A Chat w/ Roy and Cecil About WvW Development Goals

[Sheff.4851]

Hi everyone. My name is Sheff, I make videos about World vs. World on the internet. Earlier this week, I had the opportunity to talk to Roy and Cecil about the Restructuring development process: what the limitations of previous systems like linking were that it addresses, and what directions of future development it enables. We also had some conversations about World vs. World design goals overall, things like scoring, making winning matter, and rewards. This was originally a stream, but I converted it into a YouTube vod and added some chapter markers to make it easier to navigate around to specific questions for people who may have missed it previously. Take a look here: https://youtu.be/tgduXol9jEk

[XenesisII.1540]

They're already failing wvw so meh. They can paint the monster problem up with scoring changes, more stingy rewards available, nerfing everything that touches a boon ball, recycling everyone every four weeks around their precious boon blobbing friends, but they're sucking the life out of wvw if they continue to ignore the actual problem killing player motivation.

[Sheff.4851]

So this is in the video description, and we talk about it later in the video -- this is not the balance team. This is the team in charge of things like Restructuring and scoring. Different teams at ArenaNet.

[Daxia.1425]

I hope they can make their ideas happen. The week thing been fun and feels like it didnt happen that much.. or i just kept missing out on it 🙂

[XenesisII.1540]

24 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

So this is in the video description, and we talk about it later in the video -- this is not the balance team. This is the team in charge of things like Restructuring and scoring. Different teams at ArenaNet.

Pretty sure Roy is involved in class balance. 🤔

But in any case, it's not just about class/combat balance, wvw balance between offense and defense is also involved, the numerous nerfs to defense so that the attackers can "feel good" attacking someones objective in their territory, that has all been under Roy's watch.

"Making sure winning matters", yeah by getting everyone in blobs to run over those who aren't, it's all tied together.

Rewards? thanks for the 0.000000001% drop rate wvw infusion. More green junk in bags to clutter bag space.

Nothing this team says matters until they start listening to everyone and not just a select few chatting it up with Roy on private discord, start making the game fun again for everyone, and stop being biased to the type of players they run with.

They're failing wvw, and have been for a while now.

-------------------

Now I'm expecting my post to be reported for expressing my displeasure with current wvw/gw2.

[Sheff.4851]

He is explicitly not involved with class balance, he's just one of the presenters on balance and update streams, and he says as much in this very interview. vOv

26 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Pretty sure Roy is involved in class balance. 🤔

But in any case, it's not just about class/combat balance, wvw balance between offense and defense is also involved, the numerous nerfs to defense so that the attackers can "feel good" attacking someones objective in their territory, that has all been under Roy's watch.

"Making sure winning matters", yeah by getting everyone in blobs to run over those who aren't, it's all tied together.

Rewards? thanks for the 0.000000001% drop rate wvw infusion. More green junk in bags to clutter bag space.

Nothing this team says matters until they start listening to everyone and not just a select few chatting it up with Roy on private discord, start making the game fun again for everyone, and stop being biased to the type of players they run with.

They're failing wvw, and have been for a while now.

-------------------

Now I'm expecting my post to be reported for expressing my displeasure with current wvw/gw2.

 

[XenesisII.1540]

2 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

He is explicitly not involved with class balance, he's just one of the presenters on balance and update streams, and he says as much in this very interview. vOv

Makes no difference, the wvw team is balancing wvw to the benefit of boon balls, it's all tied together. I hardly believe he doesn't share any advice on class balance, he plays on guard and a boon ball fight guild. You can shift blame wherever, but they are both failing the game in their departments, it's all tied together.

[ArchonWing.9480]

1 hour ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

So this is in the video description, and we talk about it later in the video -- this is not the balance team. This is the team in charge of things like Restructuring and scoring. Different teams at ArenaNet.

Which I feel is kind of a issue here.

Even if  this should work, class balance has done a lot of damage to WvW as a well, playable, game mode and I am not sure if these changes are synced up with those.

[Sheff.4851]

Just now, ArchonWing.9480 said:

Which I feel is kind of a issue here.

Even if  this should work, class balance has done a lot of damage to WvW as a well, playable, game mode and I am not sure if these changes are synced up with those.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. I think the current balance environment is definitely one of the issues with the gamemode as it is. But the split isn't necessarily "boonball" versus "not boonball". It's more that there is a large group of players that is interested in discovering and using the most effective techniques available to them in order to perform well. Right now that's boonballs. That may get changed to something else in the future, at which point the group of players that are minmaxing will shift to that, and then a new group of players will complain about that new meta that's been discovered.

Balance isn't something that has a static, defined solution, that everyone will be happy with. Instead, it's something that needs to shift and adapt over time as effective strategies emerge, to keep the game fresh and to give theorycrafters something to work on.

[Sheff.4851]

15 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Makes no difference, the wvw team is balancing wvw to the benefit of boon balls, it's all tied together. I hardly believe he doesn't share any advice on class balance, he plays on guard and a boon ball fight guild. You can shift blame wherever, but they are both failing the game in their departments, it's all tied together.

Very interesting, thank you for your insights! I wasn't aware that Roy was secretly feeding advice to the balance team about his experiences as a player. I'll definitely make a video on that next.

[Illustratr.9054]

Outright dummy stuff.

[Sheff.4851]

2 minutes ago, Illustratr.9054 said:

Outright dummy stuff.

I'm flattered, thank you!

[XenesisII.1540]

11 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

I don't necessarily disagree with that. I think the current balance environment is definitely one of the issues with the gamemode as it is. But the split isn't necessarily "boonball" versus "not boonball". It's more that there is a large group of players that is interested in discovering and using the most effective techniques available to them in order to perform well. Right now that's boonballs. That may get changed to something else in the future, at which point the group of players that are minmaxing will shift to that, and then a new group of players will complain about that new meta that's been discovered.

Balance isn't something that has a static, defined solution, that everyone will be happy with. Instead, it's something that needs to shift and adapt over time as effective strategies emerge, to keep the game fresh and to give theorycrafters something to work on.

I don't have a problem with players going the extra mile to min max, or meta changing to keep things fresh, the problem is when they start taking away all the counters and overwhelming throw balance to one side. It has created a huge gap between types of players. You see a 40-50 boon ball show up, your only solution is to have a 40-50 boon ball of your own, otherwise you might as well go play on another map, and frankly many do, which isn't healthy for the mode.

Now they're dismantling defenses to make it easier for those groups to get into lords room to have their "farm fest", they nerf invul walls and siege disablers for the outside stuff, but then they try to change ring sizes and buff the lord with boons, change chilling tactivator to a heal lol, to keep defenders interested in defending, then nerf wall repairs so attackers have a better chance to get back in quickly. Some players spend 2-3 hours upgrading objectives only to have it smashed down in 5mins because some players don't like "standing around in arrow carts", even though it's to the point they can just afk under 3-4 of them firing on them constantly.

Then they go with a wut move, and reduce arrow cart cost..... after they spent all that time nerfing objective supplies, nerfing walls requiring 50% repair so a huge minimum amount required to dump into them after every siege fight, so now what, they think there isn't enough defensive siege being built anymore?

Maybe they should add boon strip to arrow carts and then we can have some happy thoughts about wvw again.

[Sheff.4851]

2 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

I don't have a problem with players going the extra mile to min max, or meta changing to keep things fresh, the problem is when they start taking away all the counters and overwhelming throw balance to one side. It has created a huge gap between types of players. You see a 40-50 boon ball show up, your only solution is to have a 40-50 boon ball of your own, otherwise you might as well go play on another map, and frankly many do, which isn't healthy for the mode.

Now they're dismantling defenses to make it easier for those groups to get into lords room to have their "farm fest", they nerf invul walls and siege disablers for the outside stuff, but then they try to change ring sizes and buff the lord with boons, change chilling tactivator to a heal lol, to keep defenders interested in defending, then nerf wall repairs so attackers have a better chance to get back in quickly. Some players spend 2-3 hours upgrading objectives only to have it smashed down in 5mins because some players don't like "standing around in arrow carts", even though it's to the point they can just afk under 3-4 of them firing on them constantly.

Then they go with a wut move, and reduce arrow cart cost..... after they spent all that time nerfing objective supplies, nerfing walls requiring 50% repair so a huge minimum amount required to dump into them after every siege fight, so now what, they think there isn't enough defensive siege being built anymore?

Maybe they should add boon strip to arrow carts and then we can have some happy thoughts about wvw again.

Right, so we talk about that in the video. I believe it's around the 1:10:10 timestamp. Basically, ArenaNet's current design philosophy is that the attack and defense of a structure should involve players fighting one another, not players fighting NPCs and objects like gates and walls. So to that end, you can see why things like Siege Disabler and Structural Invulnerability got changed. If there's nobody defending a tower, one person can pull SI and make an objective completely immune for a minute. That's not fun for an attacking group, if there's no defenders showing up in the first place. Changing Chilling Fog to Healing Mist, and having the lord grant Stability and boons while its breakbar is active gives defending groups a window to push and attack, while forcing attacking groups to pay more attention to the lord's health to counter those attacks. Do those changes do enough? No, probably not, and I've said as much in the update review videos that I did for those changes. But it's a move in a good direction, that encourages groups to actually fight with their buttons, rather than using endless delay and disruption tactics to slow down the inevitable outcome.

Similarly, the wall change is a buff for defending groups, if anything. When walls repaired at 10%, it was exceptionally easy to build one catapult, fire it three times, and break back into the objective. Now that the threshold is 50%, yes, it's harder to close. But it's also much harder to reopen, especially if you're depriving an attacking group of their supply. It makes it easier to cut off reinforcements, and grind down a group inside one of your structures. And if you're unable to down any players in that group in the first place, well, it doesn't really matter what the wall repair threshold is, or the exact effect of Structural Invulnerability anyway. You're just up against a larger, more coordinated group, and they were going to prevail regardless.

[Illustratr.9054]

As long as groups that play for 2 hours are happy, shouldn't we all be?

Boo hoo ... Group of dummies stack 5 catas...got disabled... Solution not stack siege.... Nope... Nerf the disabler.

Boo hoo .. Group chose to attack objective with invulnerable tactic that actually got pulled... Solution.. Attack something else or deal with your choice.. Nope.. Nerf the tactic.

So much silly.

Edited July 21 by Illustratr.9054

[Sonderm.4639]

43 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

Similarly, the wall change is a buff for defending groups, if anything. When walls repaired at 10%, it was exceptionally easy to build one catapult, fire it three times, and break back into the objective. Now that the threshold is 50%, yes, it's harder to close. But it's also much harder to reopen, especially if you're depriving an attacking group of their supply. It makes it easier to cut off reinforcements, and grind down a group inside one of your structures. And if you're unable to down any players in that group in the first place, well, it doesn't really matter what the wall repair threshold is, or the exact effect of Structural Invulnerability anyway. You're just up against a larger, more coordinated group, and they were going to prevail regardless.

That doesn't make any sense. When the walls closed at 10% nothing stopped you from repairing it further if you wished - behind the safety of a closed wall. And if we take the defeatist stance - "they are going to flip it anyway", why make the poor attackers go through building siege and capturing the circle in the first place. The structure should flip automatically when the game detects an overwhelming disparity in player numbers!

Edited July 20 by Sonderm.4639

[Sheff.4851]

1 minute ago, Sonderm.4639 said:

That doesn't make any sense. If the wall closed at 10% nothing stops you from repairing it further if you wished - behind the safety of a closed wall. And if we take the defeatist stance - "they are going to flip it anyway", why make the poor attackers go through building siege and capturing the circle in the first place. The structure should flip automatically when the game detects an overwhelming disparity in player numbers!

If nothing stops you from repairing it further if you want to, what's the difference between 10% and 50%?

[Sonderm.4639]

1 minute ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

If nothing stops you from repairing it further if you want to, what's the difference between 10% and 50%?

You might not have supps for 50%? Time spending repairing an open wall?

[Zyreva.1078]

1 hour ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

Balance isn't something that has a static, defined solution, that everyone will be happy with. Instead, it's something that needs to shift and adapt over time as effective strategies emerge, to keep the game fresh and to give theorycrafters something to work on.

And that's exactly what's not happening, because the devs keep pushing the very same direction with extremely onesided changes and with no turnarround in sight- this applies to both class balance as well as overall wvw changes.

2 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

If nothing stops you from repairing it further if you want to, what's the difference between 10% and 50%?

Sometimes something does stop you ...

[XenesisII.1540]

9 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

Right, so we talk about that in the video. I believe it's around the 1:10:10 timestamp. Basically, ArenaNet's current design philosophy is that the attack and defense of a structure should involve players fighting one another, not players fighting NPCs and objects like gates and walls. So to that end, you can see why things like Siege Disabler and Structural Invulnerability got changed. If there's nobody defending a tower, one person can pull SI and make an objective completely immune for a minute. That's not fun for an attacking group, if there's no defenders showing up in the first place.

Huh, well there's the disconnect, and shows why these are the wrong people in charge of wvw these days, trying to turn wvw a game mode that is a about personnel combat AND siege warfare into just a deathmatch mode.

Things like siege disabler, and invul wall, and gates, and walls, are DELAY tactics, in order to give your defenders time to show up for a fight. You can't say a fight should involve players and not npcs, but then turn around and nerf the things that gave time for defenders to show up for that fight. Do they really want that fight? or a bigger chance to cap an empty objective? If they don't like fighting walled objectives, then don't attack walled objectives.... If no one wants to face you in the open field, that is a different problem, one that goes back to class and meta balance which they continue to ignore. If you want to sweaty pants with 50 people to run over the opposition, don't be surprised when people ignore you to do something else if they cannot match you.

You can nerf all the defensive barriers between these different type of groups, but they're running to objectives for a reason and that is were the issues should be addressed, why are they running, why are they not staying to challenge your group in the open.

Next I expect they'll just remove the outer gates from keeps, I mean why delay them twice before getting to lords, amiright, lord fights all day every day.

 

9 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

Changing Chilling Fog to Healing Mist, and having the lord grant Stability and boons while its breakbar is active gives defending groups a window to push and attack, while forcing attacking groups to pay more attention to the lord's health to counter those attacks. Do those changes do enough? No, probably not, and I've said as much in the update review videos that I did for those changes. But it's a move in a good direction, that encourages groups to actually fight with their buttons, rather than using endless delay and disruption tactics to slow down the inevitable outcome.

So we go from fights shouldn't be about npcs, to fights suddenly have to rely on npc lord to keep things interesting for the defenders. After we nerf all the objective defenses, nerf the guild claims, now suddenly, oh guess people aren't interested in lord fights no more, let's slap rng support on the lord, cause that solves all combat problems.

 

9 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

Similarly, the wall change is a buff for defending groups, if anything. When walls repaired at 10%, it was exceptionally easy to build one catapult, fire it three times, and break back into the objective. Now that the threshold is 50%, yes, it's harder to close. But it's also much harder to reopen, especially if you're depriving an attacking group of their supply. It makes it easier to cut off reinforcements, and grind down a group inside one of your structures. And if you're unable to down any players in that group in the first place, well, it doesn't really matter what the wall repair threshold is, or the exact effect of Structural Invulnerability anyway. You're just up against a larger, more coordinated group, and they were going to prevail regardless.

I don't see a problem with having to rebuild a cata to fire it off 3 times to re-enter, at least you forced the attackers to use supply to enter again, just like they forced you to use supply to close the wall in the first place.

The wall change was overdone and ridiculous, walls are left open for far longer times than before, especially for double wall opens from one set of siege, making it quite easy for reinforcements to get back in quickly. It's not hard for the attackers to run to the nearest camp and grab a fresh 150 supply again. Let's not even discuss the 3rd team team that can just waltz in there for free in the middle of those fights. The defenders are under constant pressure to scout, defend, supply management, repairs, have matching numbers while facing double team anywhere on the map. It's a joke that a blob could show up and build some alphas and break into a double walled t3 keep and be in lords in less than 5mins, then farm lords for 10 mins and claim wvw is boring.

[Sheff.4851]

1 minute ago, Sonderm.4639 said:

You might not have supps for 50%? Time spending repairing an open wall?

These are issues that present themselves to attackers looking at a 50% wall as well -- it's just usually easier for a defender to locate supply than an attacker, given that things like Supply Trap, Burning Oil, and Trebuchet exist, which is why I think it's a change in favor of defending groups. Once somebody's locked out, they have a much harder time getting back in. It's very, very easy to kill 2-3 people manning one catapult to get back to their tag, and it takes those 2-3 people much longer to get back inside once the wall is closed.

[Reztek.7805]

27 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

If there's nobody defending a tower, one person can pull SI and make an objective completely immune for a minute. That's not fun for an attacking group, if there's no defenders showing up in the first place.

What kind of biased argument is this? And what if the defenders show up during that minute? Then everything worked as expected? It's just bad if no one shows up? And is it fun for the defending group if they arrive to late? And what's up with all the other stuff that is not fun for some random group?

 

4 hours ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

 Take a look here: https://youtu.be/tgduXol9jEk

~45 min: I'm not surprised that they did not get positive feedback for their changes in the last year (except for some vendors). But it's kinda strange, that he does not give a straight answer here. Instead saying that he likes to think that people receive most things positive. Yeah, sure.

Of course positive feedback is much rarer than negative feedback, but almost no positive feedback? And how has the number of players and their playing time changed in the last year? 😉

[Sheff.4851]

2 minutes ago, Reztek.7805 said:

And how has the number of players and their playing time changed in the last year? 😉

NA has five tiers instead of four, and still, every one of our maps were queued on reset last night for about an hour and a half, so I'd say that number of players and playing time is much higher, just doing some napkin math on it.

edit: or, you can see later in the VoD while I'm playing with Soar and wHo, the number of times that we couldn't quite fit into a map, even though it was an hour or two before NA prime really kicked off.

Edited July 20 by Gahagan.4302

[Hesione.9412]

2 minutes ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

These are issues that present themselves to attackers looking at a 50% wall as well -- it's just usually easier for a defender to locate supply than an attacker, given that things like Supply Trap, Burning Oil, and Trebuchet exist, which is why I think it's a change in favor of defending groups. Once somebody's locked out, they have a much harder time getting back in. It's very, very easy to kill 2-3 people manning one catapult to get back to their tag, and it takes those 2-3 people much longer to get back inside once the wall is closed.

When you have a blob on the lord, and players racing in who get killed, from that blob, defenders are split between trying to fight the blob on the lord, and trying to repair. The attackers just stream in because both outer and inner need to be repaired to 50%.

[Hesione.9412]

1 minute ago, Gahagan.4302 said:

NA has five tiers instead of four, and still, every one of our maps were queued on reset last night for about an hour and a half, so I'd say that number of players and playing time is much higher, just doing some napkin math on it.

Reset is always high. Wait until middle of the week.