Mandatory Claim buff reminder and how it kills fights

[Riba.3271]

Argument: Claim buff kills fights

 

Math: Claim buff is +100 power, + 100 precision, + 100 vit, +100 toughness, + 25% movement speed. If we estimate it downwards as power and toughess are better stats than vitality and precision in power meta => +200 precision + 200 vitality. So 9.5% crit chance and 2k HP.

Average WvW build has around 20k HP, so 2k HP added to that will increase your survivability by around 10%. 200 precision or 9.5% crit chance is harder to calculate as it depends on your ferocity and precision but for minstrel build it is 8% damage increase and for 70% crit chance 220% crit damage build 6% damage increase.  So let us calculate it as around 6.5% damage increase.

 

In keeps these effects are doubled so 20% survivability and ~13% damage increase. This math is undeniable

 

Situations

Lets take a look at individual situations where groups fight each other.

 

Guild perspective

Can equally skilled guilds overcome 10% extra survivability and 6.5% extra damage? This equals to a strong runeset. If your guild had extra runeset, would you beat most guilds you are losing to right now? If you have a nice fight at friendly tower and swap to enemy tower, can you overcome double this difference? You needing to do around 17% more damage and taking 17% more? This equals to about 2 runesets, 1 defensive and offensive.

 

Outcome: It is fair to say in Guild vs Guild fights swapping claim buffs to fight in is not viable as dealing 17% more damage and taking 17% more is not something you can overcome by strategies. Thus guilds are confined to running around south side of borderlands and looking for open field fights. This matches the current behaviour of most guilds. If they have several matchups with guilds unwilling to fight them, they will most likely disband. No competitive scene can exist as 2nd best guild would always beat best guild at their claim buff.

 

Cloud perspective

Here +25% movement speed from claim buff also comes to play as lot of clouding builds do not have sufficient swiftness upkeep (for example eles, dragonhunters, scrappers). We can estimate the necessity of running Fireworks runes and convert it into stats. Comparing Firework runes to Pack runes is natural choice. Pack runes effect is slightly weaker but hits multiple allies and it gives +125 extra precision. So let us estimate downwards that pack effect hits 2 people at least equalizing with fireworks and add +125 precision to cloud builds. Meaning at least 3.5% more damage

So optimized clouds will have at least 10% more damage and 10% survivability.

 

Outcome: Clouds enjoy over 500 stats advantage. Clouds don't need to organise to win fights as they have 15+ might worth of stats. If clouds leave their objectives and try to attack anything of enemy, they will deal no damage and lose the fight. This leads to a stalemate.

 

Dueling/solo roaming pespective

Obviously in dueling and solo roaming, every bit of damage matters. Most popular dueling spot was around stonemist castle even though dueling has been relatively unpopular since after HoT (when claim buffs were added).1 Runeset worth of stats obviously breaks dueling and if SM changes owners during week, it becomes 2 runesets worth of stats. Means you win faceroll fights one week and get facerolled other weeks. Even taking enemy camp will be hard.

 

Outcome: Close fights as roamer can never be consistant as objectives change owners leading up to 2 runesets worth of stat swing. Even if you manage to defend a camp in a close fight, you cannot take enemy camp against same player. Thus competitive dueling and roaming is dead. You can still sneak camps/towers but if you get found by similarly skilled player you are dead, which isn't exactly PvP or competitive. No best roamer can exist.

 

Blob vs blob perspective

Main situation where claim buff becomes problematic in blob scale is when one side defends and swaps to offensive. 2 Runesets stats swap owners in addition to all the defensive advantages like respawns, tactics, gliding, choke holding and siege. If blobs are close to even level, it means neither side can take anything from the opposing side.

 

Outcome: Stalemate. Very few want to tag up as fights aren't competitive if you take turns defending and attacking.

 

Scouting perspective

There are very few willing to attack objectives and wall/gate HP was reduced instead of claim buff after claim buff was added. Very uninfluential role with little activity as defenders win almost all fights.

 

Outcome: Doing nothing is boring. Siege isn't even needed most of the time.

 

SUMMARY: Reduce claim buff by at least 70% or rework it to non combat buffs. It kills all scenes.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Riba.3271

[Mabi black.1824]

I understand your reasoning riba, however personally I do not mind that the defender has any advantage over the aggressor.

I'm talking about structures that should have a rightful owner, and if you think about it the enemy group moves towards your structures when it has the numbers to be able to do it or when it has the skills to do it or when it has both. so the defender very often is inferior or is not immediately ready with his organized group.

so some advantage to the defense personally I do not mind. I would completely agree to eliminate all the claim buffs only for the central castle of ebg. because in fact it is the castle of ''nobody'' should be the object of eternal battle and no one has the right to have advantages over all the others.

[kash.9213]

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

I understand your reasoning riba, however personally I do not mind that the defender has any advantage over the aggressor.

I'm talking about structures that should have a rightful owner, and if you think about it the enemy group moves towards your structures when it has the numbers to be able to do it or when it has the skills to do it or when it has both. so the defender very often is inferior or is not immediately ready with his organized group.

so some advantage to the defense personally I do not mind. I would completely agree to eliminate all the claim buffs only for the central castle of ebg. because in fact it is the castle of ''nobody'' should be the object of eternal battle and no one has the right to have advantages over all the others.

A problem there is that WvW isn't open world, it's a large match and much of the maps aren't ever used and have no reason to be used. There are match points and time limits to play by and WvW simmers down to catching fights along a select few lanes where medium to large fights can actually happen that will attract and hold bodies. That means pretty much all fights will happen near a claim buff even if taking the structure isn't even the plan. Watch pretty much any large fight going down and it's likely the ebb and flow is based on territory lines instead of terrain or other advantages.

Even if the buffs aren't really on anyone's mind, the fights still mostly follow that habit because there's no dead space between territories. Most often defender buffs aren't used, they're just there. The buffs should only be active inside the walls.

[Dawdler.8521]

3 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Guild perspective

Oh yeah I see it all the time, even guilds with more people than the enemy going we cant fight here the enemy has 10% more stats than us, retreat!

Surely all guild raid leaders can confirm this is what happen every time you go near enemy objectives.

[Xenesis.6389]

Random: Claim buffs kills content!

Fite guilds: Still claiming stuff.....

Ok.....

🤡

 

[Bias.4306]

Totally agree. It's already too hard to take objectives and defense is too strong.

 

People should have an incentive to attack. Turtle is boring.

[kash.9213]

50 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Random: Claim buffs kills content!

Fite guilds: Still claiming stuff.....

Ok.....

🤡

 

Almost no one is trying to plan for those buffs, but people feel the difference even if they don't get why, and the fights roll out according to that. It's like naturally picking the shallow but steady downhill sidewalk, it's just easier and your body tells you that. The thread also isn't talking about claiming or losing stuff being the problem. 

[MedievalThings.5417]

4 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Argument: Claim buff kills fights

 

Math: Claim buff is +100 power, + 100 precision, + 100 vit, +100 toughness, + 25% movement speed. If we estimate it downwards as power and toughess are better stats than vitality and precision in power meta => +200 precision + 200 vitality. So 9.5% crit chance and 2k HP.

Average WvW build has around 20k HP, so 2k HP added to that will increase your survivability by around 10%. 200 precision or 9.5% crit chance is harder to calculate as it depends on your ferocity and precision but for minstrel build it is 8% damage increase and for 70% crit chance 220% crit damage build 6% damage increase.  So let us calculate it as around 6.5% damage increase.

 

In keeps these effects are doubled so 20% survivability and ~13% damage increase. This math is undeniable

 

Situations

Lets take a look at individual situations where groups fight each other.

 

Guild perspective

Can equally skilled guilds overcome 10% extra survivability and 6.5% extra damage? This equals to a strong runeset. If your guild had extra runeset, would you beat most guilds you are losing to right now? If you have a nice fight at friendly tower and swap to enemy tower, can you overcome double this difference? You needing to do around 17% more damage and taking 17% more? This equals to about 2 runesets, 1 defensive and offensive.

 

Outcome: It is fair to say in Guild vs Guild fights swapping claim buffs to fight in is not viable as dealing 17% more damage and taking 17% more is not something you can overcome by strategies. Thus guilds are confined to running around south side of borderlands and looking for open field fights. This matches the current behaviour of most guilds. If they have several matchups with guilds unwilling to fight them, they will most likely disband. No competitive scene can exist as 2nd best guild would always beat best guild at their claim buff.

 

Cloud perspective

Here +25% movement speed from claim buff also comes to play as lot of clouding builds do not have sufficient swiftness upkeep (for example eles, dragonhunters, scrappers). We can estimate the necessity of running Fireworks runes and convert it into stats. Comparing Firework runes to Pack runes is natural choice. Pack runes effect is slightly weaker but hits multiple allies and it gives +125 extra precision. So let us estimate downwards that pack effect hits 2 people at least equalizing with fireworks and add +125 precision to cloud builds. Meaning at least 3.5% more damage

So optimized clouds will have at least 10% more damage and 10% survivability.

 

Outcome: Clouds enjoy over 500 stats advantage. Clouds don't need to organise to win fights as they have 15+ might worth of stats. If clouds leave their objectives and try to attack anything of enemy, they will deal no damage and lose the fight. This leads to a stalemate.

 

Dueling/solo roaming pespective

Obviously in dueling and solo roaming, every bit of damage matters. Most popular dueling spot was around stonemist castle even though dueling has been relatively unpopular since after HoT (when claim buffs were added).1 Runeset worth of stats obviously breaks dueling and if SM changes owners during week, it becomes 2 runesets worth of stats. Means you win faceroll fights one week and get facerolled other weeks. Even taking enemy camp will be hard.

 

Outcome: Close fights as roamer can never be consistant as objectives change owners leading up to 2 runesets worth of stat swing. Even if you manage to defend a camp in a close fight, you cannot take enemy camp against same player. Thus competitive dueling and roaming is dead. You can still sneak camps/towers but if you get found by similarly skilled player you are dead, which isn't exactly PvP or competitive. No best roamer can exist.

 

Blob vs blob perspective

Main situation where claim buff becomes problematic in blob scale is when one side defends and swaps to offensive. 2 Runesets stats swap owners in addition to all the defensive advantages like respawns, tactics, gliding, choke holding and siege. If blobs are close to even level, it means neither side can take anything from the opposing side.

 

Outcome: Stalemate. Very few want to tag up as fights aren't competitive if you take turns defending and attacking.

 

Scouting perspective

There are very few willing to attack objectives and wall/gate HP was reduced instead of claim buff after claim buff was added. Very uninfluential role with little activity as defenders win almost all fights.

 

Outcome: Doing nothing is boring. Siege isn't even needed most of the time.

 

SUMMARY: Reduce claim buff by at least 70% or rework it to non combat buffs. It kills all scenes.

The defender should have the advantage, which is fnny because walls favor the attacker.

That said, the only place a change needs to be made is Stonemist.  They should remove the claim buff from the castle completely, and go one step further, by removing the supply and supply huts as well.  It should take the same # of yaks to upgrade, but the superblob camping in SMC trebbing everything, shouldn't get a free 1800 supply.

[Svarty.8019]

This reads like, "Please Anet, kill any semblance of defending, I want WvW to be an easymode karmatrain like EotM was."

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

1 hour ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Random: Claim buffs kills content!

Fite guilds: Still claiming stuff.....

Ok.....

🤡

 

Wtf come out of your keep and fight my 40 person boon ball (plus pugs) like a real fighter!

[Justine.6351]

Mag cloud strikes again?

[Xenesis.6389]

/rant on

Stream rolling over objectives in less than 2 mins, even though it took 1-3 hours to upgrade that same objective to it's highest tier, because defenders couldn't respond in force in time if at all able to, or because they won't even bother because of who's doing the steam rolling, that's also boring and sad, hi bg and mag.

Here's the greatest incentive for both sides, you do something to not be bored, you want to be rewarded.

You find fights because it's fun and not boring, you take stuff from the enemy because it's fun and not boring, and it's particularly fun when you are able to take something under a disadvantage, because you overcame the odds and still took something away from your enemy. For defenders being able to repel an attack that maybe has you at a numbers or positional disadvantage can be fun, being able to protect something you worked on upgrading can be fun. Yes pure turtle and pure ktrains situations are boring and not fun, but I don't think the game is stuck in either side at the moment, the problem really comes down to the number of players around at any given time, which can vastly shift the scenarios you face.

 

If there's no incentive for defenders to defend you also lose on content, it's a two way street. There's a line that must be maintained to keep both sides engaged, otherwise it turns into a back cap k-train fest that no one in their right mind wants, other than the pve k-train sheep that want rewards handed to them on a boring gold platter with no resistance. A lot of commanders won't even bother to defend something unless it's upgraded, or has a waypoint, and not already engaged in a potentially long and fun fight, otherwise it's fodder to back cap in 5 mins, I've seen commanders sit in smc or an enemy keep for "fun fights" while every T3 tower on their side falls. Because guess what, ppt means nothing, they don't do any of the upgrading, heck they barely even repair these days either, leaving it to pugs to spend 10 mins burning participation while fixing a wall that they could have done in 30s with their zerg.

 

"But look at reset night!"

Yeah look at reset night where all the maps are queued, some groups don't even have their full numbers to play with, and the defenders are at a huge disadvantage without their buffs while being double teamed on their map, where 75% of the map is sitting in enemies hands most of the two hours. And if blob balls are running it turns into a very short night for the defenders, it's just weather the storm and take back whatever whenever.

"But those garrison fights are kitten bomb!"

Yeah but you could literally have the same three way fights anywhere else on the map during that time and there would be no difference, you just need to pop the batman symbol up(ojs). Fights still come down to a numbers advantage, especially meta advantage.

 

On top of that defenders are at a disadvantage to start every fight, because the attackers can always get to the objective first without notice, white swords don't even pop for 30s, then defenders need to rely on usually idiotic scout calls that takes a few minutes to decipher,

Chat: [linked objective]

ok numbers?

white swords!

ok and?

red there!

ok and?

they have catas!

ok and?

it's [guild]

ok and?

they have 30+!

well finally the imjportant information appears... ewp?

no! and they're on lord!

ok gl then!

We even had someone call a smc gate out by number the other night.... "green at gate 1".... wutface? is smc an airport now? the oj's popped at nw inner anyways.

 

I doubt all the people that ask for defensive nerfs bother defending(because why ask to nerf their advantage?). I can understand roamers asking for it, but they too need to understand, you're STANDING IN ENEMY TERRITORY expect to have a disadvantage, whether that is by bonus stats or you suddenly outnumbered.

"But I also don't like being marked!"

You're worried about some kitten running back and forth in some gate at a watch tower that you chased two miles away to, over the entire flipping map you have to roam and find fights? that's called desperation. Entire game doesn't revolve around you and your class, you need to revolve around the game, or rather that tower that has a weather balloon up....

 

Think defending is too good? What about the groups that can break into a T3 garrison in less than 2mins and run around inner for 20 mins? Imagine if you take away the defense, you think those same zergs will now suddenly get smaller? nope! they'll bring the same numbers because boon balls and numbers is always an advantage now, and if another boon ball shows up to defend you want to make sure you have more in the first place! I feel like some people never experienced having their map k-trained for an entire week before HoT, they get a taste of mag doing it to ebg and it's horrific, but they've never experienced it on all maps for days on end I would bet.

 

/rant off

 

End of the day, good fight satisfaction comes from hard earned beating the odds fights, defendable objectives with buffs is part of this equation (not that I even care if they take away the stat buffs, I fight cause I like to fight, but people looking at stats as if that's the reason they died is laughable most times).

[Xenesis.6389]

2 hours ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Wtf come out of your keep and fight my 40 person boon ball (plus pugs) like a real fighter!

I got a moa for you!

P.S I gave you a funny to offset the confused.

 

 

Edited July 21, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[Xenesis.6389]

1 hour ago, Ubi.4136 said:

The defender should have the advantage, which is fnny because walls favor the attacker.

That said, the only place a change needs to be made is Stonemist.  They should remove the claim buff from the castle completely, and go one step further, by removing the supply and supply huts as well.  It should take the same # of yaks to upgrade, but the superblob camping in SMC trebbing everything, shouldn't get a free 1800 supply.

I agree that they should remove supply from smc. Even though there is Sabotage Depot to remove that supply on capture, Hardened Gates is also in that tier unfortunately, and more useful especially for smc when you can only get through gates on inner.

 

I sometimes wonder if it would be better to lower the supply cap at every objective, but increase it at camps. Thereby forcing players to travel out of walled objectives more often. But then the whole losing participation to help upgrade and build stuff comes into play... 

[kash.9213]

13 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

/rant on

Stream rolling over objectives in less than 2 mins, even though it took 1-3 hours to upgrade that same objective to it's highest tier, because defenders couldn't respond in force in time if at all able to, or because they won't even bother because of who's doing the steam rolling, that's also boring and sad, hi bg and mag.

Here's the greatest incentive for both sides, you do something to not be bored, you want to be rewarded.

You find fights because it's fun and not boring, you take stuff from the enemy because it's fun and not boring, and it's particularly fun when you are able to take something under a disadvantage, because you overcame the odds and still took something away from your enemy. For defenders being able to repel an attack that maybe has you at a numbers or positional disadvantage can be fun, being able to protect something you worked on upgrading can be fun. Yes pure turtle and pure ktrains situations are boring and not fun, but I don't think the game is stuck in either side at the moment, the problem really comes down to the number of players around at any given time, which can vastly shift the scenarios you face.

 

If there's no incentive for defenders to defend you also lose on content, it's a two way street. There's a line that must be maintained to keep both sides engaged, otherwise it turns into a back cap k-train fest that no one in their right mind wants, other than the pve k-train sheep that want rewards handed to them on a boring gold platter with no resistance. A lot of commanders won't even bother to defend something unless it's upgraded, or has a waypoint, and not already engaged in a potentially long and fun fight, otherwise it's fodder to back cap in 5 mins, I've seen commanders sit in smc or an enemy keep for "fun fights" while every T3 tower on their side falls. Because guess what, ppt means nothing, they don't do any of the upgrading, heck they barely even repair these days either, leaving it to pugs to spend 10 mins burning participation while fixing a wall that they could have done in 30s with their zerg.

 

"But look at reset night!"

Yeah look at reset night where all the maps are queued, some groups don't even have their full numbers to play with, and the defenders are at a huge disadvantage without their buffs while being double teamed on their map, where 75% of the map is sitting in enemies hands most of the two hours. And if blob balls are running it turns into a very short night for the defenders, it's just weather the storm and take back whatever whenever.

"But those garrison fights are kitten bomb!"

Yeah but you could literally have the same three way fights anywhere else on the map during that time and there would be no difference, you just need to pop the batman symbol up(ojs). Fights still come down to a numbers advantage, especially meta advantage.

 

On top of that defenders are at a disadvantage to start every fight, because the attackers can always get to the objective first without notice, white swords don't even pop for 30s, then defenders need to rely on usually idiotic scout calls that takes a few minutes to decipher,

Chat: [linked objective]

ok numbers?

white swords!

ok and?

red there!

ok and?

they have catas!

ok and?

it's [guild]

ok and?

they have 30+!

well finally the imjportant information appears... ewp?

no! and they're on lord!

ok gl then!

We even had someone call a smc gate out by number the other night.... "green at gate 1".... wutface? is smc an airport now? the oj's popped at nw inner anyways.

 

I doubt all the people that ask for defensive nerfs bother defending(because why ask to nerf their advantage?). I can understand roamers asking for it, but they too need to understand, you're STANDING IN ENEMY TERRITORY expect to have a disadvantage, whether that is by bonus stats or you suddenly outnumbered.

"But I also don't like being marked!"

You're worried about some kitten running back and forth in some gate at a watch tower that you chased two miles away to, over the entire flipping map you have to roam and find fights? that's called desperation. Entire game doesn't revolve around you and your class, you need to revolve around the game, or rather that tower that has a weather balloon up....

 

Think defending is too good? What about the groups that can break into a T3 garrison in less than 2mins and run around inner for 20 mins? Imagine if you take away the defense, you think those same zergs will now suddenly get smaller? nope! they'll bring the same numbers because boon balls and numbers is always an advantage now, and if another boon ball shows up to defend you want to make sure you have more in the first place! I feel like some people never experienced having their map k-trained for an entire week before HoT, they get a taste of mag doing it to ebg and it's horrific, but they've never experienced it on all maps for days on end I would bet.

 

/rant off

 

End of the day, good fight satisfaction comes from hard earned beating the odds fights, defendable objectives with buffs is part of this equation (not that I even care if they take away the stat buffs, I fight cause I like to fight, but people looking at stats as if that's the reason they died is laughable most times).

 

Defenders would still get their buffs where they need to have them if buffs were only active inside the structure and on top of walls. Then fights outside, that likely have nothing to do with the structure, can roll out naturally and to natural advantages, instead of seeing the rushes and retreats consistently happen right about where you expect them to happen. 

I agree with you about defending and defenders. They shouldn't have their buffs taken away but either we need a legit open world pvp mode or we need to adjust WvW mechanics that are designed for three massive pve blobs to fight on structures and with full siege. 

[Xenesis.6389]

7 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Argument: Claim buff kills fights

SUMMARY: Reduce claim buff by at least 70% or rework it to non combat buffs. It kills all scenes.

Shouldn't they also remove bloodlust as well then?

[Svarty.8019]

1 hour ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

I sometimes wonder if it would be better to lower the supply cap at every objective, but increase it at camps. Thereby forcing players to travel out of walled objectives more often. 

This is a great idea, but sadly it involves changing something, so it won't happen.

 

The big problem with WvW that needs to be addressed is the difference between big zergs and small ones.

• Big (70+) zerg can cap anything with little-to-no problem.
• Medium (~30) zerg can sometimes cap things.
• Small zerg (~15) is going to really struggle to capture anything because; 1) they can't build as much siege because they can't carry as much supply, so it'll take longer and allow defenders more time to arrive and, 2) the defenders' cloud is much more effective when the damage mitigation effect (due to ability target caps) isn't as good.

Edited July 21, 2022 by Svarty.8019
NOTHING WILL BE DONE

[Sviel.7493]

I do not care if people who have no interest in objective based play are disincentivized from playing around objectives.  I agree that invisible stats are not an interesting way to give a defensive advantage and would not mind a redesign, but the goal of that redesign shouldn't be to create perfectly fair, open-field fights in objectives somehow.

Defense in WvW should follow two rules:
1.) It must not be possible to stall indefinitely while significantly outnumbered.

2.) It must be possible to stall temporarily while significantly outnumbered.

 

A small, but significant, clump of stats doesn't work towards satisfying either of those rules.  The best way to achieve this would be an extensive siege and supply rework, but this won't satisfy people who are looking for solely zerg vs. zerg content.

[kash.9213]

17 minutes ago, Sviel.7493 said:

I do not care if people who have no interest in objective based play are disincentivized from playing around objectives.  I agree that invisible stats are not an interesting way to give a defensive advantage and would not mind a redesign, but the goal of that redesign shouldn't be to create perfectly fair, open-field fights in objectives somehow.

Defense in WvW should follow two rules:
1.) It must not be possible to stall indefinitely while significantly outnumbered.

2.) It must be possible to stall temporarily while significantly outnumbered.

 

A small, but significant, clump of stats doesn't work towards satisfying either of those rules.  The best way to achieve this would be an extensive siege and supply rework, but this won't satisfy people who are looking for solely zerg vs. zerg content.

Do you mean around objectives? Again, the buff can be inside and on top of walls while leaving outside alone. I'd even buff a little more on top of walls maybe or make walls a legit defense instead of were enemy zergs go fishing for your people.  

Xenesis brought up a good point about Bloodlust, but that should probably be re-worked at some point also. Clutch buffs and modifiers really should be more situational, but then better within that stipulation as far as sieging goes. 

Edited July 21, 2022 by kash.9213

[Sviel.7493]

@kash.9213
Defending an objective requires going beyond the walls to engage with enemies using siege, so I wouldn't characterize it as within and on the walls only.  If we're going to have a buff (something I'm not fond of), it makes sense for it to cover at least part of the siege staging area as that's where the bulk of defensive action takes place.  I should note that the way territories are currently designed is mostly for gliding, though.  It doesn't seem like siege was a consideration.

If your concern is that claim buffs interfere with the roaming scene, I think that's a fair complaint.

[kash.9213]

3 hours ago, Sviel.7493 said:

@kash.9213
Defending an objective requires going beyond the walls to engage with enemies using siege, so I wouldn't characterize it as within and on the walls only.  If we're going to have a buff (something I'm not fond of), it makes sense for it to cover at least part of the siege staging area as that's where the bulk of defensive action takes place.  I should note that the way territories are currently designed is mostly for gliding, though.  It doesn't seem like siege was a consideration.

If your concern is that claim buffs interfere with the roaming scene, I think that's a fair complaint.

That's a good point, I should have thought about that. I'm sure a more deliberate set of advantages would be hard to balance around so it's a lot to ask for. I wish WvW and open world worked together more, or at least if we had some new maps rotated in to mess around on, gimmicks and all. 

[Ronin.4501]

OK Threather/Riba/[whatever you change your account name to next], how many threads are you going to make about this???  It's like a broken record...

I hate Red BL, remove it.

Claim buff OP, remove it.

I hate Red BL, remove it.

Claim buff OP, remove it.

Seriously, you should do a commercial for shampoo and conditioner. RINSE AND REPEAT.

PS. Inc thread about hating Red BL in 3...2...1...

Edited July 22, 2022 by Ronin.4501
PS

[Sahne.6950]

daily reminder, that the claimbuff is not making that much of a difference. And that the difference is not calculatable by just math.

If calculating how powerfull someone will be, would be as easy as saying: 200 precision and 200 vitality = yada yada....           Everyone would run Celestial in a zerg, because that has literally almost double the stats compared to zerker.. 

but that is sadly not how largescale works. There is more to it than having raw stats. Most of the time someone dies because they get caught in a bomb or something. Having +100 toughness will NOT safe you from that bomb.

tactics>raw statnumbers.

Also i think there is nothing wrong with the defenders having the advantage... defensive siege is a joke... they need to have something!

[kash.9213]

8 hours ago, Sahne.6950 said:

daily reminder, that the claimbuff is not making that much of a difference. And that the difference is not calculatable by just math.

If calculating how powerfull someone will be, would be as easy as saying: 200 precision and 200 vitality = yada yada....           Everyone would run Celestial in a zerg, because that has literally almost double the stats compared to zerker.. 

but that is sadly not how largescale works. There is more to it than having raw stats. Most of the time someone dies because they get caught in a bomb or something. Having +100 toughness will NOT safe you from that bomb.

tactics>raw statnumbers.

Also i think there is nothing wrong with the defenders having the advantage... defensive siege is a joke... they need to have something!

If tactics always won out against stats then there wouldn't be so many threads about boon balls and whatever else. Fights would happen on that territory line far less also. If one side has structure buffs they already have the collective stat advantage and if they get bloodlust on top of that, the other side often ends up only probing some across that line while keeping their own tower to their backs in case of a rush. EB, bottom home bls, and most other lanes seem to play out the same way.

Most people already agreed that defenders need to have an advantage regardless of the stance they take on current claim buffs, not sure why anyone's still claiming someones trying to nerf defense, kind of a strawman. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by kash.9213

[Riba.3271]

On 7/21/2022 at 11:36 PM, Xenesis.6389 said:

Shouldn't they also remove bloodlust as well then?

Bloodlust is different because

- It is easy to play around: Cap it back before hitting enemy objective. So it doesn't hinder willingness to attack

- It equates to maximum 250 useful stat difference (50 Healing power, power, precision, toughness, vitality) if you lose bloodlust to opposing server whereas claim buff is always 400 useful stats and doubles or triples when swapping objectives you fight at

- Usually all servers have it at same time

- It promotes fighting over it and there are almost no other defender advantages at ruins (other than cannons)

- It is objective that promotes small groups whereas claim buff forces you to "just bring more numbers" to play around it

 

So borderlands bloodlust is well designed system to fight over which shows that original WvW devs were more competent regarding numbers. It is true bloodlust could be replaced with another more fight inducing objective like a castle but it isn't numerically a problem

Edited July 24, 2022 by Riba.3271