Defend Achievements - Difficult Progression by current design and change

[Xenesis.6389]

1 hour ago, Ashen.2907 said:

So, if I see a swords on an objective I should not bother to respond. 

Only if it's a camp, apparently repairing walls means it's no longer worth saving an objective.

🍿

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

4 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

What's ironic is the lack of supply in the larger structures was causing people to leave defensive positions and creating more open field movements and more scattering of people and thereby more open world fights and more fights in camps. Before we go into this, anyone that was trying to level WvW levels via just repairing was only wasting their own time, people repairing after an event were either doing it because their driver indicated it or they did it themselves since they didn't want to leave an open breach. Note I said after the event to define the reward people from the don't lose your stuff people.

So the first iteration where repairing removed participation triggered people to pretty much not repair at all leaving repairing to only people that wanted some warning when their structure was being attacked which meant longer and slower repairs that lasted extended times.

Second iteration was what we just went thu that repairs by most people were only done during the event. Not sure what others were seeing but afterward it ended a lot of people just stopped. That left the people from the first scenario with less house cleaning to do. Instead of just adjusting the levels and adding in other defensive actions which people were requesting it was just brick and hammer repaired in the code.

Third iteration guesstimate before failed attacks, expecting less open field fights since more people won't care about camps again, more siege warfare and people complaining that they are killed by too many AC, though they hit like wetnoodles if you aren't in glass-cannon and still do if stacked in a boon ball, more boon balls just standing in air rain and people complaining about wall hangers. 

All of which is ironic since we don't know what shape the failed attacks will take. Either case lets see how it changes the flow and get feedback since different servers reacted differently.

What will happen once the rewards for failed attacks are put in is that objectives will remain open and two or three zergs will circle in and out of them without ever capping to farm both set of rewards none stop. Some people will claim that it will be peak WvW, but if you look at that tally above on page 1 everything will plummet except WvW levels gained. What Anet should have done is put in all the rewards from the beginning so that there was increased incentive for all of it rather than just some of it. It was frankly a failed test.

[MedievalThings.5417]

The problem, not even related to just this, is that SMC has supply.  It shouldn't.  They could just remove the supply depots from SMC and this problem goes away.  Instead, Anet decides NO ONE should defend anything.,

[IndigoSundown.5419]

The list of disincentives for roaming and small group WvW, which began with the reward revamps, has now been added to.  It seems to me that ANet only wants massive blobs.  Not sure why I bother with this game anymore.

[Blockhead Magee.3092]

Repeat until blue in the face (unless you're a blue faced sylvari, then go green)

 

Anet will always nerf defense and buff the boon ball.  Why?  Because the few Anet employees who walk into WvW always follow a blob commander.   They listen to only them and make changes that only benefit them. 

 

Anyone else doing the little things get jack squat and that's how its always been. 

[MedievalThings.5417]

32 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Mag's reward is people's tears. That doesn't change. They're account bound anyways.

They're gonna own smc 20+ hours a day regardless.  Now they can go back to owning all of EB all day long.

[LordHT.8297]

After they took away the extra pips for playing on an outnumbered map nothing surprises me anymore. This change is just another example of Anet creating problems in the game by changing mechanics that have been well established in the game for many years (for some reason) and then creating even bigger problems by trying to fix them instead of simply reverting the changes. Nobody asked to quadruple the wxp of a keep/tower defense. When we say that wvw needs better rewards we are saying that we need to receive something for every little contribution we give to our team especially the boring and dull tasks that NO ONE would do without any rewards.

[Burch.5732]

1 hour ago, Vova.2640 said:

this is a good change.. this was honestly ridiculous in its previous state.

u have ppl afk on trebs with macros set up for hitting smc walls 24/7(sadly this is likely not addressed yet)
and then u have ppl constantly draining supply to repair the smc walls to get easy rewards.

with this change hopefully there will be less afk repairers clogging the ebg queues.
one thing i will add- if they can add dealing dmg to enemies to award some defence participation that would be good. i do agree right now if u dont get a kill u likely wont get any credit- and it is hard to get kills if u r outnumbered defending.

1.  ppl afk on trebs has nothing to do with this topic

2.  how can a player be afk and repairing a wall at the same time?  I guess you repair go afk and return and repair - oh wait i am dead - lol

3.  If a player is on the wall and actively defending then credit should be given.

[TheQuickFox.3826]

Well, some players requested this for years.

Enjoy your change!

[Nidome.1365]

If the problem is to do with SM then just reduce the rewards for defending and attacking SM rather than nerf all defending.

[Pifil.5193]

Yeah why not reduce it so that you can only ever get bronze from repairing or something like that?

 

Or better grant participation for damaging enemy players and healing/buffing allies that are in combat with them? I've killed enemy players inside our keeps and gotten nothing, do the enemies have to be actually in combat with the keep guards or lords or have actually done damage to the walls or what?

 

They've (fairly) rapidly fixed this issue. Lets hope they come up with a solution for a good mechanism for calculating defense participation just as quickly.

[morpheus.6489]

They already nerfed the rewards from smc wall repairing. This just wasn't needed at all. What they needed to do is redesign what counts as defending. Right now its just killing a player and anyone who plays wvw knows there is a lot more to defending a structure like a keep or tower than just killing a player. This just is laziness by anet and only further drives people away from playing wvw.

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 hour ago, Lan Deathrider.5910 said:

What will happen once the rewards for failed attacks are put in is that objectives will remain open and two or three zergs will circle in and out of them without ever capping to farm both set of rewards none stop. Some people will claim that it will be peak WvW, but if you look at that tally above on page 1 everything will plummet except WvW levels gained. What Anet should have done is put in all the rewards from the beginning so that there was increased incentive for all of it rather than just some of it. It was frankly a failed test.

Agree. So far tonight the theme is paper paper every where and choo choo goes the Karma Train. Nerfing one side of the attack/defend ratio before both sides are out in play, well its going to be a bumpy ride.

[Xenesis.6389]

Just now, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Agree. So far tonight the theme is paper paper every where and choo choo goes the Karma Train. Nerfing one side of the attack/defend ratio before both sides are out in play, well its going to be a bumpy ride.

I mean it's tuesday... people would still be working on weeklies...

[Neathra.1950]

In my live test of the defender daily today (And that's a real irritation). I participated in 2 kills in Earth Keep. Died a bit because we were outgunned, and even after several ticks of DEFEND event, got nothing. So kills are still borked.

[Xenesis.6389]

So everyone complaining about not getting defend events from repairs, harder to get it from kills from blobs.

But what about the opposite, when attackers who try for something, get blobbed with defenders, fail, and don't get either attack fail, or objective capture events, why isn't anyone complaining/protesting how unfair it is for those people?

🤡🍿

[Neathra.1950]

1 minute ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

So everyone complaining about not getting defend events from repairs, harder to get it from kills from blobs.

But what about the opposite, when attackers who try for something, get blobbed with defenders, fail, and don't get either attack fail, or objective capture events, why isn't anyone complaining/protesting how unfair it is for those people?

🤡🍿

Because Anet didn't just change the rules to make their lives more difficult. 

[Xenesis.6389]

Just now, Neathra.1950 said:

Because Anet didn't just change the rules to make their lives more difficult. 

Somehow that makes it ok for one side to get showered with rewards when those outnumbered attackers face the same challenges?

[IndigoSundown.5419]

If they're going to keep the "no credit for repair" on defend events, ANet really needs to fix defend via kills.

 

My guild group just defended our home camp (alpine BL) from a group of enemy.  Going into the defense, I had 23 weekly kills. Coming out, I had 36.  Others had similar numbers of kills.  All of the fighting we took part in took place inside the camp's capture circle.    A couple of us got "Objective Defender" credit.  Most of us did not.

 

Fix your kitten game ANet.

[Xenesis.6389]

3 minutes ago, IndigoSundown.5419 said:

If they're going to keep the "no credit for repair" on defend events, ANet really needs to fix defend via kills.

 

My guild group just defended our home camp (alpine BL) from a group of enemy.  Going into the defense, I had 23 weekly kills. Coming out, I had 36.  Others had similar numbers of kills.  All of the fighting we took part in took place inside the camp's capture circle.    A couple of us got "Objective Defender" credit.  Most of us did not.

 

Fix your kitten game ANet.

The attackers got nothing too. 🤷‍♂️

[Jake Orion.2049]

Honestly, this was a really bad overall change.  Any full support classes that were unable to dish out any damage are definitely most affected by this.  Now their builds will have to sacrifice some support to just plink a few enemies and pray those players hit go down.  Even as a ranger with barrage I've had groups survive with zero credit given to me.  (Rare, but it happens.)

 

There is now zero incentive to repair anything and just focus on downing the enemies.

 

Some ideas about rewarding those has already been thrown in this thread, but I'll throw one of mine as well:  I think what they could have done is zero rewards, but keep the participation up.  While probably not the best solution, I think it wouldn't have been as punishing of what they just did.  Yes, you are still screwed on the weeklies, but for me, losing participation is what really hurts.

[hugeboss.5432]

You could perhaps think of "wall repairing" as a type of wall structure maintenance job, and not a true combat defense event :D

But, I'm glad it's was removed, it finally made EBG accessable again (was queued constantly by lots of solo players seeking easy smc repair events, half of which were afk most of the time). As a quickfix it works & effective, but perhaps it needs some tweaking down the road. Perhaps make wall repairing only valid to ding the event once per hour (yes... a timegate).
 

[Voltaire.8369]

2 hours ago, Nidome.1365 said:

If the problem is to do with SM then just reduce the rewards for defending and attacking SM rather than nerf all defending.

This - or have full defense rewards apply only to secondary keeps, with reduced rewards for SMC and garrisons/EK (the players should be defending them for their utility alone).

[PseudoNewb.5468]

10 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Go ahead and don't repair. 

That just means you'll lose the objective faster.

Perfect, more objectives to get capture credit for. Since defense credit has become very hard.

K-train for life.

[Abjurer.9302]

If there is a 20-minute fight over an objective, defenders would get 6 defense successes while attackers would only get one attack success if they capped it.

 

Instead of the 3-minute timer should defense events only succeed if the objective has been uncontested for 30 seconds?  This would put it more in line with the attack event and make it not necessary to nerf defense participation.