WvW Problems - Would have it been better to just rework WvW completely?

[enkidu.5937]

On 4/3/2022 at 6:53 PM, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

The issue with the game mode has always been in it’s most fundamental design.

 

In World vs World, the requirement to T3 your structures is based on your camps. Every base already has two camps, and therefor one of the optimal strategies in the game is for every player to just sit in their base, and wait forever.

 

In war games, and in the real world, the idea behind resources is that: in order to win you need resources that you don’t have, that somebody else does, and you need to take it from them.

 

For example, You have wheat but need oil in order to survive… we have oil but need wheat to survive… Therefor we go to war…because if we do nothing we both die.
 

Everyone is thus forced in a way to venture outside the confines of safety in order to stay alive. WvW fundamentally does not have this. You don’t need to go anywhere in order to T3 your keeps and “win” so to speak.
 

This is why WvW feels empty during off hours. Because the will to go to war is not a necessity, when there are less players around, you have less reason to go attack someone because you realize the more optimal strategy given the number of players you have to make an impact is to just stay and sit in your base. 

Interesting point of view! WvW needs more of that Sun Tzu / Musashi / Gandalf - style strategy. 😝

 

Imo the major problem is that the dominating team focuses the second team (to keep them at second place), and the second team is simultaneously focussed by the bottom team (they want to overtake the second place).

 

Would be better balanced, if the second and bottom team would both fight the dominating team, to counter that dominance. And that the dominating team not just mindlessly blobs keep after keep, but also has to care for multiple camps and ruins (maybe to get a combination of different resources).

 

Introduction of upkeep for objects would be nice imo. To keep it simple, we might not even need different resources. E. g. a T2 keep needs X Dolyaks per tick for upkeep (from different camps), otherwise the HP of walls and gates would drop to 50% over time (and also the score tick from that keep). A T3 keep might need additional control of the ruins.

 

So, the more the dominating team has conquered and upgraded, the more they would have to split their forces among both enemy teams and a multitude of small objects. To get resources from different objects.

[Sahne.6950]

I would love if they remove that 5 Minute perioud where you cant kill the Lord/Sentry. i hope that this would lead to more constant fighting. Right now if you saw 3 people take a camp and you arrive with 3 people right afterwards there is no reason to fight besides fun. I wish you could just take any objective right back. This would incentivise defending, while also creating more constant fighting instead of this: OHH The northwesterncamp has 1:34 left on the counter! lets go there mayyyybe there is some people to fight...

It would feel more like a true Territory war where you have to actually HOLD sections of the map instead of just running from timer to timer to take unoccupied objectives.

[Mabi black.1824]

On 4/3/2022 at 4:11 AM, Nymthalas.4019 said:

 

I think the best solution would be making it a pvp mode, but that's not gonna happen. So I'm going to offer some ideas I've had over the time, and some solves problems I see posted here.

 

1. Relinks kills servers but not only because of bandwaggoning, there is also a bigger problem, with the intention of "balancing" there is sometimes linking between servers with SUPER different mentality, by that I don't mean clouding and roaming servers vs fighting server (it could affect but not as much), is placing chill servers with hardcore servers, is a way of making both server be uncomfortable because they can not play the way they like, because anet decided that the balancing on population is more important. I would say stop with that super wrong mentality. If WvW has tiers is for something, if people want to play chill let them fight against other chill players in lower tiers, and hardcore player fight other hardcore players in higher tiers, thats what tiers are for, not for mixing different playstyles and force people to play in a way they don't like.

 

2. Squads of 50 players, that's one of the biggest mistakes in the game for me squads should be 30 player tops. Might not seem like a big deal, but part of why there is much "leeching" is because of this, either we talk about pve or wvw. In pve you have this "difficult" event (triple worm, octovine, chak...) that needs people in each lane, but it usually means 50/50 squad with 10 people around in one lane, and the others asking for people, the way to fix it was nerfing the event, with 30 people squad you kind of force people to distribute, and for events that needs all the people in the same place... what is the problem of having more than one tag going together?.

   In WvW it would change everything, the meta is stale because of having 50 people squad, because the server having a full map squad (50/50 plus random people around) will have it way easier when fighting other server even if the other server has 2 squads of 30 and 20 people. And when you go with a full map you only need stab, cleanse, strips and aoe/spike damage, and with this conditions the meta is limited to a very few classes/builds. Having 30 people squads will introduce more fun as maps won't be 1 HUGE tag , it will give more room for strategy as when to fight when to take objectives, how to fight (do you want to go 2 squads vs 2 squads? 1 squad def and 1 attack?). Also 30 people squads allow huge ammounts of variety that 50 people squads doesn't, why? with 30 people you can run with the actual meta, but 15 people have a chance to fight those 30 but couldn't if they were 50. So it would make 20 people or less squads way more viable, and that opens the meta A LOT, because 20 or less groups in wvw has a lot more options for builds and playstyles.

 

3. I'm going to add a couple of things on pvp, it's absurd that in ranked you can not join with a party. So a game that encourages players to join and play together, to make meta events with a hundred players in the same map, you can not play ranked pvp with 5 friends? EVERY F**** GAME out there allows you to go ranked pvp with full party of friends (Dota, LoL, CSGO, WoW). Again as WvW has tiers, PvP has leagues, so the chill players go lower leagues and fight other chill players and hardcore players go higher tiers. But one way of killing pvp is forcing people to play alone in an mmo, is like "hey! come to gw2 we really want you to play with people and have fun" then you discover it applies only if you are not playing pvp, because if you do you are marginalized, don't get content, and you are forced to almost play alone. You want people play pvp? let people play with friends, at the beggining there will be problems because there is a low population in pvp? yes, but either you take the risk of allowing players playing pvp with friends and try to infuse some life to pvp, or just let it die slowly like is happening right now.

 Also important is why have GvG has to be something player organized? GvG HAS TO BE A PVP MODE , it should have been for a long time, in fact I think 5v5 pvp should be the normal pvp with parties and spectators (with 5 min delay)  and tournaments should be 10v10 or 15v15 or 20v20. And this would make a real reason for guilds to exist, GvG could gives guild a rating in pvp (or something like that based on won tournaments). And again I sense someone will say something like it would close the gamemode to elitist guilds, but for starters you have unranked pvp in case you want to chill, second ranked pvp has leagues so if you play chill you will go to lower leagues with other chill players and will have more fair fights because you are supposed to find less higher league players who can stomp you. For GvG tournaments I would say every guild should get a reward, although the participation reward should be much lower than the winner ofc, but hey let guilds try the tournament and get something that even if its no a super reward makes it worth their time and effort for participating in the GvG tournament.

 

4. (Related to 1 and 3) Competitive PvE vs PvP/WvW: when you talk about instanced content it's clear you kill the boss you get the reward, you don't kill it you don't get the reward, and PvE player can choose with WHO they want to play, if you want to play either chill just for fun, to improve without stress, to help other people or just hardcore you find that people in lfg, discord or guild and just make a parties with them. And it might seem stupid but allowing to choose the party you play with helps to enjoy the game, because mixing for example chill players with hardcore can make really bad situations (and yeah toxicity is both ways not only hardcore elitists can be toxic), so the best is to allow people to choose the party and people they play with so everyone play the same way.

  But when it comes to PvP / WvW things change A LOT, in PvP you are not allowed to choose who you play with so with the actual low pvp population if you are in mid leagues is really easy that you will be placed with people with a very different playstyle than yours, if i'm gonna get stomped at least let me play with people I enjoy playing with.

For WvW there is tiers, and I get the feeling Anet has this mindset of patronizing lower tier servers, like if they should not be lower tier, like its better linking them with a higher tier server, seems a good idea but it is not. The lower tier server players get stomped if they go higher tiers, so they can't fight, but when the linked servers go to lower tiers the higher tier server player start to HATE the gamemode they like to play, because they are forced out of what they like to play. The worst part is that it is not fault of the players, is fault of Anet not realizing they dont have to patronize players, and they just have to let them play, they already have a solution for that and don't realize, but tier system is there.

5. With alliances my fear is that Anet wants to make a lot of atomized alliances go together, and first organizing will be chaos, second if there was some feeling of comunity that was servers, and it will be destroyed because each relink your community will be lots of alliances you don't know about, making it even less community oriented. So I would say allow alliances to get a size to be half server pop, so you don't get 1 dominating alliance, but at the same time you can make a community out of the alliance. In the end small alliances, guilds without alliance and free agents will end up in lower tiers, but if you don't want to make a big alliance or care to join a main WvW guild most surely you are a chill player, and in that case is better that you are placed in t5 so you can play chill and do dailies without getting stomped every half minute, and hardcore players can organize hardcore fights in higher tiers.

 

Btw it might seem i defend that players of different playstyles should never be in the same party, and is completelly the opposite, I think players have to be the ones able to choose how they want to play in every moment, from chill players who want to improve (with the WvW example they would just try to join a mid tier guild to play with that alliance for some time) to hardcore players that for some reason want to relax and chill so they join lower tier guilds and play chill for some weeks. This would solve a lot of the conflicts happening between different playing styles, so it would help the "mixing" of players as they would mix with other playing styles player on their own pace, and not a forced one (which can make playing disgusting for all playing styles)

 

I find very interesting what you wrote. and I agree with you on many descriptions and suggestions.

often when I read some ports on the forum I realize that the administrator would have so many different ways to take care of their product.

[Mabi black.1824]

On 4/3/2022 at 4:11 AM, Nymthalas.4019 said:

For WvW there is tiers, and I get the feeling Anet has this mindset of patronizing lower tier servers, like if they should not be lower tier, like its better linking them with a higher tier server, seems a good idea but it is not. The lower tier server players get stomped if they go higher tiers, so they can't fight, but when the linked servers go to lower tiers the higher tier server player start to HATE the gamemode they like to play, because they are forced out of what they like to play. The worst part is that it is not fault of the players, is fault of Anet not realizing they dont have to patronize players, and they just have to let them play, they already have a solution for that and don't realize, but tier system is there.

your idea of managing levels I do not mind, but before this you need to fix something.

1- block transfers (you do it with alliances you don't need to wait, let's do it right away)

2 -build teams/servers with the same number of players (or something that comes as close as possible)

3 -correct the war points that generate the structures based on the number of active players on the individual servers (count the players online automatically every 60 minutes) problem 24/7 solved.

only now that the teams/servers have the same potential does it make sense to think about the current tiered system.

and as you suggest, the most hardcore servers will probably group and level up and the most relaxed servers will group and level down.

[Dawdler.8521]

6 hours ago, enkidu.5937 said:

Introduction of upkeep for objects would be nice imo. To keep it simple, we might not even need different resources. E. g. a T2 keep needs X Dolyaks per tick for upkeep (from different camps), otherwise the HP of walls and gates would drop to 50% over time (and also the score tick from that keep). A T3 keep might need additional control of the ruins.

Had this discussion so many times over the years and the simplest thing is just to allow downgrade just as well as upgrades.

Ie if a keep can get 4 dollys/min in, it always drop 2 dollys/min. If a T3 keep is sieged and starved when it drops below 1/80... yep, keep goes back to T2.

Camps and dollys would be so much more important and smaller groups can fight over objectives again instead of no-thanks-wont-even-touch-t3 situations where its very hard to get the ball rolling.

[GewRoo.4172]

Eerwewreeeerere

[MedievalThings.5417]

On 4/1/2022 at 8:44 AM, bluberblasen.9684 said:

Just make more advertisements to wvw.

* give wvw some shiny  infusion (not tradeable)

* give us super shiny skins for rams, catapults, arrow carts and so on. ( some tradeable some that you get by playing for a ( very)  long time.

* change the ticket system ( diamond chest at the start not at the end) so more people could play for an hour every day instead of never play this game mode.

* make more pve missions that use wvw mechanics, so some people could love that and come to wvw to try it in real mode.

* Increase the rewards for solo / small scale that you no need a big squad for getting baggys / rewards ( let us carry 20 or 25 supplies at low level) and than increase it to 25 or 30 with higher levels. ( and increase the supply of every level 0 camp to 250 and increase it to 500 level 3 camp)

* increase supply generation from every camp.

* give more ways to spend our wvw  rewards. ( you can also buy legendary components for legendary sigill and legendary runes additional to the PvE ones)

 

 

If they added an infusion that is wvw only, you would have 2500 member PvE alliances ktraining everything when no one else is playing, or switching maps to avoid groups larger than 5.   Wait, that's most of what WvW is now.  Nevermind.  Yeah, I can't think of any valid reason not to add one for WvW.

 

Seconded.

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

Maybe you're overthinking it too much. I've played other RvR games and they all have these problems; you're not going to be eliminate the core problems of a 24/7 PvP game mode.

 

Just introduce Alliances, compress the WXP curve to be more similar to sPvP (i.e, months to max out, not years), and give the same rewards as PvP Leagues and we'll be in good shape I think.

 

The #1 rule is to think of new players, not veterans. Its nice to retain veterans but without a constant influx of new players to the game mode it'll never feel balanced, because currently balance is determined by who loses (not gains) the most players first, and it shouldn't be that way.

 

Currently sPvP is in even worse shape yet its better to play it reward- and progression-wise.

Edited April 12, 2022 by Hannelore.8153

[Nymthalas.4019]

20 hours ago, Hannelore.8153 said:

You're overthinking it too much. I've played other RvR games and they all have these problems; you're not going to be eliminate the core problems of a 24/7 PvP game mode.

 

Just introduce Alliances, compress the WXP curve to be more similar to sPvP (i.e, months to max out, not years), and give the same rewards as PvP Leagues and we'll be in good shape I think.

 

The #1 rule is to think of new players, not veterans. Its nice to retain veterans but without a constant influx of new players to the game mode it'll never feel balanced, because currently balance is determined by who loses (not gains) the most players first, and it shouldn't be that way.

 

Currently sPvP is in even worse shape yet its better to play it reward- and progression-wise.

 

Well GW2 is the only game that doesnt allow you to play pvp with friends, the only one. It could have an easy solution like delete unranked, make soloq and team/party q, tournamets just for 15 v 15 (give guilds more meaning in pvp), but I really think anet doesnt care.

For WvW tbh lfg interface need a huge redesign so players can search for wvw/pvp easier,  and wvw should be much more tiers, alliances (ALONE) fighting in only 1 map, ebg for everyone, and not this jumping maps checking if there is content, queues again, zerg jumping maps to avoid fights making things boring...

[kash.9213]

1 hour ago, Nymthalas.4019 said:

 

Well GW2 is the only game that doesnt allow you to play pvp with friends, the only one. It could have an easy solution like delete unranked, make soloq and team/party q, tournamets just for 15 v 15 (give guilds more meaning in pvp), but I really think anet doesnt care.

For WvW tbh lfg interface need a huge redesign so players can search for wvw/pvp easier,  and wvw should be much more tiers, alliances (ALONE) fighting in only 1 map, ebg for everyone, and not this jumping maps checking if there is content, queues again, zerg jumping maps to avoid fights making things boring...

I've never seen anything posted on the WvW LFG anyway, I don't think people would use it. I rarely see any squad info either unless it's a discord link or some promotional content. A new player can walk into a recently queued map and see nothing happening and no one around from their perspective.

That would be a tightly packed EBG. It sounds like you're talking guild vs guild matches on instanced maps. That's going to be way more popular on forums than in game.

[Junkpile.7439]

Two losing servers could only kill leading server players and only cap their objectives. That would balance matchups. 🤯

[Nymthalas.4019]

14 hours ago, kash.9213 said:

I've never seen anything posted on the WvW LFG anyway, I don't think people would use it. I rarely see any squad info either unless it's a discord link or some promotional content. A new player can walk into a recently queued map and see nothing happening and no one around from their perspective.

That would be a tightly packed EBG. It sounds like you're talking guild vs guild matches on instanced maps. That's going to be way more popular on forums than in game.

I mean LFG for  wvw guilds, for when alliances come, better than randomly spamming.

And for the EBG thing might happen what you say, but I disagree, because tiers are there something its supposed to be the way of placing everyone in a fair matchup, and with a little less of bandwaggoning, it might work. Because having lots of people spread around maps, and being more worried about you can or not with all the people to one map than of the fights or the structures doesnt make any sense to me.