Intro
Old player here who has somewhat recently returned to gw2. I'd like to share my stance on the current state of WvW. It's better than the older versions (with the orbs of power and poor participation criteria) from what I remember, but it still has much more improvement outside of server match-up balancing. I am quite surprised at how little WvW has changed from when I last played in 2012 and 2015. And while I do think there is merit in "don't fix what's not broken", I don't think that applies here. I am going to be critical of WvW because I want it to be good, not because I hate the game. So please keep that in mind while reading.
Server Matching
Speaking of server matching, it is clear that matching and linking servers in order to achieve balance just isn't enough. Time and time again servers are either completely dominated through numbers at particular times or have nobody to fight because of the severe number difference. This is obviously very unhealthy for the mode as it only means less and less players are going to engage with it. So, what are the other options? Balancing through mechanics may help alleviate some of the pressure of population imbalance. I'll leave some "brain-stormy" suggestions below:
Dynamic scoring based on the current position of the server (including point difference).
Based on server score, certain advantages are given to losing servers. Stronger tactics, constant emergency waypoints (even in lvl 1 or 2 keeps), etc.
Winning servers (based on score difference) have to hold onto objectives (not just flip them) in order to start to gain points (Idea here is to split players).
Better Outnumbered buff (and please fix the tooltip as it's outdated as it still consists of gear durability). Maybe grant players with stability/protection/resistance/resolution on friendly walls? Or the ability to resurrect with temporary invisibility at your current location after a short delay (15-20 seconds).
Lack of Explanation
A lesser issue is the lack of explanation. I've seen people often complain about "newbs using tactics for no reason". Part of the problem is that there is no explanation of what each tactic does or the restrictions/costs of using them. When I started playing again, I didn't know what these levers were. There were these different symbols that meant nothing to me, and if I pulled any, what then? Can I pull them all? Is there a cooldown? What do they even do? These are questions I had when I joined WvW.
Another problem is: why does it matter if a server wins or loses? What is the overall goal of winning? Should there be a reward tied to winning as a server? Not necessarily, but I do think the game should tell the players where their server stands among all other servers. I think it's important to give players more of a reason to want to win for their server.
Additionally, the game should explain the difference between war score and victory points (or just exclude war score).
End of the week
Another issue with WvW is towards the end of the week, the population dies off. There are two reasons for this (in my opinion). First is that the repeatable pip chests are really bad. The second is that as the week draws to an end, the match is already decided. What's the point of trying if the match is already decided right? Some obvious solutions are:
Increase the rewards from repeatable pip chests.
Increase match scoring as the week draws closer to the end. Meaning the last day points are worth more than the first day.
Rewards and Participation
I've already touched on this in the previous point. But the rewards for WvW are bad, like night and day bad when you are comparing them to any other game mode. An argument I see often about WvW rewards is; "But WvW isn't about rewards, it's about fun". And my reply to this common argument is; Remove rewards from PvP and PvE, then see what happens.
As a general rule I also think certain WvW dailies are toxic to the mode. How many times do you hear "come for daily keep" after someone has put up an emergency waypoint to defend a T3 keep? While a player shouldn't be forced to help in this situation, the daily task also shouldn't dictate what they do in WvW. And the problem isn't WvW dailies themselves, it's ones that push players towards particular goals.
Another issue I have is with the Participation. Obviously, this is way better than the 2012 version(s) where you'd have players bot-following Dolyaks. And I get it, there needs to be some system in place to combat AFKing and long-idling. But I really think the current Participation mechanic needs improvements. Currently the participation punishes players for taking a losing fight (dying), guarding points, scouting, and even pressuring towers/keeps with siege. I think currently these things should count towards participation:
Increase Participation for hitting walls/siege/players with siege (it's not enough).
Grant Participation for standing near someone else hitting walls/siege/players with siege.
Hitting enemy players grants Participation.
A way without using traps, for a player to gain Participation through calling out an enemy force (I'm thinking something like the call target function that works when 3 or more players are near the called target).
Siege Warfare
This topic is going to be in a few parts as there are a lot of minor issues or grievances I have, as well as some quality of life I'd like to see.
Catapults: I think we can all agree that melee catapults are thematically dumb right? But currently it's an effective way to storm a tower/keep for 2 reasons. It's more DPS (or at least a perceived higher DPS, which is important), but most importantly, they are impossible to destroy via mortar fire (unless from another tower/keep). There is a very simple way to "fix" this issue, catapults can damage themselves with the AoE.
Mortar: I think mortars do way too much damage to siege. In my opinion, mortars should be more about disruption than absolute defence. One solution to this would be to drastically reduce the damage to siege engines (and players), and instead to provide knockback that ignores stability.
Mobile Siege: As indicated, I think certain siege engines should be moveable at a somewhat slow pace (like walking speed?). Things like catapults, rams, and arrow carts. It always did strike me as immersion breaking that these couldn't be moved despite having wheels. And yes, I know, certain variants of the same siege don't have wheels.
Superior Siege: I really dislike superior siege engines as they are currently implemented. The damage increase is far too much, and it makes regular siege obsolete. It also contributes to walls being undefendable because they fall like paper machete. There are really three solutions I see to "fix" this issue. The first is the easier solution of reducing the damage bonus to something more reasonable (like 15-20%). The second solution is to make superior siege work slightly differently or have downsides to a damage increase. The other solution would be to change damage increase to health increase. Though I think this last solution would have the reverse effect on some siege, making the superior a waste of supply/resources.
Siege Durability: On the topic of siege health, I think certain siege is destroyed far too easily by players. The problem being that all a team needs to do is ball-up and run over siege, even if the other team contests them, the siege is going to be destroyed. Additionally, certain defensive siege (cannons and oil) is often useless, not only do they get destroyed by non-siege weaponry quite quickly, but players can't even use them without getting one shot by 30 AoEs (which is another topic). I think at the very least cannons and oils should have a major damage resistance against players, but I also think cannons should have a slight range reduction and be unable to shoot "backwards".
As for field-siege maybe there could be some new mechanic that allowed teams to reduce the damage to deployed siege that is a certain distance away from tower/keeps. Maybe a deployable siege camp of sorts which provides nearby siege with durability? Or maybe any siege placed outside of a tower/keeps range (like 2000 range) should have damage resistance against players. I'm just spit balling here.
Disassemble/Convert Siege: Why does siege have to belong to a team and be unusable by others? Thematically it doesn't make sense. Pretty "simple", allow players to convert enemy siege and/or disassemble their own/enemy siege. Would this open the door to trolling? I don't think it has to be, and certainly no more than any trolling currently. I also don't see many players that "troll siege" to begin with.
Defending: As pointed out earlier, part of the problem with cannons and oil is even if you can use them, it's often impossible without getting pulled (even if you are out of LoS for some reason) or just instant killed by mass AoE. And while I wouldn't want to see a mechanic that completely removes attackers being able to pressure wall defenders, the act of wall pressure is too one-sided currently. I think if a player is operating a walled siege defence, they should gain stability and be only affected by 1 or 2 AoEs. This still allows them to be pressured, but not instantly killed.
Siege Price: More aimed towards newer players, I think siege prices (badges and silver) should be drastically lowered (maybe with the exception of golems). I don't see a reason to tax players for regular siege, especially in a mode that already has a very low reward pay-out.
Siege Duration: A minor gripe here. I'd like to see the expire rate of siege be soft-lifted. Essentially, when a siege engine is built, it doesn't start to expire. Once a certain threshold of siege has been built on the map, then every siege after that threshold has an expire time. This is more aimed towards having defensive siege not expire because people didn't refresh them.
EDIT: Keybinds: I did forget to mention I'd like to see separate keybinds for siege (as with the warclaw). This is more of a quality of life change I'd like to see.
Zerging
I really don't mind zergs in WvW, maybe I am a minority with that view. However, I do think balling up on the commander is way stronger than it ever has been, and I think the main reason for this is due to AoE blocks/reflects (and to some degree stability and other boon stacking). These AoE abilities are very problematic within a WvW setting because they have no attack/missile limit. Meaning as long as a group is coordinated, they can chain these together and be nearly unkillable. And there is no counter to this play other than mirroring it, which is quite toxic game design in my opinion. I'd like to see these abilities get a limit (just like every other AoE). Will this stop balling-up? I highly doubt it, but that's not the point, the point is to make a coordinated group not completely unkillable.
Map Design
Of course, I am going to talk about the desert map. While I really like the artistic design of the map, the layout of it is awful. It is very unintuitive to navigate, sometimes you have to go north in order to go south, up to go down. It really is a nightmare for anyone who hasn't either played the map a lot or studied it. The other issue being that the other borderland maps don't mirror it in the slightest, making the balance between maps pretty wide. But assuming the other borderlands get the same treatment somewhere down the line, then the issue of poor layout/pathing would be the biggest one.
Additionally, one thing I've always kind of disliked about the borderlands and eternal battlegrounds is how disconnected they are from each other. Yes, they all matter for score, but that's not my point, they feel disconnected. And I think a more seamless connection to each map would help fix this minor gripe. When I open my map, it would be nice to see the actual connection between maps. This is really a small issue, but one I think is more important than one might think.
I would also like to see some sort of "map rotation" for WvW. PvE content has had so many extra maps, while WvW has had only minor adjustments to maps and one new map. I really think if Anet wants to keep WvW continually active, they need to have something fresh every now and then. Games need to evolve in order to not stagnate, it's the simple truth, even a game like league of legends has map updates that significantly change the way it's played. Even when people aren't completely happy with the changes, it still makes the game feel new and less abandoned. Which is also an important topic, if a mode feels abandoned (even if it's not), people are less likely to engage with that content.
Objectives
The issue here is the lack of objectives around the map (and/or their importance). You can count on one hand the things a player can do in WvW to help their team; that's pretty bad. There should be additional mechanics for players to engage with, even if it's something like collecting oil (like in the mists). But also, these objectives should matter, which brings be to mercs. They need a rework of some sort. As a general rule, NPCs defending an objective is completely meaningless from the time I've spent in WvW. I also think mercs shouldn't just attack camps, but rather also attack towers/keeps, enough so to force players to defend them every so often. The point here isn't for the mercs to be a force on their own, but to create pressure (like super creeps in league).
Flipping
For those unfamiliar with the term flipping, it's the act of taking a T2-3 objective with the goal of removing those tiers. While I don't hate the idea of flipping, I think it needs some adjustments in its current design. For example, if a team loses an objective, they have a set amount of time (after the invulnerability wears off) to retake the objective without losing the previous tier it had. This means if a team wants to flip, they have to take an objective and make sure it isn't taken back immediately.
Conclusion
That's all I got for now. I might have forgotten something I wanted to mention, I'll update the post if that's the case. Also, if you don't agree with any of these points, I'd like to hear why. Please refrain from playing devil's advocate or being a contrarian for the sake of conflict. Thanks for reading.
Exactly, supposed to be.
