Leaving repairs aside, things that should earn participation in an objective defense

[blp.3489]

Leaving aside the question of whether simply doing a repair should earn you objective defense participation, what are the things that you think "should" earn you participation?

It seems to me that killing an enemy player, or some threshold number of enemy players, inside an objective should absolutely earn you participation regardless of whether they have damaged a wall or guard or lord.  If you earn a player kill bag while a player is inside your objective that should count toward earning participation.

It seems to me that destroying a siege weapon that has done damage to the objective structure during a defense event should earn you participation.

It seems to me that doing a threshold amount of damage against enemy players while the player is inside the structure during a defense event should earn you participation in a defense event.

Are there problems with any of the above?  Are there other things, other than repairing, that should earn participation?  I'm only excluding repairing because it has been discussed a lot in other threads and I don't want to repeat the same discussion here.

I was part of a largish battle over one of our towers the other day, which struck me as exactly what these rewards are intended to encourage, but never got any participation, likely because, although the walls were attacked with siege, they were never breached, I absolutely do not believe that you should have to let the enemy into you objective in order to get defense participation.  That said, I'm not sure what defined criteria should be used to make an enemy player part of an attack.  Killing a random enemy player on the other side of the map should not give participation in a given objective defense event.

[Erich.1783]

It should be more than just inside the objective, there seems to be a small range now, I would expand that range a bit.  I have suggested something like 1.5 max cata range, that way if you hit the group standing around the catas taking a wall down you could get credit.  As things stand you can not get defend credit against a cata attach until the wall comes down and the enemy forces move into, or at least very close to, the objective.  

TLDR:  Expand the radius of defense event.

[Dayra.7405]

Blocking siege of course.

And we already have an area marked on the map, no need to define an extra one, doing damage over a threshold (e.g. 30k enough to kill an average player if  she isn’t healed) on enemies and their siege inside that area  should give you participation, if there is a defense event active. 

Edited March 18, 2023 by Dayra.7405

[Xenesis.6389]

1. Kill players. Should there be thresholds? maybe. Kill 1 bronze, kill 2-5 silver, kill 5+ gold, minimums. Each section should provide parts of the bronze-gold credit, so killing 1 person and kill 1 cata, and ressing a lord could lead to a gold as an example.

2. Kill siege. This one is tricky since siege can be built way off of objectives, in some cases even out of the objective zone.

3. Kill npcs, for attacking. Guards being the lowest, lord being the top.

4. Res npcs, lord being the top of the list. If you can get credit for killing npcs, logically the opposite should apply.

5. Capture ring, for attacking. Ressing the lord breaks this so again should provide a decent credit for defense events.

6. Repair walls/gates no longer counts, the opposite of breaking walls/gates probably shouldn't either now to be fair.

7. Disablers, supply traps. Maybe, again the range where it happens can be iffy to call.

Doubt anet wants to spend the time to min max ranges on every single thing involved with event credits and just keep it within a certain range, basically inside the objective.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Xenesis.6389

[blp.3489]

Can anyone see a downside to counting any kills in the objective's zone, during a defense event, contributing to participation?  I only wonder if there is an easy way to code whether a player is in a zone.  If we knew what the developers had to work with it would make the exercise easier.

I had said inside the objective as an absolute minimum, i.e. not getting credit for killing an enemy inside the objective, regardless of their prior actions or lack thereof, makes no sense to me.  I don't see a downside to anywhere in the zone.

I agree, I can't see how resing a lord shouldn't give participation.  Resing the quartermasters etc. is certainly easier as they are often killed away from the capture ring.

Destroying siege that has damaged the objective for sure.

Disablers and traps yup.

So, outside of repairs, it seems like there are several clear things anet should give defense credit for, it is only a question of whether they can code those things.  I can't immediately think of how any of those things could be abused, anyone see a way?

[Xenesis.6389]

8 minutes ago, blp.3489 said:

Can anyone see a downside to counting any kills in the objective's zone, during a defense event, contributing to participation?  I only wonder if there is an easy way to code whether a player is in a zone.  If we knew what the developers had to work with it would make the exercise easier.

I had said inside the objective as an absolute minimum, i.e. not getting credit for killing an enemy inside the objective, regardless of their prior actions or lack thereof, makes no sense to me.  I don't see a downside to anywhere in the zone.

I agree, I can't see how resing a lord shouldn't give participation.  Resing the quartermasters etc. is certainly easier as they are often killed away from the capture ring.

Destroying siege that has damaged the objective for sure.

Disablers and traps yup.

So, outside of repairs, it seems like there are several clear things anet should give defense credit for, it is only a question of whether they can code those things.  I can't immediately think of how any of those things could be abused, anyone see a way?

Considering triggering the white swords is only a matter of running past guards as a roamer, not even killing them, with absolutely no threat to the structure in the first place, I don't think there should be a zone wide credit for the event. Now if white swords only start from actual siege damage, hence an actual threat to the objective, then yes zone wide credit would be more acceptable I think, especially when siege like catas and trebs are usually at max distances from the objective.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Xenesis.6389

[Gorani.7205]

All depending on whether ANet can register those defensive activities (in no particular order):
1. Closing a broken wall/gate (because that repair actually is useful, blocking more attackers from arriving inside)
2. Disabling a siege close to a wall (not a far away treb etc.) as long as the lord is still up
3. Destroying attacking siege close to a wall as long as the lord is still up
4. Doing a fair amount of damage to enemies with stationary siege (because usually Oils and Canons are dangerous to use, but can be effective)
5. Fighting at the Lord to save him (perhaps doing some damage to foes + support to lord, so you can't just run past the action once)
6. Any attempt to rezz the Lord
 

[Dayra.7405]

I think you focus to much on more or less successful (but how successful is it to kill 1 of 20?) actions.

- Dying in the cap-circle (if you aren't afk, e.g. moved or did damge)

- being pulled and dying on the wall (if you aren't afk, e.g. moved or did damge)

- ...

all these heroic failures should give (in my opinion) participation as well

Edited March 18, 2023 by Dayra.7405

[Johje Holan.4607]

Most of these sound good.  (I don't think you can include dying in the reward calculation though.  Seems like it would be too easy to abuse.)

Perhaps all these various activities could be a graduated system.  And combinations of them would earn greater rewards.  For example if you do one of the "rewarded activities" then you get bronze.  If you do more than one you have an opportunity to get silver or gold depending on how many/how much you do.

As others have said, all this depends on if Anet can code it.  And it seems like they have always had trouble accounting for certain activities; especially defense related.

Edited March 19, 2023 by Johje Holan.4607

[ZTeamG.4603]

13 hours ago, Johje Holan.4607 said:

As others have said, all this depends on if Anet can code it.  And it seems like they have always had trouble accounting for certain activities; especially defense related.

We know they have the data (or the capability to track it) for a lot of these things based on other stats, from sPvP stats for things like damage, healing, time holding circle, etc. to stats for the total number of x mob killed by players over the years. We get wxp for killing siege, so tying that to defense credit shouldn't be too different from tying player kills to it.

 

I think the main reason they haven't expanded it is worries about abuse, but if abuse is the concern then maybe expand ways of getting participation without immediately tying 2500wxp every 3min to it.

[MarzAttakz.9608]

How about some love for your supports too?

We get the short end of the stick when it comes to killing npc's, an even shorter end when it comes to killing players and now are completely shafted with the latest defense parameters. At least repping gave us participation. Can't use the Ram or Cata or even tag a few guards because Alacrity bot. Why must UberDPS trump UberHealz?

Switching out support for a DPS build is not even remotely an option 95% of the time.

Side rant: tagging something doesn't equate to making it dead. Don't be a DPSTard, leave some for others too please...

Edited March 22, 2023 by MarzAttakz.9608

[ArchonWing.9480]

Killing players anywhere near an objective when it's contested, destroying completed enemy siege (does this even count?), ressing downed (not defeated) players and ressing guards. Repairing walls, but this should only be rewarded once every defense cycle. SMC should have a longer defense cycle, like 10 minutes, to prevent degenerates from farming too much.

Also there should be no minimum damage contribution, much like tagging yaks. This should resolve most "omg im a support" issues.

We should also buff the quartermaster; she does nothing but rallybot and I don't even think ressing them even counts for anything.

Edited March 22, 2023 by ArchonWing.9480