Wvw proposal for roammers

[Bladestrom.6425]

1 minute ago, zonias.1083 said:

you are totally right that it would definitely change many things in world vs world.

I still fully believe that among equally skilled players no player would be able to solo multiple adversaries at the same time ever. 

 

but you are right, that it would lead to frustration where top players could dominate bigger groups. 

Yup and you have to remember wvw is open world deliberately that is not balanced for 1v1 its balanced for blob v blob, gang v gang etc.  In this environment the pleasure come from beating unfair odds, and at times catching the unwary and slaughtering.  That's what makes wvw so interesting as apposed to spvp that is designed to be balanced.

[TheGrimm.5624]

3 hours ago, zonias.1083 said:

would it be a good idea, to make so that when you face multiple enemies your starts scare, like world bosses for example?

As a roamer, no. 

Roaming is fun because it is not easy and it adds challenge levels since you have to plan on not having backup. You also get to attempt to choose the size of the engagement. When you go fishing and pull in more than expected that's just an opportunity to see how many you can get. It also makes you more ready for the next time it happens. No I don't want scaling. I do still think the change to outnumbered was misguided since roamers were drawn to outnumbered maps for that challenge and if we couldn't dent the numbers it had less of a bite to it.

[zonias.1083]

1 minute ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

Yup and you have to remember wvw is open world deliberately that is not balanced for 1v1 its balanced for blob v blob, gang v gang etc.  In this environment the pleasure come from beating unfair odds, and at times catching the unwary and slaughtering.  That's what makes wvw so interesting as apposed to spvp that is designed to be balanced.

I was thinking these changes for reduced numbers of fights, to give roamers and smalls groups some chances. 

 

Only in heavily outnumbered situations. If a 1 players kills 5 players alone that means the 5 players need to step up their game. 

 

As of now, if 1 player loses to 5 players that joined the fight, that does not mean the 5 players did anything good, just got together. 

 

Like any content is must be challenging to be rewarding, when 50 players demolish 10 players that where caught, does any of the sides feels happy about it?

10 players misplayed and did not retreat fast enough, and the 50 players simple run them over without any opposition, there is no need to think just press 1 and kill. 

[zonias.1083]

6 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

No I don't want scaling. I do still think the change to outnumbered was misguided since roamers were drawn to outnumbered maps for that challenge and if we couldn't dent the numbers it had less of a bite to it.

If i go against many opponent, there are two possible outcomes. 

 

Either i win because they are new players and played horribly, or do not have proper gear and i feel bad because i did not get to have a proper fight. 

 

Or i lose because they where more people and i had no chance. 

 

Any outnumber fight you win currently is because you played against much less skilled people. 

The outcome is not decided on skilled, or outsmarting your opponent. 

It is either a totally new players that get dominated, or too many people for skill to decide anything. 

[Bladestrom.6425]

2 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

I was thinking these changes for reduced numbers of fights, to give roamers and smalls groups some chances. 

 

Only in heavily outnumbered situations. If a 1 players kills 5 players alone that means the 5 players need to step up their game. 

 

As of now, if 1 player loses to 5 players that joined the fight, that does not mean the 5 players did anything good, just got together. 

 

Like any content is must be challenging to be rewarding, when 50 players demolish 10 players that where caught, does any of the sides feels happy about it?

10 players misplayed and did not retreat fast enough, and the 50 players simple run them over without any opposition, there is no need to think just press 1 and kill. 

 

You as a player are meant to be aware of your surroundings, that is the balancing.  Aside from that how do you expect Anets server tech to measure a players personal skill to make the fight balanced?   Even if Anet's servers could somehow magically measure personal skill (?) what then?

 

1v3 : 3 against weaker players.  No buff required, that would be fair on the weaker players.  

1v3 equally skilled players - no buff required

 

And if you buff regardless? well when someone wins 1v3 they pick of the opposition 1 by 1, and guess what 1v1 when you have this buff you will have an unfair advantage.  

 

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

3 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

I was thinking these changes for reduced numbers of fights, to give roamers and smalls groups some chances. 

 

Only in heavily outnumbered situations. If a 1 players kills 5 players alone that means the 5 players need to step up their game. 

 

As of now, if 1 player loses to 5 players that joined the fight, that does not mean the 5 players did anything good, just got together. 

 

Like any content is must be challenging to be rewarding, when 50 players demolish 10 players that where caught, does any of the sides feels happy about it?

10 players misplayed and did not retreat fast enough, and the 50 players simple run them over without any opposition, there is no need to think just press 1 and kill. 

Roamers can and do win fights against multiple people. Been on both sides of that. What this sounds like is what I call efficiency. Using less to do more has no meaning in game at this time. That's also why I say bring back reasons to win which, per ANet's words they are working on. It will lead to Alliance's stacking but thats going to happen anyway. But give us a reason for efficient play. Create that reason for the zerg to break up into smaller sizes to do more at once. Roamers and havoc take advantage of that already, it just doesn't mean anything except to ourselves.

[TheGrimm.5624]

2 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

If i go against many opponent, there are two possible outcomes. 

 

Either i win because they are new players and played horribly, or do not have proper gear and i feel bad because i did not get to have a proper fight. 

 

Or i lose because they where more people and i had no chance. 

 

Any outnumber fight you win currently is because you played against much less skilled people. 

The outcome is not decided on skilled, or outsmarting your opponent. 

It is either a totally new players that get dominated, or too many people for skill to decide anything. 

New players aren't ranked in Mith and Diamond, doesn't mean they are used to roaming though. No small scale has variables in builds, skill and knowing your build and playing theirs. That's another reason I tell people don't just call hacks and ask for nerfs on the forums. Create what you think is the build, go play it and learn its up and downs when you fight it.

[zonias.1083]

4 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

You as a player are meant to be aware of your surroundings, that is the balancing.  Aside from that how do you expect Anets server tech to measure a players personal skill to make the fight balanced?   Even if Anet's servers could somehow magically measure personal skill (?) what then?

 

you would have to check numbers, but i was thinking along the lines. 

 

Of, 1 vs 2 people: 10% buff to certain stats

       1 vs 3 people: 20% buff. not sure

       1 vs 4 people: 30%

       etc.

 

[Bladestrom.6425]

Just now, zonias.1083 said:

you would have to check numbers, but i was thinking along the lines. 

 

Of, 1 vs 2 people: 10% buff to certain stats

       1 vs 3 people: 20% buff. not sure

       1 vs 4 people: 30%

       etc.

 

So, you are 1v2, you have a 10% advantage 1v1, you pick them off 1 by 1 and have a 10% advantage against each player.  even worse, you are higher skilled than the 2 players - now you destroy them 1v1.

 

The answer is for you to get 10% better.

[zonias.1083]

1 minute ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

That's another reason I tell people don't just call hacks and ask for nerfs on the forums. Create what you think is the build, go play it and learn its up and downs when you fight it.

this would not disrupt this aspect, people would still be able to experiment. But of course if someone where to play a build that brings nothing for a team, then that person would not be able to shield behind a big group and cover their lack of fundamentals. 

 

People are still free to experiment and come up with their builds to cover a role. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 minute ago, zonias.1083 said:

you would have to check numbers, but i was thinking along the lines. 

 

Of, 1 vs 2 people: 10% buff to certain stats

       1 vs 3 people: 20% buff. not sure

       1 vs 4 people: 30%

       etc.

 

No. This will just lead to more people calling for nerfs because there were artificial buffs to stats and not an issue in skill or armor balancing. When roamers choose to attack and enter a 1vX fight its their choose and each of us have our own reasons to do so. I do so to practice when I get in a bad spot. When roaming you need to plan that others will look to attack you solo which depending on if you are trying to bait them in all the better. If you aren't then that's situational awareness and its a matter of practice. But no buffs.

[zonias.1083]

4 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

now you destroy them 1v1.

The scaling would not work for 1 vs 1 in that case. If they are worst then yes they will lose the 1 vs 1. 

 

As for getting 10% better. if 5 people come gang up on me, because they chasing, or keep coming how can i get 50% better? there is am impossible wall that you can not overcome with skill. 

Even a 100% boosts on stats can not help you fight vs 10 people, it i just want to give a fighting chance for the solo players against small groups. 

[zonias.1083]

1 minute ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

This will just lead to more people calling for nerfs because there were artificial buffs to stats and not an issue in skill or armor balancing.

In my opinion is X people lose vs 1 guy, that means they are much worst, they need to get better gear, because what they are using is clearly wrong, or get better because they do not use their skill in a meaningful way. 

[Bladestrom.6425]

6 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

The scaling would not work for 1 vs 1 in that case. If they are worst then yes they will lose the 1 vs 1. 

 

As for getting 10% better. if 5 people come gang up on me, because they chasing, or keep coming how can i get 50% better? there is am impossible wall that you can not overcome with skill. 

Even a 100% boosts on stats can not help you fight vs 10 people, it i just want to give a fighting chance for the solo players against small groups. 

 

4 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

In my opinion is X people lose vs 1 guy, that means they are much worst, they need to get better gear, because what they are using is clearly wrong, or get better because they do not use their skill in a meaningful way. 

exactly, you don't need automagically applied magic buffs, the answer is be aware of your surroundings and use your skill to engage/disengage and enjoy the danger an open battlefield gives. 

 

I.e you are in a 1v1, its on you to disengage and run your face off if you see another group of enemy incoming.

Edited March 25, 2023 by vesica tempestas.1563

[zonias.1083]

1 minute ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

exactly, you don't need automatically applied magic buffs, the answer is be aware of your surroundings and use your skill to engage/disengage and enjoy the danger an open battlefield gives.

if you win a fight against multiple people, you are just abusing of less skilled people or who have really bad gear. it is not a fair fight, and the big group that lost, feels it is unfair, because they got one shot either by a skill difference or gear difference, which they are, they lost to a single player despite having a massive disadvantage, that means they need to get correct gear and understand their class. 

 

 

You are simply crushing much worst players. If i go and kill 2 people at the same time, i do not enjoy, because i know they are just bad, it was challenging, but it is like fighting two babies, what is the question then how many babies can i take at the same time? 

it is not a good experience for me, because i did not push myself for a fair fight, and for them because they have no idea why the lost. 

For the current system. 

 

If you could balanced outnumber fights, you can fight equally skilled opponents and it would still be challenging for both dies, i would not simply avoid 1 vs 2, i would take like you very well said enjoy the danger of the field. 

 

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

3 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

In my opinion is X people lose vs 1 guy, that means they are much worst, they need to get better gear, because what they are using is clearly wrong, or get better because they do not use their skill in a meaningful way. 

Or they didn't play to their role. People that build for group play don't do as well against people building for roamer builds. This is also why there is much back and fourth on boon balls and uptimes of boons. Boosting just potentially means more imbalance in classes that can spam boons versus those that can't, again not something that would add more balance in play, it would probably just lead to more more boon spamming and more imbalance to larger vs smaller group play.

[Bladestrom.6425]

1 minute ago, zonias.1083 said:

if you win a fight against multiple people, you are just abusing of less skilled people or who have really bad gear. it is not a fair fight, and the big group that lost, feels it is unfair, because they got one shot either by a skill difference or gear difference, which they are, they lost to a single player despite having a massive disadvantage, that means they need to get correct gear and understand their class. 

 

 

You are simply crushing much worst players. If i go and kill 2 people at the same time, i do not enjoy, because i know they are just bad, it was challenging, but it is like fighting two babies, what is the question then how many babies can i take at the same time? 

it is not a good experience for me, because i did not push myself for a fair fight, and for them because they have no idea why the lost. 

For the current system. 

 

If you could balanced outnumber fights, you can fight equally skilled opponents and it would still be challenging for both dies, i would not simply avoid 1 vs 2, i would take like you very well said enjoy the danger of the field. 

 

 

what tyour asking for is Mindreading technology that can magically measure player skill.  come back in 500 years maybe 🙂

[zonias.1083]

9 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

I.e you are in a 1v1, its on you to disengage and run your face off if you see another group of enemy incoming.

it is impossible to disengage, when enemies are coming with mount and you can not because you are in combat, unless you are really close to your own structure in which it is not roaming but defending an alied position where you have tools like walls, cannons, etc. 

[Bladestrom.6425]

Just now, zonias.1083 said:

it is impossible to disengage, when enemies are coming with mount and you can not because you are in combat, unless you are really close to your own structure in which it is not roaming but defending an alied position where you have tools like walls, cannons, etc. 

strange i do it all the time.

[zonias.1083]

2 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Or they didn't play to their role. People that build for group play don't do as well against people building for roamer builds. This is also why there is much back and fourth on boon balls and uptimes of boons.

you should not play a build that is design for big groups in a small fight. You should not be rewarded for doing so, it is like if i play that build for large scaled WvW into ranked pvp of course i deserve to be clapped. 

[zonias.1083]

3 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

what tyour asking for is Mindreading technology that can magically measure player skill.  come back in 500 years maybe 🙂

i am not asking for that, i am simply for a buff in some stats that could lead to a more fight when outnumbered. 

[Bladestrom.6425]

2 minutes ago, zonias.1083 said:

i am not asking for that, i am simply for a buff in some stats that could lead to a more fight when outnumbered. 

And im saying that is impossible because you cant know the relative skill levels of the players or the impact that buff would have.  The answer is for you to use your skills, not have a buff as a crutch.  Ask yourself how is it that others can roam for hours wth sometimes no deaths.

 

Think of it this way, what happens when a top tier pvp roamer gets the buff....

Edited March 25, 2023 by vesica tempestas.1563

[zonias.1083]

3 minutes ago, vesica tempestas.1563 said:

strange i do it all the time.

how come? because, i was not able to run away, even though i used all my ports from revenant and run away as fast as possible in the moment i noticed the approaching, while being chased by a guarding, and they ended up catching me and killing me. 

[Bladestrom.6425]

Just now, zonias.1083 said:

how come? because, i was not able to run away, even though i used all my ports from revenant and run away as fast as possible in the moment i noticed the approaching, while being chased by a guarding, and they ended up catching me and killing me. 

camera panned out, kill enemy fast, run when you see trouble and use speed buffs.

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 minute ago, zonias.1083 said:

You are simply crushing much worst players.

First of have fought [SPACE] and as a roamer and can be frustrating, doesn't mean I won't try and attack them while roaming. But I do enjoy their video's and music selections so from this roamer +1. But they do show the power that boons already work in small scale and against larger groups. So when you considered boosting this is an good example of why that would be a bad idea.

Reference: