Reflections on WvW After Scaling Rewards

[Malus.2184]

On 2/23/2023 at 8:13 PM, TheGrimm.5624 said:

🙂 Let me try this from a different direction. Are you encountering structures that have supply stockpiled? I am mostly finding any controlled objectives to be mostly less than 100 and more times closer to 0 supply in them when a defense is needed and mostly limited siege. Feels like camp flips have increased but it could be the lack of supply in objectives that's making that more visible. Could just be server differences here.

In my tier, it's pretty standard that Keeps have a lot of siege equipment and almost full Supply since one of the sides does little PPT seeing WvW as PvP+. Also, attacking a garrison without a Siegebreaker Soulbreast is creative suicide as you'll get pelted 24/7 by 5+ AC.

ANet's goal is also to get people into doing more siege in which case it'll become a serious issue. Just because something is no issue now has no impact on it becoming a serious one in the future.

The way to achieve this without the current state becoming a serious issue is to increase the supply that Towers and above can store. Give them some basic siege with upgrades other than the cannons, which are placed in a way so using them is in most cases suicide, and make using Siege cost supply to fire when using projectiles. Make the last Mastery of the thing reduce the supply in addition to other effects. This would also solve the issue of people blind firing Trebs against a structure without one side being able to do anything other than attack the tower and waste supplies. Smaller groups can stave them out by denying them Supplies and eventually the treb would be severely pressed without anyone directly attacking it.

Firing a projectile from a warm machine takes resources as ammunition costs something. Right now it's free.

[Malus.2184]

17 hours ago, MarzAttakz.9608 said:

SM defense needs to be nerfed or other objectives increased if this is the base line you're aiming for.

You're not doing the longevity of the mode any favours (not that you have subjectively done so in the past) with these changes.

The rewards for defending would automatically be nerfed if defending it is more costly. The faster they chew through their supply the faster the attackers only have the cloud and any organised defense group to worry about.

[Xenesis.6389]

2 minutes ago, Malus.2184 said:

ANet's goal is also to get people into doing more siege

I dunno where you got this idea from, but their goal is to have more fights on inner, not long drawn out sieges anymore. This is why over the years walls gates and siege have been nerfed. Why they buffed rams for more in close fights rather than long range, why they've cut max supply to keeps and smc and added more to camps so attackers can quickly restock and come back, while the defenders have lower stockpiles for repairs or more siege. Camps are also flipping often enough now that it slows down upgrades, not mention everything on ebg is getting drained to dump into smc walls for freebies.

[KeyOrion.9506]

Siege disablers are used to delay the enemy.  Delay.  Not stop.  It was never meant to stop.  It was just meant to get more time for friendly forces to reach the assaulted area.  And over the course of most battles, delaying tactics are valid tactics.  I like disablers.  Whether used successfully by my team, or the opponents team.  It's used by people needing a little extra time to get reinforcements.  A chance to defend.  And sometimes, there isn't enough defenders on the map.  And those defenders have to wait for reinforcements from off map.  I don't see a problem with defense, or the rewards linked to defending a location.

 

What I do see is a problem with the commanders who basically kick people out of the group, who are not on the offensive.  So basically, a defense is no longer group play, it's solo or individual play.  So, what's the problem?  At least someone who WANTS to defend a location will get properly rewarded.  And those that don't want to defend, can just do a little dance, around the enemy, as they do a little ballet in open field combat, and get their little bags.

[TheGrimm.5624]

7 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

In my tier, it's pretty standard that Keeps have a lot of siege equipment and almost full Supply since one of the sides does little PPT seeing WvW as PvP+. Also, attacking a garrison without a Siegebreaker Soulbreast is creative suicide as you'll get pelted 24/7 by 5+ AC.

ANet's goal is also to get people into doing more siege in which case it'll become a serious issue. Just because something is no issue now has no impact on it becoming a serious one in the future.

The way to achieve this without the current state becoming a serious issue is to increase the supply that Towers and above can store. Give them some basic siege with upgrades other than the cannons, which are placed in a way so using them is in most cases suicide, and make using Siege cost supply to fire when using projectiles. Make the last Mastery of the thing reduce the supply in addition to other effects. This would also solve the issue of people blind firing Trebs against a structure without one side being able to do anything other than attack the tower and waste supplies. Smaller groups can stave them out by denying them Supplies and eventually the treb would be severely pressed without anyone directly attacking it.

Firing a projectile from a warm machine takes resources as ammunition costs something. Right now it's free.

I appreciate the reply and additional information. This is sounding more like a difference in time zones where the other side has had more with more numbers and control. Not seeing what you are where there are more equal numbers towards prime time. This might more be an issue for the WR project as well as them releasing the other side of the attack/defense equation.

[TheGrimm.5624]

7 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

ANet's goal is also to get people into doing more siege

This I would disagree with since they have been saying time to take is too high hence all the nerfs to defense they had been making.

[SlateSloan.3654]

Thanks for attacking us but not take the castle…

https://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/11b6h2u/i_would_like_to_thank_isles_of_janthir_and_henge/

```Additionally, we want failed assaults to be rewarded in this fashion. This is currently not functioning, and we are working on it for a future update```

The farm is born. Lets only pretend to fight…

[Malus.2184]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

This I would disagree with since they have been saying time to take is too high hence all the nerfs to defense they had been making.

That's because the defense has to be nerfed heavily. Laying siege in real life massively favours the defender. A good rule of thumb is that in a siege the attacker has to outnumber the defender 3:1. The defender has all the advantages whereas the attacker has none.

One siege in history only ended when the defenders surrendered to the attacker and at that point, the defender was down to three people and two of them were ill.

The only way the attacker can gain an advantage is by laying a blockade and preventing the defender from resupplying since with supplies the defender, at least without modern weaponry being a factor can hold out forever.

This can in no way be represented in the game since that would make WvW extremely boring and as such, the defender has to be nerfed into the ground for the attacker to even have a chance.

[Malus.2184]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

I appreciate the reply and additional information. This is sounding more like a difference in time zones where the other side has had more with more numbers and control. Not seeing what you are where there are more equal numbers towards prime time. This might more be an issue for the WR project as well as them releasing the other side of the attack/defense equation.

This is prime time.

[Malus.2184]

12 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

I dunno where you got this idea from, but their goal is to have more fights on inner, not long drawn out sieges anymore. This is why over the years walls gates and siege have been nerfed. Why they buffed rams for more in close fights rather than long range, why they've cut max supply to keeps and smc and added more to camps so attackers can quickly restock and come back, while the defenders have lower stockpiles for repairs or more siege. Camps are also flipping often enough now that it slows down upgrades, not mention everything on ebg is getting drained to dump into smc walls for freebies.

And it's still too little and does nothing to actually create a double-edged sword for the defenders where they can either use their supply on repairs or siege equipment if they already built the siege equipment.

This way there would be less need to build any and using them would reduce Supply since the defenders would have to restock constantly. There would be natural interaction between defending and repairing and the siege would eventually end with a victory for the attacker if they can brave the defense unless a counter-assault is formed to chase them away. This is how it should be since this is a game that's supposed to be fun and interactive for all involved.

There would also be less of people building a ram in the middle of nowhere so they can get the Iron Hide Boon since that comes with conditions.