I dont Care how Desert Borderland event was buggy at first . I want Events in WvW

[Knighthonor.4061]

Yeah yeah yeah, the early testing for the desert borderland map had a dynamic event that was buggy.

 

So what. Its been many years since then. Plenty of time for them to fix that mess. I want dynamic events with active win/lose objectives of different scales in WvW. Give us more things to do in WvW all times of the day. 

[Strider Pj.2193]

8 hours ago, Knighthonor.4061 said:

Yeah yeah yeah, the early testing for the desert borderland map had a dynamic event that was buggy.

 

So what. Its been many years since then. Plenty of time for them to fix that mess. I want dynamic events with active win/lose objectives of different scales in WvW. Give us more things to do in WvW all times of the day. 

The uhhhh. Event wasn’t ‘buggy’. It lagged the map harder than a SMC three way on steroids.

 

People would disconnect, lag was an understatement.  
 

Honestly, the event itself wasn’t the problem.  It was the stupid-young-cat laser part after the event was over.  If they could have damaged the walls of structures without the laser going off, it may have worked more in the long term.

[Dagger.2035]

The event also ran every hour and it got annoying because you had to constantly stop playing WvW to deal with it.  It also still favored the side with numbers.  A blob could come in and take over the event and recap all of the damaged structures.

[joneirikb.7506]

I think the event had some good ideas, but lacked in execution (the lag problem, and that it favoured the out-numbering).

I understand (and agree with) why they turned it off, but I'd have liked to see them try to iterate and improve on it somehow.

I personally think that some PVE elements like events can be used to create a better PVP experience, which I know is an unpopular opinion on these forums 🙂

[kash.9213]

We could just have flagged open world pvp and adjust some things to involve guild claiming, supply lines, and whatever else makes sense. If it's flagged pvp then all it does to pve players is keep their maps hopping and more interesting with actual guild wars. 

It already doesn't take a lot of density to murder a WvW map. It's not as blatant as some older games I've played where I used to turn my force to face away from the map object density while facing theirs towards it since it would hit hardest in some games while your character would be facing it. Whatever advantage a side would have with numbers would be compounded by not having prime position to not get floored by the lag. 

For some reason huge events are handled better in other maps while WvW can become a slide show. Maybe it's all the individual wall sections at different stages, that's what killed the map during fights in one game I've played, dunno. 

Good idea, but it would be dicey. I'd rather go out and flex in the core maps anyway. 

[coro.3176]

39 minutes ago, kash.9213 said:

Good idea, but it would be dicey. I'd rather go out and flex in the core maps anyway. 

It really is a shame we can't PvP in them. GW2 is full of these beautifully designed, expansive open world maps .. and they're all PvE only. Why not have an opt-in flag system in the open world? A quick duel or free-for-all melee here and there would break the monotony of map event metas.

I want to believe there's some technical reason they don't allow it, but deep down, I think they just don't want the delicate PvE-ers exposed to the fact that some players do want to fight each other. It'd scare them off :)

[kash.9213]

15 minutes ago, coro.3176 said:

It really is a shame we can't PvP in them. GW2 is full of these beautifully designed, expansive open world maps .. and they're all PvE only. Why not have an opt-in flag system in the open world? A quick duel or free-for-all melee here and there would break the monotony of map event metas.

I want to believe there's some technical reason they don't allow it, but deep down, I think they just don't want the delicate PvE-ers exposed to the fact that some players do want to fight each other. It'd scare them off 🙂

I think a lot of players would complain for awhile and I'd get it, it would feel disruptive to them. After awhile though they'd want to get in on attacking supply yaks (and skiffs because everyone wants to be a pirate at some point) and sieging a small tower or town with guild flags flying and all that. It could give more depth to belonging to a guild if you can get a bit of a harvesting boost or a new tab on vendors for the guild that's claimed that point. Nothing map ending for non guildies or too disruptive, just a reason to fight for stuff and to hold it for awhile and to show off guild flags and clicking on a claimed area could show information about that guild to help advertise. 

Anet has to hope that alliances can maintain a longer prime time if there's no change to the game mode, with more action before and after for at least a year but probably less or it's going to dip down to where we're at currently again in short order. 

 

[Ronin.4501]

See response below (added in the quote I responding to).

Edited January 24, 2022 by Ronin.4501

[Ronin.4501]

2 hours ago, coro.3176 said:

It really is a shame we can't PvP in them. GW2 is full of these beautifully designed, expansive open world maps .. and they're all PvE only. Why not have an opt-in flag system in the open world? A quick duel or free-for-all melee here and there would break the monotony of map event metas.

I want to believe there's some technical reason they don't allow it, but deep down, I think they just don't want the delicate PvE-ers exposed to the fact that some players do want to fight each other. It'd scare them off 🙂

 

As much as I love this idea, I see a few issues;  First, there are no objectives to capture in the current PvE maps.  If you wanted to utilize the PvE maps as though they were WvW maps, you'd need camps, towers, and keeps.  You'd also need dolyak supply lines as well as pathing for those supply lines to operate.  Second, even if you decided to utilize the maps simply for open-field, player vs player combat, the PvE maps are all significantly larger than any of the current WvW maps.  Short of significantly expanding the population allowed for each side, you'd have a lot more ground to cover for players to find one another to engage in combat.

 

That being said, Anet COULD re-work (ie. open maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of a PvE map to WvW) a PvE map to be usable for WvW.  Possibly even make it a week-long event type thing (or even a festival-length type event?).  The WPs would also have to be deactivated or reconfigured to account for 3 different teams.  But I think before Anet were to invest any time/resources into such a project, they'll want to see what sort of return they get from the Alliances project...namely increased player activity in WvW.

 

But the only way I truly see something like this working is if Anet not only reduced the size of the PvE map that was opened to WvW play, but also set it up in an instance separate from normal PvE to allow PvE players to avoid the map.

[coro.3176]

45 minutes ago, Ronin.4501 said:

 

As much as I love this idea, I see a few issues;  First, there are no objectives to capture in the current PvE maps.  If you wanted to utilize the PvE maps as though they were WvW maps, you'd need ... <lots of stuff>

Oh, nothing that involved. I just mean like a tonic or something you could consume that would put you into "PvP mode" against other players that have also used the tonic, the same way players can fight each other eg. in the Heart of the Mists arena.

It'd be just for fun, like costume brawl.

[Chaba.5410]

6 hours ago, kash.9213 said:

We could just have flagged open world pvp and adjust some things to involve guild claiming, supply lines, and whatever else makes sense. If it's flagged pvp then all it does to pve players is keep their maps hopping and more interesting with actual guild wars.

Can you not imagine the rage from PvE players if we were open world PvPing in a full map during meta event?

[kash.9213]

13 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Can you not imagine the rage from PvE players if we were open world PvPing in a full map during meta event?

About as mad as people get in EB when pver's afk their Gifts or whatever. Not to take it too seriously, but I think  LFG group instancing would sort out a lot of that like it does already, and pvp flagged players could be herded into the same instance. 

[Gorani.7205]

On 1/24/2022 at 5:17 AM, Knighthonor.4061 said:

I want dynamic events with active win/lose objectives of different scales in WvW. Give us more things to do in WvW all times of the day. 

Do you want additional things to do? Or do you want things that affect the war score? Or things that provide advantages for your side and/or disadvantages for the enemy? Or do you simple want a classic dynamic event for more participation/rewards?
All of the possibilities have very different implications.

[Bristingr.5034]

16 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Can you not imagine the rage from PvE players if we were open world PvPing in a full map during meta event?

If I don't see 20+ people fighting each other during Tequil or the Shatterer, I don't want it.

[Knighthonor.4061]

On 1/25/2022 at 11:51 AM, Gorani.7205 said:

Do you want additional things to do? Or do you want things that affect the war score? Or things that provide advantages for your side and/or disadvantages for the enemy? Or do you simple want a classic dynamic event for more participation/rewards?
All of the possibilities have very different implications.

Why not all of that?

[Gorani.7205]

5 hours ago, Knighthonor.4061 said:

Why not all of that?

Because every "tier" has implications on players, servers, scoring and who much code has to be added to the game and linked to each other (I run QA and tests on software as part of my RL job and believe me, a lot can break down if you turn just one screw)
e.g. lets add another "kill a veteran" event on a map
- if the event is just like the others you have to place it on the map, it has to count for daily Vet slayer and award the usual points
- if the event is allied/opposed to you, you will have to code the mechanics that are used for e.g. sentinels
- if the event should apply war score, you will have to add code for that too
- if you want new things (e.g. the veteran creature turns ally and goes off to block a supply route, attacking a dolly) new code will have to be written and integrated into the existing code
- if the event should "chain react" with another event, even more "what happens when" things have to be checked and coded.

 

Because of those things Anet can't even pup "old content" in, like crafting stations at spawn, the orb mechanic, the Quaggans & Krait in Alpine BLs, the barricades in DBL (which would be less problematic now, with Warclaw being able to tear them down a quasi-siege).
I wholeheartedly agree, that WvW lacks strategic and tactical content not focused on combat (like we had when we "bought upgrades"), especially using the supply on the map (e.g. some sort of degenerative mechanic, when you are outnumbering; or dynamic events that can potentially sabotage supply, if not actively countered). Those could be activities that the less "fighting/PvP" focused players could do and IMO would like to do to contribute).
Anet hasn't touched any WvW mechanics with a long stick, since PoF gave us DBL and EotM failed as temporary overflow map. Honestly, I don't think they ever will add something that big again.

[Knighthonor.4061]

11 hours ago, Gorani.7205 said:

Because every "tier" has implications on players, servers, scoring and who much code has to be added to the game and linked to each other (I run QA and tests on software as part of my RL job and believe me, a lot can break down if you turn just one screw)
e.g. lets add another "kill a veteran" event on a map
- if the event is just like the others you have to place it on the map, it has to count for daily Vet slayer and award the usual points
- if the event is allied/opposed to you, you will have to code the mechanics that are used for e.g. sentinels
- if the event should apply war score, you will have to add code for that too
- if you want new things (e.g. the veteran creature turns ally and goes off to block a supply route, attacking a dolly) new code will have to be written and integrated into the existing code
- if the event should "chain react" with another event, even more "what happens when" things have to be checked and coded.

 

Because of those things Anet can't even pup "old content" in, like crafting stations at spawn, the orb mechanic, the Quaggans & Krait in Alpine BLs, the barricades in DBL (which would be less problematic now, with Warclaw being able to tear them down a quasi-siege).
I wholeheartedly agree, that WvW lacks strategic and tactical content not focused on combat (like we had when we "bought upgrades"), especially using the supply on the map (e.g. some sort of degenerative mechanic, when you are outnumbering; or dynamic events that can potentially sabotage supply, if not actively countered). Those could be activities that the less "fighting/PvP" focused players could do and IMO would like to do to contribute).
Anet hasn't touched any WvW mechanics with a long stick, since PoF gave us DBL and EotM failed as temporary overflow map. Honestly, I don't think they ever will add something that big again.

Coding is all thr developers do. So this isn't any different from when they want to add a new skin or a new elite spec or any of that stuff.  It can be done. Like all stuff, there are bugs and glitches in new stuff. But its meant to be worked out.  I want new gameplay in WvW, and Events in WvW adds more objective based gameplay with meaningful winners and losers and rewards gameplay other than what currently gets rewarded. Events can be big, to small to inbetween and keep everybody engaged regardless of time of day or what commanders are on the map. Something like this could really make Desert Borderland map actually interesting to more players rather then just being known as the burden map.

Edited January 29, 2022 by Knighthonor.4061