Hey ANet so that thought about people only defend while outnumbered due to Outnumbered Buff, how are your numbers looking?

[TheGrimm.5624]

So players were discouraged to defend and hold via two changes. Making it so repairing applied zero participation and playing while outnumbered only aided if the out numbered side was successful in killing the larger force. What we have seen is more of squads will move on versus repairing and more people will move maps to attack since trying to hold while outnumbered means just a respawn.  So it leaves even less to try and stop and repair for the sake of holding and more just moving on to attack. I agree with people that say well it means the server doesn't want to hold it's objectives but it still means don't worry about defending just karma train. 

Ran into about 3 hours where less were holding out against more to retain what they owned, because it was theirs. They were finally over run. But they were over run because why should people stop to repair or hold since it meant less return for their time, just move on. So fewer were left with repairs and camp holds to do said repairs as why bother its of less value then just taking. Let stop siding with the karma side of equation please. We are already having to wait for Alliances before we can discuss winning, stop tipping the balance of the scales to the attackers versus the defenders. And I say this as a roamer/havoc. Which is always easier to attack than defend. Stop abusing the scouts and defenders with one sided changes because you fear the few pip hunters, instead increase the decay rate of people in spawn to account for those idle people that might be looking to harvest pips and remove the bias of repairs versus supply to attack. Remove the bias to attack versus defend and to try and hold even if they can't hold out. Outnumbered was meant to draw more in, now it means, just get away and leave. You lost the purpose which was, hold till we get more. You were worried more about people trying to game the system versus the players playing the game mode. Rebalance holding versus attacking and taking only.

[Justine.6351]

Gotta use those pulls and pushes if you want to secure kills.

[Zyreva.1078]

I haven't noticed any changes in player behaviour when it comes to defending. Those that care about defending still do it, those that don't care never did (and no, stuffing a little bit of supply into a wall once in a while to keep participation up does not equal defending and has no impact on the outcome of the siege).

The main reasons players don't defend are that it's less rewarding (which has always been the case, mind you) and they don't want to face enemy players. Both factors used to be much less relevant, because nobody used to play WvW for the rewards and it was mostly about the (PvP) gameplay. That being said, players still defend a lot when it's easy and safe to do so (just look at all those north camp campers and players hugging their T3 keeps/SM with massive numbers).

Also attacking is only easier if there are no defenders present (or those are heavily outnumbered). When numbers are even, it's usually the defenders that are at an advantage (which again pushes players more towards PvDoor).

Edited November 21, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907

[Xenesis.6389]

10 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

What we have seen is more of squads will move on

That had already happened a lot before the outnumbered change. It came down to the commanders preference and outnumbered really has no effect on this decision. These squads, mainly the organized guilds, and anet included, all want fights to happen on the inside of objectives. When repairs are done to the minimum it suits them just fine as it extends periods for fighting around that objective.

Having a wall tapped shut is enough of a breather for those groups to regroup themselves, until the next fight which they would welcome, ever notice how much counter siege these groups drop? practically none, most times they wait for the wall to drop before attacking through chokes. The only time a squad (mainly a pug one), would want full repair is if they expect not being able to respond in time, because they're going to be on the other side of the map or on another map. Strictly as a delay tactic, they don't care about some scout getting repair participation, they never did.

Quote

more people will move maps to attack since trying to hold while outnumbered means just a respawn.

So then doesn't that just mean the outnumbered now motivates players to attack something rather than stand around half afk waiting to repair a wall? Zerg groups will move maps because they cannot beat boon ball groups greater than theirs, which boils down to more of a problem with combat than outnumbered these days.

Holding while outnumbered more often than not relies on whether or not you have groups on to come counter defend, otherwise you are going to lose the objective anyways. The only time a lesser group is suppose to hold out is through smart use of disables, tactivators, and counter siege, not so much on spam repairs to full, upgraded walls and whatever supply is available for a repair or two after breaks is suppose to be enough of a delay to get a defensive group in position.

I do agree the change to the outnumbered pips was way too premature now, or maybe a couple extra pips should have stayed, since a year later they still don't even have WR/Alliances out of the beta, which was even stated to be out "in 2021". This change should have only been made right as WR was deployed, which from our perspective now looks like it could be another couple years given their snail pace on the betas. They stalled for 3 years and claimed "but we really started in 2021 with the new team!", now a year and half later it seems they are trying to complete the meme again. "Cornerstone"

I do think one thing should change, and that is how much supply is put into a repair per "hammer tick" from Repair master, but also how much is put in after the max amount. Right now repair master goes to 10 supply per tick, but also if you have less than that it tends to put it in by 2's, for example if you had 3 remaining and go to repair it would take 2 and then the 1 instead of all 3 in the first place. The amount of supply you put in from the mastery needs to be raised to 25, and the full amounts should be put in over one tick, not over 2-3 other hammer ticks. This would reduce the time it takes for solo players to repair walls, thus less time wasting participation.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Xenesis.6389

[MedievalThings.5417]

Since the change, there's been a slight reduction in willingness to defend.

The big thing has been who or when.  Large groups will come back to kill a small attacking group or equal group if it's pugs.  Large groups won't even change maps to defend against another large boon blob.  The ktrain blobs expect pugs and roamers to hold everything then complain when they don't have a waypoint.

 

Repairing, almost no one bothers anymore.  Most of the defending and repairing has been the dedicated players/scouts.  Scouts get no credit for anything and get blamed when things get taken.  Yet people expect them to build all the siege, refresh it, make all the callouts perfectly, never go to the bathroom AND do all of that while not even getting participation.  It's gotten to where scouts are expected to defend and keep both camps too.

 

Anet is succeeding in making it so that the only way to play is for 50+ groups to only ever fight smaller groups, comps to only ever fight pugs, and defending is complained about.  Every nerf has been a way to make ktrain blobs more efficient.

[Sahne.6950]

The sentence i hear the most lately:

i have wasted so much time of my life, solo repairing walls... now i will even loose my participation while doing it....

*runs off into the sunset to zerg some random Camp*   

Me:  *stands there.... looks at the wall with 22%.......*   That´ll do!   *follows the zerg*

Edited November 22, 2022 by Sahne.6950

[Nikola.3841]

DAOC developers were clearly
 

 

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

18 hours ago, Nikola.3841 said:

DAOC developers were clearly
 

 

 

 

Missed DAoC, but was in WAR thru its entire lifespawn and played with many DAoC players. Might you clarify more?

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 11/21/2022 at 1:07 PM, Xenesis.6389 said:

That had already happened a lot before the outnumbered change. It came down to the commanders preference and outnumbered really has no effect on this decision. 

 

I agree. Commanders move on because they don't see outnumbered because they weren't and just move, not realizing they now left a map outnumbered. That left a few to repair because they didn't want to lose their stuff but still had repairs to do and didn't care they would lose participation because they were looking to win the week versus have their objective taken which could be re-taken later. Aka Karma-Train ANet. 

Where I am going is outnumbered now discourages smaller game play. Roamers and havocs might have in the past play outnumbered be that to attack or defend because of outnumbered buff but after it and the change to repairing it's a disincentive to stop and defend/repair which further divides roamers and havoc even from trying to hold their own. Larger play was already encouraged to skip and ktrain. So if ANet is going there, than increase PPT to account for the move to don't fight, take the empty that has zero holding. Again its about balance in attack and defend and not some pip farmer or AFK player, we have plenty of the attack farmers already.

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by TheGrimm.5624

[Nikola.3841]

28 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

Missed DAoC, but was in WAR thru its entire lifespawn and played with many DAoC players. Might you clarify more?

 

They got almost everything right...sure, it had lots of bugs and balance problems (46 different classes!), but it had best to this day RvR (realm vs realm), RvR was real endgame for most people, players itself created 8vs8 and 1vs1 scene (which still mattered in grand scheme of things), you had incentive to go to RvR because it affected PVE too, command line was best ever too, there were TSR people (employees that would help with problems on-line, immediately), housing was great, crafting was great...

 

Watch this video for short glimpse (its not rendered but real gameplay):

 

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 11/21/2022 at 1:07 PM, Xenesis.6389 said:

So then doesn't that just mean the outnumbered now motivates players to attack something rather than stand around half afk waiting to repair a wall?

 

Xen, my friend, 🙂. Yes and no. It comes down to players looking to milk versus those trying to hold their stuff against more. To some it might have meant hold as long as you can in hoping backup will come versus gain something while on map as something falls. Not saying people didn't try and farm the system but the changes also erred on the side of why try and defend. IMO, the devs went in the KTrain side of the equation due to whatever reason. 

[Cyninja.2954]

I'm with @Xenesis.6389 on this. The main issue is the type of player you look at.

 

I know some scouts on my server, they have their favorite objective and they will defend it until it falls. Some commanders will actively help and the it's possible to get a nice groove going, mostly disrupted only by severe player number disparity.

 

I've also seen commanders who will instant teleport the moment enemies appear, taking their 10-20 players with them and most certainly not engagning in any fighting or defending.

 

Then you have your "I saw 1 red dot, siege up EVERYTHING NOW" servers where you can rest assured every areow cart and siege weapon will be manned until the power goes out, while getting steamrolled open field.

 

All of these are behaviors which first and foremost are guided by a players approach to the game mode.

 

That said, rewards and game design do factor in significantly. I personally believe the first step has to be to improve player balance before adjusting rewards (though design could already see touch ups) because some design decisions play out very differently in regards to how big of a number disparity sides have.

 

Finally, yes, DAoC and WH:Online all the way. While not all of those games design decisions can be transfered or applied to modern day WvW, the developers should absolutely take a look at those games and see what worked and didn't work. I recall especially WH having to try multiple different approaches to scoring before player ingenuity in abusing the scoreing system where minimized (remember when the enemy couldn't take your structures if not enough defenders showed up?).

[Nikola.3841]

33 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

I'm with @Xenesis.6389 on this. The main issue is the type of player you look at.

 

I've also seen commanders who will instant teleport the moment enemies appear, taking their 10-20 players with them and most certainly not engagning in any fighting or defending.

 

I saw whole server doing that. That server always tap garri to prevent us coming fast, use spies to activate all our tactivators, and put 10 catas on bay or hills, and if all those methods to avoid fighting fail, they bail out the moment they see us coming

[Karagee.6830]

2 hours ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Then you have your "I saw 1 red dot, siege up EVERYTHING NOW" servers where you can rest assured every areow cart and siege weapon will be manned until the power goes out, while getting steamrolled open field.

 

Yes yes the Death Star building type of server. The ones who build defensive siege to the cap, trebs, shield gens, loads of acs, the works. 

[Xenesis.6389]

11 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

I agree. Commanders move on because they don't see outnumbered because they weren't and just move, not realizing they now left a map outnumbered. That left a few to repair because they didn't want to lose their stuff but still had repairs to do and didn't care they would lose participation because they were looking to win the week versus have their objective taken which could be re-taken later. Aka Karma-Train ANet. 

 

Where I am going is outnumbered now discourages smaller game play. Roamers and havocs might have in the past play outnumbered, be that to attack or defend because of outnumbered buff, but after it and the change to repairing it's a disincentive to stop and defend/repair which further divides roamers and havoc even from trying to hold their own.

 

Larger play was already encouraged to skip and ktrain. So if ANet is going there, than increase PPT to account for the move to don't fight, take the empty that has zero holding. Again its about balance in attack and defend and not some pip farmer or AFK player, we have plenty of the attack farmers already.

Again it really comes down to the players, not the outnumbered buff as motivation. If the roamers and havoc groups are active in taking camps, sentries, towers, killing players, they have more than enough participation and the outnumbered change did nothing to them, and in fact got more out of it now since they can play whether outnumbered was on or not with the additional pips. It's mainly the players who sat in objectives for long periods of time and relied on repairing as their main source of participation that got affected. 

 

In regards to repairing, players need to stop thinking they need to spend 10 mins repairing anything by themselves, and get everyone else on the map to pitch in and make it a couple mins job instead. I wonder how many make regular call outs for repairs? Personally whenever an attack is done I dump my supply into the broken area, and then usually call out it's been repaired to whatever %, /m outer wg repaired to 15%, this lets everyone on the map know that spot still needs repair, a lot of times I will run off to a camp and then come back to see that spot already repaired to close to 100%. You don't need a zerg to repair if your scouts/roamers on the map all chip in, and sometimes it's just a matter of letting them know.

 

Yes it sucks when the zerg hops maps without helping, but a lot of times it's a matter of factors, like maybe trying to put out another fire on another map, a lot of times you'll see one zerg trying to defend both ebg and homebl. Or even times they hop maps to the side that just attacked, to try and draw them back onto their own home map and away from yours. Or maybe the local camp was just taken and the next place to run for supplies is too far to drag 20-40 people around for just 100 supply at another camp. Or maybe they're a fight guild that cares about nothing but fighting.

 

Either way, the scouts can make their jobs easier by announcing what needs repairs more often, roamers will pitch in if they cared about holding stuff. Be active and you won't need to worry about participation. Repair mastery could use an upgrade.

[Dawdler.8521]

46 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

In regards to repairing, players need to stop thinking they need to spend 10 mins repairing anything by themselves, and get everyone else on the map to pitch in and make it a couple mins job instead. I wonder how many make regular call outs for repairs? Personally whenever an attack is done I dump my supply into the broken area, and then usually call out it's been repaired to whatever %, /m outer wg repaired to 15%, this lets everyone on the map know that spot still needs repair, a lot of times I will run off to a camp and then come back to see that spot already repaired to close to 100%. You don't need a zerg to repair if your scouts/roamers on the map all chip in, and sometimes it's just a matter of letting them know.

This is the same "issue" that exist in general - people completely lack initiative unless they have a commander to guide them.

Nothing will show you this better than when siege is built and 10 people are just staring at it going why doesnt it do anything?!

[Svarty.8019]

On 11/21/2022 at 7:54 AM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

So players were discouraged to defend and hold via two changes. Making it so repairing applied zero participation and playing while outnumbered only aided if the out numbered side was successful in killing the larger force. What we have seen is more of squads will move on versus repairing and more people will move maps to attack since trying to hold while outnumbered means just a respawn.  So it leaves even less to try and stop and repair for the sake of holding and more just moving on to attack. I agree with people that say well it means the server doesn't want to hold it's objectives but it still means don't worry about defending just karma train. 

Ran into about 3 hours where less were holding out against more to retain what they owned, because it was theirs. They were finally over run. But they were over run because why should people stop to repair or hold since it meant less return for their time, just move on. So fewer were left with repairs and camp holds to do said repairs as why bother its of less value then just taking. Let stop siding with the karma side of equation please. We are already having to wait for Alliances before we can discuss winning, stop tipping the balance of the scales to the attackers versus the defenders. And I say this as a roamer/havoc. Which is always easier to attack than defend. Stop abusing the scouts and defenders with one sided changes because you fear the few pip hunters, instead increase the decay rate of people in spawn to account for those idle people that might be looking to harvest pips and remove the bias of repairs versus supply to attack. Remove the bias to attack versus defend and to try and hold even if they can't hold out. Outnumbered was meant to draw more in, now it means, just get away and leave. You lost the purpose which was, hold till we get more. You were worried more about people trying to game the system versus the players playing the game mode. Rebalance holding versus attacking and taking only.

Hey everybody, get this person! They think logic, reasonable argument and common sense might influence Arenanet. HAHHAHAHA! That's a good one!

[HazyDaisy.4107]

Yep, we said this would happen and imagine that it did. 

 

But no no no, "those afkers and their 5 mins participation" relax, they're still there, only now there's not as many defenders there to watch them pull the tacts before they switch accts to get their daily keep cap...So glad they took care of that 5 minute problem.

[TheGrimm.5624]

11 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Again it really comes down to the players, not the outnumbered buff as motivation. If the roamers and havoc groups are active in taking camps, sentries, towers, killing players, they have more than enough participation and the outnumbered change did nothing to them

 

Xen, divide the topics here participation and outnumbered. More interested in why people will try and hold and others won't because of numbers. So I will give you an example though I agree it meant the server versus some did not want to hold their stuff based on actions. What I question is the balance in the ones that tried to hold versus the others that went for an easier score. I believe this was due to disincentives to do so based on ease of attacking versus defending. No incentive to repair and a negative impact on defensive actions tend to make more players choose not to hold their objectives. As of the example, while trying to repair the players looking to hold were outnumbered, meaning if they fell while doing so they had a long run back, they also were facing 3 to 1 while trying to reclaim camps to get supply and if they got aid the aid appeared and left without repairing. I agree the server deserved to lose the objective due to their choices. What I question is the balance in attacking versus defending that leads players to the mindset of let it fall we will take it back later. That makes me question the PPK value in having higher tiered objectives balance versus players own ideas of personal reward. The idea was that people that defended was in it for themselves but wouldn't that be more applied to those that are looking to the easy takes? Outnumbered helped to balance that to try and draw more people to come to a map where the population was out of balance to try and restore that. It encouraged less to do more. That's why I bring these up. Efficiency should have value on both attack and defense.  

[ArchonWing.9480]

On 11/20/2022 at 11:54 PM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

. Stop abusing the scouts and defenders with one sided changes because you fear the few pip hunters

I've always felt that it was a bad idea to punish everyone for the actions for a few.

It seems very out of touch that people feel that some are out to exploit the great bounty that is WvW rewards. Yes you have bad players trying to leech legendary armor and dailies, but ...

 

Is that really any better then those server hopping  "fight" guilds (and when i mean fight, I mean only take fights when they have no chance of dying) that hop to hold hands with like minded guilds which remain passive** in spawn for like 45 minutes putting on makeup and/or trying to get their full map queue in while telling other guilds/defenders to leave even though they will complain of the inconvenience of having no waypoints?

I like how people constantly complain about new players and pvers clogging up the map, yet it's usually those regulars that autorun into a corner or run circles around the keep. They might take a sentry if adventorous, and otherwise they're just flaming commanders or new players. Or just complaining.  Like you see them for years and wonder if anyone has been like "Wow, I'm glad so and so was there!" to them. Why are they still in the game? Thank God for alliances, for we will gatekeep the kitten out of sorry one push behind them finally.

At least to your average WvW'er, all are a waste of queue space. Problem is one has a bit more power.

** Under further advice I have decided to change "afk" to "remain passive", to not offend anyone's playstyle.

Edited November 24, 2022 by ArchonWing.9480

[Xenesis.6389]

9 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Xen, divide the topics here participation and outnumbered. More interested in why people will try and hold and others won't because of numbers. So I will give you an example though I agree it meant the server versus some did not want to hold their stuff based on actions.

 

What I question is the balance in the ones that tried to hold versus the others that went for an easier score. I believe this was due to disincentives to do so based on ease of attacking versus defending. No incentive to repair and a negative impact on defensive actions tend to make more players choose not to hold their objectives.

 

As of the example, while trying to repair the players looking to hold were outnumbered, meaning if they fell while doing so they had a long run back, they also were facing 3 to 1 while trying to reclaim camps to get supply and if they got aid the aid appeared and left without repairing. I agree the server deserved to lose the objective due to their choices. 

 

What I question is the balance in attacking versus defending that leads players to the mindset of let it fall we will take it back later. That makes me question the PPK value in having higher tiered objectives balance versus players own ideas of personal reward. The idea was that people that defended was in it for themselves but wouldn't that be more applied to those that are looking to the easy takes?

 

Outnumbered helped to balance that to try and draw more people to come to a map where the population was out of balance to try and restore that. It encouraged less to do more. That's why I bring these up. Efficiency should have value on both attack and defense.  

The simple answer to the balance between wanting to hold and wanting an easier score, is players motivated more by rewards or not. Wanting to hold comes down to different factors. One of which is players who don't take part in the upgrade/repair process really don't understand the time it takes, part of which was lost when auto upgrades became a thing, that value isn't there for them to want to defend it tooth and nail, they don't care if something falls and can just be recapped in 5mins and they'll be on their way. But imo this was true for both before and after the changes.

 

I believe a lot of players(including myself) will not try to fully defend at times if the enemy is overwhelming, both in the sense of numbers and combat prowess(aka boon ball), and you really don't expect more defenders especially if no squad or commanders are running, or you figure out they're really just there to farm bags. Will I respond to a call regardless of the situation, buffs, rewards, ect, yes, all those things have no bearing on that decision for me, but I won't be throwing myself into a ring to try and delay a boon blob when there's obviously no help coming..

 

In those situations it's just best to let them have the objective asap so they get bored with your side, and go after the other side while you rebuild. This is the switch you have to make from going all out defending, to capping what you can until you get numbers. Overall this is a problem that has crept up with combat over the years in which combat situations require to have at least near equal numbers, organization, and meta to have a chance. There are still situations where less numbers and organized can still defend against big groups, but it's less likely these days. Taking out outnumber rewards had no effect on a player like myself, what drives me is whether or not I have a chance of defeating the enemy and that requires me to show up and access the situation myself.

 

In regards to the balance between attacking and defending, motivations for this has to always be a little towards attacking, as  promoting conflicts is what drives pvp and wvw to keep it active and give a reason to play. If this equation is swung too far into defending, then you'd have a bunch of places that would never flip, players wouldn't attempt to attack something that is heavily fortified and requires a map q to break. This was a big complaint when it took 3 hours to break fully tiered, well populated, and heavily sieged keeps. This I believe is the line of reasoning for anet to want fights to take place on inner not outer more often, and why they nerfed walls and siege.

 

Now, does outnumber drive some of these situations and motivations, sure. But defending and outnumbered counteract each other, as with defending you always want more numbers, anyone who wants 5 people on the map so they can keep outnumbered and get the pips, while the enemy zerg runs over everything you own, isn't really interested in defending and keeping your objectives, they were only in it for the extra rewards for themselves. Defenders always want more players, they are happy when their zerg is on the map to help defend and recapture stuff, and they're certainly not happy when players don't respond to their call outs.

 

I'm of the belief that players who chased outnumbered did so on attacking enemy maps rather than defending your own. So I question whether or not a lot of players who want outnumbered so badly, really wanted it to draw players to a map(which would kill your outnumbered) or if they really wanted just the extra rewards from it. Most times when someone was asking for an outnumbered map they were doing so to get the pips, not to help populate the map, notice how many ask about outnumbered these days? pretty much none.

 

You could just as easily lose outnumbered in the next tick with someone advertising in map chat for outnumbered on home or a zerg was spotted, and your own side would respond, which kills the outnumbered. Now did the roamers/defenders leave your map to find another outnumbered map because your zerg entered and killed outnumbered? or did they stick around regardless of outnumbered gone and worked with the zerg for fights and recapturing objectives around the map? If they stuck around, then your statement about outnumbered promoting population balance is true, and still is true today.

 

TLDR In the purest sense, outnumbered is just a measurement to signal to your side where population is needed, and not some random loot goblin to chase for extra loot. Wanting less teammates to get more loot should not be a primary motivation to play  a team game. Most people who complained about outnumbered, did so with pip rewards as the mean reason. People will defend if there's a chance for them to succeed with it by how many respond to call outs, not outnumbered incentives, if not they might as well go look for something else to do. I still would like repairing to be faster by improving the mastery and process to spend less time on it, so it fixes that particular problem and not open it to abuse with rewards as the pips did.

 

Sorry for the essay.

[Nikola.3841]

On 11/24/2022 at 8:27 AM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

Xen, divide the topics here participation and outnumbered. More interested in why people will try and hold and others won't because of numbers. So I will give you an example though I agree it meant the server versus some did not want to hold their stuff based on actions. What I question is the balance in the ones that tried to hold versus the others that went for an easier score. I believe this was due to disincentives to do so based on ease of attacking versus defending. No incentive to repair and a negative impact on defensive actions tend to make more players choose not to hold their objectives. As of the example, while trying to repair the players looking to hold were outnumbered, meaning if they fell while doing so they had a long run back, they also were facing 3 to 1 while trying to reclaim camps to get supply and if they got aid the aid appeared and left without repairing. I agree the server deserved to lose the objective due to their choices. What I question is the balance in attacking versus defending that leads players to the mindset of let it fall we will take it back later. That makes me question the PPK value in having higher tiered objectives balance versus players own ideas of personal reward. The idea was that people that defended was in it for themselves but wouldn't that be more applied to those that are looking to the easy takes? Outnumbered helped to balance that to try and draw more people to come to a map where the population was out of balance to try and restore that. It encouraged less to do more. That's why I bring these up. Efficiency should have value on both attack and defense.  

 

And then we can check how my favorite subject, DAOC, did this.

 

1. Defenders have huge advantage, like in real life. No stupid pull spells that help attackers, but do nothing for defenders.

Instead, we got murder holes that help defenders

2. Oil works! Why? Because if put on maxed keep, its almost unreachable, just like you'd do in real life. You don't put your

best defense to be death point for defenders, you put it where enemy cant reach it. Logical?

3. Physics! Imagine, Mythic developers, on their Pentium 2 servers, decided that it would be logical that your archers

and your balistas/catapults/trebs have bigger range than attacker ones who have to shoot upwards, so they spent

their precious CPU cycles on physics instead on flashy effects

4. chokepoints...unrestricted pbaoe spells hit everyone in their range, not just 5 people. You had to be creative

to overcome this, instead just bringing bigger numbers, which seems to be solution for everything in GW2

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Nikola.3841 said:

1. Defenders have huge advantage, like in real life. No stupid pull spells that help attackers, but do nothing for defenders.

I cant even tell how often I've seen a 30 man zerg stack on a wall to attack, 5 or so defenders harassing, pulling people out and even getting stomps... and 20 people standing inside/on the walls "defending" and being utterly useless. If everyone had been outside, clouded and drawing the enemy zerg out they could beat them. But no, of course defense fails because the ones inside are 10% combat effective and the ones outside arent enough to make a difference. So both sides of the wall cry outnumbered despite having a chance together.

People have this idea that the walls are static defenses you are supposed to stand on top or hide behind. They're not. They are an obstacle that prevent the enemy from just walking inside and capping. They are a tool for going over and out without being too predictable. Even when broken they can be used as a chokepoint to separate the enemy.

You are the kitten defense. 

[Nikola.3841]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

You are the kitten defense. 

 

And that is why it fails...its counterintuitive, its not siege, but capture the flag, where people expect siege