I HOPE THIS RESTRUCTURING DONT GO TROUGH

[Chaba.5410]

On 1/22/2024 at 2:26 AM, Gehenna.3625 said:

I firmly believe, having played a number of MMOs that balance is NOT a thing that developers aim for. Far from it and that's why there exist so many imbalances in GW2 as well. I suspect that imbalances are one of the things that keep most people engaged oddly.

Depends upon how "balance" is being defined.  MMOs are not symmetrical games.

So-called competitive game modes though require fair chances.  In WvW, winning has always come down to numbers+coverage.  If a team isn't as close as other teams in numbers+coverage, there isn't a fair chance.  The closer teams are to each other, the fairer the chance at winning becomes.  Since it's a 24/7 game mode and with the way scoring is structured, it's ok for numbers or coverage to be lacking in some skirmishes.  This still leads to poor playing experience during individual playtimes, of course.  Most players want balance at the skirmish level.  That's much harder to achieve without ensuring that all four maps are queued across all teams.  If a team is still losing with all four maps queued against the two other teams with all four maps queued, that's a team not playing as a team.

Edited January 23 by Chaba.5410

[Gehenna.3625]

5 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Depends upon how "balance" is being defined.  MMOs are not symmetrical games.

So-called competitive game modes though require fair chances.  In WvW, winning has always come down to numbers+coverage.  If a team isn't as close as other teams in numbers+coverage, there isn't a fair chance.  The closer teams are to each other, the fairer the chance at winning becomes.  Since it's a 24/7 game mode and with the way scoring is structured, it's ok for numbers or coverage to be lacking in some skirmishes.  This still leads to poor playing experience during individual playtimes, of course.  Most players want balance at the skirmish level.  That's much harder to achieve without ensuring that all four maps are queued across all teams.  If a team is still losing with all four maps queued against the two other teams with all four maps queued, that's a team not playing as a team.

The number of players in a group is not the main issue. The group's organisation is much more important. You can have 40 players that are pugs against a boonball of 20 players and the boonball will win every time.

Edit: This is very specific to GW2 because of how powerful boons are.

Edited January 23 by Gehenna.3625

[CafPow.1542]

10 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

The number of players in a group is not the main issue. The group's organisation is much more important. You can have 40 players that are pugs against a boonball of 20 players and the boonball will win every time.

Edit: This is very specific to GW2 because of how powerful boons are.

Today i heard teapot talking about boons and i think he has a point. It’s not just the power of the boons, it’s that they are up always a 100% of the time and i really agree with him here. 

[Gehenna.3625]

5 minutes ago, CafPow.1542 said:

Today i heard teapot talking about boons and i think he has a point. It’s not just the power of the boons, it’s that they are up always a 100% of the time and i really agree with him here. 

Yep that's part of what makes them so powerful but it's worth mentioning separately. I can't remember any game I played where you could maintain or even achieve a crit rate of 100%, for example.

[CafPow.1542]

14 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

Yep that's part of what makes them so powerful but it's worth mentioning separately. I can't remember any game I played where you could maintain or even achieve a crit rate of 100%, for example.

Yeah me neither. But 75% of said critchance doesn’t come from fury right.

but besides that, on the example of protection i see it very good. The amount of damage-reduce is fine imo. The permanent uptime is silly, he was specifically talking about raids but it’s a problem in wvw aswell.

hypothetically this counts for condis aswell (for example vulnerability)…. And maybe anet should completely delete concentration and maybe even expertise.

i also miss the mechanic of combos. I feel like maintaining 25 stacks of might through combos would be cool, more interesting at least than just spamming a few abilities.

or remember the old dungeonmeta where teefs where meta cause of smoke fields that needed blasts so the group was able to skip stuff? Mechanics like that are fun i think. (At least in pve)

Edited January 24 by CafPow.1542

[Chaba.5410]

47 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

The group's organisation is much more important. You can have 40 players that are pugs against a boonball of 20 players and the boonball will win every time.

Edit: This is very specific to GW2 because of how powerful boons are.

Sure I agree with that.  I don't see that as having to do with restructuring though and the problem it aims to solve.  It's not supposed to be for solving any problems of meta.  Maybe we're getting away from the restructuring discussion.

Edited January 23 by Chaba.5410

[Aeolus.3615]

14 hours ago, CafPow.1542 said:

Today i heard teapot talking about boons and i think he has a point. It’s not just the power of the boons, it’s that they are up always a 100% of the time and i really agree with him here. 

That's what  players have been telling.... Anet nerf's counters to boons and adds a ton more boons to be spammed. 

14 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Sure I agree with that.  I don't see that as having to do with restructuring though and the problem it aims to solve.  It's not supposed to be for solving any problems of meta.  Maybe we're getting away from the restructuring discussion.

I think both are related, one affects the another, alliances will create more organized blob vs smaller content anyway since most focus on a few time zones the 500 players will ktrain different maps, only and IF only an enemy server has similiar numbers at the same time i bet both will try to avoid each other and both ktrain the empty server, even the smaller server with a gorup of organized 40 cant beat a organized blob/omni queue.

Metas on the small servers will change to more havock to try to stress zerg by making them move back and forth, but i am wondering if zergs will bother anyway.

Zergs will proly hunt smaller groups for the KD ratio show off.

Edited January 24 by Aeolus.3615

[Gehenna.3625]

23 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Sure, and I agree with that.  I don't see that as having to do with restructuring though and the problem it aims to solve.  It's not supposed to be for solving any problems of meta.  Maybe we're getting away from the restructuring discussion.

Yeah, restructuring won't solve that, but that's my point. Restructuring won't solve the biggest problems and it will just make things different but not (necessarily) better because the core issues or at least most of them will still exist.

[Aeolus.3615]

11 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

Yeah, restructuring won't solve that, but that's my point. Restructuring won't solve the biggest problems and it will just make things different but not (necessarily) better because the core issues or at least most of them will still exist.

That's the TRUE design Anet keeps enforcing no matter how many problems it adds to the player side.

Edited January 25 by Aeolus.3615

[Knighthonor.4061]

On 1/19/2024 at 12:33 AM, Thomas.2564 said:

The WR isn't gonna have any impact on gameplay or amount of content ur gonna experience. That's not what its for, so if u think that, well ur gonna be disapointed. It's supose to manage population issue's and all the stupid banwaggoning after each link reset. Which is fine if u ask me. 

So if ur finding the WR lacking, in what ever shape or form, maybe u forgot to choose an alliance or u didnt bother cause u thought, meh, who cares anyway. 

I for one would prefer if they gave up on the whole wr/alliances, and instead forcused on the ACTUAL issues in wvw. Of which there are MANY!! Im not gonna waste time naming them and pointing them out, since if u play wvw on a daily basis, u know all the issues, to which I am refering. 

I assume you didnt read or understand the OP

[Nidome.1365]

Scrap the restructuring - it will kill WvW for good, it is generating too much apathy, It seems to have taken away any reason for winning matchups or even defending objectives. It doesn't even seem to have balanced the teams.

What WvW really needs is the 10+ year old bugs, exploits & hacks fixing.

[Scolix.4879]

I hope it goes through as wvw has been way more fun during it than it was with completely one sided fights.

[Scolix.4879]

7 hours ago, Nidome.1365 said:

It doesn't even seem to have balanced the teams.

Neither did the old systems even more so it was one side completely dominating the other two.

[RisingDawn.5796]

One my accounts, is basically FoW and other communities/alliances and a French guild, so I don't  believe the system is at anywhere near being ready after 8 betas. No fow, hasn't got an Alliance or community guild, AFAIK either.

 

[Gehenna.3625]

On 1/28/2024 at 2:08 PM, Scolix.4879 said:

Neither did the old systems even more so it was one side completely dominating the other two.

I think it's too early to tell whether this new system is better. I'll give you a few reasons why:

• It's still a beta so stuff isn't working to its full potential
• There's more incentives to play WvW during the betas because there's double XP
• People are more actively organising stuff before a beta and therefore WvW gets extra attention

So when the restructuring becomes the way things are done, we will see what happens then.

[RisingDawn.5796]

There has been several betas though.

Since 2021, they have  said Alliances were coming soon or this year, back in an article that year.

So we were prepared, only problem, the amount of guilds, commanders and players are probably less without the wvw rush/bonus wxp events, that were during every beta.

Edited January 31 by RisingDawn.5796

[Gehenna.3625]

56 minutes ago, RisingDawn.5796 said:

There has been several betas though.

Kinda makes you think, right? And apparently they're still working on the mechanics and not so much the actual balancing.

56 minutes ago, RisingDawn.5796 said:

Since 2021, they have  said Alliances were coming soon or this year, back in an article that year.

Promises, promises...they never committed to anything though.

56 minutes ago, RisingDawn.5796 said:

So we were prepared, only problem, the amount of guilds, commanders and players are probably less without the wvw rush/bonus wxp events, they were during every beta.

Yes, and that's my point, however, it it's not either or but all things together. So all of these things together makes that the experiences during these betas are not representative afaic.