

    you won’t see the current behavior change.

    And each of those items have significant problems currently with incentivizing them.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

©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.