The patch was a failure and went in completely wrong direction

[Riba.3271]

At WvWs hayday when sieges were thrilling and long lasting with ton of fair fights, the balance was actually opposite way:

•  Siege did more damage to siege: Attackers had to try multiple times. Siege damage to siege was halved accidentally when they made conditions and crits affect siege So essentially rams are supposed to be weaker, not stronger.
•  Stonemists and Keeps took much more dolyaks to upgrade, making resetting them and defending them more thrilling. All they're doing by slightly touching amount of supply SM has, is promoting SM camping and transferring to winning server again.
•  Guilds and best fight commanders fought inside objectives, since there was no stat boosts for defender. Having +800 combat stats inside keeps and tactivators is a lot of combat advantage. These are the real issues why everyone hates attacking, not some weird 20% more ram hp or little bit of maximum supply. Yes, groups still attack things, but they only attempt once or twice. Sieging attempts that last more than 15 minutes and have multiple good fights are extinct.
• Walls had more hp and attacker less supply, so defenders had extra time to gather matching numbers and then you could have good fair fight with no stat advantages or tactics ruining it
•  If you outnumbered enemy a lot, instead of being bored during a siege you could go duel them on the walls of their keep, and both sides would have a blast. But now with increased stats and in combat gliding, it just isn't fun since experienced defender has big fight advantage in addition to never being able to die from 1 or 2 people. Its just not fun when the worse performing player that lost the fight glides away or hides at high ground.
•   There were no shield gens, meaning superior siege positioning  and perceverance won in addition to catapults and trebs being viable attacking option. If enemy builds shield gens then catapults, trebs, mortars, ballistas, arrow carts and omega golems, all become useless. So it already always devolved into ram wars as long as there are smart players around. So by buffing rams, they're just doubling down on the only viable strategy against hard opponent, instead of making WvW have its variety back.

Also guys, there is a green circle that indicates the range of the ram when you place it. If you actually use that, the catapults can't hit your rams or knock the players off. So actually the main part of the update, does nothing. Catapults don't have range to hit rams through a gate, trebs do, and anyone that builds catapults behind a gate, are only countering noobs. This doesn't change WvW at all if you have competent a non-pip farming commander.

Getting inside objectives was never the problem. You can just spam a couple of golems, build a few shield gens, and you're in. You can even do it in enemy border since guild golems are for some weird reason 50 supply and unstoppable due to being able to give them boons now. Real problem is taking objectives doesn't involve fighting anymore, it is just farming much worse players since good players will always utilize extra stats, tactics, stealth and gliding to destroy you, the things you don't have available as assaultant. It is age of clouds, server stacking and T3 objective camping, which is something that needs to be fixed. Sad part is that changing numbers is enough, which means it really isn't a big job, you dont' need to develop new skills or new UI, good WvW meta with ton of action and fair fights is just 1 day of dev work away.

Edited February 1 by Riba.3271

[Xenesis.6389]

The guilds complained it took too long to take a keep, draining their supply and sitting under siege for 3 hours.

So anet tried to make them happy by making it 3 minutes to break in, and 20 minutes to camp lords.

Blame the guilds, for everything.

🤭🍿

Oh My! did I peeve off the guild people 🤭🍿 ->

Edited February 1 by Xenesis.6389

[Riba.3271]

7 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

The guilds complained it took too long to take a keep, draining their supply and sitting under siege for 3 hours.

So anet tried to make them happy by making it 3 minutes to break in, and 20 minutes to camp lords.

Blame the guilds, for everything.

I am sure that was adressed already in the AC patch where they added cooldown to players being able to be hit by arrow carts more than once per 0.5 seconds. Rest of the stuff, is something only illogical crybaby scouts wanted. Those crybaby scouts have already quit the game because no ones willing to attack anything more than twice and things upgrade in less than 2 hours, so they went from having constant action to having nothing to do.

[Chaba.5410]

Pretty sure we had shield gens back then too except they were called elementalists with swirling winds...

[Serephen.3420]

9 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Pretty sure we had shield gens back then too except they were called elementalists with swirling winds...

I kinda miss doing that tbh😂

[prototypedragon.1406]

I miss the glory days of using tactics with squads of several individuals using 6 superior arrow carts and  a single guardians line of warding along with a sanctuary bubble to hold zergs on the stairs on a focused point in towers as arrows would wipe entire zergs. Back when Stability was a scarce commodity.

[Dawdler.8521]

I'm not quite sure what the message is here.

The patch nerfed objectives. The drop in supplies lower the defence buffer so that the smaller forces have it easier draining supps and keeping objectives damaged/open - while having next to no impact on larger forces that will be inside T3 lord before anyone start using supplies anyway.

OP talks about the glory days (which will never come again because most of those guilds and fight commanders... they kind of left long ago) and how this is the wrong direction. Is it? What the right direction? Making it impossible to take something without a 50 man?

Edited February 1 by Dawdler.8521

[Riba.3271]

4 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

 

The patch nerfed objectives. The drop in supplies lower the defence buffer so that the smaller forces have it easier draining supps and keeping objectives damaged/open - while having next to no impact on larger forces that will be inside T3 lord before anyone start using supplies anyway.

There are multiple traits that objectives have: How easy are they to get into, how easy are they to win fight in, how entertaining are they, how much do they promote server stacking, how fast do they upgrade.

Getting inside objectives was super duper easy already since shield gens counter all defensive siege. What they should have changed is how many times a group can attack it without wanting to throw their keyboard on the wall.

Black and white thinking is where you tend to fall short. If you buff defending by giving lord extra 1000% hit points and buff attacking by reducing gates health percentage by 80%, it doesn't come to a decent balance. They're not the same thing.

What I want to see is nerfs and buffs to both attacking and defending. After all, once you delve a step deeper in your thinking, you will realise it isn't about what needs to change, but what certain change would bring about.

Edited February 1 by Riba.3271

[Biermeister.4678]

Patch has done little of nothing just made it easier to cap a T3 keep with a 10 person group, so the 5 person group can back cap it, 

Cap objectives wait for RI next group caps wait for RI third group caps it, rinse and repeat weekly done,

Little 1v1 and a Dance party is fun waiting for RI to expire, 

[Dawdler.8521]

9 minutes ago, Riba.3271 said:

Getting inside objectives was super duper easy already since shield gens counter all defensive siege. What they should have changed is how many times a group can attack it without wanting to throw their keyboard on the wall.

What you think they should have changed is whole other matter from "the patch was a failure and went in completely wrong direction".

Objectively, this is what the patch does to objectives ignoring the fluff:

It reduce the supply buffer on keeps/SM making it easier for smaller groups to damage/drain, while changing basicly nothing for zergs.

It buffs camp supply making it easier for smaller group to use costlier siege (trebs at camp distance for example), while changing basicly nothing for zergs already having 800+ supplies.

How is that a failure? You dont think smaller groups should siege keeps?

How is this the wrong direction? You dont think making a more active WvW where smaller groups can do more is the way to go?

Should the patch have done more? There are lots of things "wrong" one can argue around. Doesnt mean its a failure though.

I dont think this patch will do much in practice. People will do exactly what they did before.

[Nivelis.8763]

This patch, just llike 'beta WvW events',  is another insult to dedicated WvW players.
Any reason changes to WvW take so long? This is really frustrating!!!

WvW is unique and keeps lots of dedicated players for years now. Yet the ammount of changes and time between updates looks like no one in dev team is working on WvW full time. Its sad that managers dont see how big potential this mode have...  WvW was also not adressed in EoD expansion!

What WvW really needs, without waiting another years:

- rewards, items in shop, skins, infusions, etc. something to spend skirmish tickets and badges of honor (players got thousands of them and nothing to spend them now after years of same stuff npc offer)

- new borderlands map!!!

- new type of siege

- new tactics

- some changes to siege/defense encouraging more strategies and splitting zergs. Maybe even some additional small objectives to capture that affect keeps offence/defence

- some content for roamers

- new event, season competition like the one in 2014 + acchievements/titles/unique AP points

Thats for start, but really WvW needs 2-3 dedicated devs working on it with passion, as full time job, talking with community and making this mode alive. So many players left because nothing is changing for years now. Last border map? 8 years ago? Last big update? warclaw 4-5 years ago? wtf Anet?

Edited February 1 by Nivelis.8763

[Biermeister.4678]

13 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

What you think they should have changed is whole other matter from "the patch was a failure and went in completely wrong direction".

Objectively, this is what the patch does to objectives ignoring the fluff:

It reduce the supply buffer on keeps/SM making it easier for smaller groups to damage/drain, while changing basicly nothing for zergs.

It buffs camp supply making it easier for smaller group to use costlier siege (trebs at camp distance for example), while changing basicly nothing for zergs already having 800+ supplies.

How is that a failure? You dont think smaller groups should siege keeps?

How is this the wrong direction? You dont think making a more active WvW where smaller groups can do more is the way to go?

Should the patch have done more? There are lots of things "wrong" one can argue around. Doesnt mean its a failure though.

I dont think this patch will do much in practice. People will do exactly what they did before.

Smaller groups taking objectives was never the problem the problem is defense against the Boon Ball running over the few defenders in the objective.

I will not waste 100+ supply on a camp treb when I can use two to four guild golems to take a keep.

[prototypedragon.1406]

It would be interesting if anet decided to remove most of the boons in world versus world aside from might fury and stability with maximum stab stacks reaching a total of 3 at one time. But that would never happen.

Edited February 1 by prototypedragon.1406
..

[apharma.3741]

You're also missing one major and crucial difference.

ANet didn't nuke their playerbase with an expansion forcing them to play on a border that very few like using even now.

 

Also the balance issues that came with that, I still remember the horror story my friend told me when they were in one of the top fight guilds at the time. You had to co-ordinate all reapers on your team to corrupt boon the enemy reaper at the same time, spam your shouts for condition damage (because that was a thing), then banish them and then sit the blob on them wailing away, maybe another banish to make sure they're not getting rezzed. Rinse, repeat for each necro and the fight might be done before Christmas.

[Biermeister.4678]

3 hours ago, apharma.3741 said:

You're also missing one major and crucial difference.

ANet didn't nuke their playerbase with an expansion forcing them to play on a border that very few like using even now.

 

Also the balance issues that came with that, I still remember the horror story my friend told me when they were in one of the top fight guilds at the time. You had to co-ordinate all reapers on your team to corrupt boon the enemy reaper at the same time, spam your shouts for condition damage (because that was a thing), then banish them and then sit the blob on them wailing away, maybe another banish to make sure they're not getting rezzed. Rinse, repeat for each necro and the fight might be done before Christmas.

One Reaper takes three supports to keep alive in a fight, now back in the early days if Reaper just hold w and spin to win, core Necro is better at corrupting boon in my view 

Edited February 1 by Biermeister.4678
Spelling

[apharma.3741]

20 minutes ago, Biermeister.4678 said:

One Reaper takes three supports to keep alive in a fight, now back in the early days if Reaper just hold w and sin to win, core Necro is better at corrupting boon in my view 

I'm telling you exactly how the meta was back at HoT launch when ANet destroyed the WvW playerbase. This was during the height of the boonball.

[Dahkeus.8243]

8 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

At WvWs hayday when sieges were thrilling and long lasting with ton of fair fights, the balance was actually opposite way:

•  Siege did more damage to siege: Attackers had to try multiple times. Siege damage to siege was halved accidentally when they made conditions and crits affect siege So essentially rams are supposed to be weaker, not stronger.
•  Stonemists and Keeps took much more dolyaks to upgrade, making resetting them and defending them more thrilling. All they're doing by slightly touching amount of supply SM has, is promoting SM camping and transferring to winning server again.
•  Guilds and best fight commanders fought inside objectives, since there was no stat boosts for defender. Having +800 combat stats inside keeps and tactivators is a lot of combat advantage. These are the real issues why everyone hates attacking, not some weird 20% more ram hp or little bit of maximum supply. Yes, groups still attack things, but they only attempt once or twice. Sieging attempts that last more than 15 minutes and have multiple good fights are extinct.
• Walls had more hp and attacker less supply, so defenders had extra time to gather matching numbers and then you could have good fair fight with no stat advantages or tactics ruining it
•  If you outnumbered enemy a lot, instead of being bored during a siege you could go duel them on the walls of their keep, and both sides would have a blast. But now with increased stats and in combat gliding, it just isn't fun since experienced defender has big fight advantage in addition to never being able to die from 1 or 2 people. Its just not fun when the worse performing player that lost the fight glides away or hides at high ground.
•   There were no shield gens, meaning superior siege positioning  and perceverance won in addition to catapults and trebs being viable attacking option. If enemy builds shield gens then catapults, trebs, mortars, ballistas, arrow carts and omega golems, all become useless. So it already always devolved into ram wars as long as there are smart players around. So by buffing rams, they're just doubling down on the only viable strategy against hard opponent, instead of making WvW have its variety back.

Also guys, there is a green circle that indicates the range of the ram when you place it. If you actually use that, the catapults can't hit your rams or knock the players off. So actually the main part of the update, does nothing. Catapults don't have range to hit rams through a gate, trebs do, and anyone that builds catapults behind a gate, are only countering noobs. This doesn't change WvW at all if you have competent a non-pip farming commander.

Getting inside objectives was never the problem. You can just spam a couple of golems, build a few shield gens, and you're in. You can even do it in enemy border since guild golems are for some weird reason 50 supply and unstoppable due to being able to give them boons now. Real problem is taking objectives doesn't involve fighting anymore, it is just farming much worse players since good players will always utilize extra stats, tactics, stealth and gliding to destroy you, the things you don't have available as assaultant. It is age of clouds, server stacking and T3 objective camping, which is something that needs to be fixed. Sad part is that changing numbers is enough, which means it really isn't a big job, you dont' need to develop new skills or new UI, good WvW meta with ton of action and fair fights is just 1 day of dev work away.

Lots of talk about what you identify as the problem.  What is the solution?  What should ANet have done that would have been better?

[Doo Lally.8594]

Rejoice - cap trading is back and once more the new 'meta'.

 

Get ready to hop on your ranged class, tag an NPC at an objective, sit on 5 ruins for 5 mins and AOE leech a zerg fight. Rinse, repeat. Weeklies done!

 

Hyperbole aside, I did see a lot of this last night. I hope it calms down.

[Biermeister.4678]

27 minutes ago, Doo Lally.8594 said:

Rejoice - cap trading is back and once more the new 'meta'.

 

Get ready to hop on your ranged class, tag an NPC at an objective, sit on 5 ruins for 5 mins and AOE leech a zerg fight. Rinse, repeat. Weeklies done!

 

Hyperbole aside, I did see a lot of this last night. I hope it calms down.

We had a group sitting at North West Camp just flipping it back and forth and killing Yaks 

Rotation was Red Blue Green, some 1v1 and 2v2 fights, fun times 

[SimplyRed.9378]

Pretty obvious me, who ever is in charge for the WvW mode right now, has only been playing WvW with a big zerg that goes around flipping everything in sight, if ever. And never experienced playing in an outnumbered situation and getting rolled over by a higher population server, or playing in the dead timezone. Game mode should be balance, not everything is about offense. Also everyone is right, do something about all the currencies. Just my 2 cents.

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, Biermeister.4678 said:

I will not waste 100+ supply on a camp treb when I can use two to four guild golems to take a keep.

You plan to use 2-4 golems yourself when the keep is defended by a few enemies that stay inside and disable anything that gets within throwing distance?

Thats dedication I guess.

If you say "well duh I'm not alone" then you could already build at least 3 guild golems with just 2 people (the supps they bring plus a full camp) before the patch. So no difference.

If you want to start to discuss boonballs... well the patch did zero balancing. So thats a whole other matter.

 

Edited February 1 by Dawdler.8521

[Chaba.5410]

20 minutes ago, SimplyRed.9378 said:

Pretty obvious me, who ever is in charge for the WvW mode right now, has only been playing WvW with a big zerg that goes around flipping everything in sight, if ever. And never experienced playing in an outnumbered situation and getting rolled over by a higher population server, or playing in the dead timezone. Game mode should be balance, not everything is about offense. Also everyone is right, do something about all the currencies. Just my 2 cents.

Ever try to balance for 5v50?  Whatever you give the small group, the large group gets too.  Never can be balanced like you think.

[Chaba.5410]

2 hours ago, Biermeister.4678 said:

Smaller groups taking objectives was never the problem the problem is defense against the Boon Ball running over the few defenders in the objective.

I will not waste 100+ supply on a camp treb when I can use two to four guild golems to take a keep.

I keep re-reading this and it makes zero sense.

Smaller groups usually can't take objectives unless there are no defenders.  How is that any different from a larger group "running over the few defenders"?

Why is that not a problem but the other one is?

Edited February 1 by Chaba.5410

[Biermeister.4678]

13 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

You plan to use 2-4 golems yourself when the keep is defended by a few enemies that stay inside and disable anything that gets within throwing distance?

Thats dedication I guess.

If you say "well duh I'm not alone" then you could already build at least 3 guild golems with just 2 people (the supps they bring plus a full camp) before the patch. So no difference.

If you want to start to discuss boonballs... well the patch did zero balancing. So thats a whole other matter.

 

Like I said in the first paragraph smaller groups, a supply camp treb only hits outer wall guild golems are a better use of resources. Unless it is the server everyone tries to avoid most objectives are not scouted when I Back Cap

[Biermeister.4678]

29 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

I keep re-reading this and it makes zero sense.

Smaller groups usually can't take objectives unless there are no defenders.  How is that any different from a larger group "running over the few defenders"?

Why is that not a problem but the other one is?

10v10 good fight 10v50 not even a speed bump objective is gone in three minutes. The whole idea of door trebs and cata's was to slow the assault until reinforcement could map in. 

I might be mistaken but you were one of the first people to place door counter siege to knock people off the ram's and slow them down