Its time to fix Outnumbered — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Its time to fix Outnumbered

Zetsuei.8942Zetsuei.8942 Member ✭✭

Lets look at the buff: It gives 50% Participation, 20% MF, 25% WXP, no armor damage on death and no war score for enemy. Overall this buff makes no sense. Some are those decent but the rest serve no purpose. What is MF and WXP gonna do when you can't fight back or take anything?

Outnumbered should become what I always view it as: A way to fight back. If you're truly outnumbered you won't win. If the enemy has 60 and you have 15 you just cant win, but if the buff gave offense and defense buffs then at least you can do something. It should give something like 100% flat damage and like 75% damage reduction. If outnumbered was like this then low populated servers could at least fight back.

As I sit here and type this my server is being spawn camped and we're unable to do anything because the 15 of us can't fight their 30+ here. If outnumbered gave some form of damage increase/damage reduction then we could at least push in and fight. I know Anet lacks the resources to do sweeping changes but changing the values on a buff has to be easy and its desperately needed.

Comments

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    it shouldnt be buffs on damage def or healing. with a good team that 15 can push the 30. why not simply avoid the blob?
    this is more of an issue of population imabalance.

    id prefer. if enemy is atleast 35, they should be permanently marked. hehe

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • SlateSloan.3654SlateSloan.3654 Member ✭✭✭

    generally i think its not a bad idea if there was some kind of outnumbered = survival instinct buffs and for the situation you describe it would indeed be of help.

    but i believe that experienced smallscale guilds will just use this outnumbered buff and walk over any other squad then, making fights alot unequal.

    And there is only one thing we say to Death: 'not today'.

  • L A T I O N.8923L A T I O N.8923 Member ✭✭✭

    IT still motivates to havock...Being outnumbered

    Havock VS.havock with zerg in background (Lets say 7v7) wouldnt be fair if the team without the zerg gets Stats bonus

  • enkidu.5937enkidu.5937 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    Maybe add additional rewards (war score, pips etc.) for capturing / killing / defending vs. the dominant server, so that the outnumbered servers work together vs. the dominant one.

    If the dominant server keeps its full zone, it would still win the fights, but lose by points / map coverage.

    If the dominant server splits its forces, it would still win the coverage, but fights would be more even.

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

    Combat buffs are a horrible idea and I shouldn't have to explain to you why.

    How is the current buff nonsensical? You don't grant them any score. They can farm you 24/7 and they don't gain anything from it besides an ego boost and 5 world exp per kill. Fantastic. Have you tried, I don't know, using one of the 2 other spawn exits?

    Bite me.

  • EremiteAngel.9765EremiteAngel.9765 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Lower the cap on the number of players allowed in each map during off hours.
    If prime NA time map player size is 70 players from each server per map, then hours after prime NA time will be gradually reduced over the hours and capped at 20 or less before increasing back to 70 as the hours approach NA prime again.
    Any extra players trying to get into the map will have to queue.
    Or transfer off to a less populated world to play.

    Visit 🏴‍☠️ Eremite's WvW Necromancy Graveyard 🏴‍☠️

    CD -> TC -> Mag -> GOM -> AR -> JQ

  • Cyninja.2954Cyninja.2954 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:
    A way to fight back. If you're truly outnumbered you won't win.

    Outnumbered was never intended as a buff to allow people to fight back. Not sure where you got this notion. Even the buff as it is implemented right now does NOTHING in the way of giving a combat advantage.

    Outnumbered was and is designed to create an incentive to join the fight or to reward players who are fighting an uphill battle if succeeding against the odds. That is a completely different approach to say try to equalize the success chance. Now we could argue if the buff as is right now fullfills its purpose or not and how it might be improved or which improvements could be made to create situations where more equal number of players fight each other (starting with maybe a stacking penalty for consecutive server transfers within following matchups), but that is something completely different than giving combat advantage.

    As others have stated, combat buffs are a terrible idea. They would create a ton of problems beyond balance. If you don't understand this or don't see this, you shouldn't be part of this conversation.

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:
    Lets look at the buff: It gives 50% Participation, 20% MF, 25% WXP, no armor damage on death and no war score for enemy. Overall this buff makes no sense. Some are those decent but the rest serve no purpose. What is MF and WXP gonna do when you can't fight back or take anything?

    It makes up for it. Because you won't take much, it will reward more to compensate.

    Outnumbered should become what I always view it as: A way to fight back. If you're truly outnumbered you won't win. If the enemy has 60 and you have 15 you just cant win, but if the buff gave offense and defense buffs then at least you can do something. It should give something like 100% flat damage and like 75% damage reduction. If outnumbered was like this then low populated servers could at least fight back.

    I would literally swap maps all day for the buff just to instagib people.
    Defense buffs on my Minstrel Firebrand would also be fun to troll enemies.

    As I sit here and type this my server is being spawn camped and we're unable to do anything because the 15 of us can't fight their 30+ here. If outnumbered gave some form of damage increase/damage reduction then we could at least push in and fight. I know Anet lacks the resources to do sweeping changes but changing the values on a buff has to be easy and its desperately needed.

    There are usually 3 exits to a spawn. Go around them? You also have a warclaw to help with that.

    If you're keen to fight them, group up and bait them to somewhere with siege.
    If you're keen to PPT, hit objectives on the other side of the map or coordinate to hit 2 objectives at once expecting 1 to fail.

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    06210311 251521 121512

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

    @EremiteAngel.9765 said:
    Lower the cap on the number of players allowed in each map during off hours.

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:
    They should devalue the map for server score when it appears. Make it a grade. High vs. low, 100% more players, 0% map value. 50% = 50% etc.

    these are interesting ideas.

    Te lazla otstra.

  • nthmetal.9652nthmetal.9652 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:

    Outnumbered should become what I always view it as: A way to fight back. If you're truly outnumbered you won't win. If the enemy has 60 and you have 15 you just cant win, but if the buff gave offense and defense buffs then at least you can do something. It should give something like 100% flat damage and like 75% damage reduction. If outnumbered was like this then low populated servers could at least fight back.

    I agree: WvW should offer handicap mechanics, that buff the currently losing / overpowered side, in order to keep losers engaged, but also in order to keep the overpowering side engaged. If one side greatly outshines the other, usually what happens is that the losing commander tags off, meaning the aleady losing side is now not even getting that 10 second resistance chance. And then the winning commander tags off, because there is nothing to do anymore. Everyone loses.
    I'd suggest tying such mechanics like you suggested not to "outnumbered", but rather to the success of one side. What you want to avoid is, that you have a really tight guild group of about 15 people, already winning lots of fights, a full blob on the other side, lacking organization and THEN buff the already winning side.

    However if you're outnumbered, maybe you should try your luck on a different map until such a time where Arenanet realizes that in order to make WvW more interesting, they have to keep the maximum number of people possible engaged.

    "and then we know that we have looked back through the ivory gates into that world of wonder which was ours before we were wise and unhappy"
    -- H. P. Lovecraft - Celephais

  • Bigpapasmurf.5623Bigpapasmurf.5623 Member ✭✭✭✭

    This takes me back to my days commanding a calvary group (zergbuster havok group). 15v30? I used strats that could win it. Heck ive used an old school strat not too long ago and it worked like a charm. I miss those days (pre HoT)

    Red = Dead...or someone runs away. Either way it's gone.
    twitch.tv/TRMC
    Lover of Jumping puzzles, Squirrels, WvW, and Taimi
    Co-Leader of SOmething inAPpropriate {SOAP}

  • bluberblasen.9684bluberblasen.9684 Member ✭✭✭

    Dont kill roaming (more) with damage boost or damage reduction.
    And delete defender 100 All stats buff. Stupid roaming killer...

  • Bellefon.1259Bellefon.1259 Member ✭✭
    edited July 13, 2019

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:
    As I sit here and type this my server is being spawn camped and we're unable to do anything because the 15 of us can't fight their 30+ here.

    The Outnumbered buff is an incentive to keep fighting in a map rather than abandon it, not to give combat advantages, as others have already stated (though I think some of the score deprecations are interesting ideas.)

    But what about a “Spawn Camped” buff to focus on the specific issue of spawn camping?

    Let’s say the enemy/ally ratio in spawn territory (using current territory boundaries) is 2:1 (or whatever). If the ratio persists until the next 5m tick (mirroring how Outnumbered gets applied), everyone in map currently (but not fresh joiners) gets the buff that opens a portal in spawn leading to a random tower (excluding camps/keeps) on that enemy’s territory in the same map (similar to the non-random travel portals in Edge of the Mists, again not usable by players just joining the map.) Hitting objectives while this buff is active doesn’t cause swords to show on the map until the buff is gone.

    Or maybe the portal exits “inside” the random enemy tower (any tier) — you can bet spawn would clear up fast.

    Yes, there’s more than one path out of spawn, but it’s still a relatively tight area. This buff will likely only last one tick. It deters spawn-camping, and creates activity again, even if short-lived once the zerg hunts you down. So the spawn-campers get a slap on the wrist, the outnumbered team gets a little progress, but no combat buffs to disenfranchise any side.

  • Jaruselka.5943Jaruselka.5943 Member ✭✭✭

    Why not scale the existing outmanned buff by a percentage of how much your side is outnumbered? Outnumbered 3 to 1? You get 3x the base reward. Sure you will probably die a lot..but you will die rich.

  • Cambeleg.7632Cambeleg.7632 Member ✭✭✭

    "It's time to fix outnumbered"?

    What about "It's time to fix WvW and make it enjoyable again"?

    I would prefer this option, you know?

  • i like the idea, those numbers are way too high though. 75% damage reduction is nuts by itself, then you deal 100% more damage as well?
    something that scales dynamically like 5%/5% if you're just outnumbered enough to pop the buff up to like 20-25% if you're way outnumbered would be more appropriate. gives you more of a fighting chance but the side with more numbers/better coordination will still probably win

  • HazyDaisy.4107HazyDaisy.4107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    Again and as we've said every single time this reckless and thoughtless idea come up, you are suggesting that 5 players should get 100% damage buff when they are ganking 1 enemy, just because that 1 enemy happen to have a 50 man zerging PPTing an undefended keep on the other side of the border. The outnumbered buff does not consider whether you are actually fighting outnumbered or not.

    While I agree outnumbered defenders should not receive damage reduction in addition to what they already receive, I want to touch on the 1 enemy roamer scenario in your post. Roaming is risky when done right, but a single roamer ppting outside of his/her zerg covered BL isn't really taking risks. They are counting on distraction to be able to call themselves a roamer. That defenders would choose to ignore a blob and go after the opportunist instead is just common sense. Neither side is necessarily right, but neither deserves sympathy either.

    [HaHa] Hazardous Hallucination - Sorrows Furnace

  • Kovu.7560Kovu.7560 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:
    should give something like 100% flat damage and like 75% damage reduction.

    As someone who enjoys smallscale roaming on outnumbered maps I would love this for small scale and think it would be completely balanced. =)

    ... In all seriousness if they're going to do something to truly provide an advantage for outnumbered players with regards to the mechanics of the gamemode they should grant folks with the outnumbered buff +25% siege damage vs. structures, or something. It would improve the potential of ninja'ing unscouted structures and keep the more numerous defenders on their toes.

    That said, with the way the balancing crew over at Anet functions, they'll probably add something weird to the buff, like 100% downstate health and +15% damage against the mobs associated with the Veteran Creature Slayer daily.

    ~ Kovu

    Edit- That first line was sarcasm. Doesn't translate well with text.

    Ranger main before it was viable.
    Fort Aspenwood.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019

    @HazyDaisy.4107 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    Again and as we've said every single time this reckless and thoughtless idea come up, you are suggesting that 5 players should get 100% damage buff when they are ganking 1 enemy, just because that 1 enemy happen to have a 50 man zerging PPTing an undefended keep on the other side of the border. The outnumbered buff does not consider whether you are actually fighting outnumbered or not.

    While I agree outnumbered defenders should not receive damage reduction in addition to what they already receive, I want to touch on the 1 enemy roamer scenario in your post. Roaming is risky when done right, but a single roamer ppting outside of his/her zerg covered BL isn't really taking risks. They are counting on distraction to be able to call themselves a roamer. That defenders would choose to ignore a blob and go after the opportunist instead is just common sense. Neither side is necessarily right, but neither deserves sympathy either.

    That has absolutely nothing to do with the point and isnt even relevant to the thread.

    I could have said it was a 5v5 already engaged in a fight when the tick change and the situation would be exactly the same - 5 of those would still have 100% damage done and 75% less damage taken because according to the outnumbered buff its 5v55.

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

  • Doug.4930Doug.4930 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019

    @Kovu.7560 said:

    they should grant folks with the outnumbered buff +25% siege damage vs. structures, or something. It would improve the potential of ninja'ing unscouted structures and keep the more numerous defenders on their toes.

    I was going to post something that was essentially this. Making the outnumbered buff give health/damage mitigation/damage output benefits would be terrible. It would encourage people to not log on. Guilds are going to be less inclined to play the game if they get into a 10v10 when the other side has a 40+ pug zerg somewhere else on the map, thus giving the group of 10 the advantage.
    So I think the only way to level the playing field would be through siege. More damage to walls/gates and more damage to players. This way actual player vs player fights wouldn't be ruined, but the 5 defenders may have a better chance against the 30 breaking down their gate.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:
    Yes, they should change the outnumbered buff.

    No, they shouldn't add damage modifiers or anything like that.

    They should devalue the map for server score when it appears. Make it a grade. High vs. low, 100% more players, 0% map value. 50% = 50% etc.

    That will likely change player behaviour with transfers, reward players fighting under even conditions and solve population balance over time.

    It also enables them to remove the queue system and use overflows. It works under the server system and will work under the alliance system.

    It does all of that without unecessarily punishing off-time players or smaller scaled players. I've pretty much said this since outnumbered came out.

    This feels like a good idea, maybe not exactly as you describe but at least individual debuffs for fighting with greater numbers, like less xp and loots, for example . . .

    I think the reason anet didn't go this way is it would create a lot of toxicity, we were here first, get off this map, if you not on tag move maps, etc. . . .

    I also feel like in the past anet wanted to encourage ppl to group up, which is why they resisted invisible tags. But now that they've reversed course on that issue perhaps they would consider some debuff for having a significant numbers advantage as well, idk . . .

  • bluberblasen.9684bluberblasen.9684 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 14, 2019

    just reduce the supply cost for outnumbered buff.
    50 - > 40
    40 - > 25
    and reduce the price for all guild sieges... 50 silver +++ is way to high.

  • Vancho.8750Vancho.8750 Member ✭✭✭

    It should give some great buff when you are in a owned area, so for example you get to defeat a large zerg with a small group under the protection of the walls of a castle.

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

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:

    @EremiteAngel.9765 said:
    Lower the cap on the number of players allowed in each map during off hours.

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:
    They should devalue the map for server score when it appears. Make it a grade. High vs. low, 100% more players, 0% map value. 50% = 50% etc.

    these are interesting ideas.

    There are no "off hours" in a global game. For whatever reason, we have two server clusters - EU and NA. Clearly that doesn't represent the audience the game has acquired. Unless ANet is going to open specific data centers for the other major time-zones, each of which have substantial populations relative to WvW, there are going to be plenty of people whose prime playing time is NA's or EU's "off hours".

    There are businesses that trade on exclusivity, by limiting access to their products and services to make them seem more attractive than their intrinsic value suports, but massively multiple online games, particularly ones that emphasize collaboration, co-operation and accessibility, aren't among them. Putting limitations in place that prevent customers who've purchased the game from playing any part of it based on the time of day they choose to play - which could and, correctly, would be associated with the part of the world in which they live, would be a PR disaster.

    What they might have done to ameliorate this predictable problem from the start would have been to come up with a scoring system that took time-zones into account. Not a penalty but a split, so that each match scores in phases, for example. Or separate matches during a week - or a couple of weeks - with staggered reset times and an aggregate score across all matches to decide who won the set. There are plenty of ways it could have been arranged that would have resulted in a more balanced outcome than the very basic system we've been using.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Tiny Doom.4380 said:

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:

    @EremiteAngel.9765 said:
    Lower the cap on the number of players allowed in each map during off hours.

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:
    They should devalue the map for server score when it appears. Make it a grade. High vs. low, 100% more players, 0% map value. 50% = 50% etc.

    these are interesting ideas.

    There are no "off hours" in a global game. For whatever reason, we have two server clusters - EU and NA. Clearly that doesn't represent the audience the game has acquired. Unless ANet is going to open specific data centers for the other major time-zones, each of which have substantial populations relative to WvW, there are going to be plenty of people whose prime playing time is NA's or EU's "off hours".

    "plenty", but fewer. Far fewer. I know bc I am one of those ppl who plays off peak and it does make me uncomfortable knowing my play hours are being valued much more highly than the same number of hours being put in by someone else playing during primetime . . .

    Ofc the same could be said for roaming hours being much more valuable than zerging hours, but that is more directly under individual player control so it's not as much of an issue . . .

    Anet probably should do something to balance scoring based on play hours rather than weighting all hours equally, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to the topic of the thread, which is what should be done when one server greatly outnumbers another on a particular map during a particular tick . . .

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

    https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Outnumbered

    Outnumbered is an effect

    Just to start with the definition, there is no "Outnumbered Buff", it's an effect. And it's primary purpose is:

    • Warn of presence of large enemy forces on the map.
    • Give you some slight rewards if you still brave it.

    Outnumbered Effect has never been about equalizing forces on the battlefield.


    But if you wanted to add some "handicap" system to the game, I could understand that. And it would make sense to either implement that onto the existing "Outnumbered Effect" or something else similar that triggered on it for example.

    First of all is the question, should the game mode have a handicap system ?

    If yes: The game mode will become a whole lot more casual:

    • This would strongly affect 1vs1 and 5vs5 fights, on maps with "Handicap" enabled.
    • Would completely change/ruin most organized comp/groups as they are, since variable stats/buffs etc.
    • Outnumbered a player might win fights, and then lose another right after on another map and not understanding why.
    • I know some roamers that can already beat large numbers of enemy players, if you give some of those handicap bonuses as well, they could likely survive running through zergs.

    If no: The game retains some illusion of being competitive:

    • As is, but fights in equal numbers can be competitive, people can still GvG, or zerg bust etc

    If still yes, then you're also going to have to accept that combat will become a joke in the game mode. It just won't be balanced when 80 players can run around in a group somewhere, and you're trying to solo cap a camp on the other side of the map, and meet another player that literally got +100% everything to you and just auto-kills you.

    Or organized groups that can use the "Handicap buff" to become virtually immortal and just slowly kill large groups. Super roamers with "handicap" that becomes darn near unkillable etc.

    The game really need a way to create a localized "outnumbered effect" first, before it could even begin to apply "handicap" systems to it. That, and it would completely change the game-mode.

    And this is even without really talking about how big a "handicap" there should be.


    If you want to change the "Outnumbered Effect" to help combat against a larger enemy, the best way to do so is to use it on things that doesn't affect actual 5vs5 fights/stats, and rather help with things that you can't do because outnumbered in regards to objectives.

    Examples:

    • Double supply max
    • Increase speed/effect of repair/build
    • Increase Siege effects (damage, longer duration effects, faster cooldowns)
    • Arguably: Double target limit on skills (AoE goes from target limit 5 to 10 etc), to allow groups a chance to actually fight against larger groups.

    tldr: Honestly, nope. A "Handicap" system will create more problems than gains. WvW isn't meant to be balanced anyways.

    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

  • Turkeyspit.3965Turkeyspit.3965 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Zetsuei.8942 said:
    Lets look at the buff: It gives 50% Participation, 20% MF, 25% WXP, no armor damage on death and no war score for enemy. Overall this buff makes no sense. Some are those decent but the rest serve no purpose. What is MF and WXP gonna do when you can't fight back or take anything?

    Why does every post about this effect miss the most important benefit it renders?

    While this effect is active, the player will gain 5 extra pips towards their Skirmish reward track progress per tick.

    They could remove everything else, but so long as they keep the ^^^, it would still be worth it.

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2019

    if outnumbered, remove bloodlust application on the map.

    bonuses on loot etc are ok.

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • Jaruselka.5943Jaruselka.5943 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 17, 2019

    Another idea that was mentioned years ago would be to have the "Outnumbered" effect override "Righteous Indignation". Basically if you are outnumbered you can damage NPCs with RI. That would require the larger server to spread out to give better protection to their territory.

  • LetoII.3782LetoII.3782 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @SlateSloan.3654 said:
    generally i think its not a bad idea if there was some kind of outnumbered = survival instinct buffs and for the situation you describe it would indeed be of help.

    but i believe that experienced smallscale guilds will just use this outnumbered buff and walk over any other squad then, making fights alot unequal.

    When you've got the outnumbered buff, fights are already alot unequal.

    Two unequals equals an equal

    [HUNT] the predatory instinct

©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.