What would you think of trying to facilitate longer battles with game mechanics?

[Fipmip.7219]

There are a few games that try to deal with large scale player battles. one that comes to mind is planetside 2, in which spawning is much more close quarters and unrestricted, leading to battles that last longer and maintain momentum. In my opinion, WvW is supposed to be the big battle mode, but big battles usually only last a few minutes. It seems to me like the focus should be on getting the ball rolling, and trying to maintain it as long as possible for the "mind bending, gut wrenching all out war" as the mist recruiters like to call it.

 

As to how i would do this personally, I would add more spawns around the map, and allow people to spawn in contested areas. I would also add camps as a buildable siege option that would become a spawn location, that can only be placed within a certain radius of castles and eachother, and decay over time if not used. But that just a simple suggestion, and the main question is to whether you would support this design philosophy of "keeping the fight going and making it easy to drop into the fight" overall.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Fipmip.7219

[SoftFootpaws.9134]

We already had these features;

Originally, Warclaw had a much higher movement speed, allowing you to get back to battles very quickly, and near the start of the game revival skills could be used on lords, etc. As a result battles were extremely long (almost never-ending) in both scenarios but it was "fixed" because of complaints from the playerbase.

 

The complaints were the same as for downstate, because players don't want longer battles, they want instant gratification. If you gave the playerbase in this game the option of instagibbing enemies, they'd take it, just so they could laugh while the funny number goes up.

 

The challenge of "gut wrenching war" isn't something anyone seems to want these days.

Edited September 2, 2022 by Mariyuuna.6508

[Dawdler.8521]

The more casual respawn system is called revival.

[Fipmip.7219]

2 hours ago, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

We already had these features;

Originally, Warclaw had a much higher movement speed, allowing you to get back to battles very quickly, and near the start of the game revival skills could be used on lords, etc. As a result battles were extremely long (almost never-ending) in both scenarios but it was "fixed" because of complaints from the playerbase.

 

The complaints were the same as for downstate, because players don't want longer battles, they want instant gratification. If you gave the playerbase in this game the option of instagibbing enemies, they'd take it, just so they could laugh while the funny number goes up.

 

The challenge of "gut wrenching war" isn't something anyone seems to want these days.

That's a real shame I guess, since I was hoping wvw might change over the years to try and facilitate more prolonged combat. I don't see why players would shy away from being able to fight longer to farm kills and get action more easily but I guess capping objectives is ingrained into the established base at this point. Maybe in GW3.

[Zyreva.1078]

If you want fights to not end instantly - get better and don't die instantly. Srsly. It is already way too easy to defend close to spawn structures by nonstop respawning and eventually overwhelming opponents with sheer numbers.

WvW already has a lot of carry mechanics  for bad players and superior numbers - don't need even more.

Faster respawns would actually kill good (even and longer lasting) fights, because insta killing the entirety of your opponents becomes the only way to win.

Edited September 2, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907

[Fipmip.7219]

1 hour ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

If you want fights to not end instantly - get better and don't die instantly. Srsly. It is already way too easy to defend close to spawn structures by nonstop respawning and eventually overwhelming opponents with sheer numbers.

WvW already has a lot of carry mechanics  for bad players and superior numbers - don't need even more.

Faster respawns would actually kill good (even and longer lasting) fights, because insta killing the entirety of your opponents becomes the only way to win.

How does this make sense? just because I'm not dying personally doesnt mean the overall fight is gonna last much longer. It's a team fight after all.

We know it's possible to make large scale games with long satisfying fights because they exist in this world. so why is it impossible in GW2?

Edited September 2, 2022 by Fipmip.7219

[Zyreva.1078]

24 minutes ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

so why is it impossible in GW2?

It's not. Fight's can be long and they can be satisfying, sometimes even both.

Instant respawns won't make fights any better.

Edited September 2, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907

[Mabi black.1824]

19 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

It's not. Fight's can be long and they can be satisfying, sometimes even both.

Instant respawns won't make fights any better.

I think the same way. you can not claim to overturn the result of a clash even prolonged just because you continue wp 30 seconds from the combat zone, it would not be correct for the team that played its cards better.

[Strider Pj.2193]

Your post brings up a couple of interesting issues:

 

1.  WvW is about epic fights

2.  WvW is about capturing objectives.

 

the two tend to clash…. If it was just about fights (and for many of us that is why they play the game) your suggestion would be fantastic.

 

However, it breaks down fast when considering capturing objectives.  If the respawn process went as quickly as you have suggested, objectives would only be captured if you are just PvDooring all day/night. (Which happens now as well..)

 

 

[Zyreva.1078]

7 minutes ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

If it was just about fights (and for many of us that is why they play the game) your suggestion would be fantastic.

Are spawn camps really the epitome of good fights? Because that's what you'd get everywhere instead of only right next to the spawn ...

(Also objectives and fights don't need to exclude each other, they'd just have to reduce the amount of fight deterrents arround objectives ...)

Edited September 2, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907

[Strider Pj.2193]

29 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Are spawn camps really the epitome of good fights? Because that's what you'd get everywhere instead of only right next to the spawn ...

(Also objectives and fights don't need to exclude each other, they'd just have to reduce the amount of fight deterrents arround objectives ...)

No.  And no that isn’t at all what I suggested.

 

There are games where the spawn points are fluid…. And you have a continuous stream of players to fight.   which, if fights were the only way to score and make points ( which, by the way are pointless lol.  No reason to ‘win’) then it would be a possible option.
 

As far as the objectives and fights being exclusive, I fully agree with you.  In fact, I miss being able to banner the lord.  30 minute garrison fights ‘back in the day’ with repetitive bannering of the lord could be very epic.  
 

But having someone be able to just pop right back in would not present any aspect of attrition.    

[Dawdler.8521]

8 minutes ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

In fact, I miss being able to banner the lord.  30 minute garrison fights ‘back in the day’ with repetitive bannering of the lord could be very epic.  

30 minutes? Sounds like a breeze. We used to have 2h+ constant 3-way full border zerg fights in garri lords with the enemy side ressing the lord 30+ times before it was finally capped, or everyone stopped fighting due to fatigue lol.

Either way I still stand by what I said earlier: The answer to the thread is revival. Its there for a reason, as is downstate. This is the reason.

[godfat.2604]

14 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

29 minutes ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

In fact, I miss being able to banner the lord.  30 minute garrison fights ‘back in the day’ with repetitive bannering of the lord could be very epic.  

30 minutes? Sounds like a breeze. We used to have 2h+ constant 3-way full border zerg fights in garri lords with the enemy side ressing the lord 30+ times before it was finally capped, or everyone stopped fighting due to fatigue lol

I was thinking exactly this. It’s epic and unforgettable, even though it’s like a joke. Perhaps we should bring this back, just add downed penalty to the lords so they can’t be revived for too many times in a row.

As for the topic, I actually think that SMC is exactly the place today, and also most of my experiences for bannering the lord back then. As long as the walls and gates are down, and there are not too many roamers catching zergling running back, it can still last quite some time even we can’t banner the lord now.

The only map which I think it takes a bit too much time running back is the desert map. But I have to admit that it’s also because I am still not familiar with it today, and I often got lost running back…

[kash.9213]

4 hours ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

How does this make sense? just because I'm not dying personally doesnt mean the overall fight is gonna last much longer. It's a team fight after all.

We know it's possible to make large scale games with long satisfying fights because they exist in this world. so why is it impossible in GW2?

I think what you want is a scaled up spvp match. WvW was designed with the idea that multiple squads and groups would spread out across the maps hitting up objectives giving players options of the type of activity they want. Your request only considers two large sides in a persistent fight in one location. 

When was the last time you saw someone in chat volunteer to patrol around the keep and your corner of the map to make sure the keep isn't constantly tapped? 

When was the last time your server consistently defended all of their waypoint structures? Would even more remote waypoints be defended and available for enough time to be a factor in map travel if many of us rarely see our color Bay or Hills? 

Ideally if you die and your side is pushing with full force on a corner of a map then you'd run back with increased speed and protection with other players, or you'd take the opportunity to head somewhere else and clean up territory along the way. I think the playerbase and group habits will determine your frustration more than a proliferation of convenience. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by kash.9213

[Xenesis.6389]

Battles are meant to be fights of attrition, not prolonged let's farm each other for 2 hrs straight like they did in OS all those years ago for the ultimate dominator title.

 

10 hours ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

I don't see why players would shy away from being able to fight longer to farm kills and get action more easily

This already happens, have you not witnessed fight guilds in their boon balls farming keeps or towers? happens ever day, just turn on Indo's stream to see it. Even last night it happened when ET SoR DH all had fight guilds battling around Swt on green bl. You even get the pug v pug fights in places like ogrewatch sentry or wildcreek sentry areas. The problem isn't respawns, it's the sustain and positioning of groups. Adding more spawns isn't going to make battles longer and better, it'll just be more feeding the boon ball meat grinder groups. Fun when you're the meat grinder sure, not fun when you're on the other end though.

 

13 hours ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

There are a few games that try to deal with large scale player battles. one that comes to mind is planetside 2, in which spawning is much more close quarters and unrestricted, leading to battles that last longer and maintain momentum.

Planetside has huge maps in comparison, those frontline respawn points are also temporary as they can be destroyed.

 

ESO also has one huge map and so their spawns go as far as connected objectives go, but again those can be disrupted along the way.

 

Unless you combine all of ebg and the three borderland maps together for one giant map, there's no real need to have frontline spawning. Even then... we already have emergency waypoints.

[Gorani.7205]

14 hours ago, Mariyuuna.6508 said:

We already had these features;

...

"Bannering" the Lord, getting that three second window after each "contested event" to try to use the keep way point ... those have not been the worst times in WvW. Fighting in and over keeps was much more common during those days. Getting dollies and stalling the enemy while your wall upgrade was closing in to 100% (or the T2 to T3 upgrade for a way point) have been exciting things to fight over.

[Avion Blade.4869]

Make airship drops a tactic deployable at camps. You cannot waypoint into the air above the camp if you do not have the glider unlocked, players spawn gliding just incase someone lags and so they don't fall to their death. 

I know its a far reach of a suggestion, but it would make for some flashy ways of reinforcing a point; its similar to EWP but in the sky, not to high though, maybe like only 8 golemn's high.

[Justine.6351]

Yes wvw needs more graveyarding...

[Fipmip.7219]

8 hours ago, godfat.2604 said:

I was thinking exactly this. It’s epic and unforgettable, even though it’s like a joke. Perhaps we should bring this back, just add downed penalty to the lords so they can’t be revived for too many times in a row.

As for the topic, I actually think that SMC is exactly the place today, and also most of my experiences for bannering the lord back then. As long as the walls and gates are down, and there are not too many roamers catching zergling running back, it can still last quite some time even we can’t banner the lord now.

The only map which I think it takes a bit too much time running back is the desert map. But I have to admit that it’s also because I am still not familiar with it today, and I often got lost running back…

Imo people probably complained because repeatedly reviving the lord just feels kind of unsatisfying, like you should have won but cant finish it. functionally it leads to longer fights but thematically it would feel bad. I think from reading this thread, people dont mind having longer fights but it needs to feel right.

 

Taking from planetside, you could rework the castles to have multiple small objectives with weaker lords defending them, so that the majority of points need to be held and a bar fills up to take the objective. That would require a full map rework though so just wishful thinking here.

 

5 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

 

 

This already happens, have you not witnessed fight guilds in their boon balls farming keeps or towers? happens ever day, just turn on Indo's stream to see it. Even last night it happened when ET SoR DH all had fight guilds battling around Swt on green bl. You even get the pug v pug fights in places like ogrewatch sentry or wildcreek sentry areas. The problem isn't respawns, it's the sustain and positioning of groups. Adding more spawns isn't going to make battles longer and better, it'll just be more feeding the boon ball meat grinder groups. Fun when you're the meat grinder sure, not fun when you're on the other end though.

I mean, no i really havent. I dipped my toes in for enough time to reach WvW rank 30. I also played a couple of years ago to get my other GoB and i was kind of dissapointed to find the experience is basically unchanged. I do see boon ball zergs farming objectives but when they fight eachother? fun for a few minutes then its over. If you read my post, I was suggesting the same siege camp mobile spawn mechanics found in PS2, and I remember seeing suggestions for it on the old forums as well. Again though, it's just a simple suggestion and not really the focus of the post. the focus is really: to debate whether longer fights are better and whether anet should try and facilitate them with game mechanics.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

yes. uncontestable (if enemies aren't in the circle) waypoints in every t1 tower and keep.  this would not only promote longer fights but increase peoples willingness to defend. it would create more fun with no downsides.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Stand The Wall.6987

[Odin.6487]

1 hour ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

Imo people probably complained because repeatedly reviving the lord just feels kind of unsatisfying, like you should have won but cant finish it. functionally it leads to longer fights but thematically it would feel bad. I think from reading this thread, people dont mind having longer fights but it needs to feel right.

 

Taking from planetside, you could rework the castles to have multiple small objectives with weaker lords defending them, so that the majority of points need to be held and a bar fills up to take the objective. That would require a full map rework though so just wishful thinking here.

this would require anet to not be lazy. 

 

theyd have to do more than read the wiki to accomplish this. 

[Xenesis.6389]

16 hours ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

I mean, no i really havent. I dipped my toes in for enough time to reach WvW rank 30. I also played a couple of years ago to get my other GoB and i was kind of dissapointed to find the experience is basically unchanged. I do see boon ball zergs farming objectives but when they fight eachother? fun for a few minutes then its over. If you read my post, I was suggesting the same siege camp mobile spawn mechanics found in PS2, and I remember seeing suggestions for it on the old forums as well. Again though, it's just a simple suggestion and not really the focus of the post. the focus is really: to debate whether longer fights are better and whether anet should try and facilitate them with game mechanics.

Why do you think we've moved into boon balling? it's to help pleb groups with sustain. It's the whole reason anet has made this push to have boon spam everywhere in the game, to help raise the level of play for players cause their own personal skill wasn't cutting it. They moved away  from stuff like fields and blasting for more spamming because players either couldn't understand it or it was too much work for them.

 

Are you asking for longer fights through constant respawns like you're playing some random fps game like battlefield or cod? Cause tbh playing meat grinder isn't fun.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[displayname.8315]

You can have long fights, survive even when your team is horrible, pick up the pieces with the other 8 surviving people that learned to play and defend the gate or whatever.

 

The game really is designed with skill in mind.

 

 

[Fipmip.7219]

2 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Why do you think we've moved into boon balling? it's to help pleb groups with sustain. It's the whole reason anet has made this push to have boon spam everywhere in the game, to help raise the level of play for players cause their own personal skill wasn't cutting it. They took away stuff like fields and blasting for more spamming because players either couldn't understand it or it was too much work for them.

 

Are you asking for longer fights through constant respawns like you're playing some random fps game like battlefield or cod? Cause tbh playing meat grinder isn't fun.

Well yeah, the meatgrinder is fun to me. It would be better than what we have now, just running from cap to cap just shattering all resistance in minutes/trying to blast through walls before people can react. its just depending on skill you can be the one doing the grinding or getting grinded. right now, the difference is either instakilling or getting instakilled.

[Ausar.9542]

a mobile Waypoint siege machine would be epic in WvW. there would be some massive fights and battles to control those waypoints.