Jump to content
  • Sign Up

[Suggestion] Enhanced Skirmishes - Finally A Reason To Care About Winning In WvW


Recommended Posts

I was putting together a list of things I'd like to see in GW2, and sitting at the top of the list is something that ArenaNet has admittedly struggled with for a while now: Giving players a reason to care about PPT and winning skirmishes. With world restructuring on the horizon, it is the perfect time to talk about this. Some of the most fun I've had in GW2 revolves around capturing or defending WvW objectives -- from ninja'ing towers with a small roaming squad, to half-hour long intense battles for control over SMC. While many of us now embrace the "fight culture" in WvW, we must not forget that it was the game of PPT that introduced us to large scale combat in the first place, many years ago.

 

Eventually for most of us, the motivation to play WvW "the right way" withered away. In fact, the only reason most people care about winning or losing a match is so that they can play against certain guilds the following week. I wanted to come up with a solution that would get players genuinely excited about winning skirmishes. I took a bit of inspiration from other games' reward structures -- some of you may notice some similarity to Trials of Osiris in Destiny 2. In general, I think Bungie does a fantastic job of getting players to care about different activities in their games, and ArenaNet could learn a lot from their reward systems.

 

Enhanced Skirmishes is a simple idea: From Friday daily reset to Monday daily reset, winning a skirmish will grant significant rewards to players who participated on the winning side. (Don't get too caught up on the exact time and days in which Enhanced Skirmishes are active. The purpose of the restricted time window is to prevent excessive farming and/or burnout, and to make it both exciting and competitive when Enhanced Skirmishes are active.)

 

The idea itself is simple, but ArenaNet will have to make some decisions on the implementation side of things. To prevent leeching, rewards should scale with the length of time a player maintained high participation. There is also the question of what should the rewards look like?

 

Here is an example of something that could be part of the reward structure -- A collection achievement. Each week, a different item from the collection has a chance to drop upon winning an Enhanced Skirmish. When the collection is complete, the player is rewarded with something really juicy: maybe a precursor, a mount skin selection, etc... Then, the collection resets, and the player can begin their hunt for all the collection items again. The important part of this idea is that the player cannot farm the whole collection in one week; they will have to win skirmishes in multiple different weeks to get all the items they need.

 

Again, the implementation details are flexible, but the main idea is that having "time-windowed" enhanced reward skirmishes will surely get players interested in playing to win. I'm sure there is a psychological explanation for this, but I am not a psychologist, just a sweaty gamer who wants to take your castle. Let me know what you all think 🙂 

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They said in the blogpost that they're working on scoring adjustments... but neglected to say anything about rewards. I agree that there needs to be better rewards for winning skirmishes and even matches... but this idea is imo, too discriminating. Part time rewards, that automatically exclude certain players in certain real world employment professions. (It doesn't really matter what time cycle is used) 

A better idea vs part time rewards imo, to prevent excessiveness,  would be daily/ weekly achievements providing rewards with low limit requirements of said rewards... similar to the Weekly Convergences achievement that gives rewards for completing  3 Convergences in a week. I know there are weekly achievements for objectives like camps, kills, yaks, defenses, etc, but these would need to be placing in the skirmish. Place 3rd get x rewards. Place second, get y rewards, place 1st get z rewards. And work like adventures, where if you Place better, you also receive the worse rewards. But of course, only once per reward (or whatever the limit is for the weekly)

Then there could also be base rewards for winning a skimish, which could also be based on Place finished..

The collection idea is nice, but since it's repeatable, should NOT require multiple weeks of commitment and rare drops,  simply because that would also incentivize excessive farming and burnout. A multi week collection achievement should be one time, whereas repeatable ones should be weekly/ daily depending on ease/ difficulty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Some initial thoughts:
* Any sort of time window will exclude some people. Working hours, family, etc.
* I don't know a lot of players that would care for a collection achievement
* A precursor couldn't work as a guaranteed reward, problems with both market and people farming any kind of guarantee.

I think the idea is basically a good one, to try to find rewards that promotes active play. I think the proposed idea is too narrowly aimed at a specific type of players and their specific play-style/aim. It probably wouldn't go over well with most WvW veterans, and I'd like to imagine that at least part of the PVE players aren't just reward/collection hamsters in a wheel.

I also think that giving a collection will turn the game more into a checklist, where players would ignore WvW/points/objectives/any normal way of playing, and race past bunch of fights or objectives because they happen to need a drop from a centaur in upper alpine.

(I personally don't think I would engage in the idea as suggested at all, but I'm notoriously reward and achievement shy and tend to dislike dealing with them in any way.)

----

I would suggest thinking more in terms of rewarding specific actions, that is strongly related to proper play. Some examples: Picking up supply (not when already full), stomping a player, destroying siege, CC players on siege.

This would naturally require ANet and/or Players to sit down and discuss which actions would qualify as good play, and which is not and could be AFKed or abused.

Then ANet would have to sit down and find a proper reward system for that, and an ICD for it, so you can't just spam the same action on repeat (repair a wall, cancel, pick up supply, repeat). This should then be a many small rewards that adds up style thing.

End goal is to link rewards to good play in wvw, that way people who learn to try to maximize rewards end up trying to learn to play at least decent/good in order to do so.

Several of these should be in some way linked to getting points, or actions that often lead to points. But specifically avoid linking them to having lots of points, as to avoid band-wagoning (in whatever form that would take in WR, and it will). ANet had the right base idea when they made the reward tracks, by making the reward structure in WvW "Personal" and not "Group" based for just this reason.

Edited by joneirikb.7506
Sneaky... sneaky little typo... my precious grammar.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, joneirikb.7506 said:

I also think that giving a collection will turn the game more into a checklist, where players would ignore WvW/points/objectives/any normal way of playing, and race past bunch of fights or objectives because they happen to need a drop from a centaur in upper alpine.

On the contrary - remember that you would have to win skirmishes to earn collection items. This would encourage players to play strategically and competitively - the way that WvW was meant to be played.

Quote

I would suggest thinking more in terms of rewarding specific actions, that is strongly related to proper play. Some examples: Picking up supply (not when already full), stomping a player, destroying siege, CC players on siege.

What you're describing is a checklist of activities that players will complete as fast as possible before logging out. If you want to encourage organic gameplay, rewards need to be based around winning skirmishes.

Quote

End goal is to link rewards to good play in wvw, that way people who learn to try to maximize rewards end up trying to learn to play at least decent/good in order to do so.

Several of these should be in some way linked to getting points, or actions that often lead to points.

You're on the right track here, but this still doesn't achieve the intended goal of encouraging organic gameplay. Under this reward philosophy, a player would not care about the points that they earn for their team; earning points would just be a byproduct of what they are already doing for themselves. We want the primary goal to be earning points for your team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Forgotten Legend.9281 said:

They said in the blogpost that they're working on scoring adjustments... but neglected to say anything about rewards. I agree that there needs to be better rewards for winning skirmishes and even matches... but this idea is imo, too discriminating. Part time rewards, that automatically exclude certain players in certain real world employment professions. (It doesn't really matter what time cycle is used)

By this logic, they may as well just delete MATs because not everyone can be online on Saturdays... Listen, I can empathize with players who don't have a lot of time to play the game, but scarcity is a necessary ingredient to any reward structure that will both encourage winning in WvW while discouraging farming/burnout. You can't please everyone, but you can put these enhanced rewards on a rotation that most people will be happy with.

Quote

The collection idea is nice, but since it's repeatable, should NOT require multiple weeks of commitment and rare drops,  simply because that would also incentivize excessive farming and burnout. A multi week collection achievement should be one time, whereas repeatable ones should be weekly/ daily depending on ease/ difficulty. 

Actually, I think the opposite is true. You get burned out from playing too much in a short period of time. By spreading out the collection rewards so that you can't get them all in one week, you will allow players to pace themselves and avoid burnout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

By this logic, they may as well just delete MATs because not everyone can be online on Saturdays... Listen, I can empathize with players who don't have a lot of time to play the game, but scarcity is a necessary ingredient to any reward structure that will both encourage winning in WvW while discouraging farming/burnout. You can't please everyone, but you can put these enhanced rewards on a rotation that most people will be happy with.

Actually, I think the opposite is true. You get burned out from playing too much in a short period of time. By spreading out the collection rewards so that you can't get them all in one week, you will allow players to pace themselves and avoid burnout.

I like your suggestions.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does not solve the problem of how you win a skirmish of the week.
Currently (and in the past, too) you win matches by time slot coverage => number of available players => strategic game play (e.g. when to map hopp, react to EWP etc) => tactical game play (splitting up, blocking WPs, siege placement) => individual skill and decision making  (1 vs.1, camp flipping, scouting)
To be winning, you will have to "bandwagon" and utilize "the boon ball" and to maximize your rewards, you have to "check off" (like  @joneirikb.7506 said) individual tasks to get something from the collection (be it an item reward or placement in a "winning tier"). As long as pressing #1 in a zerg rewards you way more than roaming, making tactical choices for your server's side defending with the chance to fail and keeping up battlefield awareness for you and other players (like reports in map chat), I don't see any way WvW gets out of the niche it currently is in.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"Team" size is too large and volatile in WvW for a true competitive game mode.

Why should i ever care about something i can barely influence?

Better treat WvW like the sandbox it really is. If you want true competition (and not just the illusion of it) you are better off looking at stuff like sPvP or GvG.

Edited by Zyreva.1078
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gorani.7205 said:

This does not solve the problem of how you win a skirmish of the week.
Currently (and in the past, too) you win matches by time slot coverage => number of available players => strategic game play (e.g. when to map hopp, react to EWP etc) => tactical game play (splitting up, blocking WPs, siege placement) => individual skill and decision making  (1 vs.1, camp flipping, scouting)
To be winning, you will have to "bandwagon" and utilize "the boon ball" and to maximize your rewards, you have to "check off" (like  @joneirikb.7506 said) individual tasks to get something from the collection (be it an item reward or placement in a "winning tier"). As long as pressing #1 in a zerg rewards you way more than roaming, making tactical choices for your server's side defending with the chance to fail and keeping up battlefield awareness for you and other players (like reports in map chat), I don't see any way WvW gets out of the niche it currently is in.

World Restructuring solves the bandwagon and population issues you mention by automatically balancing teams based on coverage. In theory, this should create fair matches where strategy and skill will play a larger role.

 

You also mention the boon ball for some reason, but this is not a conversation about the WvW meta team composition, so I don't see how that is relevant at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

You also mention the boon ball for some reason, but this is not a conversation about the WvW meta team composition, so I don't see how that is relevant at all.

The relevancy is, that your proposition correlates better rewards to being on the winning side of the skirmish - and being able to create a boon ball of critical mass (over a long time) is a key element to winning the skirmish, because your will create a high score for your side, which results in winning the match up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

By this logic, they may as well just delete MATs because not everyone can be online on Saturdays... Listen, I can empathize with players who don't have a lot of time to play the game, but scarcity is a necessary ingredient to any reward structure that will both encourage winning in WvW while discouraging farming/burnout. You can't please everyone, but you can put these enhanced rewards on a rotation that most people will be happy with.

Actually, I think the opposite is true. You get burned out from playing too much in a short period of time. By spreading out the collection rewards so that you can't get them all in one week, you will allow players to pace themselves and avoid burnout.

For the record, i actually like that you're trying to come up with reward ideas and that you're also taking into account that players tend to addict themselves to farming for rewards that they want. The following comments are simply based on my observations. AND on the suggested requirement of winning AND on that it's not a guaranteed drop. the comments are intended to add to the discussion, because the mode needs better rewards as incentives to win, i believe it is creative, and brings to light worries that i've seen discussed in various guilds in which i've been a member of, over the 12 years of the game, and what i've seen discussed over the multiple forums that Anet has hosted of the years (they've totally replaced the forums at least twice, and therefore lost a lot of prior stuff, like for example, some of our original join dates. Mine would be during the beta (alpha?) back when the skill effects where actual 2D and looked like they were just quick hand-drawings on paper, and before there were even map completion rewards.) I intend my comments to be constructive toward the end goal of better rewards and incentives to win.

section "A" below is my thought process behind what i said in the other post, quoted below for reference, while B, C, and D are further brainstorms about implementation with your stated goals

15 hours ago, Forgotten Legend.9281 said:

The collection idea is nice, but since it's repeatable, should NOT require multiple weeks of commitment and rare drops,  simply because that would also incentivize excessive farming and burnout.

A) it's the combination of the multiweek deal PLUS that the drops are only a chance (i should have emphasized the NON-guaranteed drops in the quote above).... if someone gets unlucky and never gets the drop, then they will burn themselves out constantly grinding for the drop that they never get, and then abandon the game mode. Spreading them out isn't the issue. (long term goals are good... see legendary gear, see the Wizard's Vault.) NOT guaranteed to drop is the main issue. (assuming that the drop changes from week to week.)

PvP matches are a totally different beast than WvW... because matches only last a few (say 20) minutes compared to the 2-hour-long skirmishes. there are 12 skirmishes in a day, whereas you can play 60+ PvP matches in a day if you grind the mode all day. with such a limited number of available skirmishes, combined with limited playtime due to work schedules (believe it or not, there are MANY adults in the workforce playing this game, not just high schoolers and college students). the nature of WvW design means that if only 4 skirmishes a day are selected ... say 6pm, 12pm, 6am, and 12am, that many people who play this game will not be able to participate due to to real world obligations. there are many people who work 12 -14 hour shifts, with an hour commute to and from work, and still need time to be able to sleep and eat and such. there are others that won't be able to play due to time zone they're in, due to the bias of prime time differing in each time zone. 3 zones away from the above list would mean 3pm, 9pm, 3am, 9pm. relegating the enhanced skirmish to the weekend would leave out people in the service industry that profits heavily from working the weekend (like bartenders in Austin, police working security, retail workers, restaurant workers, etc)

ALSO, since these rewards are CHANCES for WINNING... there is a high chance that your side might never win an ENHANCED skirmish, which means that in order to receive the rare drops, one is REQUIRED to play all the ENHANCED skirmishes in order for a CHANCE at a repeatable collection item. IF your team wins all the time, then you can earn the reward "quickly"... but if you're unlucky enough to always lose the Enhanced Skirmishes you play, then the multiweek collection becomes a multiyear collection, just to complete ONCE, while someone else might complete the repeatable collection 12 times in the same timeframe.

an example of what i mean is There are people who have successfully completed Tequatl encounter hundreds of times and never received Tequatl's Hoard, because the drop is only a chance

B) if the collection drop is guaranteed for completing an easier achievement (even meta achievement, like the weekly WvW meta achievement, which is designed to NOT force anyone to play at a specific time, but requires enough 'small victories' to prove actual participation), then it reduces the chance of burnout through the bad luck of never receiving the drop, and could work as a multiweek collection. 

C) another idea, is to simply limit the drop to 1 a week, but the drop is based on what you've already received.... it wouldn't matter how long you played if you always received the drops in order. for example:

a) player 1 receives item 1 during week 1, item 2 on week 2, item 3 on  week 3, and item 4 on week 4, completes the collection, and then chooses the reward, on week 5 receives item 1, on week 6 item 2, etc... Player 2 doesn't play week 1, receives item 1 on week 2, doesn't play week 3, receives item 2 on week 4, item 3 on week 5, doesn't play week 6, and receives item 4 on week 7, thereby completing the collection.

b) versus item 1 only being available for everybody week 1, then week 2 everybody can only earn item 2, etc

i personally prefer version "a" over "b" because it allows for varying play time without forcing someone to play every single week / or until they finally get the drop during the week, when they might not be able to.

D) the collection item could drop from winning ANY skirmish during the week, not just the enhanced ones. the enhanced ones could still offer better rewards of course, but the collection drop wouldn't be as exclusive, since the collection needs to repeatable to continue incentivizing victory of skirmishes. and as a guaranteed drop for winning a skirmish, reduces burnout associated with constant grinding many skirmishes trying for it. remember, skirmishes last 2 hours, not 20 minutes

PS: i acknowledge that you suggested that this is IN ADDITION to regular rewards for winning skirmishes. i am NOT trying to undermine any part of your suggestion. only trying to further take into account that players tend to grind / farm for rewards that they want, which can lead to burnout.

EDIT: PPS: my "yelling" above is because i'm frustrated at the lack of rewards for wining skirmishes and matches. i'm only letting passion get the best of me. i'm on YOUR side requesting rewards for victories, because it reduces the chances that shards will intentionally lose to avoid certain other teams

Edited by Forgotten Legend.9281
added PPS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

World Restructuring solves the bandwagon and population issues you mention by automatically balancing teams based on coverage. In theory, this should create fair matches where strategy and skill will play a larger role.

WR is trying to balance arround an average, but actual player activity can be very volatile and as such matches will still be imbalanced. In the end it's still mostly about who plays the most, not so much about who plays the best. And the only way to win for players is to join a winning team, as personal impact and "carry potential" is basically non existent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Forgotten Legend.9281 said:

A) it's the combination of the multiweek deal PLUS that the drops are only a chance (i should have emphasized the NON-guaranteed drops in the quote above).... if someone gets unlucky and never gets the drop, then they will burn themselves out constantly grinding for the drop that they never get, and then abandon the game mode. Spreading them out isn't the issue. (long term goals are good... see legendary gear, see the Wizard's Vault.) NOT guaranteed to drop is the main issue. (assuming that the drop changes from week to week.)

Totally valid point. The example I gave is something that felt most exciting to me personally, but I understand that not everyone will feel the same way. You may be absolutely correct that most players would prefer a guaranteed drop system over a chance-to-loot system for the proposed collection. That's why it's important to gather community feedback when creating systems like this.

Quote

PvP matches are a totally different beast than WvW... because matches only last a few (say 20) minutes compared to the 2-hour-long skirmishes. there are 12 skirmishes in a day, whereas you can play 60+ PvP matches in a day if you grind the mode all day. with such a limited number of available skirmishes, combined with limited playtime due to work schedules (believe it or not, there are MANY adults in the workforce playing this game, not just high schoolers and college students). the nature of WvW design means that if only 4 skirmishes a day are selected ... say 6pm, 12pm, 6am, and 12am, that many people who play this game will not be able to participate due to to real world obligations. there are many people who work 12 -14 hour shifts, with an hour commute to and from work, and still need time to be able to sleep and eat and such. there are others that won't be able to play due to time zone they're in, due to the bias of prime time differing in each time zone. 3 zones away from the above list would mean 3pm, 9pm, 3am, 9pm. relegating the enhanced skirmish to the weekend would leave out people in the service industry that profits heavily from working the weekend (like bartenders in Austin, police working security, retail workers, restaurant workers, etc)

If I'm not mistaken, PvP automated tournaments can often last several hours, similar to the length of a WvW skirmish. There are other systems in the game that only occur within certain time windows (PvE meta events come to mind). I understand these are not direct 1-to-1 comparisons, but I'm trying to demonstrate that limited time windows can be healthy for the overall game. Again, you're not going to please everyone with this, but that doesn't mean the system won't be an overall net positive.

Also, I want to clarify, I'm not saying that you would have to play for the entire skirmish, just that you would need to reach high participation at some point within the skirmish, and that rewards should scale with the length of time you maintained high participation.

Quote

C) another idea, is to simply limit the drop to 1 a week, but the drop is based on what you've already received.... it wouldn't matter how long you played if you always received the drops in order. for example:

a) player 1 receives item 1 during week 1, item 2 on week 2, item 3 on  week 3, and item 4 on week 4, completes the collection, and then chooses the reward, on week 5 receives item 1, on week 6 item 2, etc... Player 2 doesn't play week 1, receives item 1 on week 2, doesn't play week 3, receives item 2 on week 4, item 3 on week 5, doesn't play week 6, and receives item 4 on week 7, thereby completing the collection.

This is another valid point, and I think I'd actually be in favor of the system working this way. It would feel pretty bad to miss out on a week and have to wait another several weeks to get the specific item you need.

I do appreciate you (and others) taking the time to give your thoughts on the idea. This is how we can come up with a system that everyone can agree on.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

On the contrary - remember that you would have to win skirmishes to earn collection items. This would encourage players to play strategically and competitively - the way that WvW was meant to be played.

What you're describing is a checklist of activities that players will complete as fast as possible before logging out. If you want to encourage organic gameplay, rewards need to be based around winning skirmishes.

You're on the right track here, but this still doesn't achieve the intended goal of encouraging organic gameplay. Under this reward philosophy, a player would not care about the points that they earn for their team; earning points would just be a byproduct of what they are already doing for themselves. We want the primary goal to be earning points for your team.

Ah didn't notice the initial idea said you could only get the collection items from winning skirmishes. Though that makes me like the idea even less, as it removes player agency further and ends up rewarding players for being on a "winning side" or just rewarding players from joining a Guild to stack their time zone so they can try to always win skirmishes in their own time zone.

It's the reasons I focused my own suggestion not on winning skirmishes, but on creating points, or other actions that encourages good play in the game mode. Even if you're outnumbered with an enemy zerg beating down all your walls, you can still earn good chunk of extra rewards just doing a decent defence to slow them down, even if you can't stop them. Player agency on getting rewards.

And nope it's not a checklist, it's similar to the current participation system, as long as you do something the game deems as "useful" you get participation to refresh your rewards. I suggested a system that builds on that to give bonuses in a similar way for doing typical actions that players does all the time when they're being useful in wvw. For example if killing enemy yak's was one such thing, that gave you a small extra pip or something each time, then a player could go and kill enemy yaks all day and earn extra on that. Or you could just play organically take camps, kill yaks, join a zerg for a tower, take out siege on the walls, etc and would get bonuses from things you do during all of that.

The reason I focus on "actions that create points" is because:
1: Rewarding those will train players to play good (because majority of players are mostly rewards-driven)
2: Because most players are rewards-driven they don't really care about points anyway, unless you link rewards specifically to having the most points, in which case: Bandwagon.
3: By focusing on creating points, the focus is more on making players do actions that also will win a skirmish. Thus you create more organic play around the skirmishes, thus the whole match.

It still won't get players to "care" about a week win etc, but at this point I don't think it's possible to make players care about a week-win unless you link actual strong rewards to it, in which case: Bandwagon and we're back in the bad trenches again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joneirikb.7506 said:

The reason I focus on "actions that create points" is because: ...
It still won't get players to "care" about a week win etc, but at this point I don't think it's possible to make players care about a week-win unless you link actual strong rewards to it, in which case: Bandwagon and we're back in the bad trenches again.

the trouble with suggesting "actions " for rewards, is that those are already rewarded through daily and weekly objectives in achievements and the Wizard's Vault... the OP (and others, myself included) are seeking for rewards tied to winning skirmishes and weekly matches, to incentivize people to actually win, ( this part is my own reasoning: instead of tanking a match specifically to avoid fighting against a team they don't want to fight against. ) individual skirmishes only last 2 hours.... so 12 a day, and 84 a week. those don't need to be the STRONG rewards, but they need be strong enough to make the effort worth it. ( say, reward a few memories of battle, maybe a few skirmish tickets, and gold) and could even be tied to how many skirmishes are won in an achievement similar to Weekly Convergences achievement. The match reward is the one that needs to be STRONG. (reward some skirmish tickets, memories of battle, badges of honor, and match tickets ( or astral acclaim ) to be used as currency for the new ultra rewards.)

as for the bandwagoning... 1) that partly occurs from guilds constantly transferring servers in the middle of linkups. that won't be possible in the WR system. 2) The other main part is the single boonblob zerg running around... There are strategies utilizing several smaller groups that can take control of objectives while keeping the enemy map-blob occupied. there is also "the cloud" that can disrupt or occupy the map-blob. there is also a big difference between the weekly reset first skirmish, and skirmishes that happen during the opposite of prime time.

7 hours ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

I do appreciate you (and others) taking the time to give your thoughts on the idea. This is how we can come up with a system that everyone can agree on.

that's the main reason i give feedback, especially about certain ideas that can improve systems that i'm passionate about... and this is one area that can be seen on the forums, that MANY people are requesting improvements. I must say that 1) the repeatable collection idea really is promising and 2) i am certainly impressed at your consideration of including as many as you can in the system.

I'm glad that you could understand my worries, and even consider that maybe one of my offerings could actually align with your idea. I really hope the WvW and rewards teams read this thread and take this idea to heart. Maybe this will be a big part of the implementation of WvW skirmish / match rewards in the future.

PS: thank you for your reply on my PvP vs WvW comments, as they helped me better understand your point about limited time windows (and reminding me of how they benefit players through world boss and meta usage), and thank you for your understanding, and patience with me as i had NOT actually explained what i meant to say the first time around. I've found that ends up being a major benefit of discussion, is that what at first can appear to be a disagreement, sometimes leads to better communication of ideas that were merely poorly expressed at first. And the better communication and understanding of each other's ideas and motivations, which are often focused the same way, leads to better, more complete ideas/plans that hopefully get implemented in a way to improve the game for everyone.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Elementalist Owner.7802 said:

World Restructuring solves the bandwagon and population issues you mention by automatically balancing teams based on coverage. In theory, this should create fair matches where strategy and skill will play a larger role.

 

You also mention the boon ball for some reason, but this is not a conversation about the WvW meta team composition, so I don't see how that is relevant at all.

That would only be true if World Restructuring would throw all players into random servers. With the current model it does nothing like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the solution is to make future tiers based on kdr (kill death rate). Currently they are based on 90% ppt base which is easy to manipulate and so we have a situation where certain stronger groups avoid each other in order to hunt the weaker ones. And it is extremely unfair to those who start the game. I hope that the new system places only those players / guilds with the highest kdr rank in tier 1 & 2. With no way to escape downwards. (They have to earn their kdr by fighting an opponent who is their own level, this is how it is in most games.) Abandon ppt based tiers. This would create an opportunity for the lower tiers to be less active, beginners, casuals and ppt lovers. It would be a fairer system for beginners, more motivating to start pine wvw. And also for those who have reached a higher skill level, they also get more challenges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...