ChrisWhitey.9076
-
Posts
41 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by ChrisWhitey.9076
-
-
world restructuring would be live now if it was not for bugs. Feels like these changes were made to balance WvW outcome. WvW is meant to be a numbers game to be balanced is what it feels like now otherwise outnumbered would actually have an impact.
-
2
-
-
These changes to defense are great. For too long have under populated servers suffered from not having people to cap during off hours then at prime time it takes forever to take things back. Thank you anet for looking out for the little guys.
-
2
-
4
-
1
-
-
Cheating continues to be rampant in online games everywhere. Anti cheat has become the norm to balance it and it really depends on whether anet wants to pursue anti cheat measure to fix this issue. At the end of the day for most people WvW is a casual experience and nothing more so I don't see a big push for this to be fixed.
-
Lag meta was a thing for months on reset. Now teams that are not comped for high lag get run over by no skill teams with lag meta builds. I think it is time to embrace a new meta because I don't see a fix happening when people have been crying about this for months.
Ex. Berserker is meta in boonball but you can lag out their rotation to a point a scrapper can out dps them in lag meta-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:
I don't get why you think anything needs to be nerfed at all?
If that's your concern, I don't see why anyghing would be nerfed.
Holo is built around its burst dps and fast ramp and if it can have access to weapon swap it could hit potentially 46k dps where the other professions are trying kept around 42k. If weapon swap was allowed things have to be nerfed to keep things balanced.
-
3
-
2
-
-
Adding weapon swap would probably for auto attacks to hit like wet noodles on engi imo which would not be great for condi enjoyers having to swap to sword or mace if using pistol. Power holo and condi holo having weapon swap would basically nerf a lot of great things about engi to the ground if we got weapon swap. And supports having weapon swap would probably nerf medkit even more and I think its been tuned down enough.
-
4
-
2
-
1
-
-
No more alac.
We did it. Ele is nerfed. -
8 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:
Now if you are looking to bring a full map queue in at the same time, I think that's more on your guild to make sure their members get online early and in place prior to raid time if they want to make sure everyone is in. If queues are not normal for your guild but they then faced it during the WR, that could show issues in the sorting logic on Anet's end but its also something your guild would need to rethink in how they face what others might see as normal queues. The point of the WR is to find a fine line between queues across all servers in that region and timezone that would be considered prime at the time.
This is a great point and we did start early in the WR when we could and it worked great but all it did was make another guild have to cancel because it was too full for them. Most guilds run for 2 hours and a 15 person queue was moving at 30 minutes per 15 so 1 hour in the queue cleared and 15 people got in another hour and half the group is in and the run is over. It cannot be great for the calculating match making if guilds are not running when they should be then the next pairing gets all out of wack.
Tried to move people over to EtoM and it is a mess. It is not easy to navigate for the new people that have not played it and need to run back and gliding and mounts could help the process but its not supported. If people played it more common it probably would not be as big of an issue but rewards in EotM are not worth playing it on the regular.
Thanks for the feedback you made a great constructive post and appreciate the effort you put in to it. -
16 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:
Pretty certain most agreed queues are not an issue. Queues exist and overall are a sign of a healthy gamemode. They dont become an "issue" until it's constant and excessive. IMO we are nowhere near that and I didnt even see it during the first week of the beta which had much more activity than the average WvW week. When you see total queues of 300+ to WvW every other day... maybe then it's time to take a look at the solution Anet already made, EoTM. A 50 man queue to EBG and nowhere else is just people zerging EBG.
For lag we know Anet is unwilling to delete the boonball soooooooooo... 🤷♂️Queues are not a healthy game mode for team content. If all maps are queued to 15+ and a guild is scheduled to start they have no place to fit and cancel the run. This means anet doesn't even know how bad the problem can be. Sure it is not an issue if a solo player want to wait but it is not viable for a guild that has a set schedule to just move a 50+ group to play a few hours later.
edit-it doesn't help that EotM is so bad that everyone would rather cancel then go to an overflow map-
1
-
1
-
-
So we agree that lag and queues are an issue, but not a lot of comments do think it is a high priority to be fixed? Just interested to know if that is just a few people in the forums or will it continue the majority of the forums as this grows.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Getting an influx of new players is always a good thing and the beta I am all for but if you have an influx of new people getting a bad experience that is not a good thing so the beta should be on hold until it is fixed is my personal belief. Sounds like no one is denying that these issues exist my thoughts was are they a higher priority to fix then the WR or not.
-
2
-
-
I think WvW devs had stated the WvW is a team game mode and they don't care about 1v1 balance. You might have better luck posting in the profession channels so the balance team can view it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:
When I read this, I get the sense that you don't have a good understanding of what "the problem" is and how WR addresses it. WR isn't supposed to address "these issues" of skill lag and queues directly.
This is a fair point as the cause is not population based but Anets solution was to always reduce the population size on maps to fix it to the point that we have seen around 60 be the cap per team. With queues being an issue that number has been increased to the point we have both issues. Boonball has made skill lag worse but that is better off for the balance team to fix hopefully they have done better work for the state of WvW than the WvW team.
-
1
-
-
World Restructuring [WR] had large queues during prime time and prevented people from getting in the map. Skill lag was god awful because there were too many people on the map with boons. WR was suppose to spread people out to fix these issues but we know now that it is not an unbalanced population issue that is the source of the problem. Anyone else have any thoughts?
Edit: So it sounds like all post before about WR fixing lag and queues with population re-balance were wrong so I will accept that and move forward. So if anet wants to put focus on WR over other issues that currently exist in game is WR really more important than stability?
Also lets keep the class balance issues out of WvW. Blanace of classes is another team and not the WvW dev team.-
2
-
1
-
4
-
1
-
-
This was just closed because you continue to gaslight guilds on how you want to run. Stop trying to gatekeep.
-
4
-
1
-
-
On 1/5/2024 at 5:37 PM, Jerus.4350 said:
Condi quick Scrapper is a thing. And would get like 3k more dps from making objects in motion work on condi too (~34k->~37k). Also can’t really nerf condi quick without also hitting the other quick builds or Engi as a whole. If they added a condi option I think it would be better elsewhere like applied force, though that’d be a small buff to the already overperforming pScrapper. Personally I don’t think Scrapper needs it, it’d just be core Engi with function gyro and superspeed instead of tools and streamlined kits.
Now, making impact savant work with condi would be lovely 😉
Applied force would not help condi quick scrapper. This was the idea that was needed since the bow is designed as support. Only other thought would be the bow works as holo support in WvW but since only a small amount of people play WvW I doubt they would understand support holo and even though it works it is still weird.
-
1
-
2
-
-
I was hoping with WvW alliance guilds replacing alliances we would get an announcement on what the fix would be like more guild slots. Hopefully that will be addressed before this goes live.
-
5
-
-
If we are stuck with a new support weapon and condi is not viable on scrapper then if nothing changes at best getting the short bow feels mid. Objects in motion needs to also give a buff to condi damage and blade gyro needs to pump bleeds. I am sure the bow might work on holo but holo is a weird support class. Anyone else have any thoughts?
Edit - This is looking at the bow as an offensive support weapon. Defensive support I still think mace shield should be best in slot.-
2
-
4
-
1
-
-
There has been reddit posts about the issue and yep the a good portion of the map of friendlies and enemies are getting booted. I hear EU reset was a dumpster fire.
-
EotM was designed to be an overflow map and I feel like it was never finished. I wonder if it was set to another EBG map and you get map rewards would make that more favorable.
-
10 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:
But... has the fact that you can only be 50 man in a squad stopped guilds that have more than 50 members from playing?
What about member #219, does he not get to play when it's time to raid?Technically large guilds already have first come first serve sign ups for every raid to help manage and do take attendance. Though yeah if the whole server guild stacking is not a concern I think this was funny and I am the dumb.
-
Thanks for the feedback @TheGrimm.5624 I think my concern is that if servers stacking was an issue guild stacking is inevitable. I think you might have some thoughts that the restructure might remove stacking all together so if that is the case we might not have an issue. Anyways my thoughts are below so if there is anything you think is worth critic I would love to hear it to make sure the game has a positive direction forward.
10 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:Why? The 500 cap is not new. The Alliance sub-function of the WR, which is effectively on hold, had 500 to keep guilds and Alliances in step for the sorting logic. The goal was to allow for massive group of players to stick together but not to dominate the population of a new server. When looking at just WvW players I am not sure how many 500 player WvW guilds there are anymore if any. Casuals will fit into servers and they will also account for out of balance matches as they do today but if all works out should factor into the sorting logic to balance them around. They will ironically also account for more fluctuations in queue since causal by nature means they may or may not show up in their normal timezone or outside of it.
My concern is long term. If people are going through the effort to stack servers they will stack guilds. Some servers are already creating WvW guilds for restructure already to have many commanders and many hours of coverage. Once the 500 player limit is hit and people compete to who is in the guild then usually it is the casual players that get cut. This will not be an issue at the launch of beta but will be the overall outcome long term. This of course is speculation and I think it is great if competitive guild are happy to keep casuals and still be happy.15 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:This again assumes a full WvW guild.
This is again coming from hearing that WvW servers and making server guilds so I am sure it is a thing.
17 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:Not sure where you are going here.
This was just if casuals have to fight for a guild spot then it will be an issue as GW2 imo is not a try hard MMO like many others it competes against. (doesn't mean that there are people that do not go hard in this game cause there are).
25 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:Where does ranking guilds come into issues with causals? How do you rank guilds when there is both PPT and PPK which are important to game play? How do you rank a 3 player guild versus a 500 one? If a 3 player guild took the same objective that the 500 player one had just done who was more effective in terms of a rank?
This is more of a dream in the future and yeah it seems like a mess but if balance is suppose to match guilds then there must be a ranking system for balance and I just think a rank system would be a nice touch. My thoughts that guilds with different sizes have different rank pools so 50 people guilds are not ranked against 500 but this is not important.
28 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:When you say LFG from anywhere are you talking about cross servers? If so will have to go with a no there since that is the point of the WR is to discourage stacking since that is what got us into this mess in the beginning. As far as a system to spread new players around Anet is more than likely already planning for this and we might see more info on it in the blog in January. Non-guilded players will already be sorted the same as guilds to spread them about based on their average play hours and time zone. Trying to match both player counts and amount of play to make things even across the new servers.
I agree that it non guild players should not be able to stack groups as it would be a mess. Was just an idea to help people find new guilds as a few players with out a home might not make a difference. I guess in game chat the forums and social networking will have to do but it was a thought.
-
That is a very fair point but that is where I hope that the match making that comes with it balances that out. If you want to fight only weaker teams to max k/d then you either get matched up against strong teams. Same could be said for guilds that PPT when it is dead to flip a map and leave they get other guilds to fight. I am thinking that it will not work at launch so I hope that it works out. If match making means guilds can still pick to fight bag farms and PPT at dead hours then it seems like a dead system at launch.
-
I like the idea of balanced game play and think this is a great move forward for the veterans of WvW. I am concerned that if there is a 500 guild/alliance cap it will make things harder for casuals. If there is limits as to who can play it will cause guilds to cut baggage and inactives. Even if guilds have good players they might get cut if they only show up 10% of the time. GW2 is a game where I think people come and go and I think that is a plus for it but that is just my opinion. I think if players want to play with tag and some guilds play close tag these players have moved to other servers with more open tags for a casual experience. I think it should be good for players to be in a WvW guild overall but some casuals just want to play when ever and join who ever. I prefer the competitive style we are moving to but I think we will need something to make it easy for new players have fun in WvW. I would love to see guilds have ranks so that the best guilds are ranked from bronze to diamond. I think one solution would be guilds that need players that they could get fills in LFG from anywhere if the player is solo (and are not in a WvW guild) but then balance becomes an issue.
-
2
-
WvW restructuring without guild Alliances is a mistake
in World vs. World
Posted
I believe someone mentioned that the WvW population was not that big and around 1,500-3,000. Having an alliance or guild capacity over 500 members makes no sense if that is the case.