July 16 Competitive Update Preview

[Chrome.9841]

3 hours ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

I think that once it gets below the threshold the timer will start and will last 2-3 minutes. If no more damage is done then the timer will just run out. That seems to be a more logical/plausible interpretation of what they're saying. 

I hope it's like this otherwise will be a pain..

[Demonhead.7584]

Will be curious to see how these new EWP changes affect the way people attack keeps. 

[whitelightknight.2180]

I couldn't see any mention of defend event's in WvW, will the rewarded points/war score/loot etc be increased also? I hate seeing people not defending an objective because its "paper" . If the rewards aren't in line with the capturing bonus's this is just going to get worse.

[Lalary.3561]

LOLOLOL They tried so hard to chase away roamers and now PPTers too?

[DeWolfe.2174]

1 hour ago, whitelightknight.2180 said:

If the rewards aren't in line with the capturing bonus's this is just going to get worse.

Of course it's going to get worse. They're catering to the tags that run 35-50 man Boon Ball Zergs. The modes a lost cause now.

[Tiamat.8254]

What do the tables for wvw changes represent? It's a bit confusing for me sorry!

Edited July 11 by Tiamat.8254
Typo

[TheGrimm.5624]

22 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

Siege Updates:

• Some siege supply costs have been adjusted:
  • Guild Siege Golem supply cost increased from 50 to 75
  • Arrow Cart supply cost reduced from 40 to 25
  • Superior Arrow Cart supply cost reduced from 50 to 35
  • Trebuchet supply cost reduced from 100 to 50
  • Superior Trebuchet supply cost reduced from 120 to 60

 

Under this model guild AC should go to 25 supply. Guild Trebs down to 50. You still need regular siege to make guild and since it does the same damage as sup it should cost less supply since it takes more time and resources upfront to create so it has more impact to deploy.

[TheGrimm.5624]

22 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

Objective Contesting and EWP

• Old system:
  • Objectives contest when an associated guard gets into combat, or when a gate/wall is damaged
• New system:
  • Objectives contest when the lord/supervisor is put into combat, or when a gate/wall is damaged below 98%

This is not a good change, I can see how I can use it in a havoc/roamer role, but from a tactics part of game play this is dumbing down game play. -5 from here. Scouts have their roles, this is just telling players to only focus on getting back to the blob. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 7/10/2024 at 4:32 PM, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

WvW Updates

WvW Scoring Updates

•Victory Points are now going to be weighted based on player population per skirmish, per region:

Does this change as population does as in is it is dynamic? If not sorts by themselves will throw scores way off. How does this score adjust every 4 weeks? 

Got a chance to catch the VOD, this was covered. 

 

Edited July 11 by TheGrimm.5624
Edit: updated based on VOD info

[TheGrimm.5624]

22 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

WvW Updates

WvW Scoring Updates

•Victory Points are now going to be weighted based on player population per skirmish, per region:

NA:

 

This seems over biased to EST in NA time and under biased to PST. Bumping it some during overlaps works, but this is too heavy. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

22 hours ago, Rubi Bayer.8493 said:

WvW Updates

WvW Scoring Updates

• The warscore awarded from defeating an enemy player in WvW is increasing from 2 to 3

 

No encouragement for the sides in second and third to target the side that is leading in score? Seems like a missed opportunity.

[Loke.1429]

Amazing changes for wvw. Every single one. Next up buffing ele staff damage :)))

Edited July 12 by Loke.1429

[Magus Antiverse.8569]

@Rubi Bayer.8493 I appreciate the updates to PvP and WvW.  However, is there ever going to be a time when the gift of battle reward track is added to PvP to provide alternative methods of acquiring the gift.  It shows an unbalanced favoritism from the Anet team that there is a mandatory WvW item required for almost all legendary items, including the PvP exclusive amulet: Transcendence, but no comparable PvP requirement or option.  I am not asking for a PvP exclusive requirement for legendary items, but another method for earning Gifts of Battle.  The PvP items that are required for some legendary equipment can easily be obtained through the trading post and do not require any actual interaction with the game mode.  If the reward track is never to be added to PvP can we get an explanation as to why?  This upcoming competitive update seems like the perfect time to rectify this issue.  

Edited July 11 by Magus Antiverse.8569

[TheGrimm.5624]

VOD for gameplay does help in getting inside information and insight so I think its worth the air time. I think it might have been worth the time to cover the mind set behind the scoring in some detail though.

First off am a fan of the equal weighted periods, I think when we first went to them it helped a lot with run away matches and allowed for catchup mechanics since it could contain a period where populations were out of balance in a given time of play.

Not sure I agree with the swings but let me try and back into some it. The chart was odd since it started the period before reset. Which for NA has the same weight as the start of a reset. Why is this, don't know. It could be used as final push mechanic with a swing of 22 points on the line. Do agree with current end of week scoring you can press harder early and win the match before you even get to reset and the the swing's goals might be to remove this certainty of when the match is over, keeping the players in the fight all week long. If that was part of the goal that being shared would have helped. But with the swings across the different periods and being a vast spread it might also lead to more blowouts as player get on see the score and say, it's over, see you next week. 

Example in NA at reset, if you come in third for the first 2 skirms, you need to win the next 5 skirms while keeping the first place team in 3rd to catch back up before the NA time is over. I figure the CEST and OCX higher numbers and spreads are to offset NA points, but that is an assumption. 

Now, how will this impact the balance between PPK and PPT and people not focusing on objectives will be interesting I will say. It does give less weight to players that aren't in the more prized skirm periods which is concerning since it reads as your time doesn't have as much value. That is not the best feel to it. 

 

[Mistwraithe.3106]

5 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

This is not a good change, I can see how I can use it in a havoc/roamer role, but from a tactics part of game play this is dumbing down game play. -5 from here. Scouts have their roles, this is just telling players to only focus on getting back to the blob. 

Can you elaborate?

The objective contesting changes are the main part of these changes I like. Generally I find myself agreeing with your posts so I'm genuinely curious why you don't like this?

[TheGrimm.5624]

1 hour ago, Mistwraithe.3106 said:

Can you elaborate?

The objective contesting changes are the main part of these changes I like. Generally I find myself agreeing with your posts so I'm genuinely curious why you don't like this?

I did under the WvW link that is following this one in a couple of posts. Short version it won't really fix waypoint tapping and will now also not be able to alert to a real attack that may begin by the keeps outer siege being cleared from the ground first. Sure it doesn't have the 30 second delay once walls or gates fall below 98% but you still just lost all your outer siege with no warning given that a zerg was outside of the keep. Maybe if they allowed WTs for keeps or extended the rule that if siege was destroyed.

I think any tag that didn't stop to clear siege before will now do so since it won't raise the alarm so why not clear the siege first since the activity is masked by this change. I know when I tag I will be doing more hit and clears first, as a havoc I will have more room to pre-set sieges for taking or multi-taking, as a roamer, I will be waypoint tagging with siege that pulls defenders away from where I want them looking and don't have to worry about the guards spotting me. As I said in the other posts, I would prefer to have my waypoint be contested versus lose my keep that contained that WP. 

Referencing the other thread since a lot have dropped notes on this one but didn't put them here:

 

 

Edited July 12 by TheGrimm.5624
Edit: ref links

[TheGrimm.5624]

Are scoring changes going to wait till Tuesday and we will have mixed scoring week for this upcoming reset?

[Gotejjeken.1267]

More AT changes but no access changes as to how they are viewed and also no changes for the pvp normie that just wants to queue.  

I don't understand who this is catering to.  Actually, I think I do, but stockholm is making me not want to admit it.

For WvW, guess three EWPs could be fun, probably a step back in the defender direction after the utter nuke that was repairing.  Also like the tapping change, at least we know a thief has glitched into the keep/tower now instead of wondering if it was a guard tap.  

[Tavin.7450]

Once again about the WvW scoring update:
After talking to more WvW players,  I feel that the curve needs to be flattened further. No further incentives are needed to lure more players into primetime to create higher queues. The total "devaluation" of other game times must not take place either.
(KI-Translater)

Perhaps more like this:

Cest	2:00	4:00	6:00	8:00	10:00	12:00	14:00	16:00	18:00	20:00	22:00	24:00
1st	12	12	12	15	15	15	15	20	20	20	20	20
2nd	10	10	10	12	12	12	12	15	15	15	15	15
3rd	6	6	6	9	9	9	9	12	12	12	12	12

Edited July 12 by Tavin.7450

[LichOverlord.6329]

21 hours ago, The O.2315 said:

Starfall sounds like it could be super unfun, as worded there is no counterplay if used by a mesmer with distortion or a stealthed thief. I'm all for a way to dislodge bunkers with map mechanics, but not in a way where you may not even be able to tell it's going to happen.

The counterplay is you dodge or block it - none of these new abilities are meant to be shut down entirely in all situations

They're incredibly powerful, but can only be used once by one person and require a lengthy channel to obtain - the idea is you actually want to go down in the arena to get it now, instead of just ignoring the djiin

[Zok.4956]

On 7/11/2024 at 12:14 AM, Dak.2749 said:

Looks like a typo in the slides and post here, this should say 19:00 UTC (12:00 PM PDT) instead

Yes, I agree. "19:00 UTC (12:00 PM UTC)" is obviously wrong, because 19:00 UTC cannot be 12:00 UTC at the same time. And there is no "12:00 PM UTC" either, it would be more correct to say "12:00 UTC", but that's just a minor detail.

"19:00 UTC" is "12:00 UTC-07:00" and "UTC-07:00" is "PDT", so your conclusion "19:00 UTC (12:00 PM PDT)"  is correct. 

[Zok.4956]

On 7/11/2024 at 1:46 AM, Forgotten Legend.9281 said:

if a wall is at 97% will the tower/keep stay tapped until repaired?

This question has not yet been answered by Anet. It is possible that it is contested for only a few minutes from the moment it drops below 98% or it can be contested the whole time as long as it is below 98%. Both are theoretically possible. 

[Izzy.2951]

I was hoping for them to talk/show a bit of the new pvp game mode.

Cry me a river.

[Thena Thunderhammer.1687]

For the proposed changes in the war score, I am not sure what message you are trying to communicate. WvW is a 24hour format, all contribution is valuable, regardless of the time the player plays.  The message you are sending is that prime time players are more valuable than off peak players.  The message Anet is sending is that off peak players might as well not play wvw because they are not going to contribute as much as prime time to the war score. Anet are you trying to lose players? Because that is the end result. Why should I play a game when the company doesn't value my time. Anet please reconsider your war score plans.
 

[Forgotten Legend.9281]

2 hours ago, Zok.4956 said:

This question has not yet been answered by Anet. It is possible that it is contested for only a few minutes from the moment it drops below 98% or it can be contested the whole time as long as it is below 98%. Both are theoretically possible. 

that's why i asked.... looking for an answer from ANet, not "they didn't answer that yet."