Riddle me this....

[XenesisII.1540]

Saw Rawr fighting Indo, Apex/Hate fighting SE open field this past week, usual boring predictable conveyor belt fighting, with complaints of moa and having a hard time getting downs not enough spike damage. 🤭 Also saw Indo trying to actually pug command actual pugs and get destroyed twice by other pugs and log off, guess it is a challenge if you bother to step down to the level of the people you're farming. 🤭

[Cael.3960]

8 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Saw Rawr fighting Indo, Apex/Hate fighting SE open field this past week, usual boring predictable conveyor belt fighting, with complaints of moa and having a hard time getting downs not enough spike damage. 🤭 Also saw Indo trying to actually pug command actual pugs and get destroyed twice by other pugs and log off, guess it is a challenge if you bother to step down to the level of the people you're farming. 🤭

Interesting. It's almost like you're saying skill and organization are responsible for winning fights. Clearly that's not the case, there must be something more at play here. 

I can only assume Indo wasn't running a boonball. Perhaps it was a pugball? Is pugball a thing? How big does a pugball have to be before it becomes a boonball? Is a pugball-evolved-boonball better or worse than your 'regular' boonball? Does it have less boons or more? Does it have more players or less? Does the average level of play increase with numbers like skritt, or get worse? 

Skritt=boonballs. Clearly this is the takeaway from the discussion. We should nerf skritt. 

[A Hamster.2580]

On 5/2/2024 at 1:37 PM, XenesisII.1540 said:

Shouldn't anet be making "content" "harder"/"challenging" for organized groups? Not easier?

I am not quite understanding this. Doesn't this go both ways in WvW?

If it is easier after the last patch for an organized group to attack a keep defended by an enemy group , it is also easier after the last patch for an unorganized group to attack the same keep defended by the same enemy group.

The same can be said for defending.

If it is harder after the last patch for an unorganized group to defend a keep against an enemy group, it is also harder after the last patch for an organized group to defend the same keep against the same an enemy group.

 

The recent changes were less about organized group vs unorganized group and more about attackers vs defenders.

I agree that defenders should get more advantages when defending their objectives, but I do not understand why you guys think this is about organized vs unorganized groups. 

Edited May 6 by A Hamster.2580

[DeceiverX.8361]

22 minutes ago, A Hamster.2580 said:

I am not quite understanding this. Doesn't this go both ways in WvW?

If it is easier after the last patch for an organized group to attack a keep defended by an enemy group , it is also easier after the last patch for an unorganized group to attack the same keep defended by the same enemy group.

The same can be said for defending.

If it is harder after the last patch for an unorganized group to defend a keep against an enemy group, it is also harder after the last patch for an organized group to defend the same keep against the same an enemy group.

 

The recent changes were less about organized group vs unorganized group and more about attackers vs defenders.

I agree that defenders should get more advantages when defending their objectives, but I do not understand why you guys think this is about organized vs unorganized groups. 

Attacking groups tend to be implicitly more organized than defending ones because the defending group is generally whoever is in the area to respond, versus preparing for the assault.

If things flip really fast, there's no way to mount a planned defense.

Edited May 6 by DeceiverX.8361

[Chaba.5410]

10 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Saw Rawr fighting Indo, Apex/Hate fighting SE open field this past week, usual boring predictable conveyor belt fighting, with complaints of moa and having a hard time getting downs not enough spike damage. 🤭 Also saw Indo trying to actually pug command actual pugs and get destroyed twice by other pugs and log off, guess it is a challenge if you bother to step down to the level of the people you're farming. 🤭

So wait, you saying that you saw those organized groups, who haven't fallen apart in mere months, fighting each other for the more challenging competition they bring to each other and not farming groups of 5-10 people defending an objective?

And you're using laugh emojis here for what reason?  I thought this is what you wanted by your original post.

Edited May 6 by Chaba.5410

[Gop.8713]

On 5/2/2024 at 3:37 PM, XenesisII.1540 said:

They always proclaim they're in it for "competition", but anet seem to continue making content easier for them, making it less challenging.....

Bc anet is giving them what they want, not what they say they want. It's an important distinction, and one I think anet is handling well . . .

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 5/5/2024 at 10:58 PM, Gop.8713 said:

Bc anet is giving them what they want, not what they say they want. It's an important distinction, and one I think anet is handling well . . .

Then let them implement the failed attack versus reducing fights and decreasing time to take. I could go on more but am already looking at how to use these changes and if that is their goal, use that to aid your side. If that is what they want, then change and use that to your advantage. May not lead to what they think.

[disForm.2837]

WvW is the only endgame mode where the sweatiest try hard players with a decade of experience share battlefield and even worse, fight against, rookies. It's inherent to the current WvW structure design. 

In my experience running with strong groups, farming ragtag pugs is not fun for anyone. What's the point? We may as well go and kill NPCs.

And for those thinking the standard boonball is bad, the new meta is even worse. Anyone non running it just doesn't stand a chance, let alone pugs.

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

On 5/5/2024 at 5:57 PM, A Hamster.2580 said:

I am not quite understanding this. Doesn't this go both ways in WvW?

If it is easier after the last patch for an organized group to attack a keep defended by an enemy group , it is also easier after the last patch for an unorganized group to attack the same keep defended by the same enemy group.

The same can be said for defending.

If it is harder after the last patch for an unorganized group to defend a keep against an enemy group, it is also harder after the last patch for an organized group to defend the same keep against the same an enemy group.

 

The recent changes were less about organized group vs unorganized group and more about attackers vs defenders.

I agree that defenders should get more advantages when defending their objectives, but I do not understand why you guys think this is about organized vs unorganized groups. 

What the recent changes did was lower the floor for attacking structures. People are punished less for making tactical errors (preventing disablers), and are rewarded less for moving more dynamically (not having to block repairers to allow reinforcements in).

It's not really as much as a commentary of nerfing organized groups, but rather that the requirement for organized groups be higher. But instead the standards are lowered and options are removed, because the devs like to do that instead of doing anything interesting.

Meanwhile the cost of defense is so high with having to repair to  50% to keep stuff up, especially when siege can hit multiple walls, it is not worth the supply to do so during an ongoing attack and the best method is simply to kill the attackers first or flip something back.

Having a excessively low floor for attacking structures also means that structures will flip too fast and the effort to defend them will not be worth it, or even if it's physically possible to get to it in the first place. The result is the loot train phenomenon where all sides simply backcap because it is more efficient than spending resources into defense. And such a thing has already prevalent in WvW, because the incentive to WvW was already fairly nominal.

This is also further pushed by the power creep to the point where certain siege becomes completely ineffective due to their inability to outpace player sustain. And the guards haven't gone any stronger either. I guess they tried power creeping the lord but I can't really observe any effects

It should also be known that this is also partially because of population imbalance which makes matters look a lot worse.  And personally I don't view players in terms of attack or defense, but rather the game validating various decisions and options. And I think it is rather hard to justify actively defending objectives in this current state of the game without a decent group of our own. So in the end it really boils down to that.

tl;dr Dumbing the game down for everyone  does not make things equal.

Edited May 8 by ArchonWing.9480

[TheGrimm.5624]

31 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

What the recent changes did was lower the floor for attacking structures. People are punished less for making tactical errors (preventing disablers), and are rewarded less for moving more dynamically (not having to block repairers to allow reinforcements in).

It's not really as much as a commentary of nerfing organized groups, but rather that the requirement for organized groups be higher. But instead the standards are lowered and options are removed, because the devs like to do that instead of doing anything interesting.

Meanwhile the cost of defense is so high with having to repair to  50% to keep stuff up, especially when siege can hit multiple walls, it is not worth the supply to do so during an ongoing attack and the best method is simply to kill the attackers first or flip something back.

Having a excessively low floor for attacking structures also means that structures will flip too fast and the effort to defend them will not be worth it, or even if it's physically possible to get to it in the first place. The result is the loot train phenomenon where all sides simply backcap because it is more efficient than spending resources into defense. And such a thing has already prevalent in WvW, because the incentive to WvW was already fairly nominal.

This is also further pushed by the power creep to the point where certain siege becomes completely ineffective due to their inability to outpace player sustain. And the guards haven't gone any stronger either. I guess they tried power creeping the lord but I can't really observe any effects

It should also be known that this is also partially because of population imbalance which makes matters look a lot worse.  And personally I don't view players in terms of attack or defense, but rather the game validating various decisions and options. And I think it is rather hard to justify actively defending objectives in this current state of the game without a decent group of our own. So in the end it really boils down to that.

tl;dr Dumbing the game down for everyone  does not make things equal.

Well put.

[XenesisII.1540]

36 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

What the recent changes did was lower the floor for attacking structures. People are punished less for making tactical errors (preventing disablers), and are rewarded less for moving more dynamically (not having to block repairers to allow reinforcements in).

It's not really as much as a commentary of nerfing organized groups, but rather that the requirement for organized groups be higher. But instead the standards are lowered and options are removed, because the devs like to do that instead of doing anything interesting.

Meanwhile the cost of defense is so high with having to repair to  50% to keep stuff up, especially when siege can hit multiple walls, it is not worth the supply to do so during an ongoing attack and the best method is simply to kill the attackers first or flip something back.

Having a excessively low floor for attacking structures also means that structures will flip too fast and the effort to defend them will not be worth it, or even if it's physically possible to get to it in the first place. The result is the loot train phenomenon where all sides simply backcap because it is more efficient than spending resources into defense. And such a thing has already prevalent in WvW, because the incentive to WvW was already fairly nominal.

This is also further pushed by the power creep to the point where certain siege becomes completely ineffective due to their inability to outpace player sustain. And the guards haven't gone any stronger either. I guess they tried power creeping the lord but I can't really observe any effects

It should also be known that this is also partially because of population imbalance which makes matters look a lot worse.  And personally I don't view players in terms of attack or defense, but rather the game validating various decisions and options. And I think it is rather hard to justify actively defending objectives in this current state of the game without a decent group of our own. So in the end it really boils down to that.

tl;dr Dumbing the game down for everyone  does not make things equal.

This, is why I like you Archon, very well said. 🍦

[Famine.7915]

Most of those in the dev Discord are leaders of these large groups. There is little room for smaller voices.