The patch was a failure and went in completely wrong direction

[Biermeister.4678]

23 minutes ago, ilMasa.2546 said:

Here is your avarage WvW "siege war": blobs come in,stacks unders the wall,builds 5 catas on the same pixel and thats it.

Here the problems:

• Attackers on the ground can clear a wall from any defensive sieges in a matter of 15 seconds with AoEs
• Attackers on the ground can turn walls into a deathtrap with the same AoE spammage
• Attackers on the ground while AoE spamming,are behind those walls,being defacto Out of Sight,they just need to aim to the highest point of the wall to cover the whole catwalk.
• Defenders on the other hand,have to survive the catwalk first then have to lean from the wall to siege disable,to AoE or use any kind of attack or you just get a "blocked " message
• Indistructible walls are often exploited and used as cover for siege placement: they just have to aim for those steps 8 meters away from doors or walls...the CRAZY splash dmg will reach anyways...
• You cant be extremely precise with your defensive sieges either,if the attackers are stacked behind your outer wall,there is noway to land a precise hit (lets say with a mortar),unless u move to an other Tower. Most of the Time your shots will land on your wall,too far over your wall or just nullified by the bubbles of those 5+ catas right under your wall.

And people placing Turtle or Centaur Banner in slot two of tactics along with Auto Turret 

[Sansar.1302]

8 hours 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.

It where alredy easy to cap stuff with only one person if no one defended

[Dahkeus.8243]

41 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Huh me neither, it doesn't say on the description, kind of an important thing to not state.....

It double dips as that is pretty much what speedy yaks should be for...

No one knows stuff like this because the only stuff streamers cover for WvW is builds, outnumbered roaming montages, or guides for the absolute beginner which amounts to little more than "just get geared and then follow the tag".  There's a massive gap in the community from a streamer/YouTuber perspective, so it's no wonder WvW gets left in the dust for updates and content.

[Xenesis.6389]

Just now, Dahkeus.8243 said:

No one knows stuff like this because the only stuff streamers cover for WvW is builds, outnumbered roaming montages, or guides for the absolute beginner which amounts to little more than "just get geared and then follow the tag".  There's a massive gap in the community from a streamer/YouTuber perspective, so it's no wonder WvW gets left in the dust for updates and content.

Just weird that it's been around for 8 years and never seen it mentioned before anywhere. Not like I ever look at upgrade ticks either so never noticed. Learned something new today. 🤭

[Sugar Min.5834]

ANet should encourage participations in different kinds of roles in WvW. Not always squad assaults. If the focus is always only on buffing and rewarding attacks, and nerfing and punishing defences, no one will want to defend anything. You take hours to push a paper structure to T3 and a group of 5 peeps comes along and capped  them in just a few minutes. It is very demoralising for those defenders who worked hard to push objectives to tier 3 and only to lose them in the blink of an eye. Our defence options and rewards are weak and no one cares anymore.

Not every one wants to run in squads and attack all day. And, closed and invisible tags make it even harder to join them. Please make other options more viable and fun. Squad commanders let T3 structures fall while trying to cap an enemy's paper tower. Scouts stopped calling out for help. Slowly but surely many dissapeared because their roles are not needed anymore.

 

Edited February 1, 2023 by Min Min.9368

[Chaba.5410]

2 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Huh me neither, it doesn't say on the description, kind of an important thing to not state.....

It double dips as that is pretty much what speedy yaks should be for...

Bro, Packed Yaks always counted as 2 yaks for upgrade.

[Xenesis.6389]

19 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Bro, Packed Yaks always counted as 2 yaks for upgrade.

Ever since HoT auto upgrades I never look at upgrade stuff and most times I when I bothered to put in tactivators it's for towers and keeps. 🤷‍♂️🤭

Edited February 1, 2023 by Xenesis.6389

[subversiontwo.7501]

7 hours ago, SimplyRed.9378 said:

You are missing my point, my point was about this patch is giving more to the offensive minded players, which in turn make it harder for any number of player to defend an objectives. Objectives like tower or keep should be hard to take even with smaller number of defender because the structure itself is part of the defense, so it should evens out the fight. Smaller number of supplies inside keeps is making it harder to defend anything now. Give more incentive for people to defend is all I'm saying. *Not everything is about offense.*

I get where you come from here, I really do.

However, I think you need to be mindful of what people feel or do and how things are. It is the same for the other people who argued about the impossibilities of busting zergs in this thread. While some people may feel like it is hard(er) to defend, some feel like others just don't know how to play anymore. What is it to defend? I've hardly ever seen any other people purpose-build parties for that, using all tools at their disposal, including sorties. Even though there are some rather powerful tools out there. Most defense I see amounts to some rifle boys or bear bows plinking from walls, at best building some ballista ontop or throwing down some powerful disablers with little forethought. Similarily, when people actually know how to defend, we have scores of threads complaining about their server here. Again, there are differences between what can be done, what is done and what people feel.

[Johje Holan.4607]

Regarding defense.  Yes, it would be nice if Anet could figure out a way to reward defense more but it is also a player issue.  

• It seems to me that its not that Anet doesn't want to reward defense, its that they can't figure out how to do it properly.  And I can see the reasons that it would be hard to do so without stagnating and encouraging players to do things that result in too much frozen gameplay.
• I personally love defense.  My best memories of the game are defending Bay/Gari/Hills from the onslaught of a swarm of players.  It is up to the players to defend but it seems too many don't want to.  Or too many need "rewards" to do so.  The question is, how to encourage players to defend without direct rewards (because as I said above, I don't think Anet knows how to do that).
• This is where I am hopeful for Alliances.  I don't think for an instant that Alliances will balance population.  But it may create groups of players that are interested in "playing the game".  WvW is at the core a territorial game - the "point" of the game is to capture and hold territory.  It would be great if players formed alliances with a mix of playstyles; large group, small group, havoc, solo, and yes, defense minded players. 
• With all this talk of the patch discouraging defending though, I do have to say I haven't seen it.  At least in my match of SBI/Ebay vs. TC/AR vs. DB/DH we've been defending like crazy.  Its been pretty awesome.  We're even defending on Desert!  And the commanders have been great about map hopping to come to the rescue.  I just got off from a couple great defenses of Air and Gari.   Ultimately, it is up to the players to create the game.

 

Oh, and bring back bannering the lord!  (I need to figure out how to put that in my sig.)

[RedBaron.6058]

WvW will only be interesting and rewarding if the underdog side has some chances at defending its objectives. ANet is favouring the attacking side, usually the overdog side, so the future will be the most populated side running its zerg around capping empty objectives because no sane people will ever defend and hold any objective at all.

The Outnumbered buff is completely useless and should be changed according to the rationale that desperate defenders tend better their fortifications and fight with more courage, energy and complete disregard for their lives, writing glorious pages of their Annals of War. So, the Outnumbered buff should be:

+25% to all stats/-25% enemy damage to own fortifications/+25% moving speed/-80% damage received while downed

Plus the existing buffs but changed as:

+100% participation/+100% Magic Find/+100% World Experience/No armor damage upon death plus a 1 gold reward per hour of being outnumbered/Being killed by the enemy will not grant War Score to the enemy but will grant War Score to the own side once per 5 min (to avoid abuses).

[Dawdler.8521]

7 hours ago, RedBaron.6058 said:

WvW will only be interesting and rewarding if the underdog side has some chances at defending its objectives. ANet is favouring the attacking side, usually the overdog side, so the future will be the most populated side running its zerg around capping empty objectives because no sane people will ever defend and hold any objective at all.

The Outnumbered buff is completely useless and should be changed according to the rationale that desperate defenders tend better their fortifications and fight with more courage, energy and complete disregard for their lives, writing glorious pages of their Annals of War. So, the Outnumbered buff should be:

+25% to all stats/-25% enemy damage to own fortifications/+25% moving speed/-80% damage received while downed

Plus the existing buffs but changed as:

+100% participation/+100% Magic Find/+100% World Experience/No armor damage upon death plus a 1 gold reward per hour of being outnumbered/Being killed by the enemy will not grant War Score to the enemy but will grant War Score to the own side once per 5 min (to avoid abuses).

So lets say that there's been a 15v10 back and forth fight on a border for the past hour, neither side outmanned. 

Now the side with 10 people get a 50 man that come in, karma train an objective in a minute against 0 defenders and then they bugger off the border again.

Do you think its fair that the 15 people now have massive buffs fighting 10 the entire tick? Because they are "outnumbered"?

And we havent even begun talking about the third side that could make a any random side of a 30v30 guild fight "outnumbered" because there is a 50 man zerg standing AFK in spawn...

People are always so eager to latch on to a generic "dumb" map wide buff and try to slap individual player fight buffs on it, without thinking about how outnumbered actually works.

Edited February 2, 2023 by Dawdler.8521

[Mell.4873]

Honestly the Meta is so varied and different per Server I can kind of understand where there comming from. 

Most of the time there are no Zergs rather a collection of small groups all tackling WvW. One of the biggest problems when you VS a server with a larger population is just resources. 

Normally the defender has more bodies to throe at keeping the walls up and stalling than the low server population so I think this levels the playing field. 

Let's face it a Zerg is a zerg and will take what ever they want. Normally farming you for medals and WvW levels in the process. Atleast now you counter play by attacking there keeps. 

[RedBaron.6058]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

So lets say that there's been a 15v10 back and forth fight on a border for the past hour, neither side outmanned. 

Now the side with 10 people get a 50 man that come in, karma train an objective in a minute against 0 defenders and then they bugger off the border again.

Do you think its fair that the 15 people now have massive buffs fighting 10 the entire tick? Because they are "outnumbered"?

And we havent even begun talking about the third side that could make a any random side of a 30v30 guild fight "outnumbered" because there is a 50 man zerg standing AFK in spawn...

People are always so eager to latch on to a generic "dumb" map wide buff and try to slap individual player fight buffs on it, without thinking about how outnumbered actually works.

You know Outnumbered refresh every 5 minutes, right?

[Esufer.8762]

13 hours ago, Dahkeus.8243 said:

No one knows stuff like this because the only stuff streamers cover for WvW is builds, outnumbered roaming montages, or guides for the absolute beginner which amounts to little more than "just get geared and then follow the tag".  There's a massive gap in the community from a streamer/YouTuber perspective, so it's no wonder WvW gets left in the dust for updates and content.

No worries, I'll make sure my next vid is the most "action packed" hour of dolyak escorting available on Youtube.

[Silinsar.6298]

14 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Clearly, failure to defend is all this patch fault!

That's what happens when the game creates personal goals and rewards for players (dailies, weeklies, claim events) that contradict the server's / game mode's goals.

 

What do you get for (likely unsuccessfully) defending an objective? Maybe a couple kills and a meager defense failed event. You might lose participation.

What do you get for taking something else instead? Maybe kill some defenders and a claim event. Plus you get to walk over to the bigger objective you just lost for another claim event.

 

Your team mates might say "Please help defend this keep!", but your achievement says "You need to complete me and this is the only keep you'll manage to (re-)take before logging of."

 

If, for example, a zerg walking up to (or triggering orange swords near) a keep would create a map wide event saying "defend this!" with a lot of rewards (and decent ones even if you fail), and those dynamically created events would be part of the dailies, players would be much more likely to try and defend.

[Silinsar.6298]

9 hours ago, RedBaron.6058 said:

+25% to all stats/-25% enemy damage to own fortifications/+25% moving speed/-80% damage received while downed

Outnumbered should be based purely on rewards and scoring, never character stats, imo. Otherwise instead of encouraging even fights, it would make those few that are even unbalanced as well.

[RedBaron.6058]

6 minutes ago, Silinsar.6298 said:

That's what happens when the game creates personal goals and rewards for players (dailies, weeklies, claim events) that contradict the server's / game mode's goals.

 

What do you get for (likely unsuccessfully) defending an objective? Maybe a couple kills and a meager defense failed event. You might lose participation.

What do you get for taking something else instead? Maybe kill some defenders and a claim event. Plus you get to walk over to the bigger objective you just lost for another claim event.

 

Your team mates might say "Please help defend this keep!", but your achievement says "You need to complete me and this is the only keep you'll manage to (re-)take before logging of."

 

If, for example, a zerg walking up to (or triggering orange swords near) a keep would create a map wide event saying "defend this!" with a lot of rewards (and decent ones even if you fail), and those dynamically created events would be part of the dailies, players would be much more likely to try and defend.

Good idea!

[Zyreva.1078]

23 minutes ago, RedBaron.6058 said:

You know Outnumbered refresh every 5 minutes, right?

He knows. Doesn't invalidate his arguments at all. A map wide "outnumbered buff" should never impact combat. Period.

[RedBaron.6058]

Just now, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

He knows. Doesn't invalidate his arguments at all. A map wide "outnumbered buff" should never impact combat. Period.

You must be on a stacked server...LoL

[Esufer.8762]

9 minutes ago, Silinsar.6298 said:

That's what happens when the game creates personal goals and rewards for players (dailies, weeklies, claim events) that contradict the server's / game mode's goals.

 

What do you get for (likely unsuccessfully) defending an objective? Maybe a couple kills and a meager defense failed event. You might lose participation.

What do you get for taking something else instead? Maybe kill some defenders and a claim event. Plus you get to walk over to the bigger objective you just lost for another claim event.

 

Your team mates might say "Please help defend this keep!", but your achievement says "You need to complete me and this is the only keep you'll manage to (re-)take before logging of."

 

If, for example, a zerg walking up to (or triggering orange swords near) a keep would create a map wide event saying "defend this!" with a lot of rewards (and decent ones even if you fail), and those dynamically created events would be part of the dailies, players would be much more likely to try and defend.

Worth mentioning that defending is also absolutely pants due to the way that swords on objectives currently work as well. There's quite a delay in an objective becoming "in combat" and the swords appearing on the objective icon on the map. Is it already flipping? Are the walls down? Was it someone just running past who aggroed a guard? I guess we'll never know. People aren't likely to send a group to check a tower that's been in combat as 9/10 it's going to be someone that ran past and got shot by a guard.

[Zyreva.1078]

8 minutes ago, Esufer.8762 said:

Worth mentioning that defending is also absolutely pants due to the way that swords on objectives currently work as well. There's quite a delay in an objective becoming "in combat" and the swords appearing on the objective icon on the map. Is it already flipping? Are the walls down? Was it someone just running past who aggroed a guard? I guess we'll never know. People aren't likely to send a group to check a tower that's been in combat as 9/10 it's going to be someone that ran past and got shot by a guard.

That's where scouting becomes relevant.

Unfortunately most confuse scouting with "semi afki inside a tower/keep" which is not only very unrewarding, both in terms of loot as well as gameplay, but also fairly ineffective. But with a bunch of active scouts, that roam arround and pass on information on enemy activities it would be possible to cover pretty much an entire map with just a few people.

[Riba.3271]

15 hours ago, Zikory.6871 said:

We may be endangered but not extinct. Any group over 25 that is worried about the keep stat buff is a joke. Its an issue for roamers and duels, not zergs. 

I mean mathematically if you need around 20% more damage to burst someone down from full health, and die from 20% less skills, it does come into play in guild play as well. Keep buffs makes 25 man guilds have damage and sustain of 30 man guilds. In addition to this, defenders obviously also have first stealth, siege, tactivators, more pugs and multiple attempts. Its just ridiculous that you have not only be smarter, but also benchmark 20% more damage and sustain, to be competitive inside keeps.

 

Everytime you survive or fail to kill someone with 2k hp (4k in keeps) remaining, it is the claim buff difference. For you it maybe happens two to three times a day, for your whole guild it will happen 50+ times a day. And you cannot outplay it since it is passive and not like siege or even tactivators, where you can choose optimal strategy to play around it. I know you probably haven't checked the numbers and just go with your first feeling thinking its like 100 more damage, but it is just stupid once you actually do. Any doubters can easily try taking almost equal amount of stats off their build and try to lie it doesn't really make a difference.

Edited February 2, 2023 by Riba.3271

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, RedBaron.6058 said:

You know Outnumbered refresh every 5 minutes, right?

I said for the duration of the tick, if you know what a tick is.

I assume you have no argument against what I said then.

[RedBaron.6058]

2 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

I said for the duration of the tick, if you know what a tick is.

I assume you have no argument against what I said then.

What you said just shows you play on a stacked server, nothing else. Next time think more before posting to avoid shaming yourself...

[Dawdler.8521]

47 minutes ago, RedBaron.6058 said:

What you said just shows you play on a stacked server, nothing else. Next time think more before posting to avoid shaming yourself...

Exactly, just attacking the person instead of the argument. Outnumbered doesnt care if you are on a stacked world nor does it care how many people are fighting each other, it just counts players on the map and decides. Often tough luck if you play on DBL and your world hate DBL, regardless of you winning T1 or loosing T5.

Edited February 2, 2023 by Dawdler.8521