Only 2 things I wish for WvW

[morvious.3194]

I have being playing since 2012.. so I have enjoyed the mode.. now this days the healing power of the zergs is too much.. In a way make the siege weapons ineffective against large zergs.. specially when your team is outnumbered... I would love for the siege to be way more potent against  big groups of players..  just to have a chance if outnumbered.. 

 

The second I would personally love in WvW is maybe some sort of "once per week Pve intervention.. maybe a Brand Army invading they hole map {veteran troops with their commanders} causing trouble all along the map and even  capable of capturing towers and castles.. It would be a real challenge to have this kind of scenarios with the heavy pvp involved already.. 

[Xenesis.6389]

1. Don't count on this making any dev list, boon balls don't want to siege to be effective against them, and that's who they listen to.

2. More than likely most primary wvw players will say no to pve events. Siegerazor should be updated though...

[aspirine.6852]

Delete Red borderlands is higher up the list.

[Sylvyn.4750]

On 6/11/2023 at 7:38 AM, aspirine.6852 said:

Delete Red borderlands is higher up the list.

Which would mean no new maps ever again, as the devs implied if we had voted to delete RBL those many years ago.  RBL is a roamer's dream given the complexity of the terrain.

My vote would be to get rid of all hostile PVE creatures...they can keep you in battle and prevent you from mounting while the zerg chasing you has already mounted up, among other annoyances.

[aspirine.6852]

On 6/13/2023 at 8:11 PM, Sylvyn.4750 said:

Which would mean no new maps ever again, as the devs implied if we had voted to delete RBL those many years ago.  RBL is a roamer's dream given the complexity of the terrain.

My vote would be to get rid of all hostile PVE creatures...they can keep you in battle and prevent you from mounting while the zerg chasing you has already mounted up, among other annoyances.

RBL is for pve kitten.

[Dawdler.8521]

2 hours ago, aspirine.6852 said:

RBL is for pve kitten.

EBG must be for the really hardcore PvE raiders then 😛

[Cael.3960]

The last thing we need is a significant boost to defensive siege damage when so much of the gameplay in WvW is already just a holding action so an overwhelming amount of it can be built. If the majority of 50-man squads can't crack a T3 with the CURRENT amount of siege spam, what makes you think anyone other than a 5-man ninja squad will bother if the siege is even more effective? 

 

Sure, increase the damage but halve the amount of siege that's buildable in a friendly objective. Force defenders to make a choice; siege one entrance to the nuts so that it's impenetrable to assault and defend the rest with organized groups, or spread it out and organize sallies to flank invading groups. 

 

This game mode should encourage more interaction than sitting behind friendly walls and hammering the 1 key the moment something in red comes into range. 

[Arzael.1823]

On 6/11/2023 at 4:38 PM, aspirine.6852 said:

Delete Red borderlands is higher up the list.

No... only cause some dont like it as they just want what they are used too? Many ppl love red border... well known its a nice way to have variations in your tactics 🙂 Only thing they should fix are glitches into the keeps/towers but on all borders

[Random dude.5089]

i know pvp players are alergic to pve , but i would agree if they add pve events that give the team who wins them over an advantage , like an elite mob that helps capture objectives or boost to stats for couple of minutes or maybe even make siege deal more damage , there is a lot of ideas that could change wvw and give a new fresh experience to wvw players  , they could even add new tacts , but anet is too busy making pve content and reworking scourge revive bot feature.

[Custodio.6134]

3 hours ago, Random dude.5089 said:

i know pvp players are alergic to pve , but i would agree if they add pve events that give the team who wins them over an advantage

well, in that case, you would creat basically another objective to fight over for. Which honestly, isn´t that much related to PvE-content. 

Usually, when people "complain" about PvE-events in WvW is, when they don´t add any value to the competition. When it makes no difference if they´re there or not (simple example: Veteran creatures. Yes, they´re there for the daily, but they don´t add anything to the competition). 

An opposite example would be the neutral camps on EBG, that contest a structure on their own. While still not being amazing events, they at least add value to the match (contesting the nearby camps on their own). 

The biggest problem with fitting "PvE-Events" into WvW is: How do you make them impactful enough in order to make players fight over them, but not TOO impactful and/or PvE-styled at the same time. 

[enkidu.5937]

13 hours ago, Custodio.6134 said:

Veteran creatures. Yes, they´re there for the daily, but they don´t add anything to the competition). 

one of the best side contents

you always find people to fight with if you visit a veteran creature in enemy territory when the daily is on 😅

half of them are afk, easy kills 🤡

and all others that fight will somehow damage the veteran creature and get the reward

you can even create your own personal event mod: "protect the veteran creature from all enemies" 😅 (i did that once and it was fun)

[Random dude.5089]

18 hours ago, Custodio.6134 said:

well, in that case, you would creat basically another objective to fight over for. Which honestly, isn´t that much related to PvE-content. 

Usually, when people "complain" about PvE-events in WvW is, when they don´t add any value to the competition. When it makes no difference if they´re there or not (simple example: Veteran creatures. Yes, they´re there for the daily, but they don´t add anything to the competition). 

An opposite example would be the neutral camps on EBG, that contest a structure on their own. While still not being amazing events, they at least add value to the match (contesting the nearby camps on their own). 

The biggest problem with fitting "PvE-Events" into WvW is: How do you make them impactful enough in order to make players fight over them, but not TOO impactful and/or PvE-styled at the same time. 

if you are talking about merc camps , they are so useless , like there no indicator that they are getting attacked so u can't defend them , so u cap them for like 5 min and they get taken down with ease , i rarely see a merc  camp holding more than 10 minutes , which is very little for it to be impactful , i am not game dev to give ideas that could impact wvw , but making these pve events could make the match more interesting , since most of the time , the thing that "others" expect the boonball that run arround do is cloud near sm , i mean its up to anet to figure out what can impact the match , im not game dev to balance things out , but adding pve to is fun and can give perma action arround the map , most of people get bored from the cloud that happens every game , i mean its still pvp , you have to fight over it , so its not realy pve , otherwise taking down camps will be considered pve too , since u have to kill npcs , so the pve objectives they can add will likely be the same , but it spawns random arround the map , or it gives you a 5minute warning before it does , so people can gather up , and zerg each others.

[Custodio.6134]

4 hours ago, Random dude.5089 said:

like there no indicator that they are getting attacked so u can't defend them

that´s because they´re not even supposed to be a scoring objective. Holding the mercenaries puts pressure on the nearby supply camps, and they will at least kill the guards and overseer if you don´t react to it. Which will automatically put pressure on 2 camps if you leave them be. That, and only that, is the point of mercenaries. putting pressure on the camps, and forcing the enemy to either neutralize them, or  losing the corresponding camps otherwise. 

And nowadays, neutralizing camps is a rather important preparation for attacking objectives, especially upgraded ones. The value here is not the mercenaries itself, it´s the pressure they put on the teams indirectly. forcing the enemy to respond. Sure, it´s not a massive thing (you´re not directly lose a structure because of that), but neither are they useless and only for a daily (like the veterans i mentioned). Like i said, it has to at least add SOME value to the competition. And mercenaries certainly do, while veterans don´t

[Arzael.1823]

On 7/15/2023 at 5:10 PM, Random dude.5089 said:

i know pvp players are alergic to pve , but i would agree if they add pve events that give the team who wins them over an advantage , like an elite mob that helps capture objectives or boost to stats for couple of minutes or maybe even make siege deal more damage , there is a lot of ideas that could change wvw and give a new fresh experience to wvw players  , they could even add new tacts , but anet is too busy making pve content and reworking scourge revive bot feature.

Oh you mean like the laser events on desert? the server with massive blobs won that and the minority server tried to repair bevor everything was gone... wasnt fun for the outnumbered... it would only give gain more ez way to the servers with more ppl... pls do not anet!!

[DivineAlphaLight.2738]

On 6/15/2023 at 12:01 PM, Cael.3960 said:

The last thing we need is a significant boost to defensive siege damage when so much of the gameplay in WvW is already just a holding action so an overwhelming amount of it can be built. If the majority of 50-man squads can't crack a T3 with the CURRENT amount of siege spam, what makes you think anyone other than a 5-man ninja squad will bother if the siege is even more effective? 

 

Sure, increase the damage but halve the amount of siege that's buildable in a friendly objective. Force defenders to make a choice; siege one entrance to the nuts so that it's impenetrable to assault and defend the rest with organized groups, or spread it out and organize sallies to flank invading groups. 

 

This game mode should encourage more interaction than sitting behind friendly walls and hammering the 1 key the moment something in red comes into range. 

I think he's referring to giving small teams more defensive power so they can hold out longer for reinforcements.  Currently the big servers just wreck the small servers too easily and quickly.  50-man squad CAN EASILY crack a T3 in under 5 minutes if they know what they are doing and there are only 5 defenders.  Now obviously if 20-50 defenders jump in and help out then NO, a 50-man squad can't crack that easily, nor should they.  

An alternative to stronger siege power if you just want to give towers and keeps more holdout time for reinforcements would be simply increasing the strength of the walls.  I would be happy if they increased the wall health by 2x-3x.  This would simply give commanders and squads more time to show up and defend.  I bet morvious.3194 simply plays on off peak hours.  I understand off peak hours for your server is not fun generally.  If every time you log on and your team is the underdog because you're outnumbered and playing defense.  It's incredibly frustrating and most players just quit because of this.  We need more player retention so I'm all for increasing wall defenses health 2x - 3x.