A Chat w/ Roy and Cecil About WvW Development Goals

[Chaba.5410]

1 hour ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

It is completely practical lots of other games and communities have active discussions with developers in many formats and ways with many groups of people.  ArenaNet does not.

" Instead we get side conversations with one or two people like what Sheff got or the odd forum post from a dev asking a single other forum user a question for clarification.  But apparently that isn't good enough and is considered "private" or "secretive" somehow."

Yeah, that isn't good enough.  

"A more practical method is surveys.  Well written surveys help guide players into materializing their feedback into something more constructive.  That's something Anet has done in the past, but still is not the kind of conversation you are describing"

A practical method would be to engage the community more in forum discussions, Q&A sessions, reddit threads, etc. etc.  The fact you think this is some impossible task is completely surprising to me.  There are MANY gaming companies and developers that do this frequently.

 

Still ignoring that forums with threaded discussions are poor platforms because conversations get lost, huh? Which is the very criticism about this forum being a place where feedback gets ignored. Yea, keep on with that overtly idealistic fantasy that some dev is supposed to have conservations here with everyone who posts and not spend their time doing their actual job.

Anet has done AMAs in the past, then went pretty silent and now has devs willing to be more open such as appearing on a stream and answering questions brought up from chat. And you say that isn't good enough. Your expectations remain unrealistic.

Btw, name these game companies. Anyone can go check them out then, see if it's actual devs or just a "community manager" PR person hired specifically to hold mass conversations with everyone on their forum at the scale that you suggest is "good enough". Or if it's just like here where side conversations exist.

[Cyninja.2954]

Liked the interview, good to hear they are live looking at things. Sort of backed up the suspicion that they are now gathering data on player behavior and likely data to feed the algorithm better.

Just going to touch on the 50% VS 10% repair changes (paired with the invulnerability tactic changes because some elements go hand in hand).

For this it is important to look at how player behavior changes between a wall/gate being open and closed. The established approach in the past has always been:

1. clear the siege (and it is important to note, this can be done with a force significantly smaller defending force)

2. repair the wall/gate if it is in the defending interest to keep stragglers out

3. prevent stragglers from building new siege

What is important here to note is: this can be done relatively quickly. It is close to 100% effective in keeping stragglers and back-up out. It requires minimal supplies.

Another thing to note here is: the average WvW player does not carry siege with them, or not every one is willing to drop siege blueprints. Not every player will be carrying significant supply to build new siege. The larger a structure, the easier it is to close by defenders and harder to keep open by attackers.

All of these  aspects allow defenders to mitigate number disadvantages to some extent. Meanwhile it provides "content" to smaller amounts of players while they feel "useful" when say: your main defending blob will try to pressure the attackers while smaller number of players can approach defending the objective as described.

All of this does not work at 50%.

A similar thought process can be applied to the previous invulnerability tactic. This one is indeed very un-fun to encounter as attacker, but it also provided a great way to actually allow players to gather and face each other. One has to way the benefit here of actually allowing scouting and defenders to react versus being "trolled/delayed" by 1 minute because 1 defender got in (which by the way also made for content because attackers were encouraged to keep an empty objective empty).

The changes lately have been very focused on speeding up sieges and structure flips which if players had immediate movement or reaction to attackers would make sense, but in reality just shifts the priority away from defending. I believe some adjustments here would be in order.

The most important ideas here would be: how do we allow players to actually gather and react to things happening. For example: the recent emergency way-point change to have multiple available is great in allowing defenders to actually gather.

Final though, here is one possible tactic to consider:instead of giving defenders a invulnerability tactic which makes walls/gates immune, why not turn this into one which makes the structure lord immune (and give him a damage buff). This would have a similar effect in that it would allow defenders to gather/react, attackers are now forced into action (stay on the lord and heal through if possible, leave the lord room and engage defenders). Or it could lead to defenders using this buff to improve their next attack on saving the lord (think similar to air support in stonemist castle).

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

14 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

Still ignoring that forums with threaded discussions are poor platforms because conversations get lost, huh? Which is the very criticism about this forum being a place where feedback gets ignored. Yea, keep on with that overtly idealistic fantasy that some dev is supposed to have conservations here with everyone who posts and not spend their time doing their actual job.

Many game companies utilize various formats and methods to gather feedback included threaded discussions which serve as an archive and yet somehow people manage to not get lost in those either.  "Overtly idealistic fantasy" of something completely normal for many game companies?  Your "strawman" arguments are getting stranger by the way, when did I say they had to have conversations with everyone who posts?  I said more discussions, engagement, Q&A sessions etc.  Planned and scheduled and organized.

"Anet has done AMAs in the past, then went pretty silent and now has devs willing to be more open such as appearing on a stream and answering questions brought up from chat. And you say that isn't good enough. Your expectations remain unrealistic"

Limited, sporadic at best is not indication of good, solid communication and transparency.  Your understanding of communication seems rather narrow and strange.  

"Btw, name these game companies. Anyone can go check them out then, see if it's actual devs or just a "community manager" PR person hired specifically to hold mass conversations with everyone on their forum at the scale that you suggest is "good enough". Or if it's just like here where side conversations exist."

Ashes of Creation, Pantheon just to name two MMOs for you.  I know Pantheon holds monthly Q&A sessions, the developers hold streams where they take questions, Pantheon posts Joppa's videos etc.  Ashes of Creation does the same thing.  Monster and Memories does as well.  And these studios don't even have the luxury of ArenaNet's budget.  Yes they are actual devs and not just community managers.  Would you like me to send you some video links as well?

 

  

[Sheff.4851]

2 hours ago, Troubadour.6397 said:

You clearly do not understand what gaslighting is. Having emotion in a response is not 'gaslighting'  A streamer rocking up to the official forums and telling people their years of well formulated but ignored efforts, are not contructive could well be though.

Would you prefer that I don't post here? Or just that I agree with the prevailing opinions instead of sharing my own experiences.

[Sheff.4851]

20 minutes ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

Many game companies utilize various formats and methods to gather feedback included threaded discussions which serve as an archive and yet somehow people manage to not get lost in those either.  "Overtly idealistic fantasy" of something completely normal for many game companies?  Your "strawman" arguments are getting stranger by the way, when did I say they had to have conversations with everyone who posts?  I said more discussions, engagement, Q&A sessions etc.  Planned and scheduled and organized.

"Anet has done AMAs in the past, then went pretty silent and now has devs willing to be more open such as appearing on a stream and answering questions brought up from chat. And you say that isn't good enough. Your expectations remain unrealistic"

Limited, sporadic at best is not indication of good, solid communication and transparency.  Your understanding of communication seems rather narrow and strange.  

"Btw, name these game companies. Anyone can go check them out then, see if it's actual devs or just a "community manager" PR person hired specifically to hold mass conversations with everyone on their forum at the scale that you suggest is "good enough". Or if it's just like here where side conversations exist."

Ashes of Creation, Pantheon just to name two MMOs for you.  I know Pantheon holds monthly Q&A sessions, the developers hold streams where they take questions, Pantheon posts Joppa's videos etc.  Ashes of Creation does the same thing.  Monster and Memories does as well.  And these studios don't even have the luxury of ArenaNet's budget.  Yes they are actual devs and not just community managers.  Would you like me to send you some video links as well?

 

  

Pantheon and Ashes of Creation are both in test alpha. Do you think maybe there's a difference in comparing two MMOs that haven't officially launched, with one that's been launched for 11 years? Come on.

[Sheff.4851]

26 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Liked the interview, good to hear they are live looking at things. Sort of backed up the suspicion that they are now gathering data on player behavior and likely data to feed the algorithm better.

Just going to touch on the 50% VS 10% repair changes (paired with the invulnerability tactic changes because some elements go hand in hand).

For this it is important to look at how player behavior changes between a wall/gate being open and closed. The established approach in the past has always been:

1. clear the siege (and it is important to note, this can be done with a force significantly smaller defending force)

2. repair the wall/gate if it is in the defending interest to keep stragglers out

3. prevent stragglers from building new siege

What is important here to note is: this can be done relatively quickly. It is close to 100% effective in keeping stragglers and back-up out. It requires minimal supplies.

Another thing to note here is: the average WvW player does not carry siege with them, or not every one is willing to drop siege blueprints. Not every player will be carrying significant supply to build new siege. The larger a structure, the easier it is to close by defenders and harder to keep open by attackers.

All of these  aspects allow defenders to mitigate number disadvantages to some extent. Meanwhile it provides "content" to smaller amounts of players while they feel "useful" when say: your main defending blob will try to pressure the attackers while smaller number of players can approach defending the objective as described.

All of this does not work at 50%.

A similar thought process can be applied to the previous invulnerability tactic. This one is indeed very un-fun to encounter as attacker, but it also provided a great way to actually allow players to gather and face each other. One has to way the benefit here of actually allowing scouting and defenders to react versus being "trolled/delayed" by 1 minute because 1 defender got in (which by the way also made for content because attackers were encouraged to keep an empty objective empty).

The changes lately have been very focused on speeding up sieges and structure flips which if players had immediate movement or reaction to attackers would make sense, but in reality just shifts the priority away from defending. I believe some adjustments here would be in order.

The most important ideas here would be: how do we allow players to actually gather and react to things happening. For example: the recent emergency way-point change to have multiple available is great in allowing defenders to actually gather.

Final though, here is one possible tactic to consider:instead of giving defenders a invulnerability tactic which makes walls/gates immune, why not turn this into one which makes the structure lord immune (and give him a damage buff). This would have a similar effect in that it would allow defenders to gather/react, attackers are now forced into action (stay on the lord and heal through if possible, leave the lord room and engage defenders). Or it could lead to defenders using this buff to improve their next attack on saving the lord (think similar to air support in stonemist castle).

I think that you have a good read on the defense changes, and the lord suggestion is a good one. The RedBL lords are some of my favorites to interact with, because they have mechanics that players need to be mindful of -- more true for Air and Earth than Fire, but still. I would like to see that design philosophy pushed to more keep lords, to give both attacking and defending groups the ability to plan their attacks around what the lord ia doing, rather than having it be a big HP sponge.

[Sheff.4851]

3 hours ago, Troubadour.6397 said:

and why do you think that is hmm? none of the changes encourage casuals to stay and become regulars and this restructure solely caters to elite blob style guilds. Maybe instead of just shrugging, you could be pushing the team on how that is a terrible idea and ask for changes , cause they sure as kitten don't listen to a word we say on here lol

Well, if you read up the thread a bit, there's two things that got mentioned. One is that builds are more complex and comp has gotten more important over time, as people learned the game. This makes commanding and leading strangers more difficult if you come up against a coordinated enemy group. And two is that the addition of server linking fractured existing communities, and made it harder for public tags to hold onto talent that they were working on training. Did you have anything to contribute about why public tags are becoming less common, that I can use my sway as a streamer to encourage ArenaNet to act on?

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

10 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

Pantheon and Ashes of Creation are both in test alpha. Do you think maybe there's a difference in comparing two MMOs that haven't officially launched, with one that's been launched for 11 years? Come on.

Two companies that don't have nearly the budget or infrastructure of ArenaNet manage to do something as simple as community engagement, discussions, Q&A sessions etc.  Do you think maybe there is something strange that those companies who don't have those resources still manage to engage the community more than a company that does?

[Leaa.2943]

On 7/20/2024 at 11:05 PM, Sheff.4851 said:

 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. 

And yet what is really happening in the real WvW is that people just give up because there is no longer anything they can do if there is a blob on your border and you do not have that. It is utterly ridiculous of Anet to think that all worlds have blobs on all borders, i dont even get why they think that because it never was the case. And especially on red border it often just a few players trying their best. In the past we had some chances. We did not have a blob but we could close walls, we could reduce their supplies, we could pull them out and/or pick them off, we could fight outnumbered in the lords room because we could los the pillars and keep the fight going.

Now this is not the case. A blob comes in, kill the lord in a few sec (there is really something wrong with the lords hp since last patch) and then we are not able to stay alive to contest, we are not able to strip them because no matter how much how much you strip there is new stacks added. AND on top of that the amount of bubbles that the attacker is hiding under, is not possible to cleanse or remove. So no matter how this is looked up on it is not a fair fight anymore. It is not even a fair fight when you have a blob to defend, because you have to push them and they can just make a stand in the middle with 10 bubbles and stacks of boons, cc and conditions. 

Fights in lords room WAS fun in the past. Attacking a keep or defending a keep was always the way to get fights. Now there is no fun. And people are not even responding. Anet changed fun to unfun. 

Fix boonballs, bubbles and defense. It is not working. I dont care if your number say they are, in the real WvW it is not working. I am there every day with thousands of other players and they all say it is not working, except for that special kid who feel he is so strong and you just need to git good who are not able to kill the 80 man boonball  blob with 20 players trying their best. That guy is wrong too.

[Sheff.4851]

6 minutes ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

Two companies that don't have nearly the budget or infrastructure of ArenaNet manage to do something as simple as community engagement, discussions, Q&A sessions etc.  Do you think maybe there is something strange that those companies who don't have those resources still manage to engage the community more than a company that does?

Yeah, I think when you don't have a live product you have a totally different set of goals, design decisions, and community engagement patterns. It doesn't surprise me at all. Now if you can name an MMO studio that does monthly dev Q&A for a game that's been released for 2+ years, I'd be really interested, because to the best of my knowledge FF14, EvE Online, and World of Warcraft all don't.

[ArchonWing.9480]

3 hours ago, Chaos God.1639 said:

I wouldn't call it feedback either, because the person is being emotional. emotions are like double edge sword. if you want to be taken seriously, then be serious. if devs don't agree with you, then you shouldn't get upset or emotional either.

what I would consider constructive feedback is prosocial behavior and not destructive behavior.

some of the posts here on the forums could be considered as gaslighting, whether it was intentional or not.

If you want to be taken seriously, you should not take a defensive posture even to irrational feedback by dismissing  the feedback because of its emotional state. That's not only a weak response, but also an emotional one-- you're equating an attack on what you said as an attack on yourself. Irrational feedback is defeated with facts, not with "omg why are you so negative?"

It is of course fine to disregard personal attacks and ask for elaboration but that is different.

Edited July 21 by ArchonWing.9480

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

Just now, Sheff.4851 said:

Yeah, I think when you don't have a live product you have a totally different set of goals, design decisions, and community engagement patterns. It doesn't surprise me at all. Now if you can name an MMO studio that does monthly dev Q&A for a game that's been released for 2+ years, I'd be really interested, because to the best of my knowledge FF14, EvE Online, and World of Warcraft all don't.

Yeah I think when a gaming company engages their community while they are dealing with the challenges of development and budgets, it speaks volume about that company where others who do have the resources don't at all.  Why waste time on a company that ignores or doesn't engage in feedback?  

[Sheff.4851]

3 minutes ago, Leaa.2943 said:

And yet what is really happening in the real WvW is that people just give up because there is no longer anything they can do if there is a blob on your border and you do not have that. It is utterly ridiculous of Anet to think that all worlds have blobs on all borders, i dont even get why they think that because it never was the case. And especially on red border it often just a few players trying their best. In the past we had some chances. We did not have a blob but we could close walls, we could reduce their supplies, we could pull them out and/or pick them off, we could fight outnumbered in the lords room because we could los the pillars and keep the fight going.

Now this is not the case. A blob comes in, kill the lord in a few sec (there is really something wrong with the lords hp since last patch) and then we are not able to stay alive to contest, we are not able to strip them because no matter how much how much you strip there is new stacks added. AND on top of that the amount of bubbles that the attacker is hiding under, is not possible to cleanse or remove. So no matter how this is looked up on it is not a fair fight anymore. It is not even a fair fight when you have a blob to defend, because you have to push them and they can just make a stand in the middle with 10 bubbles and stacks of boons, cc and conditions. 

Fights in lords room WAS fun in the past. Attacking a keep or defending a keep was always the way to get fights. Now there is no fun. And people are not even responding. Anet changed fun to unfun. 

Fix boonballs, bubbles and defense. It is not working. I dont care if your number say they are, in the real WvW it is not working. I am there every day with thousands of other players and they all say it is not working, except for that special kid who feel he is so strong and you just need to git good who are not able to kill the 80 man boonball  blob with 20 players trying their best. That guy is wrong too.

In a lot of cases, the 80 man boonball blob also has a bunch of players trying their best, which gets overlooked often. I get that a pitched outnumbered battle is harder these days, but the problem is that if 20 defenders beats 80 attackers then 30 defenders means that there's no possibility of an objective ever being captured, because the stall, delay, and disrupt tactics are too strong for any group to overcome. Outnumbered fights are fun, but they're difficult to balance around, because skilled players can and do exist on both sides of a fight.

[Sheff.4851]

Just now, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

Yeah I think when a gaming company engages their community while they are dealing with the challenges of development and budgets, it speaks volume about that company where others who do have the resources don't at all.  Why waste time on a company that ignores or doesn't engage in feedback?  

I agree. Can you name another successful, release state, cash-positive MMO that does that, though? Otherwise, it seems like active dev Q&A may be something that you only do in pre-release to build hype and interest, and then refocus developmemt efforts after launch for the reasons that Chaba has described.

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

Just now, Sheff.4851 said:

I agree. Can you name another successful, release state, cash-positive MMO that does that, though? Otherwise, it seems like active dev Q&A may be something that you only do in pre-release to build hype and interest, and then refocus developmemt efforts after launch for the reasons that Chaba has described.

Here is your example of EVE online.  Just did some research for you.  I can also speak for games in the past that I played which were successful and release state cash positive like Unreal Tournament which engaged in active dev Q&As.  Give me a second I will do some more research for you tonight as well.

Week of 18-24 July:  Security Q&A on Discord

https://www.eveonline.com/fr/news/view/announcing-the-summer-of-streams

[Hesione.9412]

12 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

In a lot of cases, the 80 man boonball blob also has a bunch of players trying their best, which gets overlooked often. I get that a pitched outnumbered battle is harder these days, but the problem is that if 20 defenders beats 80 attackers then 30 defenders means that there's no possibility of an objective ever being captured, because the stall, delay, and disrupt tactics are too strong for any group to overcome. Outnumbered fights are fun, but they're difficult to balance around, because skilled players can and do exist on both sides of a fight.

You are defending the boonball, which shows us your bias. Also, 20 unskilled players in a boonball is vastly different to 20 unskilled players trying to defend. A boonball supports unskilled players, who can make a lot of mistakes because the boonball supports are compensating for them. It's not "harder" to fight the boonball, it's "impossible".

Outnumbered fights are only fun if there is a chance of the smaller side winning. And if people in the boonball wanted entertaining content, they would split that boonball up between maps. Which is entirely different to having two boonballs split across two maps.

You, like the devs, don't seem to be listening to those of us in the forums who routinely face boonballs with a small group of people. And who leave because there's no point being a bag.

Edited July 21 by Hesione.9412
clarified what I meant by "harder"

[Sheff.4851]

4 minutes ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

Here is your example of EVE online.  Just did some research for you.  I can also speak for games in the past that I played which were successful and release state cash positive like Unreal Tournament which engaged in active dev Q&As.  Give me a second I will do some more research for you tonight as well.

Week of 18-24 July:  Security Q&A on Discord

https://www.eveonline.com/fr/news/view/announcing-the-summer-of-streams

I was specifically asking about MMOs because the role that Q&A plays in that genre is different than the role that Q&A plays in other types of games. If you want to talk about Q&A in other games for your own personal benefit, be my guest, but I don't think it's really comparable to this genre specifically.

As far as the link you posted, it appears to contain one Q&A for July, none on the schedule for August, and I can't find the June Q&A skimming through their devblogs, so perhaps I've missed it. I thought we were talking about regular, monthly Q&A, not one-off events like the stream that I held was.

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

Just now, Sheff.4851 said:

I was specifically asking about MMOs because the role that Q&A plays in that genre is different than the role that Q&A plays in other types of games. If you want to talk about Q&A in other games for your own personal benefit, be my guest, but I don't think it's really comparable to this genre specifically.

As far as the link you posted, it appears to contain one Q&A for July, none on the schedule for August, and I can't find the June Q&A skimming through their devblogs, so perhaps I've missed it. I thought we were talking about regular, monthly Q&A, not one-off events like the stream that I held was.

So you keep asking for more and more specific requirements.  I give you MMOs, that isn't good enough because they are in development.  I give you Eve Online, something you mentioned specifically one of the most successful online games in history, that isn't good enough.  Sheff I can't do all the research for you, you are going to have to do some reading.

Also you didn't read the link I sent you , so I will read that for you as well.  The company explicitly states with enthusiasm in the second paragraph.

"You can also follow us on EVE’s official Twitter to stay up to date on upcoming Q&A sessions that will be happening throughout the summer. Be sure to get your questions ready!"
 

So yeah I have done more than enough to meet your demands.  At some point the demands will just end up like a black hole.  But I hope it gives you some more reading material!  I hope it helps!

[Sheff.4851]

2 minutes ago, Hesione.9412 said:

You are defending the boonball, which shows us your bias. Also, 20 unskilled players in a boonball is vastly different to 20 unskilled players trying to defend. A boonball supports unskilled players, who can make a lot of mistakes because the boonball supports are compensating for them. It's not "harder" to fight the boonball, it's "impossible".

Outnumbered fights are only fun if there is a chance of the smaller side winning. And if people in the boonball wanted entertaining content, they would split that boonball up between maps. Which is entirely different to having two boonballs split across two maps.

You, like the devs, don't seem to be listening to those of us in the forums who routinely face boonballs with a small group of people. And who leave because there's no point being a bag.

There's no established "correct" way to play. You say that defending boonballs shows my bias, and that I'm not listening to people in the forums (though if I wasn't listening, I definitely wouldn't be replying).

But I could just as easily say that you're attacking boonballs and that shows your bias, and you don't listen to those of us who have fun playing the game by coordinating a squad with our friends and coming up with ways to win in fights.

I don't, because that line of argument doesn't accomplish anything. It's just fighting about whose way of playing the game is the best. That's not the point, and again, in the video, you will have heard me talk about how friction between those different playstyles exists because there's no unifying goal for players to work on, like a reward for winning a matchup.

[Sheff.4851]

1 minute ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

So you keep asking for more and more specific requirements.  I give you MMOs, that isn't good enough because they are in development.  I give you Eve Online, something you mentioned specifically one of the most successful online games in history, that isn't good enough.  Sheff I can't do all the research for you, you are going to have to do some reading.

Also you didn't read the link I sent you , so I will read that for you as well.  The company explicitly states with enthusiasm in the second paragraph.

"You can also follow us on EVE’s official Twitter to stay up to date on upcoming Q&A sessions that will be happening throughout the summer. Be sure to get your questions ready!"
 

So yeah I have done more than enough to meet your demands.  At some point the demands will just end up like a black hole.  But I hope it gives you some more reading material!  I hope it helps!

Yeah, so on the link you sent, go to "Topics Upcoming In August" and tell me where the August Q&A is. In July, it's listed under the week of 18-24 July. Found that one. Can't find the others to fulfill your own criteria of "monthly Q&A". I think if you'd actually engage with the arguments that Chaba and I have laid out, instead of moving the goalposts every time you're encountering resistance, we could get somewhere. Especially because "go do your own research" is the hallmark of somebody who, themselves, has not done sufficient research to rebuke an argument, and needs to rely on other people to do it. Its not my job to show you that other successful MMOs have monthly Q&A because its not my claim, its yours.

[Hesione.9412]

Just now, Sheff.4851 said:

There's no established "correct" way to play. You say that defending boonballs shows my bias, and that I'm not listening to people in the forums (though if I wasn't listening, I definitely wouldn't be replying).

But I could just as easily say that you're attacking boonballs and that shows your bias, and you don't listen to those of us who have fun playing the game by coordinating a squad with our friends and coming up with ways to win in fights.

I don't, because that line of argument doesn't accomplish anything. It's just fighting about whose way of playing the game is the best. That's not the point, and again, in the video, you will have heard me talk about how friction between those different playstyles exists because there's no unifying goal for players to work on, like a reward for winning a matchup.

I don't attack boonballs, like a couple of the 6 other players with me, I run away because none of us want to be a bag. They turn up on one of our objectives before the Outnumbered buff even appears. Or, you're fighting similar numbers and winning, and then the boonball appears because the other side loses when it's even numbers.

How the hell am I supposed to make a squad that can attack a boonball with fewer than 10 players? I can't magic players out of thin air. And new players coming in, how long do you think they'll stay when they face the boonball with few other players active on their shard?

The friction isn't because of no unifying goal. The friction is because the only thing that works against a boonball is another boonball. Arrow carts don't kill them. Ballistae don't kill them. They rez off our people who are killed, if they miss the downed state. We can't cloud with only 6 or so players, all they do is pick one person and the entire boonball charges at them.

One option was to cut the boonball into pieces. We could do this when walls and gates would appear at 10%. Now it's 50%, the splitting isn't happening. Every change that's happened has favoured the boonball.

From this, I conclude that the WvW devs want WvW to just be boonball versus boonball.

 

[MuscleBobBuffPants.1406]

Just now, Sheff.4851 said:

Yeah, so on the link you sent, go to "Topics Upcoming In August" and tell me where the August Q&A is. In July, it's listed under the week of 18-24 July. Found that one. Can't find the others to fulfill your own criteria of "monthly Q&A". I think if you'd actually engage with the arguments that Chaba and I have laid out, instead of moving the goalposts every time you're encountering resistance, we could get somewhere. Especially because "go do your own research" is the hallmark of somebody who, themselves, has not done sufficient research to rebuke an argument, and needs to rely on other people to do it. Its not my job to show you that other successful MMOs have monthly Q&A because its not my claim, its yours.

Sheff I can't read everything for you.  They explicitly state upcoming sessions through the the Summer, that is a plural.  You need to do some more research.  Also speaking of goalpost movement, first you mention EveOnline, then claim it isn't an MMO.  Here is some more reading for you, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Online , 
"Eve Online (stylised EVE Online) is a space-based, persistent world massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) developed and published by CCP Games. "
Anyways hope that gives you some good reading material and helps you better understand the importance of Q&A in a successful company!

[Hesione.9412]

A point that was raised in the starting post in this thread. When winning "matters", the shard that has the largest boonball coverage will win. What's the point in even playing when you know your shard is just going to help a boonball shard win? And you'll get nothing from trying your best?

[Sheff.4851]

1 minute ago, MuscleBobBuffPants.1406 said:

Sheff I can't read everything for you.  They explicitly state upcoming sessions through the the Summer, that is a plural.  You need to do some more research.  Also speaking of goalpost movement, first you mention EveOnline, then claim it isn't an MMO.  Here is some more reading for you, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eve_Online , 
"Eve Online (stylised EVE Online) is a space-based, persistent world massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) developed and published by CCP Games. "
Anyways hope that gives you some good reading material and helps you better understand the importance of Q&A in a successful company!

EvE was one I suggested. I'm just waiting to see where the confirmed Q&A is. Ashes of Creation and Pantheon are not MMOs, because a normal person cannot currently play them. Doesn't matter if they do daily Q&A, they aren't even out of alpha.

[Kozumi.5816]

23 hours ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

I am worried that all this work put into balancing population will all be for naught if players don't find the content itself desirable, outside of a very hardcore crowd. Games cannot survive on hardcore players alone. And there is much argument that WvW is quite the hostile climate for new blood.

WvW does not gain new players exactly due to the terrible game play. The game play involved in boonballing is extremely niche and already has it's entire player base of people who enjoy that type of game play.

Why Anet designs a game mode for < 200 people, I'll never know.