Stop Treating WvW like a GvG environment

[Chaba.5410]

On 9/12/2024 at 2:37 PM, Mike.3196 said:

I agree it's very healthy for game boonblobs have no counter unless you match boonballs with same numbers I agree. I agree as well boonballs is currently saving the game and reason why people are playing wvw cause boonblob is fun 

No where have I stated that boonblobs are healthy nor saving the game nor the only reason why people play WvW.  Strawman.

[Chaba.5410]

On 9/12/2024 at 2:39 PM, Mike.3196 said:

If your don't see the issue what typed  I think that's a play issue understand what's wrong with that 

This response of yours was confusing.  It is not clear what you are referring to.  Boonblobs or organizing for countering organized groups (which can even be a 5-man party of havoc players)?

When I use the word "organize" and your go-to thought is boonblob, that's a disconnect in communication.

Edited September 13 by Chaba.5410

[Triptaminas.4789]

6 hours ago, Leger.3724 said:

I think balance is important so experienced people aren't destroying new people.

Explain to me, why even play if skill doesn't matter? If a newbie can fight and sustain thru all accumulated knowledge experienced players have on his class and combat?

Like this is what wrong with balancing, the shrinking gap between complete newbie smashing keyboard randomly on some overtuned class vs veteran core ele doing 500 apm. It what kills drive to play this game. 

I play solely to get better, if there is no way to get better anymore and game reduced to numbers only I simply have no reason to play anymore.

The sentence you started with annoyed me to the core, this perception over game mode is what pushing it into a gutter.

 

This game was supposed to be all about horizontal progression. The removal of skill based gameplay is what's killing the game. I understand the logic and reasoning on why it's done, it wants to appeal to lowest common denominator of casual crowd, but when top leaves so will casuals. It's parreto principles all around.  This direction will be nails into gw coffin. 

Edited September 14 by Triptaminas.4789

[WINSON.3278]

WR desasterIt's I feel bad, I haven’t been able to play even after two years of rest.　

Cloud fly

[Leger.3724]

2 hours ago, Triptaminas.4789 said:

The removal of skill based gameplay is what's killing the game.  

No. Having 16+ abilities per player is what is killing this game. Convoluted rote memorization for end game pve is what is killing this game.  Dozens of conditions, boons, invulnerables, stealth spam among a long list of kitten makes the pvp unapproachable for a new player.

You seem to think you deserve a massive advantage for taking the time to learn how awful this system is. I'm saying that's bad game design. Experience should matter. It should not matter as much as it does in MMOs that overwhelm new players with dozens of abilities.

Plenty of games manage to have massive player skill gaps with 20%-25% of the ability bar GW2 offers - League of Legends, DOTA 2, Valorant. Some are even smaller than 20% - Call of Duty, Counterstrike. I used to boost accounts in League of Legends. I could destroy someone in Bronze-Gold. I didn't need to be worried that Riot Games wasn't giving me 10+ abilities so I could really turn the screws.

And it seems to me Arena Net is starting to understand this. The sPvP game mode is simpler and more approachable. Boon application in PvE especially for Alacrity/Quickness has been made easier. It seems there aren't enough people who love the idea of memorization style combat.

Again - you're mistaking stubbornness, memorization for skill. I don't care if you like that. It's clear most don't and I just want people to play with and against. The bigger the playerbase, the more skilled everyone becomes. The people who want to remove skill from this game are people like you. People who don't want a healthy playerbase. You say you do and you suggest ideas to Arena Net that only further constricts the playerbase.

It took over 10 years but we're finally getting to that point where Arena Net recognizes the advice they've been given to date has been horrific. The unfortunate part is we're too far gone. The hope is they have Guild Wars 3 in development for a reset. Guild Wars 1 was innovative in its own ways, Guild Wars 2 was innovative in its own ways. Here's to Guild Wars 3 being a fun experience with hopefully better combat. And I get it - I come here and slam GW2. Most people aren't going to like that. The combat is okay-ish. It's bland MMO combat. But GW2 does great casual open world content. There is a lot to like about the decisions from GW1 to GW2. Combat is just not one of them.

Edited Saturday at 02:19 AM by Leger.3724

[Triptaminas.4789]

6 hours ago, Leger.3724 said:

No. Having 16+ abilities per player is what is killing this game. Convoluted rote memorization for end game pve is what is killing this game.  Dozens of conditions, boons, invulnerables, stealth spam among a long list of kitten makes the pvp unapproachable for a new player.

You seem to think you deserve a massive advantage for taking the time to learn how awful this system is. I'm saying that's bad game design. Experience should matter. It should not matter as much as it does in MMOs that overwhelm new players with dozens of abilities.

Plenty of games manage to have massive player skill gaps with 20%-25% of the ability bar GW2 offers - League of Legends, DOTA 2, Valorant. Some are even smaller than 20% - Call of Duty, Counterstrike. I used to boost accounts in League of Legends. I could destroy someone in Bronze-Gold. I didn't need to be worried that Riot Games wasn't giving me 10+ abilities so I could really turn the screws.

And it seems to me Arena Net is starting to understand this. The sPvP game mode is simpler and more approachable. Boon application in PvE especially for Alacrity/Quickness has been made easier. It seems there aren't enough people who love the idea of memorization style combat.

Again - you're mistaking stubbornness, memorization for skill. I don't care if you like that. It's clear most don't and I just want people to play with and against. The bigger the playerbase, the more skilled everyone becomes. The people who want to remove skill from this game are people like you. People who don't want a healthy playerbase. You say you do and you suggest ideas to Arena Net that only further constricts the playerbase.

It took over 10 years but we're finally getting to that point where Arena Net recognizes the advice they've been given to date has been horrific. The unfortunate part is we're too far gone. The hope is they have Guild Wars 3 in development for a reset. Guild Wars 1 was innovative in its own ways, Guild Wars 2 was innovative in its own ways. Here's to Guild Wars 3 being a fun experience with hopefully better combat. And I get it - I come here and slam GW2. Most people aren't going to like that. The combat is okay-ish. It's bland MMO combat. But GW2 does great casual open world content. There is a lot to like about the decisions from GW1 to GW2. Combat is just not one of them.

Did u seen other mmorpg?  gw2 have least amount of skills on skillbar from all mmorpg I'm aware off. 

U literally compare gw2 with dota, DOTA and counter strike? Are u OK?????? That's completely different game types.

This is MMORPG.

Gw2 combat system is extremely simple and hence brilliant, it's different because of how little amount of skills and trait trees u have. It simple to pick up.

It is indeed action and tab hybrid but compare it to LOL is just lol, lmao even.

What memorization u even talking about, go check wow, 16 skills per hotbar, 6 hotbars on screen.

Edited Saturday at 08:43 AM by Triptaminas.4789

[Triptaminas.4789]

If u can't memorize 16 skills in mmorpg, I'm sorry that u are this way, but tuning game and balancing for lowest common denominator of playerbase is good way to lose rest of playerbase.

U compare it to call of duty, to lol, to dota.

U clearly never played other mmorpgs, u not aware why mmorpg fans actually play gw2. 

I'm sorry but I dislike players like you with all my heart. 

[Leger.3724]

4 hours ago, Triptaminas.4789 said:

If u can't memorize 16 skills in mmorpg, I'm sorry that u are this way, but tuning game and balancing for lowest common denominator of playerbase is good way to lose rest of playerbase.

U compare it to call of duty, to lol, to dota.

U clearly never played other mmorpgs, u not aware why mmorpg fans actually play gw2. 

I'm sorry but I dislike players like you with all my heart. 

Nobody. Plays.

Lets make it real simple for you: not enough people are playing so Arena Net is making changes to make the game modes more accessible.

MMO - it's massively, multiplayer, online.

MMO is not - Triptaminas gets a bunch of new players to farm because he can't be good at a game with a playerbase.

[Azinoth.1902]

This Guilds vs Guilds mentality led to a weird change I have noticed recently. The vast majority of the tags are now closed (or even hidden), you either have to go to discord with them or can't even join them at all. Worst case when you don't even see the tags on the map.

This is hurting the casual playerbase. Not everyone is able to dedicate several hours each day on organized raids, and honestly, it is not even necessary in order to enjoy the game.

Where are the open tags now? Taking some keeps and towers definitely doesn't require an organized squad with specific roles and be vocal on discord.

Why should I be vocal anymore? Those players will be gone in a couple of weeks and I will likely never see them again.
Not to mention the language barrier problems. I speak english. There is no point going to discord with german, french, spanish squads. I don't understand them.
I know that the playerbase is just not big enough.
This was already an issue with the server matchups, but now WR made this even worse.

[Anekto.8391]

After reading the start of the thread i just want to throw something in.

 

WvW is at the moment after World Restructuring designed around that fact that guilds are chose to populate a world. I think this is fine and its a good start and all.

Just maybe, dont know if its possibile. But just maybe the WvW guild slots need to be reduced in size or capacity. It would make balancing on anets part easier and stop big clusters which are harder to move. I know everyone wants to play with their friends but i dont think a guild of 500 ppl is all friends. At this point it seems those people join up together for an advantage in this competetive mode. So maybe the wvw guild slot needs to be reduced in size or an additional one added so that we have a 7th slot for wvw and anet doesnt need to have complains about the 6th slot. What is another slot to them anyways.

 

EDIT:

 

Additional thought. A Commander right now can lead a squad of 50ppl so a wvw guild slot should maybe consist of 50 or 100 ppl at max. To enable a guild tag to have their guild with them and some leeway maybe for different times for players to be online and participate. But i dont think it should be more than that.

Edited Wednesday at 11:16 AM by Anekto.8391
Additional thought for size

[Mabi black.1824]

On 9/14/2024 at 3:24 PM, Leger.3724 said:

Nobody. Plays.

Lets make it real simple for you: not enough people are playing so Arena Net is making changes to make the game modes more accessible.

MMO - it's massively, multiplayer, online.

MMO is not - Triptaminas gets a bunch of new players to farm because he can't be good at a game with a playerbase.

If this is the reason then use WR 1 time every 12 months and if necessary reduce the number of teams/servers if you don't have enough players. But given that player activity is still the same as in 2023/2024 and even increased compared to 2022, I guess this is not the reason for this change. This change is meant to make all servers more ''similar'' with each other '' to provide ''epic'' matches (PFFFF), but the way it's doing it brings with it the inevitable problem that no one cares about the team/server where it's randomly placed.

The result is: still having lopsided teams, so Anet is working on it, so much so that it is still a ''beta'' condition while to make it epic....... well we are light years away I would say. Normal, if I'm not involved in the ''team/server'' profile because it has to be only Guild, I don't even have to explain the reason for all this, I hope.

Edited Wednesday at 12:04 PM by Mabi black.1824

[Cuks.8241]

48 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

Additional thought. A Commander right now can lead a squad of 50ppl so a wvw guild slot should maybe consist of 50 or 100 ppl at max. To enable a guild tag to have their guild with them and some leeway maybe for different times for players to be online and participate. But i dont think it should be more than that.

This would immediately lead to guilds greatly increase the requirements. So only the most active and dedicated would get spots.

[Anekto.8391]

2 minutes ago, Cuks.8241 said:

This would immediately lead to guilds greatly increase the requirements. So only the most active and dedicated would get spots.

So lets assume the playerbase is a pyramid form in regards to skill. So the top guilds would be at the top of this playerbase pyramid making up the smallest amount of guilds decending down to the biggest amount of guilds at the bottom of the pyramid? Then lets assume we divide the pyramid from top down to bottom in slices with the same angle. Creating patches of the same area and stuffing those areas each into one world slot.

 

This sounds pretty balanceable to me? What do you think about it? What can you tell me would make no sense about it and why?

[Cuks.8241]

15 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

So lets assume the playerbase is a pyramid form in regards to skill. So the top guilds would be at the top of this playerbase pyramid making up the smallest amount of guilds decending down to the biggest amount of guilds at the bottom of the pyramid? Then lets assume we divide the pyramid from top down to bottom in slices with the same angle. Creating patches of the same area and stuffing those areas each into one world slot.

 

This sounds pretty balanceable to me? What do you think about it? What can you tell me would make no sense about it and why?

Factor the amount of players that are willing to manage and lead a guild. And maybe also command squads.

In addition if you have most dedicated on the top. How active would the bottom guilds be? 

[Anekto.8391]

1 minute ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Factor the amount of players that are willing to manage and lead a guild. And maybe also command squads.

In addition if you have most dedicated on the top. How active would the bottom guilds be? 

Right now the most active, dedicated and skillful will exert the most influence on the wvw experience and matchmaking. So this group of players will already self identify themselves to the devs making them easy to group and distribute. As those metrics decline towards the bottom of the pyramid the need to micro manage will decline aswell.

 

And for players without a guild they are the easiest to distribute. The problem i am trying to address is that 500 ppl alliances are not very easy to split up because you actually can not split them up. Therefore its difficult to balance around them.

 

Theres the option of either balancing around " Winner takes all and the best players will forever dominate everyone else and dictate" or "Distribute the power of the best players to give everyone a chance to mingle with their kind and fight their kind"

[Mabi black.1824]

1 hour ago, Anekto.8391 said:

But just maybe the WvW guild slots need to be reduced in size or capacity.

You can safely remove the ''maybe'' because if WR is to be the future of this game mode, it is clear that this is the first thing to do.

[Mabi black.1824]

On 9/6/2024 at 5:15 PM, Chaba.5410 said:

To have such a discussion, you'll have to go through the whole process of convincing another why these teams do not fit the concept of teams.  Because they certainly look like teams, act like teams, and function like teams.

I find it strange, but I can't rule out that it's just something about me. However all the teams that WR has provided me in these almost 3 months (as in the previous betas for that matter) are so far from what was the concept of team / server that I saw before. My old server was willing to try....... All the time. My old server had multiple guilds that would coordinate a common action for a defense/attack as soon as possible. in my old server all the various groups could count on each other. You could trust who you had on the right and who you had on the left. indeed you knew for sure who you had on the right and who you had on the left. In my old server you could coordinate which tags started and on which map at the reset. In my old server if things went wrong people didn't disappear. not to mention the free/individual players. because they were even more recognizable than guilds, more reliable not to say the foundations of the server itself. 

and finally my old server had a pride, had an interest in the scoring system, despite everything, and despite all the problems that the balance had, because we had the hope of seeing it improve through some valid and interesting updates. Now I haven't written my server name, because you are free to write any name that will always be valid in reference to the old system on a server basis. Something I absolutely didn't face with the new WR mechanic, but I don't know your experience was different from mine.

p.s. even get a big guild/alliance that takes everything while you make your kittens, and doesn't look at everyone else or the interest of the server, without blaming them because in fact at the moment we have no reason for a collective interest, you're still so far from what my old server's gaming experience was.

Edited Wednesday at 01:08 PM by Mabi black.1824

[Anekto.8391]

13 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

and finally my old server had a pride, had an interest in the scoring system, despite everything, and despite all the problems that the balance had, because we had the hope of seeing it improve through some valid and interesting updates. Now I haven't written my server name, because you are free to write any name that will always be valid in reference to the old system on a server basis. Something I absolutely didn't face with the new WR mechanic, but I don't know your experience was different from mine.

Basically the old server system was a system that provided a foundation through the initial seeding of servers and a self invite function to players for choosing that server. The only problem ensued with the guilds/players that had no sense of loyalty to the pick they made and skewed matchmaking for all other players. Usually a server consisted of part loyal and recognizable people that you encountered and knew either by guild tag or by player name. And the second part was players that transferred to or off the server with no sense of building towards a common goal.

 

Servers with max capacity had usually more loyal players than those with lots of room for incoming and outgoing players and the benefit of close to no cost of a transfer whereas on max capacity you would lose your slot on a now closed server(a final decision) and you would pay a premium if you ever wanted to get back to it if it kept stable.

 

 

EDIT:

 

The people inclined to server hopping and joining and leaving servers in their own self interest should already have held the interest that servers DONT become stable as that would ensure servers would always be there to hop to with low gem costs and they would be able to move and do as they please. Their would have been an unstable server or group environment.

Edited Wednesday at 01:17 PM by Anekto.8391
Final remark about self serving interest

[Mabi black.1824]

10 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

And the second part was players that transferred to or off the server with no sense of building towards a common goal.

true. That we've all seen grows quite a bit exactly after the first beta of WR, like the gold thing, all the guilds hopping left and right desperately looking for new players or other groups for alliances. In fact, it's been 3 years now that I've been writing that the effects of WR have begun and we have cashed them in more than 3 years ago. WVW suffered a very hard blow then, not now with the permanent version, as the damage had already been done in good part. in terms of teams/servers.

I mean..... It is Anet who decides. you can only adapt. If Anet starts telling you 3 years ago that the server will no longer make sense to anyone...... What result would you expect? especially in a server-based game?

Edited Wednesday at 01:21 PM by Mabi black.1824

[Anekto.8391]

8 minutes ago, Mabi black.1824 said:

true. That we've all seen grows quite a bit exactly after the first beta of WR, like the gold thing, all the guilds hopping left and right desperately looking for new players or other groups for alliances. In fact, it's been 3 years now that I've been writing that the effects of WR have begun and we have cashed them in more than 3 years ago. WVW suffered a very hard blow then, not now with the permanent version, as the damage had already been done in good part. in terms of teams/servers.

Yes there was nothing stopping server transfers and server hopping and the resulting match manipulation. So it basically was partly already WR. Just some of us "grew up" in a stable server environment with more loyal people than people without allegiance and self interest. It seems to have been a luxury and maybe something the ones hopping servers never understood or got.

 

EDIT:

 

But thats my nostalgia truly servers could never be really balanced the way they were with or without server hopping it would be not balanced. If the goal is balance WR is the way forward i think.

Edited Wednesday at 01:27 PM by Anekto.8391

[One more for the road.8950]

14 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

So lets assume the playerbase is a pyramid form in regards to skill. So the top guilds would be at the top of this playerbase pyramid making up the smallest amount of guilds decending down to the biggest amount of guilds at the bottom of the pyramid? Then lets assume we divide the pyramid from top down to bottom in slices with the same angle. Creating patches of the same area and stuffing those areas each into one world slot.

 

This sounds pretty balanceable to me? What do you think about it? What can you tell me would make no sense about it and why?

Yes, the guilds of today kinda do have a pyramid shape and have kind of always had it. The "best" guilds that will wipe the floors or do pure combat content are the ones where people knows the most about how to play and why, and usually have the best commanders in that particular content. Being able to read the enemy and terrain as well as knowing strategies, tactics and how to adapt on the fly. Those guilds are usually capped, have a smaller number of members and often some sort of requirement of available time and to show your skill level to join, either to know what they have to work with or because they don't want to spend time teaching people from scratch. They want their type of content when they play, and not have their content ruined by flaky or unreliable members not showing up. People in those kind of guilds have often done the "climb up" through other guilds, but sometimes it's just people that prefer that type of content from other games as well, so they go straight into those guilds because they share the mindset and do the work.

Now, where this goes from "slice the pyramid" to a balance problem is not the amount of hours you spend in WvW but what kind of content you prefer in a game, what plays style suits you the most, how much you are willing/interested to invest in getting more skilled and what is available of people willing to put in the extra work to run guilds or do steady commanding. The less "set in stone" the requirements are, the larger the guilds, as they need a larger pool of people both to participate and to command. Down to the huge large community guilds that can be 500 members but only have 15 online building defensive siege during prime time.

Into this comes the variables of things like how much time the "skilled" players and commanders have to or want to play. That's where "easy to balance" gets ruined. Being a skilled player or commander from the "top" of the pyramid doesn't mean you always have a life that makes you able to game as much as you want and therefore be in that kind of guild. Or maybe you might even be a "top of pyramid" player or commander that prefer less sweaty content. Or maybe you have seasons or parts of the year where  you and/or your friends are more active. Or maybe the current content is boring or not interesting to you so you sit it out a few days, you have other things to spend your free hours on than a game mode that currently doesn't offer what you want. Then you have the human aspect: There will always be drama, there will always be commanders, guilds members and guild leaders that don't fit you, there will be always be divas and drama queens, there will be people driven by conflict, there will be people wanting to police others - and there will always be people that prefer to just play their game and please leave all that at the door and lets all be friends. Casuals and sweats in both camps.

That said, as it is today I don't see a huge balance problem per se, where I would go in and find completely dead MUs during the linked server system, there's always some kind of content going on where I join a WR team. When taking the entire week into consideration and not a cherry picked moment, activity is a lot more balanced than it was. To put my personal take into the human aspect problem with balancing, what I find is that it's much easier to find the type of people you want to play with and stay with them in the WR system (I have a little too much self-declared server leaders/dictators and guilds trying to police servers and how people play by themselves "PTSD"). Now I am not seeing people spread all across the place due to personal conflicts, different levels of "I can't take it any more" and "screw this". I see less "toxic chat" and butting into how other people play (and don't pretend the ones that's "beginner friendly" or promote more casual play aren't as bad as the ones that prefer sweaty fight content) and if the team isn't up to your liking, it's just a small amount of time until reshuffle anyways. There's been some large alliance guild drama and/or splits as expected, but even then it's just a matter of waiting out the current team time before a new team and new environment. It feels fresher and you aren't caught stuck in old stale dynamics or conflicts.

Tl;dr: I went a bit off tangent there, but I hope the part about "easy to balance" by "slicing the pyramid" goes a bit down the drain the moment you see that the guilds, their members, playtime, level of organization and how skilled they are aren't static values.

[Mabi black.1824]

7 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

But thats my nostalgia truly servers could never be really balanced the way they were with or without server hopping it would be not balanced. If the goal is balance WR is the way forward i think.

My answer to this, my friend, is that life is made up of ''compromises'' often what's in between is the best thing to do. 😉

[Anekto.8391]

14 minutes ago, One more for the road.8950 said:

Tl;dr: I went a bit off tangent there, but I hope the part about "easy to balance" by "slicing the pyramid" goes a bit down the drain the moment you see that the guilds, their members, playtime, level of organization and how skilled they are aren't static values.

The thing i want to address with the slice of pyramid is simply that skilled players or lets call them game deciding/influential players are less distributed than casual players that have lots of different stuff going on and will less predictable influence the outcome of a wvw match or skirmish. Capping the amount of those players than can group up will ease the burden of balancing around of big chunks of them( maybe they never even chunked up? its a speculation of a different poster). And my point is and was that 50-100 ppl in a guild are enough to call friends and/or be able to form a highly competetive guild. And this would make balancing easier no matter what in my eyes.

 

EDIT:

 

Right now i think WR tries to do three things.

 

It address the issue of balance through incessant server transfers.

And it opens up the possibility for friends to easily be together in wvw through their guild.

And it gives access for guild teams to form a competetive team that stays together in the WR environment.

 

Making it not random assignment for everyone or match making assignment. It retains relationships among players while give a shot at a more balanced approach.

-----

 

A different approach would be make wvw teams in the guild tab available like they are available for pvp teams. But i rather have a seperate guild slot for this if anet cares.

Edited Wednesday at 01:48 PM by Anekto.8391

[Mabi black.1824]

On 9/6/2024 at 6:25 PM, Zyreva.1078 said:

You aren't forced to "not care"

The fact is that there is no one who forces me. It's something that comes naturally to me to let the 'competitive' aspect between servers slip away. I can't perceive it as ''my'' server and I know that in 4 weeks it will actually no longer be my server etc etc. The time aspect has its importance here. It turns all things like : it's not worth it. you want my garry .... Take it in the end it's not really my Garry. Something like that.

It is something similar to the last hours of the game even in the old system. You knew that by now the games are defined and you let everything run. Here, this, only now it is in this state all the time of 4 weeks.😭

Edited Wednesday at 01:55 PM by Mabi black.1824

[One more for the road.8950]

6 minutes ago, Anekto.8391 said:

The thing i want to address with the slice of pyramid is simply that skilled players or lets call them game deciding/influential players are less distributed than casual players that have lots of different stuff going on and will less predictable influence the outcome of a wvw match or skirmish. Capping the amount of those players than can group up will ease the burden of balancing around of big chunks of them( maybe they never even chunked up? its a speculation of a different poster). And my point is and was that 50-100 ppl in a guild are enough to call friends and/or be able to form a highly competetive guild. And this would make balancing easier no matter what in my eyes.

One of the problems we saw already on the first team shuffle in EU was that guilds that wanted the same type of content but weren't in the same alliance guild were put on the same teams. The two that was probably the best match against each other both talking separate guilds and alliance guild as a whole even ended up on the same team.

Since then some of these have split up tho, "specialized" more if you will, and it seems that has helped.