Kaiser.9873

MAybe during GW3 or GW4 if it makes it that far, but not for GW2. Track record for W3 development is......poor.

10v10? Why not 5v5? Seriously in the early days 20's were the way to go. Most skilled groups at the time? 20's. Then some moved to 15's and others moved to 25's. Not been hearing a ton of, "10v10 are most skilled." Might be the most fun for you, but others prefer larger, and some even prefer smaller.

Inertia and entropy as near as I can tell.

You are kidding, right? Seriously WvW is "everything you expected and more"? Roaming like before the structure upgrades, is DEAD since time ago. You barely will find a solo roamer more than five minutes in several servers 'cos, as soon as they're killed, the call the hordes for getting a kitten campament. The fights stopped being fun when Arenanet made balance patches unknowing what is being played in WvW. And yes, the fact they split the balances for every game mode was a shy, but good step... but not enough since clearly they don't play it really. Or should I remember how a developer who isn't in the company anymore dared to say "WvW is fine" playing in the server located in last place in the leaderboard in Europe? How the hell a dev can dare to say such thing without checking the server status prolly? WvW is far to be what is supposed to be. Siege should be challenging and fun, not "let see how many sieges we can put inside for defending", either "oh, this server is empty, let stomp the map for PvDoor!". Battles should be fun, and not "grab moar necros and bubbles!". Matchups should be fun, and not the kitten Groundhog Day week after week! You ask about promises? Good, let talk about promises... like making WvW worth to be played, with a balanced system and teams. They sold the Linking World as the way to balance... and let me remember, what happened with this? OH! Guild Wars 2 became *Bandwagoning Wars 2". And you say that "WvW is everything you expected and more"? Well, look outside and see how many *don't" think as you. #shameforGW2 I'm not sure where these people come from. Perhaps they should've included /s in their post. WvW was fun for a long while. It hasn't been in a long while. It may or may never be as fun as it was, and tbf it's too late for most of those that left already.

The only way here would be to force through a mechanic server 2 and 3 to attack server 1. Like server 2 cannot take server 3 structures, but can take anything from server 1. Camps/sentries sure, but no structures. Server 3 can only take server 2 camp/sentries/towers, but ANYTHING from server 1. Do not think that would be a good solution, but it would force the double team.

I played as long as my guild played. Only reason I held on the last 6 months or so. GL moved on as well as several of the regulars so I did as well. Thought about finding a new guild to run with. Third guild to leave game. Three strikes and I'm out as well. Too many promises unfulfilled. Too many chances given. Saw a blurb on discord about them going the mobile route again. Slap in the face if true.

Already done.

Problem is that when a commander leaves, especially a well established guild commander, a good portion of their guild leaves as well.My guild leader recently went on hiatus. Instead of 30-ish running 5 nights a week from my guild there are 5-10 running a couple times per week. The rest of us followed to a new game, at least for awhile. The stagnation of WvW is leading to a high degree of burnout, and yes it will increase as there are fewer and fewer experienced commanders for other commanders to coordinate with. Alliances are too far off to stop the trend.

Stupid event imo. I get they want to spice it up from time to time, but time would be better spent on improving the core gameplay over events.

Yeah I'm going with LOCK transfers for a week after relink. Then prorate the cost over the next 7 weeks.

If I knew that in a 1v1 I can win and get 1 gold, or loose and give 1 gold to the enemy, I would either:A ) Not fight so I can laugh at the enemy not having a chance at getting 1 goldorB ) Bring 4 friends so we can 5v1 him for a certain win and get 5 gold (wopwoptheloot!) Without any particular loot involved I'd happily fight whatever is in front and not care if I lost. Where in my response did I mention losing any gold/silver/mats when I lost?My assertion is that if heavy loot bags gave more loot when they dropped that players would have more incentive to fight.Do you lose anything when killed now? No. Gold? I didn't say anything about loot bags giving out a gold per kill.Don't try to strawman me here.

The only real way to increase the willingness of people to fight, who are generally unwilling to fight, is to increase the rewards for fighting. Make the loot bags worth more, and I could bet you will see more people out fighting. Problem is will people killtrade? Likely you would get some number of players that will meet somewhere and killtrade, but that would be a small number. Most players don't fight for PPK. It's ancillary to the game at this point. Winning has no meaning so why count PPK? Players fight for the challenge. Some choose duels, some small scale roaming, and others enjoy larger scale. Increasing the worth of loot bags would go a long way to closing the earnings gap between PvE and WvW, as well as giving leery players incentive to exit structures.

I am constantly amazed at people that can't, or won't, adapt to a new thing being added to a game mode. A game mode that everyone grinches and moans about how stale it's become. I hated the idea of mounts in WvW. They are a fact of life now, and I have adapted to it. There are aspects to mounts I kind of enjoy even as I still feel they don't really belong. The only constant is change. Adapt or don't it's your choice.

OR we could simply make the loot bags that drop from kills more lucrative.

Because it's no fun to fight 80 man map queues with 25.Because T1 is pure PPT-stress unless you are BG.Because T2 and below are far more fun.Because you don't want to Voltron with another group that may play far differently than you in order to fight said map queue.Because taking structures and then sitting in them defending for hours on end is terrible gameplay.Because guarding camps with 3-5 on ballistas, golems, and ACs is horrid.

I was better with it not in the game in the first place. So, lots of people shouted that down. So, I adapted, but now I am the toxic one because people just need to play the game to get the mount? This right here. People that play the game as ANet lays it out for us are now the toxic ones?????

I dunno what kind of guild you all are in, but our commander won't mount unless everyone is compacted. We get tail we unmount and wait for tail to catch up. Honestly as long as everyone has swiftness it's not that different to just run places. We also make sure to get our players their mounts ASAP. Granted everyone in our guild has the expacs so that isn't an issue.

P2W implies paying for an advantage, not necessarily winning. Don't really think most players feel like buying an expansion is P2W. Buying an expansion is all about keeping the game afloat. Remember Death Knights? The tankmage of WoW. Had to buy the expansion to be able to play them.

I'm glad someone gets it. The last sentence, especially. It just feels like a sick joke to be playing the WORST version of PvP for...absolutely no reason. Zergs aren't better balanced, and small scale/roaming is actually just...borderline unplayable, to be honest. Give me a middle ground (wow bgs like arathi basin) and I wouldn't be complaining. We have competitive esports team based 5v5 PvP, and 100 vs 100 PvP. There's no medium scale PvP, and WvW can't be that because of awful, awful balance. You're asking for a completely different game mode. This game has 5v5 and 80v80. It doesn't have 15v15 or 40v40 like WoW. Also there are times that you can get groups of 15 or 20 to fight. The trick is keeping those fights to yourself, and not broadcasting it to the whole BL.

Going to second Scrapper as a havoc healer over FB. They output more heals, cleanse FAR more condies, have stealth, reveal stealth, etc

WvW is and has been marketed as epic battles, large clashes, etc. Small scale roaming is a ancillary feature of WvW, it is not the main focus.You want play balanced around small scale? Go play sPvP. Does it seem like there's been an influx of ex-PvPers entering WvW lately. Seems every other post wants to make WvW more like sPvP.

I don't feel SMC is too difficult to take. It even gets ninja'd time to time.

Enumerate the cons to stealth. Well :1- One either uses skills and combos to stealth , or to attack ; cant have both.2- Stealth becomes our only defense since we are squishy , having to rely on that is not that satisfying.3-If outnumbered and want to capture points , sometimes being in stealth dont help capturing because in order to cap , you need not to be in stealth.4-Unfortunatley , its a mechanic that can be interrupted or lifted by dispell.5-Stealth is not a damage feature , which brings back to number 1 , you either attack full dps , or stealth , cant have both.These aren't really cons; they are choices made by players on which direction to take with their characters. DE's up until recently were able to perma-stealth and backstab for over 15K damage regularly. May not be satisfying, but it is very effective.True, but if in danger you can pop stealth to get away/attack. Either way if there's someone contesting you aren't capping it anyway,WoD can be interrupted, as can many/most other mechanics that players use.Can't build a tank with high DPS either, once again a choice to be made.

Enumerate the cons to stealth.

OH did you think gw2 wasn't p2w? Here's a shocker for you, buy expansions or get ran over in wvw and pvp by players with overpowered elite classes that can only be obtained via buying an expansion essentially making this game p2w. There are several core professions that are excellent in PvP and in WvW. I've been roaming around on a Radiant hammer guard lately, and having a blast.