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

[Kozumi.5816]

17 minutes ago, vares.8457 said:

And now you cry that they should change WvW because the enemy hurt you and it’s so unfair 

That's actually not what's happening at all. 99% of the games player base cannot experience the fun of ZvZ because it is gate kept by 50 person squad and 10 firebrand requirements to even attempt it. That's not good for the long term health of the game mode.

[AreohGee.7592]

2 minutes ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

That's actually not what's happening at all. 99% of the games player base cannot experience the fun of ZvZ because it is gate kept by 50 person squad and 10 firebrand requirements to even attempt it. That's not good for the long term health of the game mode.

Not on my server. 

[blp.3489]

I've always liked the idea of a second WvW mode that was balanced more toward self-reliance instead of over-powered support classes like firebrand.  To some extent that was the design for GW2, all the classes had their own offensive and defensive and heal skills.  It is also one of the appealing aspects of GW2 for a lot of the player base, you don't need to organize a group and make them all fit into the optimal composition and coordinate group login times, you can just join in and play.  It is one of the reasons raids don't appeal to a large segment of the player base.  If there were separate modes for "fight guilds" and pugs both would have more even fights.  I'm not sure if the fight guilds would enjoy fighting comparable groups more or if they are happier wiping out pugs but certainly there is a sizeable segment of the player base that wants to play without having to fight boon balls.  Randomizing the matchups so that it takes weeks for like on like matches doesn't help either.

Edited July 22, 2023 by blp.3489
Clarity

[vares.8457]

6 minutes ago, Kozumi.5816 said:

That's actually not what's happening at all. 99% of the games player base cannot experience the fun of ZvZ because it is gate kept by 50 person squad and 10 firebrand requirements to even attempt it. That's not good for the long term health of the game mode.

How do you come to the 99%? That’s not my experience at all. 
There is no gatekeeping here. Everyone can experience the fun of ZvZ if he wants to, play a Zerg class, join voice and squad. Simple 

 

Edited July 22, 2023 by vares.8457

[Kranlor Greyhelm.8417]

2 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

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.

But an organised group with a meta composition will always beat an organised group without one. Even if the the second group is BETTER organised.

And you'll realise that almost immediately when those two groups clash. Because one of them will simply roll all over the other one. Again, and again, and again. Because ANET make metas that are just ridiculously powerful and leave groups with a choice; follow the meta, or accept that if you fight you're just feeding them  bags.

People being what they are, they aren't going to stay with a group fighting a fight they can't win. Which means your "equal" fight will pretty quickly become an unequal one as players go back to roaming and avoid the zerg at all costs. Or players don't bother even defending, because you're going to get rolled over by an unstoppable boon ball that you can't kill.

They need to do something, but it needs theorycrafters that have a better handle on the mechanics than me to say what that is.

[Leger.3724]

1 hour ago, vares.8457 said:

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

???

WvW populations continue to decline and your brave and controversial take is "just play".

 

[vares.8457]

9 minutes ago, Leger.3724 said:

???

WvW populations continue to decline and your brave and controversial take is "just play".

 

No. Organize, play together and play appropriate builds. 

Edited July 22, 2023 by vares.8457

[Leger.3724]

1 minute ago, vares.8457 said:

No. Organize and play appropriate builds. 

This hasn't happened over the last 10 years. I would rather the game mode exist than not exist and for that to happen it's going to require substantial chances and not a slight balance patch that's essentially shuffling chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

[ArchonWing.9480]

Reducing squad size is a terrible idea and I have no idea why it comes up. It would not affect boon distribution and blob guilds are already capable of running multiple squads. Pugmanders on the other hand, have no such luxury. You're just going to cripple the few tools less organized groups have while organized groups have things like voice to easily compensate. People are already annoyed at being refused squad entry due to limited slots That will make gatekeeping even worse.

Adding new builds probably doesn't help because people don't want to run group builds to begin with for all kinds of reasons. They already buffed bags for support but it's just not fun. People already can get on a build that does better but they won't, because special snowflake.

Meaningful solutions include rebalancing instant res skills, nerfing projectile hate in large scale as it scales infinitely, buffing boon stripping, and reducing server lag. Of course, the game has headed in the opposite direction.

Oh, also gear and build accessibility, but rest assured with this relics nonsense that's not going to improve.

Edited July 22, 2023 by ArchonWing.9480

[Zikory.6871]

1 hour ago, Kranlor Greyhelm.8417 said:

But an organised group with a meta composition will always beat an organised group without one. Even if the the second group is BETTER organised.

I like this idea. If my group wins, we more meta then your group. When you lose, you're just not meta enough. Getting good is old news. We just need to be more meta.

[Chaba.5410]

3 hours 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.

That doesn't really answer my question.  Your series of "Yea but yea but yea but" comments is meaningless because there's no explanation to readers for why, when both sides are equalized by numbers (both have a map queue), it's somehow unfair to one side why they lose.  It's moving goalposts.  The conditions are both sides have map queues, implying they both have the same number of players on each team.  Now what?

So I ask you again and hopefully you will think upon your answer more carefully, so what if 30 are losing to 50 when they have a map queue available to them?  Every player has a choice of strategies and if they can't come together with a strategy as a team, nothing the game developer can do is going to change that.

[Chaba.5410]

2 hours ago, Kranlor Greyhelm.8417 said:

But an organised group with a meta composition will always beat an organised group without one. Even if the the second group is BETTER organised.

And you'll realise that almost immediately when those two groups clash. Because one of them will simply roll all over the other one. Again, and again, and again. Because ANET make metas that are just ridiculously powerful and leave groups with a choice; follow the meta, or accept that if you fight you're just feeding them  bags.

People being what they are, they aren't going to stay with a group fighting a fight they can't win. Which means your "equal" fight will pretty quickly become an unequal one as players go back to roaming and avoid the zerg at all costs. Or players don't bother even defending, because you're going to get rolled over by an unstoppable boon ball that you can't kill.

They need to do something, but it needs theorycrafters that have a better handle on the mechanics than me to say what that is.

Yes, because the meta comps are the result of being more organized than others.  I don't know what you mean by "even if the second group is better organized" because to me the group with the meta comp is displaying a higher level of organization than the one they are beating.  All the theorycrafting that goes into those meta comps and training players to play them are a type of getting organized.

Organization doesn't just play itself out in the context of zerg on zerg fights though.  A Maguuma EBG cloud doesn't play meta compositions and they will tend to display far more organization than other organized groups.  There's a collective choice of strategy being made.  Organization also manifests when players join their server community discords and let each other know what their plans are or when team chat is filled with requests for players on other maps to go attack a keep of a particular color.

[babana.7521]

7 hours 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.

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.

EWP works very well. When I am on the outnumbered side, there are usually players  sneaking around borderlands flipping camps that gets flip right back, because enemy have scouts and sentry, I could try to open up a structure, (sometime I can't even get catapult up because during situation like this, the maximum supply I can get is usually only 20, running back to the cata 3 times is giving enemy chances to kill me, used to be able to do it solo, its harder now, I think tier and links play a big part) if and when I managed to open up a structure, I would ask in chat for help to flip it, half the time 3-5 will turn up, but then EWP will be deploy, while you are about to kill the tower/keep lord, a hoard of 10-15 come (these are split up from where ever their main group is, usually when the player scouts and sentry couldn't defend) in and killed us. The other players who just came to help won't come again if you repeat the process. 

[BlaqueFyre.5678]

21 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

I log in on my Necro and just play, I log in on my thief/Mesmer and play…. Zero gatekeeping

[Kozumi.5816]

3 hours ago, BlaqueFyre.5678 said:

I log in on my Necro and just play, I log in on my thief/Mesmer and play…. Zero gatekeeping

You log in and 50vs50 by yourself? Amazing.

[Kranlor Greyhelm.8417]

11 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Yes, because the meta comps are the result of being more organized than others.  I don't know what you mean by "even if the second group is better organized" because to me the group with the meta comp is displaying a higher level of organization than the one they are beating. 

And that's my point; the meta is SO important, the skill of the players is less important. The skill of the commander is less important. You are so focused on the meta, you can't conceive of any level of organisation that doesn't involve the meta. How about making sure instructions are clear for when you move, for when you bomb, for where you bomb. What about the importance of those players following those instruction precisely and quickly?

They are all part of the organisation of a good group. But they are rendered relatively irrelevant by the main thing, which is getting the composition set up. Sure, the composition should be part of the organising process. But as it stands, it's just TOO important.

That's the point I was making.

[bq pd.2148]

37 minutes ago, Kranlor Greyhelm.8417 said:

And that's my point; the meta is SO important, the skill of the players is less important.

that would depend what you consider 'skilled', if an awareness of class synergies and resulting good composition/skill usage doesn't seem to be high on the list.
 

43 minutes ago, Kranlor Greyhelm.8417 said:

How about making sure instructions are clear for when you move, for when you bomb, for where you bomb. What about the importance of those players following those instruction precisely and quickly?

a commander cant possibly talk fast enough to call everything, the players should generally know what to do and when with minimal commander input.

[blp.3489]

For those of you who don't get it:

Listen guys, we've got 50 players that all play 30 hours a week at set times, play the builds we tell them to, use voice and do exactly what the commander tells them to.  You plebs that can't match that need to stop complaining and just die quickly so we can maximize our bags.  That's your role in this game mode.  We are better organized than you so you deserve to die, just stop complaining about it okay?

- Commander of the fight guild that anet devs play for

 

/parody

Edited July 23, 2023 by blp.3489
Added /parody in case anyone misses my drift

[bq pd.2148]

8 minutes ago, blp.3489 said:

 You plebs that can't match that need to stop complaining and just die quickly so we can maximize our bags.  That's your role in this game mode.  We are better organized than you so you deserve to die, just stop complaining about it okay?

not at all. my server quickly loses people when the opposition does not bring enough numbers as farming is still more efficient in PvE.

but do enlighten me, how could Anet change the combat (which this threat is about) to make sure 30 people with random builds and little experience will have a decent chance against 50 people with a lot of experience and coordinated builds? any mechanic put into the mode can be used by either group and usually the group with better coordination/experience will get more out of it.

[blp.3489]

4 minutes ago, bq pd.2148 said:

but do enlighten me, how could Anet change the combat (which this threat is about) to make sure 30 people with random builds and little experience will have a decent chance against 50 people with a lot of experience and coordinated builds? any mechanic put into the mode can be used by either group and usually the group with better coordination/experience will get more out of it.

The point is not to allow 30 players to prevail over 50 players, although with the current gameplay 30 players who are utilizing their amazing group composition skills have no trouble rolling over 50 players who rely on lowly combat skills.  The point is that if you optimize the game mode to heavily favor large fight guilds the mode becomes unattractive to the large majority of players.  You can stand on your "you too can join a fight guild so there's no problem" pedestal while the number of players in the mode dwindles to a tiny fraction of the current numbers if you like, that is Anet's prerogative after all, but those of us who don't want to play in a fight guild will only stick around so long and feel it is a shame that things have gone that way.

[Chaba.5410]

40 minutes ago, blp.3489 said:

For those of you who don't get it:

Listen guys, we've got 50 players that all play 30 hours a week at set times, play the builds we tell them to, use voice and do exactly what the commander tells them to.  You plebs that can't match that need to stop complaining and just die quickly so we can maximize our bags.  That's your role in this game mode.  We are better organized than you so you deserve to die, just stop complaining about it okay?

- Commander of the fight guild that anet devs play for

 

/parody

To me the parody is 30 players saying "we deserve to win" without actually playing in a way that results in winning.

[blp.3489]

3 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

To me the parody is 30 players saying "we deserve to win" without actually playing in a way that results in winning.

Yup, if you don't join a large fight guild that's your fault.  If there are players on your server who don't want to join your fight guild but insist on taking spots on the map that's your fault too.

[bq pd.2148]

7 minutes ago, blp.3489 said:

The point is not to allow 30 players to prevail over 50 players, although with the current gameplay 30 players who are utilizing their amazing group composition skills have no trouble rolling over 50 players who rely on lowly combat skills.  The point is that if you optimize the game mode to heavily favor large fight guilds the mode becomes unattractive to the large majority of players.  You can stand on your "you too can join a fight guild so there's no problem" pedestal while the number of players in the mode dwindles to a tiny fraction of the current numbers if you like, that is Anet's prerogative after all, but those of us who don't want to play in a fight guild will only stick around so long and feel it is a shame that things have gone that way.

this thread is about the combat being at fault and that is why i ask which combat changes could achieve the desired results.

the problem here seems to me much more that the scoring system fails to provide a competitive context for the mode and thus players come up with their own ideas of what is good or when they are winning, which to some might also be the allure of the mode. there is little reason from a rewards perspective to split into smaller groups unless that is exactly the experience you are looking for, however your opponent might not have any interest in playing the mode the same way as you do and thus fail to provide you the content you seek.
of course if you goal in WvW is only to fight in a massive group against another massive group, then indeed my advise is: try to use the options available if you do want to succeed.

i also do think with these fight guilds you are talking about that you play on NA, i have yet to see any decent guild in EU that runs with 50+ people. but some servers here have more guild groups that will then join the public leads between their raids.

[Lucy.3728]

I like the idea of reducing a squad's size to 20 or 25. That's still large enough for GvG.

Seeing 50 ppl invading one camp or sitting on one sentry is so ridiculous when the rest of the map shines in hostile colours.

I have rarely heard a commander of a 40-50 man squad say that we should split up on multiple objectives. Or that maybe we form a main squad and a smaller squad that then attacks the enemy main squad from the flank. Such situations only happen if there are enough randoms running somewhere.

If the squad sizes are reduced more, then there might be more tactical maneuvers or at least more squads on a map with different targets.

I'm not one of those who always want ppt, nor am I one of those who only want ppk as if there were no other objectives in WvW. I want both. Take something here and kill something there.

On 7/22/2023 at 6:10 AM, Kozumi.5816 said:

I've been doing WvW weeks now

The summer hole also exists in WvW. Depending on the server more or less noticeable.

-

I also like the idea of a WvW mode that is not dependent on certain classes and builds, because that is an external dependency. Much more the WvW itself should offer certain possibilities to compensate deficits. So internal dependencies, also independent of a high queue.

Edited July 23, 2023 by Lucy.3728

[Stand The Wall.6987]

there is an easy solution to this... either your squad comps up or you wipe. in no game does an uncoordinated group win over a coordinated one, it just doesn't happen. so why do you want or even think thats possible here? its not, so stop blaming the game and start blaming yourself cuz you can actually control what you do and change an outcome based on that