WTF is Anet doing to WvW?

[MedievalThings.5417]

Guild aura and presence were used for defense.  Nerfed to useless.  In the process, also making chilling fog useless.  Because now you need a comp to fight off a comp, and if you have a comp, you didn't need the other things anyway.  Before you could at least pug defend, fast close the wall, trapping/killing a few.  Use fog to snare stragglers, kill a few more.  Maybe successfully defend.  Now, with all the boons, and no counter to them, you just can't make a dent.

Things like bloodlust which attackers use..."this is fine" - anet.  

What Anet says - defending is too strong, we need to make adjustments.  What Anet meant - someone is still defending things, we will continue to nerf/remove things until you stop.

[hugeboss.5432]

Kinda agree, they seem to be center focused on helping ktraining and fast flipping stuff, and not about promoting actual large scale combat.

[One of the reasons we have those looong garrison fights isn't to actually cap it, but often just because it's a great place to fight and defenders consider it worth defending. But once it's capped... the map kinda dies.]

Edited April 17 by hugeboss.5432

[Cael.3960]

Clearly the solution is to limit borderland population to a 1:1:1 ratio. You don't get on the map until every other server has equal numbers or 1 more extra player. That way the least populated server has the exact same chance to succeed on a map as the server that's over-stacked, better organized and has better coverage. That way everyone has fair content and we discourage map blobs unless there's two other servers with a map presence big enough to fight against them. 
 

Hmm. On second thought that would probably lead to three-digit ques for some servers and absolutely empty borderlands if any one server has weak representation in a particular time slot. kitten it, if only people would spread out to have an equal population on all servers instead of just bandwagoning onto the most successful ones. Can't they see that the game is better if we all suck equally? 

 

Okay, how about we take this one step further and open up all servers to transfer for free. After 3 months, delete the one with the lowest population and continue to do so until there's a permanent que on all maps at all times. Surely with no population imbalance everyone has an equal chance to enjoy the content they prefer. Eventually the ques will force people onto other servers and everything will equal out.
 

Network error. Que 88. Well, time to run the Dragonfall until my que pops again...

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, Zok.4956 said:

Yes, my thought goes in that direction. However, it should of course be kept within limits and a single defender should not be so strong that he can take on a 50 zerg. This is just a basic idea, not a fully developed concept.

BTW: I also think that you should have a certain minimum number of players to conquer a keep in enemy map territory and it shouldn't be possible to conquer an empty keep in enemy map territory with just two people.

I don't agree with that because it further punishes timezones and servers who are outnumbered.

[ZTeamG.4603]

6 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

Defenders had to do nothing to win with weaker group

What gamemode were you playing? Because it sure wasn't WvW unless your boonblob is one of the worst possible. For the past year, the tiniest modicum of effort on a boonball's part has been enough to win against outnumbered defenders. 

If you and your group are the type to throw down 8 catas in an exposed spot while all the keep's cannons and mortars are still up and then never use the bubble skill, you deserve to get easily repelled by 1-2 people.

Edited April 17 by ZTeamG.4603

[Gotejjeken.1267]

The zerg drivers ITT are hilariously easy to spot.  

[Verdict is Vengence.6912]

My guess is that Anet often caters to the "whales", the players that support the company through heaps of gem purchases.

[ArchonWing.9480]

1 hour ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

The zerg drivers ITT are hilariously easy to spot.  

Just like in game.

That's why they always moan about being "sniped" even though it's blatantly obvious the one that charges ahead of their zerg with everyone trying to loosely follow behind is the tag.

[Arbiterjim.1472]

Yeah, this truly is ridiculous.  If they wanted to make the populated servers be able to easily steamroll everything else, they succeeded.  Thanks for killing every division except the best

[Laureh.2097]

The wvw experience is being tailored for the large streamer groups and everyone else can gth. No voice for the majority.

[Arya Whitefire.8423]

7 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

It's a historical fact that HoT tipped the game more in the direction of defenders and we can look back and analyze the results without much speculation.  
 

In an even fight, i.e. for about 4-8 hours a day, on the average server.  It is true that HoT made defense stronger.  But for uneven fights, which occur the majority of the day, for most servers. That patch, which went live, shortly before HoT, which doubled the health of all siege, along with whichever patch made ACs only able to damage a person once each second, no matter how many ACs are firing, was basically the end of the ability to hold territory with a small team vs braindead blobs.

And it is the enablement of braindead blobs that turned this mode from a somewhat engaging siege warfare simulator, with open field 15-25 man fights on the side, into the ez mode nearly pointless sandbox, that it is today.

 

[Caille.7214]

Can 't really blame Dumb and Dumber (CMCiegfried und Roy), they dead from the neck up.

But to the maniac that hired these clowns and put them in their current position:

Can you point out on the Charr doll where Arenanet hurt you?

You clearly want to destroy this company from within.

 

( dear forum mod,

Warn me, remove my post, ban me, heck delete my account, w/e... I simply don't care anymore.

this is a sinking ship and I sincerely wish you all the best and hope you'll land on your feet.

god bless 💕 )

[MysteryDude.1572]

20 hours ago, Riba.3271 said:

This was absolutely necessary change and good for WvW. Objectives were not a spot to fight in, making players stack more and more to servers that are so strong that they can go inside objectives without it being trolling. Guilds were avoiding objectives and dueling scene died, because objective auras were just too strong. Ofc not everyone knew why enemy objectives were unfun to fight in, but they still felt it and avoided them.

Of course you are right that they should still buff defenders by  increasing siege vs siege damage, removing boon golems and multiple shield generator bubbles in same spot. Defender should be at least able to buy some time with siege so they can build some numbers.

But no one can deny that objective auras were killing whole WvW experience when for any sized group difference between any friendly and enemy objective was 30% damage worth of stats. When optimal gameplay is to wait for your enemies to be stupid, the game isn't very good.

Bro , what? 

Who the f**k gvg's/rvrs into enemy keeps??

The closest to the keeps/towers groups do organised fights in EU  is maybe outside alpine garri or south towers and even then noone cares for the keep buff, maybe they kill cannons cause they strip stab. Everyone fights on south alpine camp in duel spot.

And what , you think a 50 man zerg with actual parties/double supports cares for keep buff and 30 defenders on wall ? Acs/cannons more annoying than 100+ stat 30 random defenders, omegalul. 

 

Edited April 18 by MysteryDude.1572

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, Arya Whitefire.8423 said:

In an even fight, i.e. for about 4-8 hours a day, on the average server.  It is true that HoT made defense stronger.  But for uneven fights, which occur the majority of the day, for most servers. That patch, which went live, shortly before HoT, which doubled the health of all siege, along with whichever patch made ACs only able to damage a person once each second, no matter how many ACs are firing, was basically the end of the ability to hold territory with a small team vs braindead blobs.

And it is the enablement of braindead blobs that turned this mode from a somewhat engaging siege warfare simulator, with open field 15-25 man fights on the side, into the ez mode nearly pointless sandbox, that it is today.

 

On the average server, those even fights are occurring at prime time hours which are highly populated/active in comparison to other hours of the day.  One only has to look at the kills/deaths stat to see which skirmishes have the most activity.  High activity levels across all three teams implies the ability to have even fights. There's some outlier servers that get outnumbered during prime time.  WR of course is theoretically meant to address that issue - not this patch.

People give a lot of speculative feedback impulsively without having played the changes much first.  It started as soon as the patch notes were released.  So they miss out on the more constructive feedback like revisiting those AC changes in light of changes like the siege "inconveniencer" which is supposed to help you kill siege faster or pointing out that the 50% wall repair may be too high in light of how supply was lowered in keeps.  Truth is we don't know if defenders are going to have enough supply for repair most of the time.

Edited April 18 by Chaba.5410

[One more for the road.8950]

3 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

On the average server, those even fights are occurring at prime time hours which are highly populated/active in comparison to other hours of the day.  One only has to look at the kills/deaths stat to see which skirmishes have the most activity.  High activity levels across all three teams implies the ability to have even fights. There's some outlier servers that get outnumbered during prime time.  WR of course is theoretically meant to address that issue - not this patch.

People give a lot of speculative feedback impulsively without having played the changes much first.  It started as soon as the patch notes were released.  So they miss out on the more constructive feedback like revisiting those AC changes in light of changes like the siege "inconveniencer" which is supposed to help you kill siege faster or pointing out that the 50% wall repair may be too high in light of how supply was lowered in keeps.  Truth is we don't know if defenders are going to have enough supply for repair most of the time.

You play in a place where all servers are highly populated in prime time? Happy for you.

Meanwhile, the last three weeks BEFORE patch I would occasionally log on prime time on different accounts to either to find basicly dead server so no content, a server that killed enemies and capped so fast I didn't get there in time so no content or a server that was an average server but really just one opponent who was so stacked and bored that it was barely possible to get a camp as all of them would hang around waiting. If I didn't, it was good, but I am not gonna play when I either have to hang at camps or one of three spawn exits to get kills or participation or run at five different camps before getting participation. Running sneakily across half a map just to see a camp getting 5 min RI before you get there is not content. 

If an enemy hits your main keep they should by default already be stronger than you in one way or another (skill, numbers,  coverage,  organisation, whatever) or do a gamble of not losing their own stuff while getting it. Higher risk, better rewards. 

[One more for the road.8950]

4 hours ago, MysteryDude.1572 said:

Bro , what? 

Who the f**k gvg's/rvrs into enemy keeps??

The closest to the keeps/towers groups do organised fights in EU  is maybe outside alpine garri or south towers and even then noone cares for the keep buff, maybe they kill cannons cause they strip stab. Everyone fights on south alpine camp in duel spot.

And what , you think a 50 man zerg with actual parties/double supports cares for keep buff and 30 defenders on wall ? Acs/cannons more annoying than 100+ stat 30 random defenders, omegalul. 

 

+ 1 on this. Somewhat

If you have a highly skilled enemy blob in your main keep or garri, it's because they went to your keep or garri to get any kind of content. It's not that they want your keep or garri. It's for content or kills. Be it fort farms or just that you want any content that's not PPT. If you have TWO enemy blobs or zergs in your main keep or garri, it's because one is probably higher skilled than the other and it's the only way the other enemy is going to get any kills or not-PPT content without instant wipe or that they're somewhat average but isn't the "agree to meet at the open field" type of people or just drummed up an impulsive voice tag - that might later talk to enemy tag about fights somewhere else. But since the servers are like they are at the moment, even agreed upon open field content and EotM or OS fights can be ruined by randoms from either your own or the enemy server intervening in the fights and one side throwing pepehands before leaving. Yes, the "monster" servers are so stacked they will ruin their own servers content.

If you're a guild that want more than PPT stuck on a borderland without content and not able to get into EBG if it's a MU where that's the only content, you go garri to get any kind of content after taking bay or hills or both or you log out. Or you take bay and/or hills and garri without opposition and log out.

Edited April 18 by One more for the road.8950

[Riba.3271]

Funny part about this thread occurs when defenders say they are extremely outnumbered all the time while representing majority.

 

At least make some sense. 

Edited April 18 by Riba.3271

[Mabi black.1824]

7 hours ago, Chaba.5410 said:

People give a lot of speculative feedback impulsively without having played the changes much first

That's exactly what I wrote in the other post. People are so scared and blinded by the imbalance that servers often show that they are not really looking at/evaluating these changes. This update isn't about balance, it's just looking at how to stimulate action and iteration between players.

This feedback however is a strong indicator of how much the concept of ''credible balance/competition'' on a server basis should be a priority for development. Sitting or hiding behind WR is not a good idea in my opinion, we should bring a series of easy changes for Anet capable of taking you towards more controlled and therefore more balanced teams.

Edited April 18 by Mabi black.1824

[Gehenna.3625]

lol, this is so pathetic. This is to help the unkillable boonballs so they can ignore tactics and just boonball around the map. Look at all the nerfs like in the last year or so. Defenders took one nerf after the other. But this wasn't necessary before. So what has changed I wonder? The players perhaps?

[Mabi black.1824]

Always look at the two sides of the same coin. Servers that display a huge ball of boons usually suffer on the other maps, your small group of devastation of 10 players will be much more effective and efficient. And if it will do a good job forcing the snowball formation to make decisions, split up or lose everything.

Even on EBG when they insist on sitting in 40+ in and out of SM, I usually choose to go straight to their keep through a side tower and eat their outer walls. Now that they have to spend 50% on supplies to close them, after 2 or 3 strikes they will be forced to pull their kitten out of SM or decide to split up. And let's not forget that our games are on 3 sides and if everyone does their part, there will be no shortage of content.

Edited April 18 by Mabi black.1824

[Aeolus.3615]

1 hour ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

Always look at the two sides of the same coin. Servers that display a huge ball of boons usually suffer on the other maps, your small group of devastation of 10 players will be much more effective and efficient. And if it will do a good job forcing the snowball formation to make decisions, split up or lose everything.

Even on EBG when they insist on sitting in 40+ in and out of SM, I usually choose to go straight to their keep through a side tower and eat their outer walls. Now that they have to spend 50% on supplies to close them, after 2 or 3 strikes they will be forced to pull their kitten out of SM or decide to split up. And let's not forget that our games are on 3 sides and if everyone does their part, there will be no shortage of content.

The 2 biggest servers barely fight each other most time  they even atack the smaller or empty server at the same time, there are guilds that move to desert bl  with their queue map to avoid any oposition..

At the end it will result just in faster pvd, as in less ways of delaying with wall back up at low health.

I have a some worries about the current chanmges Anet is making towards WvW  that wont make the gameplay better, but will instead make a happy EOTM PvD Ktrain in WvW for the zergs... with 0 figths.

 

 

Edited April 18 by Aeolus.3615

[Mabi black.1824]

6 minutes ago, Aeolus.3615 said:

The 2 biggest servers barely fight each other most time  they even atack the smaller or empty server at the same time, there are guilds that move to desert bl  with their queue map to avoid any oposition..

The content in this game mode, it's us, it's the players who choose what to do and what to propose to others, if you don't look for the challenge or if you only want to see your smallest opponent, it's all about the player. Upgrades of this kind, rather than class balance or boon balls, will only be marginal if not useless compared to how one chooses to play.

[Aeolus.3615]

13 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

The content in this game mode, it's us, it's the players who choose what to do and what to propose to others, if you don't look for the challenge or if you only want to see your smallest opponent, it's all about the player. Upgrades of this kind, rather than class balance or boon balls, will only be marginal if not useless compared to how one chooses to play.

100% oumaned in all maps :D its just my normal daay in WvW, the rarelly momments i am not outmaned it is us who outman the enemy.. it is stupid gameplay and population dispersion.

And yes i am content for big zergs since most zergs only atack much smaller groups than them.

Joking asside, it always was about  boonballs but now it is  more than ever with the current Anet mentality.

Both population gap has been intensifying towards blob pvd fest and makign gameplay easier for them.

Edited April 18 by Aeolus.3615

[Mabi black.1824]

21 minutes ago, Aeolus.3615 said:

100% oumaned in all maps 😄 its just my normal daay in WvW, the rarelly momments i am not outmaned it is us who outman the enemy.. it is stupid gameplay and population dispersion.

And yes i am content for big zergs since most zergs only atack much smaller groups than them.

Joking asside, it always was about  boonballs but now it is  more than ever with the current Anet mentality.

Both population gap has been intensifying towards blob pvd fest and makign gameplay easier for them.

Being constantly outnumbered will definitely affect the type of content you choose to propose. That's for sure. But again, these changes don't embrace the problems of balanced servers. Or let's put it another way. If by hypothesis we get 3 numerically identical sides, in your opinion these changes force players to make decisions and act accordingly by helping the content to emerge, or not.

[Vasdamas Anklast.1607]

On 4/17/2024 at 1:55 PM, Riba.3271 said:

This was absolutely necessary change and good for WvW. Objectives were not a spot to fight in, making players stack more and more to servers that are so strong that they can go inside objectives without it being trolling. Guilds were avoiding objectives and dueling scene died, because objective auras were just too strong. Ofc not everyone knew why enemy objectives were unfun to fight in, but they still felt it and avoided them.

Of course you are right that they should still buff defenders by  increasing siege vs siege damage, removing boon golems and multiple shield generator bubbles in same spot. Defender should be at least able to buy some time with siege so they can build some numbers.

But no one can deny that objective auras were killing whole WvW experience when for any sized group difference between any friendly and enemy objective was 30% damage worth of stats. When optimal gameplay is to wait for your enemies to be stupid, the game isn't very good.

" dueling scene died, because objective auras were just too strong"

This fits the tier of dumb, delusional and ARROGANT kitten I used to read on both Deso discord and team chat and I am surprised that YOU spat it out. Absolutely clueless, as any bag farming NPC is.