Desert border should be worth less points (Actually it should be deleted)

[Twilightzone.7452]

6 minutes ago, coro.3176 said:

DBL has so many fun quirks, like the pipe extending out of SE tower where you can hide if it gets flipped by a zerg, or jump down on groups below attacking from the rear.

Or the random terrain pieces, like the bridge/mesa gap by NWC sentry. I regularly jump across that one and use it to string out small groups chasing me. Have won several outnumbered fights with that map knowledge.

Or all the hay bale cliff jump spots, where a zerg thinks they've chased you off a cliff to your death, but you survive and get away!

Favourite is the unoffical JP behind SWT of the lord room all over the wood beams, one day ill get to the first circular landing

[XenesisII.1540]

13 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

You assume too much. You are assuming this all on ABL and EBG. Yet EotM and DBL countered this. This assumption is outdated. Get over it. Learn new tactics, Each map should have different tactics that need to be employed. Different maps should need different tactics and have different values. 

Then you end up with the tactic of just letting the objective fall and recap it whenever because they don't actually threaten anything in their area, much less even provide choke area for the nearby keep. Need I remind you too that eotm was just a ktrain mess for most of it's life, you don't upgrade anything, something that is tied back to motivation to defend something the longer you hold it and upgrade it, which funny enough is what we've been complaining about in wvw the last year because of defense changes turning wvw into more of an eotm state.

The designers of eotm and dbl never really bothered with, or never really understood, the tactical purposes of linking towers to keeps by siege, the importance of keeps(the waypoints didn't even start in fire and air keeps), nor the importance of the north towers which served as both as an early defense or a double edge sword that could be used to bunker siege the garrison. These type of tactics are some of what pushes players to defend or quickly recapture those towers, while on desert no one cares if they cap, just jump on the hidden cata and capture that bad boy in 5mins.

There's a number of things that could be done to improve desert to be more tactical and interesting, but these people can't even be bothered to fix a missing cornerstone after 9 years.

[TheGrimm.5624]

8 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

Then you end up with the tactic of just letting the objective fall and recap it whenever because they don't actually threaten anything in their area, much less even provide choke area for the nearby keep. Need I remind you too that eotm was just a ktrain mess for most of it's life, you don't upgrade anything, something that is tied back to motivation to defend something the longer you hold it and upgrade it, which funny enough is what we've been complaining about in wvw the last year because of defense changes turning wvw into more of an eotm state.

The designers of eotm and dbl never really bothered with, or never really understood, the tactical purposes of linking towers to keeps by siege, the importance of keeps(the waypoints didn't even start in fire and air keeps), nor the importance of the north towers which served as both as an early defense or a double edge sword that could be used to bunker siege the garrison. These type of tactics are some of what pushes players to defend or quickly recapture those towers, while on desert no one cares if they cap, just jump on the hidden cata and capture that bad boy in 5mins.

There's a number of things that could be done to improve desert to be more tactical and interesting, but these people can't even be bothered to fix a missing cornerstone after 9 years.

ABL the best tactic is let outer fall, you can't hold it. DBL gives you more options to hold inner. And then we have differences in EU and NA.

[Riba.3271]

If the game was released in state where 1 side had desert borderlands and 2 sides had alpine borderalnds, everyone would complain. In ideal WvW, score would matter, so people who care about score would complain that enemy won just because they had different map. People who like fights would complain that one map is easier to defend than another. 

Asymmetric map distribution is just not great and any game that does it can't be taken seriously and has no longetivity. Imagine if in PvE you only had access to wing 4 this week and other players wing 3. Imagine if PvP maps were designed so that one side has 2 points near their spawn and the other 0. Okay, there are marginal differences even in sPvP maps, which is comparable to how EB (25% of maps) corners was different, so people didn't complain too much. But when you change one sides home border, also offensive borders and defensive borders become different and it is way too much.

What I am trying to say is that the game should strive to be better if it was released today in this state. But unfortunately we have arrived to state where not only the matchmaking, siege balance and language distribution are worse, but how fair individual matchups are based on colour. Everyone here needs to do some deep thinking of how this game will be improved, and not  just based on "what you like". Even if you like desrt border what you should be doing is suggesting a better system where you can play desert border, not promote that we keep a worse one.

Let me give you an example: Let us make desert border punishment for playing badly and only lowest tier would be 3 desert borders. This will guarantee that 80% of players will want to avoid lowest tier and WvW activity will spike. Everyone, even guilds, will be PPTing off hours to avoid playing on desert borders. And if you like desert border, you can transfer to lowest tier (if we get monoservers back as deserved). What makes this suggestion even better is that if you are for keeping 1 desert border it is obvious you prefer environment with less players anyways and don't care too much about matchup outcome due to being fine with one side having different border. However we all know with 3 desert borders lowest tier would be ghost town and desert border would be removed even there eventually... But lets give desert maniacs one more futile chance to prove that many people want to play on that map.

Edited July 23 by Riba.3271

[VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.]

you are assuming that the vast majority dislikes DBL. 

But DBL is more prone to action than the alpine borderlands and usually have a healthy roaming population - unlike alpine borderlands.

DBL is the reward for winning a matchup and now facing new, potentially way stronger opponents. A reward and leg up. 

So, from my POV, your whole argument makes no sense.

But I stand with my first post: keep DBL, remove EBG. 

 

[Deniara Devious.3948]

Just remove Desert BL from rotation, but don't score it differently. It is not a fun map to play due so many reasons that is impossible to fix it e.g. distances between keeps + towers is too large and it has visibility issues and way too many exploits (which have never been fixed). And it is not a learn to play issue, I thousands of hours in WvWvW, mostly in Alpine and Desert BL and the latter really sucks.

Similarly Edge of the Mists is failed map and there should be any weeklies related to EotM or WvWvW jumping puzzle. Both EotM or jumping puzzle contribute the WvWvW.

Ayna

[XenesisII.1540]

7 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

ABL the best tactic is let outer fall, you can't hold it. DBL gives you more options to hold inner. And then we have differences in EU and NA.

For keeps? I think you got that mixed up. It's the same tactics for both, but there's more pressure to hold on inner for dbl than abl. They let outer fall on abl to use the choke, but on dbl it's if you're allowed to, because most times attackers will be on inner before anyone can even respond, the only saving grace for that is the space from outer to inner is larger so that there is slight delay for attackers, while abl has double walls as the negative but it's much faster to get to the side keeps from garrison/spawn. Not to mention the objective siege is way better placed/functional on abl than dbl which you have to rely on player siege much more. There's actually less defensive options for dbl inner too since it's so awkwardly designed with stuff in the way, it's harder to place siege in areas for counters than abl, and less scouting and players wanting to tick siege.

Dbl is usually populated with guilds wanting to get away from fight guilds, or get their fat 50+ blob in that can't fit on ebg or even on an abl at the time, or ppt in peace and they don't want a challenge, they use that map like it's eotm.

The numbers don't lie, dbl is still the least popular map, doesn't mean we should remove it, it could use some more work though.

[TheGrimm.5624]

13 hours ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

For keeps? I think you got that mixed up. It's the same tactics for both, but there's more pressure to hold on inner for dbl than abl. They let outer fall on abl to use the choke, but on dbl it's if you're allowed to, because most times attackers will be on inner before anyone can even respond, the only saving grace for that is the space from outer to inner is larger so that there is slight delay for attackers, while abl has double walls as the negative but it's much faster to get to the side keeps from garrison/spawn. Not to mention the objective siege is way better placed/functional on abl than dbl which you have to rely on player siege much more. There's actually less defensive options for dbl inner too since it's so awkwardly designed with stuff in the way, it's harder to place siege in areas for counters than abl, and less scouting and players wanting to tick siege.

Dbl is usually populated with guilds wanting to get away from fight guilds, or get their fat 50+ blob in that can't fit on ebg or even on an abl at the time, or ppt in peace and they don't want a challenge, they use that map like it's eotm.

The numbers don't lie, dbl is still the least popular map, doesn't mean we should remove it, it could use some more work though.

lol, disagree, once outer is breached anywhere all that siege is gone. At least for me that is why I siege inner first when on defense. When I tag, I wipe outer siege and then clear all inner siege I can reach from the floor. Then I come come back to breach inner. My friend I think you are used to me as a defense roamer versus an open tag, mileage varies my friend.

[CafPow.1542]

14 hours ago, Deniara Devious.3948 said:

and way too many exploits

This one i agree. Bit i think it’s not to much asking from a game designer to fix their stuff! Jesus christ anet do it. And while at it, there is a missing pieve of wall in stoic ranpart.

[XenesisII.1540]

1 hour ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

lol, disagree, once outer is breached anywhere all that siege is gone. At least for me that is why I siege inner first when on defense. When I tag, I wipe outer siege and then clear all inner siege I can reach from the floor. Then I come come back to breach inner. My friend I think you are used to me as a defense roamer versus an open tag, mileage varies my friend.

Plenty of abl outer siege are useful if they are not taken cared of before sieging outer, and they almost always have to be taken cared of, and some of the inner can hit the outer areas. Meanwhile dbl almost never gets to use it's outer siege, attackers barely even bother to take them down, there's practically no inner siege that can be used for outer, not that it matters cause most of the fights happen on inner keeps on dbl anyways. 🤷‍♂️

 

[Leaa.2943]

4 hours ago, CafPow.1542 said:

This one i agree. Bit i think it’s not to much asking from a game designer to fix their stuff! Jesus christ anet do it. And while at it, there is a missing pieve of wall in stoic ranpart.

It litterally looks like a dev had a dad day with his child and told here you can play with this it is like lego place the walls where you like and thus we have walls that lack spot, that are higher on other spots, that have invisible spots where enemies can hit you but you can not hit them or the cattas. And on top of that The kitten cannons are useless because they hit the kitten glasstiles you stand on in which enemies can hit from under and you get hit because damage to through it. 

AND (yes sorry i am stealing your topic) you can also hit inner wall by not hitting the wall but the the stick out wall UNDER it.  

 

And now we hit lords room and this is where you start to rage. Because the lords room do not in any shape or form help you, it protects the enemies. It is so crazy that i don't even understand how this happen. The walls that are going up is closing the enemies in so that you can not hit. At some points it is still up when lord is down. *HEAVY BREATHING* Sorry again for stealing your topic.

[CafPow.1542]

16 minutes ago, Leaa.2943 said:

The walls that are going up is closing the enemies in so that you can not hit

Last time i got STUCK IN THAT WALL (!!!) two times while defending.

god knows how i survived that lol.

[SweetPotato.7456]

almost 10% of the thread started by this user is on the topic to remove the Desert Borderland, I consider this thread a spam. because enough is enough there is already many threads by the same users discussing the same topic. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER.

don't believe me
https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/search/?&q=Desert Borderland&author=Riba.3271&search_and_or=or

Edited July 24 by SweetPotato.7456

[TheIceman.1039]

On 7/20/2024 at 9:18 PM, Riba.3271 said:

Recent skirmish scoring changes made clear that balancing philosophy is following:

More players => Worth more points

In currently ongoing matchup (EU) (Source: GW2Mists)

Green BL | Blue BL | Red BL

12 443    |  12 110   |  5 675 kills

total kills in T1 to T6.

We can see that desert borderland has less than half the kills and activity than either alpine borderland. Conclusion is that objectives there should be valued half. Or even better, the map could just be deleted if it is only played as last choice?

Take your time, play only desert map like 3 months row and then u can decide again.

[maket.7529]

Been playing dbl alot recently. Hope someday anet replace one of these boring Alpines with new map, maybe echovald or jade themed. Desert one is completely fine, rly awesome map for roamers. Love shrines mechanics. 

Edited July 31 by maket.7529

[One more for the road.8950]

Desert is fine for days when you want a bit of a slower pace or you have trouble getting your dailies/weeklies in but are on a schedule and the other maps are queued or dominated by others. It's also nice for the newer ppl to get things done since they have time to figure things out or time to grab a camp even if not very efficient. It's a map you won't get roflstomped right away on if you try anything but is the weakest server. It also have some fun mechanics that people seem rather oblivious about.

The problem with desert is all the glitches that makes ppl able to take towers, keeps and garri without even taking down a wall or gate and things alike, and I am not sure if it's the pros or the cons that wins for me personally atm.