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

[Xenesis.6389]

1 hour ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

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.

Like I said those meatgrinders already exist with those boon ball guilds camping out keeps grinding pugs. You know why it doesn't last? because eventually the meat gets tired and moves on, guess what they will do when you have those temporary waypoints out in the zone, they'll ignore it and move on to something else. I've seen t3 keeps fall because defenders got tired of running into virtually unbeatable boon balls for 20 mins.

 

For wvw fights it's not a matter of respawning faster for players, it's whether or not you can even beat the group, if not they move on even to another map. Go ahead and find one of the grinder groups if that's what you want to do.

[Fipmip.7219]

38 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Like I said those meatgrinders already exist with those boon ball guilds camping out keeps grinding pugs. You know why it doesn't last? because eventually the meat gets tired and moves on, guess what they will do when you have those temporary waypoints out in the zone, they'll ignore it and move on to something else. I've seen t3 keeps fall because defenders got tired of running into virtually unbeatable boon balls for 20 mins.

 

For wvw fights it's not a matter of respawning faster for players, it's whether or not you can even beat the group, if not they move on even to another map. Go ahead and find one of the grinder groups if that's what you want to do.

Well yeah that sounds like abuse of game mechanics to artificially draw out a fight. but that's not the average experience is it? that's a separate problem with a separate solution.

 

Getting beat is part of the game, someone has to be on the losing side. That's not exclusive to long or short fights. my proposal isnt to make fights last forever, its to make them last longer. Beating your enemy into giving up because its taking too long isnt the win condition.

[Justine.6351]

51 minutes ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

Well yeah that sounds like abuse of game mechanics to artificially draw out a fight. but that's not the average experience is it? that's a separate problem with a separate solution.

 

Getting beat is part of the game, someone has to be on the losing side. That's not exclusive to long or short fights. my proposal isnt to make fights last forever, its to make them last longer. Beating your enemy into giving up because its taking too long isnt the win condition.

That's kind of what smc is already. 1 defending server and 2 attacking servers. The sides need population balance for that to function proper.

[godfat.2604]

8 hours 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.

For sure, it just didn’t make sense and I think it’s clearly an unintentional bug. However we can still adjust it so it makes better sense. Downed penalty was one thing I mentioned, the other thing can be that each revival skills can only revive for a fixed amount, so if the lord had scaled up so much, it would need to take a large amounts of banners to get back as well. Make it more difficult to do, so it can’t happen indefinitely. It was so bad because it’s just too easy to fully revive the lord with no penalty back then. I still remembered seeing a solo defy pain warrior rushing in and revived the lord despite being completely surrounded. It’s quite common that it can take several hours yet no one can take over SMC. That’s frustrating for sure.

Another example to adjust a bug as a feature is the emergency waypoint. Back then there’s another stupid bug that there’s a 1~2 seconds of window after the defending event for an objective, the waypoint would be uncontested. That’s another tool for the outnumbered team to contest the objective as long as possible. I was puzzled why this wasn’t fixed for so long. This was another contributor to the old endless fights. In the end, I think emergency waypoint was a good addition and this stupid bug must be fixed for sure.

8 hours ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

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.

Anything that is not bandaid fix will require some dedicated efforts. It’s sad that it feels any kind of suggestions for WvW are all wishful thinking. Actually, we don’t even have enough bandaid fixes. Cornerstone. Yes.

[Riba.3271]

If you want longer battles, go siege a keep as the defenders won't fully wipe everytime and can keep trying.

 

Oh wait, nvm, keep sieges are dead for several years now. Maybe fixing the siege and objective balance would help. You can tell from how guilds act, that taking things isn't exactly challenging in a fun way anymore. Well it isn't exactly competitive having to deal with lord, multiple respawns, tactics, stealth bombs, siege and considerable stat disadvantage at the same time. Back when lord was weak, tactics didn't exist and stealth bombing was extremely hard requiring a thief and waste of cooldowns,  it was just siege and respawns. Yes, walls were stronger and catapults more expensive but waiting a few minutes to catapult something was never the issue since it paid itself back with fun instead of misery.

Start by removing combat stats from claim buff by replacing it with some more magic find or supply stuff, and removing any easy ways to AoE stealth.

Edited September 3, 2022 by Riba.3271

[Sviel.7493]

The reason this works better in Planetside is because the battles themselves are usually slower paced and heavily rely on momentum.  You can't just rush up to a point and overwhelm a slightly smaller force because defensive force multipliers actually exist.  You also can't stack 50 deep and rely on AoE target caps to mitigate incoming damage.  You largely push in small cells, sometimes comprising a large overall force, and die in small cells then return to the push.

Distance in WvW is extremely important to the game's balance.  This is why, on their newest map, they were careful to mirror walking distances between objectives.  It's also why the addition of the Warclaw was akin to shooting themselves in the foot, but there's no going back on that now.  If players can re-enter the fight too quickly, you end up with stalemates that are epic if you're into that sort of thing but exhausting if you're not.  Battles are won not because of strength or strategy, but simply endurance.

Still, your feeling that fights in WvW are the RvR equivalent of minute-men is not wrong.  Sieges are a lot of waiting around followed by the possibility of a one-sided fight and that isn't a whole lot fun.  We could use a fix for this that works for GW2, but we can't just import the Planetside version.

I think the best solution is to make the siege part more active by toning down the inevitability of large groups.  There's already a huge advantage to splitting up an assault, but players don't bother because it's easier to just sit a fat zerg down on some proxy catas and wait a minute or two.  The zerg fight at the climax doesn't have to be the only part anyone enjoys.  This would require a bunch of changes and could be implemented in myriad ways, but the general idea is that the whole siege should be a fun and legendary event.

[kash.9213]

On 9/2/2022 at 11:29 PM, Xenesis.6389 said:

For wvw fights it's not a matter of respawning faster for players, it's whether or not you can even beat the group, if not they move on even to another map

That's a good point. Once one side can dial into what's keeping up the other side and can take out a few pieces then if the other side had a new Field Waypoint on the commander or whatever, it could be like taking a hot Emergency Waypoint over and over. 

13 hours ago, Sviel.7493 said:

Distance in WvW is extremely important to the game's balance.  

Ya, there has to be some way to instill care into players and especially leadership. 

There's no open world elements or tone on the maps right now connecting to the core world to give a lived in quality so the siege and fight are what people are going to rush to. 

There could be a more thematic lane from spawn all the way to the most active front lines of activities ranging from combat, team movement and travel, and social aspects that feeds equipment and effort into the siege. Even visually there's little sign of territory turnover or ruin and people still try to run into the wrong color doors. The thematic aspects could include features from different story eras of the game, possibly by having some active or passive connection to players and guild mates in the core world. GW2 even has skiffs on top of everything else at this point and we still have builds that have almost no underwater capabilities in WvW. 

Nice breakdown of the Planetside difference. The momentum of fights in that game was a blast. Too bad there wasn't much else to do in that game. 

Edited September 4, 2022 by kash.9213

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

On 9/2/2022 at 6:04 AM, 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. 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.

this just goes 100% in the wrong direction. countless people did quit the gamemode bc the fights are boring, slow and steady without much options of what u can do anymore, since feb20 roughly...

so why would u make it even more of a grind to go for a full wipe of one side?

 

also, it is 90% the fault of: a) the support players for not playing their class well /// b) damage player for running so far into a bomb till they simply eat 30 spikes at once, and dieing far too early

at a large size, losing up to 10 people is still no loss, as long as people keep their job up and do not rout

 

just, the larger amount of people playing the game atm are mostly not capable anymore of doing this... and motivation to rise this is as small as it could be. its too easy to survive for standalone people due to the dmg nerfs. and its incredibly hard for smaller groups to beat bigger ones, as hard as it never used to be

the gamemode therefore evolved into this direction and we ARE there yet where u think we are not lol

___
about the warclaw, yes it kinda was better before the nerfs. it had use back then. now it's only a optical acessoire. at least looks good, if u have some starclaw skin or sth alike :9

[Ashantara.8731]

I'd love some fun mechanics like having to carry an orb some place or having to use siege turtles. Anything to make WvW more diverse or complex. When you have played it frequently for a while, it's growing boring and somewhat braindead.

[Fipmip.7219]

On 9/4/2022 at 2:07 PM, Sviel.7493 said:

The reason this works better in Planetside is because the battles themselves are usually slower paced and heavily rely on momentum.  You can't just rush up to a point and overwhelm a slightly smaller force because defensive force multipliers actually exist.  You also can't stack 50 deep and rely on AoE target caps to mitigate incoming damage.  You largely push in small cells, sometimes comprising a large overall force, and die in small cells then return to the push.

Distance in WvW is extremely important to the game's balance.  This is why, on their newest map, they were careful to mirror walking distances between objectives.  It's also why the addition of the Warclaw was akin to shooting themselves in the foot, but there's no going back on that now.  If players can re-enter the fight too quickly, you end up with stalemates that are epic if you're into that sort of thing but exhausting if you're not.  Battles are won not because of strength or strategy, but simply endurance.

Still, your feeling that fights in WvW are the RvR equivalent of minute-men is not wrong.  Sieges are a lot of waiting around followed by the possibility of a one-sided fight and that isn't a whole lot fun.  We could use a fix for this that works for GW2, but we can't just import the Planetside version.

I think the best solution is to make the siege part more active by toning down the inevitability of large groups.  There's already a huge advantage to splitting up an assault, but players don't bother because it's easier to just sit a fat zerg down on some proxy catas and wait a minute or two.  The zerg fight at the climax doesn't have to be the only part anyone enjoys.  This would require a bunch of changes and could be implemented in myriad ways, but the general idea is that the whole siege should be a fun and legendary event.

Honestly i think the point about stacking and boonballing is the main blocker here since even with longer sieges, it's hard to kill anyone 1 on 1 like in PS2 which is the main reason that you usually cant just blast your way into the objective in planetside (MAX pushing is a thing though), which means gw2 fights will always revolve around either rapidly smashing the enemy ball or being smashed. respawning players would just trickle into their respective commander balls since being left behind means rapid death against small knots of players, like two tornadoes constantly being fed with more particulate.

 

I think one way of fixing this would be more anti zerg mechanics and classes built around mass stripping boons ( i had an idea for a 'negate magic' class that could strip AoEs off the ground) but if im being honest, WvW fights aren't that fun to begin with. no wonder no one wants them to last more than a few minutes.

Edited September 6, 2022 by Fipmip.7219

[Xenesis.6389]

13 minutes ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

I think one way of fixing this would be more anti zerg mechanics and classes built around mass stripping boons 

We have those, they've just been nerfed to the ground over the years because the other side doesn't like losing stability or their 11 other boons even for a second.

[Fipmip.7219]

13 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

We have those, they've just been nerfed to the ground over the years because the other side doesn't like losing stability or their 11 other boons even for a second.

i know we 'had' those, im saying we should 'have' those

[ArchonWing.9480]

Unnerf the Desert Wyern!

That thing can still do a number on groups; too bad it's in a hidden corner.

[Xenesis.6389]

55 minutes ago, Fipmip.7219 said:

i know we 'had' those, im saying we should 'have' those

Yes well good luck convincing the boon ball overlords about that, we've been trying to do that for years and it only gets it nerfed more.