Your Top 5 Problems or Concerns of WvW

[XenesisII.1540]

3 hours ago, Aeolus.3615 said:

It is a double edge sword  since it is resumed to a few gamemode keys groups or players , so i kinda doubt theres is a good and constructive dialogue in these chats whatever game is, sometimes player groups or certain players hold to much power over the community rather the developers we have assisted this in alot of games actually so i doubt gw2 is an exception in taht aspect reason i said it can work like a double edge sword due how certain players can have the intent of manipulate game towards their setup or the group they only represent and not the entire game population.

Yup...

Players will always look out for their own self interest in a game.

Devs should take advice, but always look out for what's best for the Game as whole.

Now what happens when the devs just take advice from one group of players, or when you get a dev who was a player before becoming a dev....

You would hope bias is set aside for what's best for the game, but it's pretty obvious it exist with their balancing act....

😕

[XenesisII.1540]

Haha every time I check the thread for a reaction I get, I always wonder who was the one person that gave the OP a confused compared to the 17 hearts. 🤭

[Coldtart.4785]

4 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Players will always look out for their own self interest in a game.

What I want to know is who is interested in the game being 80% minstrel builds.

[ArchonWing.9480]

7 minutes ago, Coldtart.4785 said:

What I want to know is who is interested in the game being 80% minstrel builds.

People that are very afraid of dying.

[Phyxrgon.7305]

1. Fix or get better servers; Server Maintenance is not going to kill your player population or feelings. No, my ISP is not your go-to scapegoat.

2. Treat ALL the professions fairly when balancing. If boonrips are nerfed, then boon generation/spam needs to be tuned down to compensate, etc.

3. Undo Siege Disruptor back to Disabler. No one asked for this...

4. Switch current trashy Firebrand page system back to old one, old was much better.

[TheGrimm.5624]

9 hours ago, Coldtart.4785 said:

What I want to know is who is interested in the game being 80% minstrel builds.

Where are your stats coming from?

Edited March 23 by TheGrimm.5624
you vs your

[TrollingDemigod.3041]

1. Balance: powercreep everywhere, too many boons, too many conditions, too high damage, too high defense/sustain, too high mobility, stealth not deleted, superspeed not deleted, skill moved from player hands to characters build choices, etc.
2. Cowardice: why fight when you can outnumber enemy? why fight when you can reset 24/7 because of #1?
3. PPT4life: the worst part of wvw is when your pve blob wants to take objective and enemy defends it
4. Lack of bans: so many cheaters/exploiters/griefers and no punishment at all, but write forbidden words and you'll get banned within 1min
5. Stupidty: I don't have high expectations from gw2 players, but I'm still dissapointed. Enemy cataing your T3 keep? Why report it when you can just stare at them, menancingly. Enemy heading to your camp? Why defend it, let them flip so you can flip it later.

That's about it I guess.

[Aeolus.3615]

23 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Haha every time I check the thread for a reaction I get, I always wonder who was the one person that gave the OP a confused compared to the 17 hearts. 🤭

Eesy... a developer with s secondary account or some one close to a developer that is a gw2 white knight.

Probably the same account that reported posts that were i called anet a lamer mentality due how they overboost zerg gemeplay, wich is what they have been doing.

I will say it again @Anet dev's the current balance is very lamer and ur boosting what is already strong due numbers it is not a balanced model to follow up  it actually creates more unbalance, stop being a bunch of lamers!

 

9 hours ago, TrollingDemigod.3041 said:

1. Balance: powercreep everywhere, too many boons, too many conditions, too high damage, too high defense/sustain, too high mobility, stealth not deleted, superspeed not deleted, skill moved from player hands to characters build choices, etc.
2. Cowardice: why fight when you can outnumber enemy? why fight when you can reset 24/7 because of #1?
3. PPT4life: the worst part of wvw is when your pve blob wants to take objective and enemy defends it
4. Lack of bans: so many cheaters/exploiters/griefers and no punishment at all, but write forbidden words and you'll get banned within 1min
5. Stupidty: I don't have high expectations from gw2 players, but I'm still dissapointed. Enemy cataing your T3 keep? Why report it when you can just stare at them, menancingly. Enemy heading to your camp? Why defend it, let them flip so you can flip it later.

That's about it I guess.

Yet it is what Anet kept pushing over and over and over, i know a few guild that can put a instant queue on map and 2 of them actually changed server and timezones so they could PVD w/o enemies o the oposition, welcome to "guild wars 2" the most fake figthing game lol.

Edited March 23 by Aeolus.3615

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 3/22/2024 at 6:53 PM, Coldtart.4785 said:

What I want to know is who is interested in the game being 80% minstrel builds.

Do you mind me asking where 80% comes from? I am up to 33 WvW toons and 0% are minstrel. Not saying no, but where is this number coming from? I ask the same question when players say everyone is 'x' build. I really am wondering if there is a site I am not using that might have some interesting data based on the registered users that allowed access to the API keys that my geek side might be missing. I couldn't tell you what is meta, I theory craft my builds. I recommend peeps to use gw2skills.net and support them and their build editor before they craft. So where is the idea that 80% are Mini? 

[XenesisII.1540]

47 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Do you mind me asking where 80% comes from? I am up to 33 WvW toons and 0% are minstrel. Not saying no, but where is this number coming from? I ask the same question when players say everyone is 'x' build. I really am wondering if there is a site I am not using that might have some interesting data based on the registered users that allowed access to the API keys that my geek side might be missing. I couldn't tell you what is meta, I theory craft my builds. I recommend peeps to use gw2skills.net and support them and their build editor before they craft. So where is the idea that 80% are Mini? 

Are any of those support builds for a zerg?

[ArchonWing.9480]

https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

5 out of the 7 builds labeled meta are minstrel builds.

Typical party setup will be something like

Pick 2 Main Supports: Firebrand, Chrono  (both minstrel obv)

1 Healer: Vindicator, Druid, Scrapper, Tempest (all minstrel)

1 utility: scourge, or an extra healer from above (again minstrel)

1 dps:  Zerker/Holo

So 80% is pretty reasonable to say.

Some may even do 2 chronos and a firebrand in the same group but that's so vomit inducing that you should pretend I never said it.

Edited March 24 by ArchonWing.9480

[Dawdler.8521]

25 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Some may even do 2 chronos and a firebrand in the same group but that's so vomit inducing that you should pretend I never said it.

Ok then I'll also pretend we dont see that every day.

[Caille.7214]

Arenanet opened our server and we got nothing but alt accounts that are just there to grief, harass and troll.

We have a 100+ Q and you see afk wall runners everywhere.

and: yes, we report them but...

We fight a full map Q double team with only 20+active players at best.

Most of us have given up.

[XenesisII.1540]

16 minutes ago, Caille.7214 said:

Arenanet opened our server and we got nothing but alt accounts that are just there to grief, harass and troll.

We have a 100+ Q and you see afk wall runners everywhere.

and: yes, we report them but...

We fight a full map Q double team with only 20+active players at best.

Most of us have given up.

Well... that's certainly one way to hamper boon blobbing..... lmao. 🤣

[Caille.7214]

29 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Well... that's certainly one way to hamper boon blobbing..... lmao. 🤣

We don't ''boonblob''...

We cloud

[XenesisII.1540]

1 minute ago, Caille.7214 said:

We don't ''boonblob''...

We cloud

I bet your server isn't the only one experiencing this, and probably will catch on now that more people are complaining about it.

At least they said they looking into the afk problem in their latest wvw update.

[ArchonWing.9480]

9 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Ok then I'll also pretend we dont see that every day.

Well, just eat after you play then.

[Willem Bever.5329]

part of the boonballs and 80% support is that only 20% is needed to kill enemies and fast as well,
though the enemy squad as a whole may take a long time to kill since its going 1 at a time
for anyone thinking I know this gameplay: yes that is what gvg tournaments look like as well

Edited March 24 by Willem Bever.5329

[Fortunello.9853]

That the people in a blob can have 30 sec of protection, resolution, alacrity,  10 stab up all the time and not in the moment they should need it and that the boonstrip feel that doesn`t do anything, is what i call a problem in wvw now and kittening kitten and im playing now as a warrior spellbreaker until anet fix the engineer. The time you couldn`t stack under the warrior bubbles because it was dangerous were good years now.

Edited March 25 by gglx.5286

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

With regard to number 5: I feel like most of the resources needed to upgrade your base are too self contained. If you got all the thing you need to get to T3, then there's no reason to venture out, and the only reason you do so is because your looking for content, driven superficially by this motivation over what the game requires.

In other words : Pretend that 80 players existed in WvW on each team at all times: the optimal state of the game, is everybody just sits in their base and does nothing, since camps are also in your base, it basically imposes that players need to derive their own reason to go outside of the base and do anything.

That's why i think like in other similiar games, you need to have game mechanical reasons for why you need to not sit in spawn. Camps should not be located in your base, they should be located outside of them (think about Warcraft 3 goldmines and how you had to establish bases outside of your main stronghold)

Anyway... trying to make this post coherent but the point is that the game mode has no fundamental game mechanical rules and it's just a joke to think about why it currently works : Players wanna have some reason to fight...and it's become such a meme to take SMC as the reason people fight because ironically SMC is the real deriver of why content happens in EBG.

Honestly if they made it more strategic to get to T3 (by placing supply areas in enemy zones, or in neutral areas of interest, rather than inside the base) then they could buff defenses and make base defense during low pop actually interesting again. It also gives people reasons to group up, and go to enemy bases since they need (their) resources to upgrade their own!

Long story short there's just some fundamental game loops and screws missing in WvW at a basic basic level. Again looking at actually successful strategy games you notice these differences.

Edit: Hold on i'll just draw an illustration.

 

Edited March 25 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

Okay example of an EBG Rework (but can apply to any borderland):

https://i.imgur.com/GRZOEqc.jpeg

After such a rework, it then makes logical sense to make defenses matter more since it's more difficult to update to t3, and therefor should be more meaningful.

One thing i like about stuff like this is that, it should increase growth scale in fights in the same way we see it do for SMC today : its starts out with a few players fighting each other at the camps...the fights grow in size since it's the main point of interest between the two sides...which leads to small-scale, and eventually to large scale fighting.

This also helps split up the map player wise to reduce lag (skill lag) that Tent warfare usually creates since everyone is fighting all at the same places all of the time.

Lastly, supply routes added from Spawn to the Keep only, for each base (The spawn is therefor a camp) It's like this so that spawn farming isn't always so oppressive when it happens, and makes it easier for players to take back their keep when it gets taken away, and upgrade it back to t3 to start themselves over. 

Edited March 25 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[TheGrimm.5624]

3 hours ago, JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

Okay example of an EBG Rework (but can apply to any borderland):

https://i.imgur.com/GRZOEqc.jpeg

After such a rework, it then makes logical sense to make defenses matter more since it's more difficult to update to t3, and therefor should be more meaningful.

One thing i like about stuff like this is that, it should increase growth scale in fights in the same way we see it do for SMC today : its starts out with a few players fighting each other at the camps...the fights grow in size since it's the main point of interest between the two sides...which leads to small-scale, and eventually to large scale fighting.

This also helps split up the map player wise to reduce lag (skill lag) that Tent warfare usually creates since everyone is fighting all at the same places all of the time.

Lastly, supply routes added from Spawn to the Keep only, for each base (The spawn is therefor a camp) It's like this so that spawn farming isn't always so oppressive when it happens, and makes it easier for players to take back their keep when it gets taken away, and upgrade it back to t3 to start themselves over. 

Interesting idea and I am all for more variety in maps and admit, I would prefer that people would need to adjust tactics map to map due to varied terrain. Map design is made even tougher though due to players. We have players that want to create content and then some players that want to be delivered content and new maps are rough on the latter. 

Considering they already adjusted supply in keeps and moved more out to the camps, what are you seeing normally? Did that create more T3 keeps or less in your matchups after the changes? Do you have more people standing around in keeps? Is that due to afkers or people not moving out since no active tags?

With the queues due to the Rush week spent some time back in EotM and seeing the design evolution from ABL to EotM to DBL its an interesting story on it own.  Didn't get to collapse a bridge while a zerg was crossing it though sadly but was some fun to be had. Do think they should add mounts and bring it in line with WvW. Just leave out the gliders since the falls are suppose to be there and you can still scroll back and click a WP before you reach the death mark if you practice the move. After telling some new EotM players about it, they were like, oh.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

  

1 hour ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

Considering they already adjusted supply in keeps and moved more out to the camps, what are you seeing normally? Did that create more T3 keeps or less in your matchups after the changes? Do you have more people standing around in keeps? Is that due to afkers or people not moving out since no active tags?

The problem to me, is where the objectives are physically on the map. You want to physically bring enemy players, and allied players together into the same physical places for a fundamental game mechanical reason. Right now players just "choose" to wander into enemy territory with pretty much no real reason other than that they are bored, and the most efficient way to "cure bordeom" is SMC (not to mention this is the cause of vacancy on other BL's too), by way of just this colloquial meme understanding that that is where you go if you want to have fights. This is bad game design to me... even though its got this quality of "if it's not broken don't fix it." How it should work, is that there is a reason you would go into an enemies territory. The first most logical step are camps because the maps "currency" are supplies. Because camps are already in your base...then why bother attacking someone else camp outside the base... just defend your own since that is more optimal, it's easier to do, takes less energy, is less risky and so on...

So why are people standing around in keeps and not doing anything?: Because there's no reason why they need to leave their base, and its the same idea on the other side of the map for the enemy. The only reason you might leave a base currently, is cause you got a tag now, and you can go bully the enemy so that you don't have to be bored sitting in base. Changing the amount of supply in the camps that exist already isn't going to change this behavior, it has to be more fundamental than this (changes to the physical locations of objectives)

So it's not so much the value of the currency itself...or the currency itself really...it's where that currency is located and asking whether it (the location) brings people together or not.

Quote

Do think they should add mounts and bring it in line with WvW. Just leave out the gliders since the falls are suppose to be there and you can still scroll back and click a WP before you reach the death mark if you practice the move. After telling some new EotM players about it, they were like, oh.

 

I think mounts are bad for the mode, because it makes roamers less of a threat. I'd bet my horse that this also inadvertently fuels some of the zerg hate that goes on here, on top of the constant nerfs to siege and tower defenses. Roamers should have use in the game mode as a way of stifling an enemies reinforcements...a tactical gameplay strategy that's essentially been eradicated and i think that's a shame...and i'm saying this as a Zergling. Not only that but players that might be newer to WvW just mount up and zip around the big baddies that are praying for content and so those Zerglings never really get to learn about how to deal with certain scenarios (like how to better run away from an enemy, or supporting your teammates in smaller skirmishes so that you can get to the zerg together) not to mention that these skirmishes ultimately create new dynamics outside of the zerg fight (and leads to more meaningful content, and reasons to fight each other)

I can kind of go on about these topics...but it's another one of these fundamental game loops that are just straight up missing from the game.

Edited March 25 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684

[Sher.1632]

Right now I am a bit mad about the server balance. My server is in T5 right now and repeatedly have to compete against a absolutely dominating server like Whiteside Ridge. Even flipping a camp or a sentry post is a highly dangerous activity. You can bet that there is a small kill squad ready just waiting to ambush you. That makes WvW really annoying to play as this is almost as bad as spawn camping. You can barely keep up your participation to gain at least some pips  for the reward chests. I really do like WvW and don't mind losing a fight but this is a kind of overwhelming pressure that kills any fun in the game mode.

Edited March 25 by Sher.1632

[Gehenna.3625]

On 3/22/2024 at 7:09 PM, XenesisII.1540 said:

Now what happens when the devs just take advice from one group of players, or when you get a dev who was a player before becoming a dev....

That's exactly what's going on though. Considering how they "balance" things in WvW, have been working on WR for years now and ignore pretty much any other problems that players put forward, surely they can only be listening to one group of players aka the zerg/boonball players