Terrible combat design has led to WvW being gate kept more than instanced PvE

[Kozumi.5816]

1. You need 50 people
2. You need 10 firebrands

Congratulations, you can now participate in ZvZ inside of WvW!

Most people do not have the ability to have 50 people on. I've been doing WvW weeks now and have not been in a single squad of 50 people the entire time, and I'm in a WvW guild and I join PUG commanders on the map.

This requirement in order to be able to fight the other team(s) who have such a comp is far too high. They gate keep any fun big  PvP combat out of the mode just because they have 50 people and 10% of their squad is firebrands.

Please fix your game balance so that WvW ZvZ fighting is more accessible to the other 99.99% of people who actually play your game and mode.  It's not a smart decision to design your mode and combat around something < 1% of the player base can accomplish.

There are many ways you can do this, here's some examples:

• DR on CC's(100% duration - > 50% duration - > 25% duration  - > immune to all CC for 30+ seconds)
• Every support having AOE stun breaks and AOE stab equal to firebrand
• WvW squad cap reduced to 20

Edited July 22, 2023 by Kozumi.5816

[Solvar.7953]

The problem is, all else being equal (builds, player skill, equipment), whoever has greater numbers is going to win.   If your world is only able to get a group of 20 together and the ones you fight against have 50, I don't think there is much Anet can (or should) do to fix that, other than to try and balance those numbers.

Certainly some builds are overpowered, but even if all that was fixed, whoever has numbers will typically be the winner.

 

[XenesisII.1540]

Blame the "fight" guilds.

If people don't have a clue on why that is at this point, go ahead and insert confused reactions. -->

[Hotride.2187]

Tbh when I was still doing zerg fights you also needed 30 or so scourges. Now they killed boon hate cause... Why did they do that actually? Pve players in wvw maybe?

[Dawdler.8521]

27 minutes ago, Hotride.2187 said:

Tbh when I was still doing zerg fights you also needed 30 or so scourges. Now they killed boon hate cause... Why did they do that actually? Pve players in wvw maybe?

Anet has the stats. WvWers love PvE.

[neven.3785]

a long while back some of the fight guilds decided bags mattered more than decent fights.  Unfortunately others had to bulk up a bit to compete with them, and then it got worse and worse.  There is even a guild in NA who run 40+ and a separate 15man so they can almost be guaranteed a win.  Not much anet can do until alliances hit unfortunately since any sort of modifiers to stacked aoes or debuffs for stacked players will take extensive coding.

Only things i think they can do without extensive coding would be:
-Limit WvW squads to 25.  This wont stop blobbing, but it waters down the boon application from guilds running larger.  The spill over boons will stay within their squad, and not help their smaller team as much.  Also putting some of your players in a second squad will create internal drama, which helps put downward pressure on guild sizes.
-Limit alliances to 250.  You can require a toggle for WvW guild that limits guild cap to the same number, or you can let guilds play lottery on who gets in their guilds server group if they choose to stack above the alliance limit.  This will give more pieces for matchmaking.
-after the above two, you can start looking at reducing map caps on a trial basis

[Drayke.3592]

I'm also on the side that thinks this isn't really a problem Anet "needs" to fix.  You know who the blob group are, since you apparently keep losing to them.  You can either choose to join one, or keep doing what your doing.  The choice is yours.

Just a side note, if you decide to take your, say,  24 and form 3 8-man teams all talking to each other and looking out for the enemy zerg, you should have no problem taking more points than them.  Avoid fights and play PPT.  Eventually the larger teams will have to divide up their zerg to match or watch themselves control almost nothing on the map.  I know a lot of people don't want to play that way, but it's the only way you're going to "beat" the larger groups unless you're willing and able to match their numbers.

Lastly, I do think there's a design flaw when just about every party needs a Firebrand.  Either stability should be fixed, or more specializations should have the ability to match what FB's can do in that area IMO.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Drayke.3592

[babana.7521]

5 hours ago, Drayke.3592 said:

I'm also on the side that thinks this isn't really a problem Anet "needs" to fix.  You know who the blob group are, since you apparently keep losing to them.  You can either choose to join one, or keep doing what your doing.  The choice is yours.

Just a side note, if you decide to take your, say,  24 and form 3 8-man teams all talking to each other and looking out for the enemy zerg, you should have no problem taking more points than them.  Avoid fights and play PPT.  Eventually the larger teams will have to divide up their zerg to match or watch themselves control almost nothing on the map.  I know a lot of people don't want to play that way, but it's the only way you're going to "beat" the larger groups unless you're willing and able to match their numbers.

Lastly, I do think there's a design flaw when just about every party needs a Firebrand.  Either stability should be fixed, or more specializations should have the ability to match what FB's can do in that area IMO.

This strategy doesn't work on some tier anymore, the larger group has become so large they are on all 4 maps guarding everything. with EWP ready in every structures, 3-8 men teams cannot flip anything. we couldn't ppt we have no zerg . Only thing we can do was to fight people outside smc whole day and whole week.

[Kozumi.5816]

47 minutes ago, babana.7521 said:

This strategy doesn't work on some tier anymore, the larger group has become so large they are on all 4 maps guarding everything. with EWP ready in every structures, 3-8 men teams cannot flip anything. we couldn't ppt we have no zerg .

Yeah. Last night at reset we had a 37 person queue for EBG yet owned zero(0) of the map and red would follow us around the map anywhere we went. They had a 50 man firebrand comp and we had 30 in squad with 3 firebrands so we could never fight them and they wouldn't let us take anything.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Kozumi.5816

[Dawdler.8521]

9 minutes ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

Yeah. Last night at reset we had a 37 person queue for EBG yet owned zero(0) of the map and red would follow us around the map anywhere we went. They had a 50 man firebrand comp and we had 30 in squad with 3 firebrands so we could never fight them and they wouldn't let us take anything.

The EBG map or entire WvW? Little confused what you are saying is the scope.

Cause that was the point before what babana said otherwise - the 30 "non-opted" in squad will never beat the 50 man "opted" squad so might as well split up in say 3x10 and go onto different borders, cap stuff and force enemy to respond/split too. Let the 37 in queue have their chance I guess. 

The way this also fail is if the enemy has 30+ mans on every border/map watching everything, which was babanas point.

But then again this scenario is pretty impossible from the get go - finding 1 person to take initiative is hard, finding 3 people with brains inside a 30 zerg? Hahahaha. Wont happen. The commander have to coddle them all or they would accidentally shoot themselves out a catapult or siege their own garrison probably.

[Kozumi.5816]

1 minute ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

The EBG map or entire WvW? Little confused what you are saying is the scope.

Cause that was the point before what babana said otherwise - the 30 "non-opted" in squad will never beat the 50 man "opted" squad so might as well split up in say 3x10 and go onto different borders, cap stuff and force enemy to respond/split too. Let the 37 in queue have their chance I guess. 

The way this also fail is if the enemy has 30+ mans on every border/map watching everything, which was babanas point.

Couldn't take the squad anywhere, every BL had a 20+ queue that wouldn't move. You were stuck where you were for the rest of the night.

The entire queue, population size, and balance system in WvW just leads to teams stomping over others with no real competition and the teams being stomped not being able to actually play the game.

[bq pd.2148]

39 minutes ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

Yeah. Last night at reset we had a 37 person queue for EBG yet owned zero(0) of the map and red would follow us around the map anywhere we went. They had a 50 man firebrand comp and we had 30 in squad with 3 firebrands so we could never fight them and they wouldn't let us take anything.

if you had a queue on the map, you had the same amount of people as your opponents or more on the map.
should you despite this still see yourself in 30 vs 50 fights all the time, then the opposition is probably way better organized, if they also have a better squad composition and coordination of course they will dominate the fights.
no matter how Anet would change the 'combat design' it wouldn't help in this instance. remember that every tool Anet could give your side to fight the opposition, they would also have and by your description i would bet they would get more use out of it than your side.

[Chaba.5410]

If all sides have a queue, you are guaranteed to have equal numbers. It is fair competition. At that point it is up to individual players how they use their numbers. Organization will always beat out the unorganized. Get organized.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Chaba.5410

[XenesisII.1540]

39 minutes ago, bq pd.2148 said:

if you had a queue on the map, you had the same amount of people as your opponents or more on the map.
should you despite this still see yourself in 30 vs 50 fights all the time, then the opposition is probably way better organized, if they also have a better squad composition and coordination of course they will dominate the fights.
no matter how Anet would change the 'combat design' it wouldn't help in this instance. remember that every tool Anet could give your side to fight the opposition, they would also have and by your description i would bet they would get more use out of it than your side.

Yeah but if its one squad of 30 with another hidden squad of 10-15 on the other side of the map because they don't want to fight with the bigger squad or have clashing tags on the map, and the rest are roamers with a map queued, there's nothing much they can do vs a competent full comp guild squad of 50. Now you have a squad of 30 players feeding or running away all night, you can't even swap classes out. 

Combat is more about numbers today than it ever was before, you got more firebrands you win, you got more support you win, you got 50 comped you roll the entire map, and all the combat changes in the past few years have pushed it in that direction, all the opposing tools have been nerfed hard. Combat design was already changed by anet, much to the pleasure of the boon blob guilds, and disgust to everyone else.

[bq pd.2148]

19 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Yeah but if its one squad of 30 with another hidden squad of 10-15 on the other side of the map because they don't want to fight with the bigger squad or have clashing tags on the map, and the rest are roamers with a map queued, there's nothing much they can do vs a competent full comp guild squad of 50. Now you have a squad of 30 players feeding or running away all night, you can't even swap classes out.

while i see the problem presented, a change to the combat which this thread is about will still benefit the already winning side more.
at the end of the day OP wants to win with less numbers against a better organized group, the only way i see this happening is with damage buffed a lot from what it is now and surprise stealth kill, which also should at most work once.

[Widebody.5071]

10 hours ago, Hotride.2187 said:

Tbh when I was still doing zerg fights you also needed 30 or so scourges. Now they killed boon hate cause... Why did they do that actually? Pve players in wvw maybe?

I don't think so, I mostly pve and I really liked the idea of being able to rip boons, it's like a equalizer. Just like stab was an equalizer against stuns and lockdowns, warrior condi use to be a equalizer against ranged and condi, and warrior speed used to be an equalizer against range's reach.

Pve players must adapt to a npc's abilities, they can't go to the company then complain about how hard it is and that it needs nerfing or toning down, they must adapt and do thier best. You only consistendly see that on the pvp side of the game.

[Chaba.5410]

54 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Yeah but if its one squad of 30 with another hidden squad of 10-15 on the other side of the map because they don't want to fight with the bigger squad or have clashing tags on the map, and the rest are roamers with a map queued, there's nothing much they can do vs a competent full comp guild squad of 50. Now you have a squad of 30 players feeding or running away all night, you can't even swap classes out. 

Combat is more about numbers today than it ever was before, you got more firebrands you win, you got more support you win, you got 50 comped you roll the entire map, and all the combat changes in the past few years have pushed it in that direction, all the opposing tools have been nerfed hard. Combat design was already changed by anet, much to the pleasure of the boon blob guilds, and disgust to everyone else.

Yea and? Honestly so what? It's a team game and if all the players on one side decide to play that way and they lose, that's their own choice. No game dev should be balancing combat around anything other than equal numbers.

[vares.8457]

13 hours ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

There are many ways you can do this, here's some examples:

• DR on CC's(100% duration - > 50% duration - > 25% duration  - > immune to all CC for 30+ seconds)
• Every support having AOE stun breaks and AOE stab equal to firebrand
• WvW squad cap reduced to 20

These are all terrible ideas, no thanks. 
I play firebrand in WvW and usually always in a full squad.
It’s about organizing your guild and server and playing together. If others can do it, so should you. 
 

Edited July 22, 2023 by vares.8457

[XenesisII.1540]

31 minutes ago, bq pd.2148 said:

while i see the problem presented, a change to the combat which this thread is about will still benefit the already winning side more.
at the end of the day OP wants to win with less numbers against a better organized group, the only way i see this happening is with damage buffed a lot from what it is now and surprise stealth kill, which also should at most work once.

I don't particularly agree with the solutions presented, I don't think small squad size will matter, I do think some DR should exist with cc's and not just rely on stun break skills or stability, but as you say these things will help the bigger groups as well. I'm just acknowledging that a problem exist between group sizes.

5 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Yea and? Honestly so what? It's a team game and if all the players on one side decide to play that way and they lose, that's their own choice. No game dev should be balancing combat around anything other than equal numbers.

WELL GOOD NEWS FOR YOU CHABA! THEY HAVE BEEN BALANCING FOR 50 SQUAD GROUPS SO EVERYONE SHOULD NOW JUST SHUT ABOUT BALANCE AND STAND IN THAT ONE SPOT AND SWING YOUR SWORD, AND SWING YOUR SWORD AGAIN, UNTIL THE BAGS DROP LIKE GOOD LIL ZOMBIES.

[Kozumi.5816]

11 minutes ago, vares.8457 said:

I play firebrand in WvW and usually always in a full squad.
It’s about organizing your guild and server and playing together. If others can do it, so should you. 

"lol why cant you get 50 warm bodies who play meta classes and have the perfect comp? it's SO easy!"

Do you really not see how crazy your response is?

My server literally doesn't have a single "fight" guild.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Kozumi.5816

[vares.8457]

1 minute ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

"lol why cant you get 50 warm bodies who play meta classes and have the perfect comp? it's SO easy!"

Do you really not see how crazy your response is?

Yeah why can’t you? Others can do it just fine. 

[Kozumi.5816]

12 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

WELL GOOD NEWS FOR YOU CHABA! THEY HAVE BEEN BALANCING FOR 50 SQUAD GROUPS SO EVERYONE SHOULD NOW JUST SHUT ABOUT BALANCE AND STAND IN THAT ONE SPOT AND SWING YOUR SWORD, AND SWING YOUR SWORD AGAIN, UNTIL THE BAGS DROP LIKE GOOD LIL ZOMBIES.

As my OP said, balancing the game around something <1% of the game modes player base gets to experience is an extremely bad decision.

Edited July 22, 2023 by Kozumi.5816

[Kozumi.5816]

12 minutes ago, vares.8457 said:

Yeah why can’t you? Others can do it just fine. 

dude i'm the ceo of a gigantic corporation and make $50mil/year. others also can do it. why can't you? 

[vares.8457]

3 minutes ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

dude i'm the ceo of a gigantic corporation and make $50mil/year. others also can do it. why can't you? 

So you are unable to organize and get your squad full with meta classes and therefore get stomped over by the other teams that organize themselves and play together. 
And now you cry that they should change WvW because the enemy hurt you and it’s so unfair 

Edited July 22, 2023 by vares.8457

[AreohGee.7592]

13 hours ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

1. You need 50 people
2. You need 10 firebrands

Congratulations, you can now participate in ZvZ inside of WvW!

Most people do not have the ability to have 50 people on. I've been doing WvW weeks now and have not been in a single squad of 50 people the entire time, and I'm in a WvW guild and I join PUG commanders on the map.

This requirement in order to be able to fight the other team(s) who have such a comp is far too high. They gate keep any fun big  PvP combat out of the mode just because they have 50 people and 10% of their squad is firebrands.

Please fix your game balance so that WvW ZvZ fighting is more accessible to the other 99.99% of people who actually play your game and mode.  It's not a smart decision to design your mode and combat around something < 1% of the player base can accomplish.

There are many ways you can do this, here's some examples:

• DR on CC's(100% duration - > 50% duration - > 25% duration  - > immune to all CC for 30+ seconds)
• Every support having AOE stun breaks and AOE stab equal to firebrand
• WvW squad cap reduced to 20

Lol.  I know we and every other guild I am in or know do NOT have that many Firebrands playing in their squad.   Or when we are fighting.  We do talk, type and listen to other commanders and we assist each other so we might have up to three squads engaging some 50+ squads.  We win some and we lose some.  

My only complaint is when we encounter immune people with some other helper to make them immune, Then we avoid them.