Riba.3271
-
Posts
1,869 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by Riba.3271
-
-
On 9/7/2023 at 1:31 AM, Gotejjeken.1267 said:
It's not even because of the one or two trolls you might encounter every other month, it's the JP is so long you lose most of your participation even if you are quick about it--and now the JP can be somewhat mandatory depending on your Wizard acheives.
Yes, it is dead. That is why you can do your jumping puzzle freely.
7 hours ago, Venport.3925 said:Honestly if you read into what OP is saying; instanced OS like eotm would be like you play OS with teams from all servers, so it would maybe actually help it be a little more lively if that was something anet wanted to encourage
Indeed, instanced OS would improve it for blobbers, guilds, duelers, gankers. Only jumping puzzle weekly doers would be troubled by this, but I am guessing part of taking WvW dailies should be willing to fight.
Same applies to EB, it has over 2 times more activity than any borderland, and 3 times more than desert map. So having more of these maps, and enough enemies to face in each, would obviously improve WvW.
-
Heart of Thorns expansion was released 23rd October 2015. So almost 8 years ago.
This is exact date that began downfall of WvW with tactivators, faster upgrades, dolyak escort buffs, objective auras, shield generators and desert map. Basically all competitiveness. logic and balance was thrown out of window for something that seems fun for 1 night. They never returned to the fair balance between siege, objectives, attackers and defenders. Of course they added carebear terrible linking system after that intead of just outright deleting worlds.
Now I am not too surpised they're wasting their energy on doing lot of work to replace servers system, when they did the same with desert map, instead of focusing on real issues that can be fixed with 100 times less work.
-
On 9/4/2023 at 8:57 PM, Twilightzone.7452 said:
ebg is just an afk map so adding a second one wont help
People afk on EB because it is most likely map to have queue.
2nd one means that afks will be reduced because queues will be smaller, and they will be split in half between 2 EBs. So if there are 40 afks out of 80 on full map now, there will be around 20 if 2nd EB is added.-
1
-
-
Well, the devs are average joes but for some reason they try all these fancy things and listening toxic people regarding balance.
All they need to do is blob and make blobbing fun for them. (Note: They don't blob)All they need to do is roam and make roaming fun for them. (Note: They don't roam)
All they need to do is scout and make scouting fun for them. (Note: They don't scout)
All they need to do is cap objectives and make it fun for them. (Note: They don't take objectives)
It really ain't that difficult to come up with positive changes to the game if you actually play the game.
Honestly, all they do is guild raiding running in circles south side of borderlands, and try to balance around that scale. One of them literally streams it.
-
3
-
-
26 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:
As said in the past NA for myself, are there queues in T5 EU outside of reset? How are the queues in T4 EU?
T5 Eu typically has 2 unlinked servers, sometimes 3, with outnumbered buffs on all maps.
T4 is much more alive in that they might get a q on 1 map if their most popular commander tags up.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:
So we add maps while the current ones are already not supported by the amount of players?
EB is still very popular. Also if you spread the commanders on less servers, there will be more times when commanders are online. Also enemies will have commanders so commanders will have more action to tag up for.
QuoteSeems counterintuitive to the modes problems currently.
But yes, mode has more pressing problems like linking system, terrible siege balance, pocket money transfers and objective camping right now. But it isn't like you can put everything in a massive thread then expect people to read it.-
1
-
-
Sieging needs following changes:
Objectives and siege
- T2 and T3 Walls and Gates have 20% more health
- Golems unaffected by boons again. Golem hitpoints increased by 20%. Guild golems cost 80 supply instead of 50.
- Placable siege (Golems, Arrow Carts, Ballistas and Trebutchets) deal 40% more damage to siege weapons
- Multiple shield generators cannot be placed near each other, and their 3 skill occurs around the shield generators rather than being ground-targeted
- Burning Oil mastery damage reduction to oil lowered
- Lord hitpoints scale based on players in combat with it rather than all nearby enemies
Upgrading and supply
- Keeps require 25% more dolyaks to upgrade. Castles 100% more. Packed dolyaks do not count double for upgrade anymore but carry 3 times more supply instead of 2.
- Keeps and Towers below Tier 3 receive 10 less supply per dolyak.
- Dolyak damage and condition duration reduction from nearby allied player reduced from 90% to 66%
Tactics and Improvements slottables
- Iron Guards and Hardened Siege Improvements damage reduction lowered from 50% to 33%
- Airship Defence tactics duration reduced from 120 seconds to 90 seconds. Damage from each strike lowered by 20%.
- Banner tactics duration reduced from 15 minutes to 5 minutes
- Watchtower improvement is only active when objective is contested
- Armored Dolyaks Improvement also reduces Dolyak respawn time to half after being slain.
Combat improvements
- Objective Aura stats reduced from +400 total stats to +120 total stats. Movement speed lowered from 25% to 10%
- Gliding cannot be initiated in combat anymore
I am happy to type out reasoning for each change if you cannot figure it out. Lot of it has to do allowing smaller groups or solo players having better time. Or equally sized groups having longer sieges but also better time-
1
-
1
-
Obvious improvements that don't need much explaining:
2 Eternal Battlegrounds (most popular maps). Sides will rotate clockwise for 2nd EB and castle can be differently designed.
3 of the most popular borderlands,
1 instanced Obsidian Sanctum (Same as EotM. Right side of WvW UI) and
1 Edge of The Mists (stays the same, admittedly though in need of improvements too)
If there are more maps, you might have to reduce tiers. 5 tiers is obviously too many for EU so 4 tiers is ok. NA has less activity than EU so 3 tiers is fine.
Now while it might not sound like a big difference having both more players and more maps, but having choice of 5 maps means there will be almost always enemy group available for some challenge. Biggest change will be though there being 2 of the by far most popular maps available. It is gonna be lit choosing between 2 EB commanders while also having less queues.
-
9
-
1
-
-
And sadly windmill GvGs is all they balance these days.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:
Because at that point winning or losing really doesn't count for anything anymore. And this is the problem to be solved.
Winning points does not matter because:
- Playing for points means putting ton more hours in, hours which could be committed to fighting. The hours you put in playing when there are no enemies, will translate to having equal amount of players less during times when there are enemies. This is an obvious flaw of matchmaking people for 2 months based on activity where you should only play during good hours as playing at slightly worse hours will make good hours outnumbered.
- The balance is garbage. Objectives are not fair for sieging or fights at all. Defenders can't hold against large groups because gates are paper, golems can be buffed by boons and shield gens block all siege. And defenders win almost all fights due to stats and several respawns. Obviously if taking an upgraded objective is garbage experience where you lose most of time, people stop caring about score since playing for score isn't fun. If there are no attackers or even dolly snipers, there is just nothing to defend against.
- The teams are not consistant. The higher percentage the randoms around you are, the less you will care about the end result. Currently it is average of like probably 55% of people are on your server, rest on linkings (0.65*0.65 + 0.35*0.35 = 0.545). Alliances would be even worse than current linking system. Why put extra hours in or care about score, when you're working with randoms? The rest 45% will just mess up any great timezone or tier you manage to put down. Also why would you support a new commander, if he is on a link, or you transfer around regularly? He isn't going to be in your team in 2 months so there is no reason to wait for them to improve or to get to know them early.
- Timezones are not consistant. As a commander, you know that when a new linking comes there is a chance that tagging dynamics change drastically. Everytime there is change in queues and sometimes even popular commander stealing almot all your players by tagging up hour before. People can adapt to slow change of going from 40 people following to 10 people over months, but not when it happens instantly. Since the system is at fault and not yourself for timezone becoming unplayable, most people will just give up on the game. Maybe transfer once or twice, but thats it. The game pulls new players or commanders in when it is great, and losing greatness instantly is very bad for longetivity.
So what we need are regular servers, not just for fairer matchmaking than currently but also for stable environment. Slow change and ability to adapt to changes around you. But not only that, we need better balance, closer to one we had in the past. Where attacking was still difficult but commanderless disorganised clouding wasn't nearly as advantageous, and keeps/castles took much longer to upgrade. Currently we have too many unlosable tier 3 objectives meaning there are too few timezones where having smaller groups slowing down or helping upgrading matters. If your activity does not matter most of the days, the scene will just die.
-
5 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:
The responsibility of Anet, is not to realize (or not want to realize) that this is a beautiful game mode '' competitive '' and leave all that freedom of control to the players, makes the same competition not credible.
Hardly credible competition = real problem of the game mode.
Server without identity = another real problem of game mode
If you cannot choose your team, your team doesn't stay the same nor is there any kind of ranked matchmaking, it isn't a competitive environment. Actual competitive environment is where you can either commit to a team (so stable servers regardless of tier you're in), you can matchmake most of your team or the numbers are actively balanced to be fair. Linking system does none of these. You won't have fair numbers any time you're online, your alliance will just be fraction of the people nor will you have power to change the team around you longterm.
So what you want is active matchmaking system that matchmakes people equally on WvW maps. So Arena matchmaking. You or your guild gets thrown in on one side, and next one gets thrown to another. But that is not what linkings are. It isn't active matchmaking. It is just terrible system taking worst of servers and arena gamemode.
And you do understand that linking system is as easily played as current system? You just make a big guild of main accounts, and guild of alts. Then you alternate between them every 2 months with one having high WvW playing hours and another low amount. And boom, you will have massive numbers advantage always. Another is just reducing playing hours couple weeks before linking, which lot of groups already do naturally. If you want developers to take truly reins of WvW, you need to have active matchmaking, or forget about large guilds completely.
-
22 hours ago, Mabi black.1824 said:On 8/25/2023 at 2:47 AM, Riba.3271 said:
Unbalanced servers and hard separation of casuals/tryhards was born from the fact that being much stronger was only way to get fun when you want fun
That is exactly where you and I disagree. You don't need to stack good players and have big numbers all day to have fun. You don't have to win to have fun. I've had a lot of fun nights while losing the weekly game. Perhaps the funniest.
In this game mode players choose how to play it, then choose a group of friends to play with together, and that's it, here should end the freedom and manipulation of the player. Then it's up to Anet to build the games and it's up to you to play those games, not manipulate them. You ended up in an unlucky match, learn to get by and invent a way to have fun. Transfers are out of place in the WVW, and even more misplaced are the alliances of 500 players.
At least that's my thought. while it would serve a purpose, a reason to involve players. Once you've made sure that various groups of players can't manipulate the mechanics, build your own servers, and give them a competitive season to participate in. 6 months 1 year and then start again. from the new game environments , different from each other, each with its own characteristics and add here and the events. Competitive events that affect your team's points. etc etc
But that's taking care of WWW, that's improving the gaming experience in this mode, with the risk of bringing too many players in here, so a lot of problems for Anet to solve. ( queues, latency, delays etc etc ) so here we are, stuck for a long time.
Indeed, you don't need such a thing. You don't need to have exactly equal or more numbers to have fun. That is why stable tiers is perfect system for people to decide what they want to do to have fun. If they want to GvG, they will go lower tier, if they want to avoid queues all together, they will go lowest tier. If everything is your thing, tier 1 is there.
You're just blaming players too much. The current state of world stacking is 90% developers fault. Only after they added linkings and massive cloud buffs, people started stacking and actually competitive voice tags slowly quit the game. Match manipulation isn't a real thing, people just do the thing which leads to most fun. So you should aim for infrastructure where balanced servers are most fun, and servers can't overstack to Full + Full point.
Anyways, bad balance isn't match manipulating. They made clouding op and they made defensive siege useless against large groups. So, all you have left is clouding servers and very little commanders that want to be clouded, so thats why the game feels bad. It is just not serious or emotion inducing enough anymore. And randomized matchmaking would make WvW completely lighthearted. And lighthearted things are very to drop.
-
Please, don't make people who don't care about WvW try to design a map. It just won't be competitive or fun. They'll just add some desert map barricade, triple the cannons/oils on each gate and CC spamming lords junk that is maybe fun first time you see it, and after that it becomes annoying.
Just increase amount of EBs and go towards old objective balance. Maps and balance created by devs who actually cared about RvR gamemodes and didn't just try to make as overpowered guild hall upgrades and shield generators possible to promote expansion whle foregoing any competitiveness or longetivity.
For example it is ridiculous how they wasted resources to try to rebalance shield gens like 5 times which still do exactly the same thing while needing exactly same amount of them to upkeep immunity to all siege. They just don't have very WvW dedicated thoughtprocess. They're throwing bandages on broken bones.-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Thomas.2564 said:
F Y I! To anyone dumb enough to run the new monk relic. Cause u think it dos what the old rune did. WRONG! Anet did a kitten poor job at reworking this stat. The description is laughable for startes. Then the way ot works makes it useless to say the least. Since no matter how many ally's are around u. The stacks ONLY register as giving boons to 1 player. Combine that with the crap stack duration. Makes its totally worthless. Leadership, tropper and antitoxin, are the only support relics worth running at this time, imo.
Even if it worked like old monk relic, it would hardly be worth it. Since healing effectiveness is additive and you will be running other healing effectiveness modifiers alongside it, it would be only around 7% more healing, and lot of it will be wasted. It is much better to have a relic with same, or more, support but you have control over.
-
Play bowbender. Adapt and overcome.
-
1
-
-
EoD was expansion about water dragon. What did we get? Useless skiffs.. No underwater combat rework, no new underwater weapons, no underwater content, no legendary aquatic helm. Well, at least we can ride skimmer underwater to avoid most of the underwater content.
At least all classes need extra underwater weapon so they have a meaningful choice, and they need to implement automatic action camera and 3d dodging being active underwater somehow. So nothing too crazy.
Btw, if they want inspiration, Lost Arks Abyssal raids underwater were amazing. Boss combats where you have to maintain your own air by finding refills without worrying about countering some stupid team wipe mechanics. And the underwater plant and animallife is just stunningly beautiful. So in theory you could have underwater fights with land abilities, you just walk on the seafloor. -
Relics are cool. There are some busted ones (Speed relic in WvW), but main thing is that we moved away from cool effects like Warrior relic effect being held back by the fact that the Warrior rune had useless vitality as main stat.
I am having so much fun experiencing new viable ways to play the game. Change is good.
Lets just hope they keep us on our toes by nerfing some obvious outperformers (Speed in WvW) and buffing some obviously unplayable relics, while adding new interesting effects into the game. Exciting times.
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Hellbound.5610 said:On 7/31/2023 at 2:54 PM, Mabi black.1824 said:
I agree, but that is only in the hands of Anet. while it is only the ''stupid'' players who want to manipulate the current system.Anet has every chance to limit this. The day Anet takes a more active, and less permissive attitude, maybe we will have more balanced / similar games and then you will finally better distribute the fun / participation you have your players.
But, the real risk is that WWW works better. So many other players flock to WWW and this is a problem for Anet. Latency, lag, endless queues etc etc. So, Anet is careful to say it freely, but not actually improving conditions in WWW is something they probably want on purpose. or they will have many other problems to solve. With one click, they have access to any data/information within GW2.
WWW works, the flows are constant, people play it anyway (because the game is nice) the wheel turns, so let it keep spinning by itself. This is + or - the development approach, just for my personal opinion.
This is the best opinion I have ever read! Totally spot in.
Nah, it was completely wrongly based opinion. The balance is in a way that Stonemist castle and objectives in general are super easy to defend, so this promotes stacking to server that can both take and actually defend objectives most of the day.
Unbalanced servers and hard separation of casuals/tryhards was born from the fact that being much stronger was only way to get fun when you want fun. If balance was fair and same server that can barely take ogrewatch, can also barely lose wildcreek, overly stacking would be extremely boring, and servers would stay relatively balanced.
Anet should also not decide which player goes where, because this will lead to monotonous experience as every server will be the same. It is much better to provide diverse options for players to go to, and have tiers do the fair matchmaking. Also regular matchmaking has the issue that organised groups will always have to be pre-made as it will rarely reach anyone outside that bubble in the little time they are together. Stable servers have incentive to teach and reach out to new players, because those will stick around forever. Regularly rearranged servers by developers will just keep the amount of new players relatively same everywhere, so any effort you do won't actually be beneficial to the quality of gameplay you experience.
All they need is fair balance, way to limit populations and incentive to reach out to new players. Having developers do the matchmaking regularly is a terrible idea as it will shut the door down between old and new players completely.
-
Expansion seems a little bit overpriced to me. It had only 2 real maps, very few boss fights and lot of recycled models. You would think that if they reuse models, they would be able to provide ton of content. Lot of things like Wizard Pass, Relic rework, etc, are just improvements to base game and not new content. The story was good tho, much better than EoD.
Nevertheless, just being able to use new weapons on every spec is worth it. For example Firebrands Axe, will suddenly become very mobile DPS weapon when combined with Willbenders off-hand sword. Heralds tankiness and boon support combined with greatsword burst is also another interesting combo.
There are also other benefits like being able to get some of the strong relics from a reward track, and being able to make legendary weapon(s?) pretty cheaply thanks to the legendary weapon kit in Wizard Pass. I am about to make Meteorlogicus with like 120 gold. (Warning: You still need gift of exploration from PvE!!!)
Overall weird expansion. They didn't fix any of the obvious issues with WvW: Desert map, objective camping, linking servers, shield gens, weak walls, boon duration, etc.
-
2
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, KrHome.1920 said:
That's the whole point of the relics. Getting rid of useless combinations and giving players actual useful options. It's a no brainer that this leads to buffs. Why some of you think the speed relic is OP is beyond me. It's substantually weaker without the +50% swiftness duration of the rune. I have to pick 3 swiftness sources in my build to make it acually preferable over other stuff while before 2 swiftness sources where enough. This significally weakens the build elsewhere. But now I can compensate this with more fitting attributes on the rune. Current favorite for power based roaming builds: Infiltration rune + speed relic.
Overall not much changed in terms of balancing but we got a lot more options to define our builds, which is great.
If you are worried about celestial builds: That attribute combination is broken with a lot of stuff, so nerf cele and not other things that are totally fine otherwise. Celestial elementalists might as much benefit from the warrior relic (minus 25% cooldown for weapon swaps) as from the speed relic.
Well, even in roaming 66% extra movement speed momentarily, will be way more sustain or damage than 10% conditional modifier.
Movement speed in general is often misused by players. Speed runes do following as long as you have swiftness:- Make cripple and chill do almost nothing. Since movement speed buffs and debuffs are additive in this game, chilled foe will have doubled the movement speed if they have Speed relic active.
- Makes you able to choose your fight and disengage from a fight. Now of course this doesn't always apply to oneshot roamers, but in group fights this is always strong effect. 1 wrong step separates you from life and death.
- It allows you to move further forward during moments you see an opening. Meaning you will hit more players earlier, which is always more than double the effect than other damage relics would always give.
- If you move 50+% faster, pulsing fields will tick 33%+ less times on you when you pass over them. Obviously a big deal in group fight.
Anyways, there is a reason they nerfed Speed runes in PvP (Where there is much less boon duration available). And in WvW they're even more busted since Firebrand already had 4 AoE swiftness applications, and rest of party and condi conversion will provide at least 6 AoE applications more. So in group setting, you don't even need to bring swiftness in your build, and you can slap speed relic in and zoom around taking 33% less damage from pulsing fields and dealing 20% more by reaching more targets earlier. All you're sacrificing is measly 10% conditional damage modifier.
QuoteIt's substantually weaker without the +50% swiftness duration of the rune
Almost all runes got statwise weaker as their 6th bonus got replaced by 125 stats or they lost 10% maximum health. But now you can take combine relic with example Fireworks runes, and have 175 power + 25% boon duration + Speed effect. Current fireworks rune with speed relic is much superior to old speed rune: It isn't like you can survive only on 1 boon
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
Yep, speed relic needs nerf.
People should note that speed runes gave only useless stats before (vitality and swiftness duration). That is why the effect seemed balanced in the past. In comparison a proper runeset gave you around 600 stats worth of value.
Now you get the stats and the effect.
-
5
-
1
-
8
-
-
Quickness and alac are fine by themselves. They could add skill expression to a game if you timed them with other skills.
But not if they have 100% uptime. It becomes unskilled and build limiting factor then. They need to make stronger boons something you can only apply momentarily to others. In general they also need to reduce boon duration Concentration stat gives. You shouldn't have perma protection, 25 might and stability, but use them at suitable situations.
Like you don't see much boon duration in sPvP so saving boons to suitable situations is a big deal. In PvE/WvW this isn't true anymore since all boons last long enough to get reapplied again with most supports having around 60% extra boon duration.
-
The WvW we fell in love with had a place for newer players while providing long term goals for the community. Siege and objective balance was in a way that it was a joy to attack things and get balanced fights out of it. Siege slowed down the attacker, supply count mattered and new players had a place utilizing supply or siege. Communities had a reason to provide guidance to new players, and tried their best to climb as high on the ladder as they could by trying to organise and educate people.
Now we entered the era of shield generators, boon golems, empty borderlands and community graveyards. It is just pointless to try buy time with siege or drain supply when very few people are willing to actively participate in sieging down objectives knowing that it won't bring good fair fights. Meanwhile there are gazillion people, guilds and commanders willing to defend knowing that they will have massive combat bonuses. Organising randoms or climbing up in tiers also has its limits, because ín return your playercount will be exactly same as enemy servers after relinking.
No matter how you balance the skills the big picture won't change: hardcore players will farm the casuals, queues will be bad at higher tiers and lot of people will try to be with winning team. What needs to be done is to fix the game so that there is something else to do than open field humping. Make the game so that siege matters. When is the last time anyone saw a trebutchet that didn't involve SM? Slow the attackers down... But give them better combat experience. Allow pushing objectives slowly. The optimal strategy for fun at 99% of situations shouldn't be stacking boon golems and shield gens, and never trying same objective again if you fail.
Now moving onto how to fix server wide communities, entities that are much larger and impactful than guilds. Well this is quite simple: Provide people stable playerbase without anyone having power to kick anyone else out. So not alliances. Not 500 man guilds consisting of guilds. Not server linkings. But an environment you either have to fix problems in, or find a better place. Yes, stable playerbase does mean some servers will have less playerbase than others, but that is why tiers are there. They can always become active again by providing people entertainment, and even if they don't, they will face against other smaller servers. It will be and feel fair, and they will have a goal, to climb up the tiers and attain the eternal glory of being known by everyone.
Summarizing main points, what we need is to bring back good combat for objectives by making disorganised clouding a terrible strategy again. Then all kind of groups will feel good at attacking objectives, and bring good times to enemies as well. They also need to slow down this revitalized experience by returning some of the time defenders have. Longer, better experiences? Yes, please! Larger communitites also need more impact by having stable playerbase they can influence. Changing people, tiers and active timezones around so often, will just end up in a mess no one can bring together.
As a sidenote, why is desert map still there? It isn't popular and all it does is make the scoring seem a joke. One server has completely inactive home map with different mechanics, and other 2 have active maps. It is supposed to be a competitive gamemode, both scoring and combatwise. Desert is an okay map, but it just doesn't have comparable activity or balance. At least developers should pretend to care about competitive balance by having 3 desert maps replace 3 alpine maps every 3 weeks. It was such an carebear solution to keep just 1 desert map around, eactly like keeping link servers around. So many things are a mess because of this indecisiveness. One makes the whole scoring a joke, and other just lets people stack infinitely with a cheap transfers anywhere. I get it, the developers are too nice to make decisions and are like a king that can't decide which farmer has rights to the land. Make a decision, it is literally the kings job.
-
2
-
-
Daily hunters? Oh, you mean the guys that skew server populations without actually contributing anything?
Well, someone needs to be bottom of foodchain. The plankton of the ecosystem. Else this guild would be.
-
3
-
1
-
Make OS instanced, add 2nd EB and reduce amount of tiers
in World vs. World
Posted · Edited by Riba.3271
Because, while you might not do following activities, it will help some people to have more enemies:
Obsidian Sanctum should be a choice for fights. GW2 with its hundreds of jumping puzzles isn't same as GW2 with 1 jumping puzzle that you can do over and over. Same is true regarding fights, instanced OS will be in many ways superior to normal WvW map since it will offer more potential enemies.