Would you like an expansion that actually expand the WvW maps we have instead of a totally new map like it was with the Desert BL?

[ilMasa.2546]

For istance how about an expansion dedicated to underwater combat:

- we could have an underground layer of rivers and underground seas conneced with the current lakes we already have in Alpine maps 
- a nice rework to make viable fof water all current skills and traits we have on ground
- dedicated new elite spec for underwater combat
- siege and mounts for underwater combat

In this way we would have the exact same maps that we love and appreciate but with a twist.Where you can continue to play as you have always played on the surface or switch to underwater while being on the same map. Zerg enemy on surface? fine i go roam underwater and vice versa.

An aerial expansion,i dont know, Anet pushed gliders on WVW right?Lets have new functions for gliders dedicated only for wvw to make it unique and have dogfights with gliders?!!
- new abilities for gliders
- new dedicated wvw masteries

Dunno just making up some ideas. It's something I've always thought about. Personally I don't care about having a new map for wvw, but I would like the ones that already exist to be expanded. No  pve stuff, but I would like something different to add something new without ruining or totally change what is already there.

Edited July 13, 2023 by ilMasa.2546

[joneirikb.7506]

Some initial thoughts:

- The majority of players in GW2 hates UW combat
- Larger maps also means it's potentially harder to find other players (friendly and enemies)
- Generally players tend to flock to the usual/same things (zerg objectives), so unless something UW got incredible rewards, I'd expect them to be mostly abandoned/ignored.
- ANet barely balance for WvW at all, and I don't think they balance for UW at-all.
- They've already said they'll stop making elite-spez for expansions, so I can't imagine they'd go back on that for WvW of all things.
- With how much players hate siege and UW separately, the combination doesn't sound popular.
- I think the only group that would appreciate this is roamers/havoc squads, that enjoy more options to sneak around the maps (having more ways to get around the entire map UW thus undetected 99%)
- Considering a large group of players are complaining that the maps are too "vertical" as it is, and idolize how flat EBG is, I'd expect those players to dislike this.
- Changes to maps is supposedly some of the most time and resource heavy things ANet can do, which seems to be why they hate doing it.

That said, personally I think more water-ways on Alpine would be interesting, I always loved sneaking around most of the map through water, since no one ever checks it. Personally I don't think much else would be needed though, the other ideas wouldn't do much to me.

Considering how little resources is dedicated to WvW, it seems the ANet leadership thinks there is little return for investment into WvW, or even that returns from WvW doesn't need to be invested into. They've all but swore to never make another WvW map again after EOTM/DBL. And the little resources they do put towards WvW goes mostly toward World Restructure, and some hand-waving toward balance to try to knee-jerk the worst problems but not much more.

So the first and foremost thing in most WvW veteran players minds will always be "We're not getting stuff for free, what will this take Time and Money away from?" And the answer to that will usually be the entire World Restructure and any future balance/rewards adjustments.

You could say that the WvW forums are "overly cynical" and you'd be right, we've been around too long and burned too often to have any "Hopes and Dreams" left in stock.

Edited July 13, 2023 by joneirikb.7506
forgot a not

[XenesisII.1540]

Other games have done it. Planetside had an expansion with a cavern system, where you could bring power orbs back to the surface so players up there could use the special weapons/vehicles. Couple others games like Daoc and ESO I think too. But anet can barely be bothered to fix jumping exploits going into places that you could do a simple map addition to cover up these days, never mind trying to get them to make any type of map expansion for wvw...

Personally I wouldn't be excited or pay for an underwater map, aerial maybe, but you have to think this will split the player base on who's playing there regularly vs the regular wvw maps which is accessible to everyone.

Edited July 13, 2023 by XenesisII.1540

[jakob.7210]

8 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Other games have done it. Planetside had an expansion with a cavern system, where you could bring power orbs back to the surface so players up there could use the special weapons/vehicles. Couple others games like Daoc and ESO I think too. But anet can barely be bothered to fix jumping exploits going into places that you could do a simple map addition to cover up these days, never mind trying to get them to make any type of map expansion for wvw...

Personally I wouldn't be excited or pay for an underwater map, aerial maybe, but you have to think this will split the player base on who's playing there regularly vs the regular wvw maps which is accessible to everyone.

DAoC died after they brought the underwater map

[Riba.3271]

There is lot of waste on maps right now. No one communicates regarding EB NPCs or Borderlands Bloodlust anymore. I would like those to be replaced with some kind of objective or event that bring players together.

Also I don't think our server had single tag on Desert Borderlands this week, and we are very active tier 1 server. They should stop trying to fix it and delete it.

Regarding underwater. 3 dimensional movement can work, just you would need also design abilities and surrounding terrain so that it is interesting and balanced and I wouldn't mind massive map with water between objectives so you can travel to siege island towers or underwater keeps (inside air bubbles). It would be cool thematically.. Just don't think they have great enough minds in their team to come up with something decent.

So as a compromise I would suggest following:

1.  Map changes: Replace interior circle of Borderland Bloodlust with an island with a tower and an underwater castle (where fights occur on land). This should make maps feel larger and increase amount of underwater combat. Of course it can't just be "empty water", but have like ruins and terrain you can use to outplay enemies. Of course they should keep most of the surroundings that people love to fight in.
2. Underwater camera and mobility: They should also make any character that enters underwater automatically use 3 dimensional action camera, with the mobility skills reworked to be able to dash in any direction. Evade distance, Evade Speed and movement speed should be increased.
3. Underwater ability rework: Professions reworked to maintain their identity underwater and more skills available there. For example since Guardian has 0 heal skills in underwater sets and they have no access to "Receive The Light!" underwater, it makes their available healing and support absolutely garbage. Definitely in need of some changes. Also each class should be added 1 more underwater weapon choice. Utility skills and evade should be available while on surface of water.

Now back to reality... They should have reworked underwater combat with EoD when we fought the Deep Sea dragon and got Skiffs. The fact they skipped it for a water related expansion means they have given up on underwater completely.

Edited July 13, 2023 by Riba.3271

[Bristingr.5034]

On 7/13/2023 at 11:31 AM, joneirikb.7506 said:

- The majority of players in GW2 hates UW combat

Because players don't know how to fight in 3D. Any fights in the air would also be hated for the exact same reason.

[Justine.6351]

6 minutes ago, Bristingr.5034 said:

Because players don't know how to fight in 3D. Any fights in the air would also be hated for the exact same reason.

Everyone just ends up trying to pewpew underwater. Even I had binded a float and sink button for uw and I never use them.

[kash.9213]

On 7/13/2023 at 1:41 PM, XenesisII.1540 said:

Other games have done it. Planetside had an expansion with a cavern system, where you could bring power orbs back to the surface so players up there could use the special weapons/vehicles. Couple others games like Daoc and ESO I think too. But anet can barely be bothered to fix jumping exploits going into places that you could do a simple map addition to cover up these days, never mind trying to get them to make any type of map expansion for wvw...

Personally I wouldn't be excited or pay for an underwater map, aerial maybe, but you have to think this will split the player base on who's playing there regularly vs the regular wvw maps which is accessible to everyone.

As much as I liked underwater combat until I started using a build that has nothing for it, that definitely would split the player base, if anyone even bothered with that map. There would still need to be land masses and floating structures or boats to fight on. It would have to be a legit pirate ship meta or it would bomb.

If a map drove us to fight on an entirely different plane then it would have to be super engaging and support the ground core game. Jump to Light Speed for Starwars Galaxies is still my standard for game expansions. It brought a whole new type of game play to the game without disrupting the current content. Instead of making old content obsolete, it fed into the current player driven world and economy while just simply being exciting to play.

Edited July 14, 2023 by kash.9213

[joneirikb.7506]

1 hour ago, Bristingr.5034 said:

Because players don't know how to fight in 3D. Any fights in the air would also be hated for the exact same reason.

Said this for years, all the players saying they want "Aerial combat, flying, 3d combat, it will be great!" And I've just said "You'd get UW/swimming combat, just in air." And people just go "No!"

“SWG is the game where I learned players KNOW what they hate but only THINK they know what they want” -Corwyn Kalenda, SWG

[babana.7521]

non of the above, What I want is to hold Lion's Arch, or name any structure in the PvE maps.

[ilMasa.2546]

4 hours ago, Bristingr.5034 said:

Because players don't know how to fight in 3D. Any fights in the air would also be hated for the exact same reason.

Well Anet could make a 3d combat tutorial,instead of the same pointless dodge one they add in every single expack,cos noone in pve dodge anyway so... lol

[Bladestrom.6425]

6 hours ago, ilMasa.2546 said:

Well Anet could make a 3d combat tutorial,instead of the same pointless dodge one they add in every single expack,cos noone in pve dodge anyway so... lol

People don't WANT to play in areas where there is 360 degree combat because it turns into who can spin the best, not to mention the visual issues.  If underwater gameplay was popular in GW2 Anet would see that in the stats and create more zones. but they haven't.

Edited July 15, 2023 by vesica tempestas.1563

[ilMasa.2546]

I was giving examples. It doesn't have to be underwater or in the skies. But something that refreshes and expands the classic wvw maps
- Few players liked EotM
- The majority didnt like Desert BL

So i assume that most players are not interested in new combat zones/maps right?. Or maybe they would like new maps but done in a totally different way. So I said to myself: "let's try something in between". 

[joneirikb.7506]

7 hours ago, ilMasa.2546 said:

I was giving examples. It doesn't have to be underwater or in the skies. But something that refreshes and expands the classic wvw maps
- Few players liked EotM
- The majority didnt like Desert BL

So i assume that most players are not interested in new combat zones/maps right?. Or maybe they would like new maps but done in a totally different way. So I said to myself: "let's try something in between". 

I think a thread (not poll, want reasons, not just a click the favourite) about players listing things they think where fun or unfun with the different maps (as unbiased as they can) by themselves could be interesting. There's a lot of varied opinions on these forums about it, but as usual we tend to have 1 or 2 vocal groups that because they're loud, a lot of people think are the majorities. 

I honestly expect EBG to be the favourite because it's a mostly flat circle that you can just go around in and find action. That for most players will just be no thinking, no running, closer to instant gratification.

But in terms of new maps, I've always expected that the most popular new map they could make, would just be a ring, with all keeps, tower, camps lined up around this ring in an even pattern, with tower/keep walls roadblocking so you need to capture/break walls to go past to the next objective. So you'd have a constant action, 2 front map, where you can basically just see where your swords are on either side and go straight to the action. The majority of veterans and roamers would likely hate it, but the pugs would likely think it was the best thing ever. So be careful what you ask for, ANet might just give it 😛 

Personally I've been arguing for years that they should change the way maps works in WvW. Instead of EBG+3 borders, they should focus on making different maps for different play styles. Blob, Zerg (organised), Havoc, Roam, Scout etc. Make different maps targeted at 2-3 of these groups at a time, so people can go to a map that plays the way they want to (instead of the old, transfer to a server that plays the way you wanted, just goes to show how long I've argued about this)

/overly verbose

[Gorani.7205]

Well, voted "no" for tinkering with the geography of the existing maps. That does not mean I don't want changes, but Id rather have changes to mechanics than to geometry.
A few more water spots could be nice, although I think that too much under water fighting in 3D is very confusing in larger fights. I love DBL, contrary to many others and I would welcome a map with as many tactical options again. Alpines are super simple and the allure of EB is the closeness to everything on the map that forces constant fights. I wish Anet could find a way to salvage what is left of EoTM.

[Random dude.5089]

On 7/13/2023 at 10:03 AM, ilMasa.2546 said:

For istance how about an expansion dedicated to underwater combat:

- we could have an underground layer of rivers and underground seas conneced with the current lakes we already have in Alpine maps 
- a nice rework to make viable fof water all current skills and traits we have on ground
- dedicated new elite spec for underwater combat
- siege and mounts for underwater combat

In this way we would have the exact same maps that we love and appreciate but with a twist.Where you can continue to play as you have always played on the surface or switch to underwater while being on the same map. Zerg enemy on surface? fine i go roam underwater and vice versa.

An aerial expansion,i dont know, Anet pushed gliders on WVW right?Lets have new functions for gliders dedicated only for wvw to make it unique and have dogfights with gliders?!!
- new abilities for gliders
- new dedicated wvw masteries

Dunno just making up some ideas. It's something I've always thought about. Personally I don't care about having a new map for wvw, but I would like the ones that already exist to be expanded. No  pve stuff, but I would like something different to add something new without ruining or totally change what is already there.

i just wanna make it brief for you , everyone that i did underwater content with , hates underwater combat , underwater combat feel so weird and very not enjoyable for the majority of people , fighting underwater feel so goofy and akward , and there is a reason why anet didn't make more than one underwater fractal.

i would actualy love to see wvw masteries , and maybe a new mount for pvp like the siege turtle but can only be useful as a mobile siege to counter siege weapons.

[Daniela.6285]

I need a map without lag. 😬

[blp.3489]

On 7/15/2023 at 1:54 PM, joneirikb.7506 said:

But in terms of new maps, I've always expected that the most popular new map they could make, would just be a ring, with all keeps, tower, camps lined up around this ring in an even pattern, with tower/keep walls roadblocking so you need to capture/break walls to go past to the next objective. So you'd have a constant action, 2 front map, where you can basically just see where your swords are on either side and go straight to the action.

I had an idea that was sort of similar and sort of the opposite of that.  I pictured three mountain valleys that converge on a central open area with no structures.  Like your ring, each valley would have a series of fort structures, and possibly other battlefield terrain features, that need to be taken in order to proceed further up the valley, and there could be camps between the structures.  After reset each team would start holding the structures in its valley so each team would have a "front" at which to fight the other teams.  Initially you would have all three teams in the central field trying to take one another's head-of-the-valley fortress.  If one team is able to push into one of the other team's valleys they would cut off that other team off from the central open area and therefore the third team.  Hence the winning team always has two fronts they are fighting on while trailing teams would be concentrated at a single front.  Effectively it is always the two less powerful teams fighting the most powerful team, the way that three way fights were "meant" to be.

Obviously this would be a specialized map with large group fights concentrated at either two or three fronts as there wouldn't be an opportunity for smaller groups to sneak into enemy territory unless structures were left unrepaired.  It would be technically possible to have several fronts but it would likely require collusion and be unstable.  You could have real siege battles at each front with opposing siege between adjacent structures in the three linear valleys or the central open area.  Where one team captures structures up an opponent's valley there is the opportunity for the third team to strike at the head of the valley dividing the enemies players and creating an additional front for the leading team.

[blp.3489]

On 7/15/2023 at 1:54 PM, joneirikb.7506 said:

Personally I've been arguing for years that they should change the way maps works in WvW. Instead of EBG+3 borders, they should focus on making different maps for different play styles. Blob, Zerg (organised), Havoc, Roam, Scout etc. Make different maps targeted at 2-3 of these groups at a time, so people can go to a map that plays the way they want to (instead of the old, transfer to a server that plays the way you wanted, just goes to show how long I've argued about this)

I'm curious if you have ideas for maps that disadvantage zergs?

[Gorani.7205]

1 hour ago, blp.3489 said:

I'm curious if you have ideas for maps that disadvantage zergs?

- "Feeding the army" - Debuff: Every tick, you lose 5 supply. That forces you to resupply at camps, build attacking siege economically or attack very fast, which makes bunkering down and waiting at spawn to block enemies to come in to defend more difficult. It also makes the zerg more predictable, because they need to get to camps to resupply more often. Debuff could be triggered by being in the area where a big orange sword is caused by a fight with 25+ combatants (? not sure about the exact number)
- "no build zones" for catas adjacent to walls if the territory does not belong to you, which gives defenders a greater chance to shoot at the catas without being on the death trap that is the top of the wall due to the LoS issues
- "siege occupies a build-able space" - each siege weapon has a 400 diameter foundation, that can only be used by one siege at a time. you can't stack catas on one spot and chain the bubble or more than three rams at a gate. This forces the zerg to spread out, making the flanks more vulnerable to counter attacks or actually chosing between a cata and a shield gen on the offence.

[Dorsai.1458]

Instead of a new WvW map, I would like a "battleground" map.  Maybe 20v20 to 40v40 depending on the battleground size (Does anyone remember Alterac Valley from WoW?).  Something with spread objectives that would spread players into manageable small to mid-scale engagements across the battleground.  

I know Alterac Valley had it's shares of issues ...but it was a fun way to fight large battles without having to boonball up.

[XenesisII.1540]

12 minutes ago, Dorsai.1458 said:

Instead of a new WvW map, I would like a "battleground" map.  Maybe 20v20 to 40v40 depending on the battleground size (Does anyone remember Alterac Valley from WoW?).  Something with spread objectives that would spread players into manageable small to mid-scale engagements across the battleground.  

I know Alterac Valley had it's shares of issues ...but it was a fun way to fight large battles without having to boonball up.

Honestly surprised they haven't done battlegrounds. (You better be talking about the old 2 day long AV's, not the garbage 7min rush to the end AV). 🤔

But without having to boonball up? lol um yeah, that wouldn't happen.

[joneirikb.7506]

9 hours ago, blp.3489 said:

I'm curious if you have ideas for maps that disadvantage zergs?

It's honestly very difficult to make maps designed around making it harder for more players, And one of the main reasons for that is no collision detection. And THAT has too many other issues, that it's just no way ANet would even consider it.

So it would be mostly up to debuffs, mechanics and incentives.

Examples:
* "Stampede" "Effect", -1% speed per player past 5 within range X (600-1200 somewhere).
* Divide the loot/rewards per number of players. 10 players is 1/10 rewards on each player.
* Make a "pve mechanic" that discourages group from gathering up. Example have something happen when more than 5 players are within X range of each others (start a alarm of some sort, then drop a bomb that blows them up, have a gigantic T-rex/Godzilla come and gobble people up that's too strong to beat, have natural disasters like earthquakes or floods wash people away and destroy roads etc)
* Also liked the above idea of supply, have an effect that reduces supply limit per number of player nearby.

So yeah, these would largely not be very popular with most players, because no one likes debuffs, no one likes less of stuff for themselves, and all the veterans get allergic reactions and starts screaming when they smell anything "pve".

Also, ANet's "care bear rule", "You should always be happy to see another player (on your team)", so anything that even smells off "No! Get away! You'll ruin my experience if you get close!!!" is out of the picture on a philosophy level. So, nope, they'll never make this game about anything but zerging.