Why did they change WvW?

[Anov.4237]

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

[Anekto.8391]

21 minutes ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

I am working on a pitch for a new game with big fights similar to WvW. so you will have to wait. otherwise i dont know what comes close. :^)

[Aeolus.3615]

2 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

if people stops caring for wvw, fights stop from happening, there's no lag and no complains.... wvw fixed.

[Santo.2419]

I actually think the 50% for wall patch was one of the better changes. It immediately created longer and fun fights in towers for skirmishes of roamers and zergs alike. Being able to patch so low was such a block of good content. It makes people have to think if its worth it for the resources, and can be used for wearing down supplies of enemy.

though, not to disagree with you fully, just that the example you gave happens to be one I think was a healthy change for the game.

although I will miss those quick patches cutting a Zerg in half or stopping them seconds before entering 😆

[Dawdler.8521]

3 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

Wait who are you asking? 

Because everyone always say the only way  to play WvW proper is fighting. Zerging. Boonballing.

PPT and defending is loathed. 

Are you asking the forum wanting this or Anet?

[Anov.4237]

10 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Wait who are you asking? 

Wanted to know why they changed things? maybe someone knew. They changed it from Server vs Servers to Guild vs Guild. Funny when most of the problems was big guilds.

[Dawdler.8521]

29 minutes ago, Anov.4237 said:

Wanted to know why they changed things? maybe someone knew. They changed it from Server vs Servers to Guild vs Guild. Funny when most of the problems was big guilds.

The question was about WR? You only mentioned walls and gates, that’s a whole other patch 🤷‍♂️

The problem was that world size varied from 1x to 6x or something like that which made it hard to even out. Worlds could be stuck in the same tiers for 6+ months with no way out, or end up bouncing like lava lamps between a tier they could never win and a tier they could never loose. You can’t just delete one low populated world without messing up the whole tier system.

A much more flexible system focused on your guild was designed, something that could add or delete tiers based on the shifting population and thus adjust itself to the now aging game mode. Something where you couldn’t bandwagon and stack worlds so much. It’s really just pure luck that no other game has come around all these years years that was good enough to collapse WvW to critically low population levels where you would have lost your world regardless.

Does that answer your question?

Edited November 29 by Dawdler.8521

[RisingDawn.5796]

10 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Wanted to know why they changed things? maybe someone knew. They changed it from Server vs Servers to Guild vs Guild. Funny when most of the problems was big guilds.

Going back to World linkings wouldn't fix your issues much. changes to upgrading, siege , dolyaks and such, are a separate issue, which happened over a decade of this game being out.

I used to scout for my original server by myself and help run upgrades, nowadays especially with the latest changes I agree it's pointless, it got more pointless how out of control the balance became with the server linkings that happened, but many people won't bother scouting and join anything organized, so it gets boring for everyone, apart from people who cloud, cap undefended objectives and enjoy it.

I don't know what the new scoring will bring, but then again, some EU Servers had so much off peak coverage (night) compared to day time, although winning matchups was not for the sake of winning for rewards and a community goal. To beat x rival server like during the first 3 years playing this the game mode, rather to climb tiers for a different matchup when necessary now.

Sure, you had servers and some Communities, who got linked together which wasn't perfect by any means, but you would see Transfers happen so often, nowadays alt accounts and such, so 'winning' coverage wars hasn't been important for over a decade, since the Last WvW tournament, where everyone was not burned out by the third season.

The problem is also not big guilds, when we had  many more active wvw guilds 10 years ago or more recently, lots of community guilds, open field, gvg guilds and commanders to train new players even, but neither systems, nor the original one which still has imbalances, with more active population, can distribute the active wvw populations, stop it from being manipulated and to balance the population properly. 

Edited November 30 by RisingDawn.5796

[Shiyo.3578]

6 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly.

Because the devs are friends with boonball "fight" guilds.

 

6 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Looking for another game any suggestions?

There isn't, which makes this whole thing even more ridiculous because they have a complete monopoly on a game mode that hundreds of thousands want to play, yet they design it for their 100 friends.

[igmolicious.5986]

19 minutes ago, Shiyo.3578 said:

Because the devs are friends with boonball "fight" guilds.

There isn't, which makes this whole thing even more ridiculous because they have a complete monopoly on a game mode that hundreds of thousands want to play, yet they design it for their 100 friends.

I don't think it's so much that they're "friends," but that the council discord is by invitation only, and the rules tend to dissuade inviting people that might disagree with the current direction (if a person is removed from that discord, the people that vouched for them are not able to vouch for anyone else for I believe a year); add on top of that the tendency of humans to be more inclined to form connections with like-minded people (so those like-minded people are more likely to get that invite in the first place), and you wind up with the situation that we currently have, where balance is decided by people that almost exclusively play boonball/large scale. I don't think it's malicious, I think it's just short-sighted.

[Galmac.4680]

Because nobody asked for it?

[Dadnir.5038]

11 minutes ago, Galmac.4680 said:

Because nobody asked for it?

Or because they think that changing things once in a while is a good way to keep providing a "fresh" experience.

[Sheff.4851]

Quote

that the council discord is by invitation only

It's not invite-only, but it does use a vouch system, which is what you're referring to later.

Quote

the rules tend to dissuade inviting people that might disagree with the current direction (if a person is removed from that discord, the people that vouched for them are not able to vouch for anyone else for I believe a year)

Sort of. It's not about disagreement, it's about participation. Anybody can join, but you need to be vouched for by existing members of the community. If you vouch for people and they end up not participating in any discussions, and never say anything (like I have), you lose your vouch perms. It's not about vouching for people who will agree with current direction, it's about vouching for people who can articulate clear, concise, and critical feedback.

Quote

where balance is decided by people that almost exclusively play boonball/large scale

There's a number of small-scale guilds, and a handful of roamers, that also participate.

[Gendalfs.7521]

9 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

There's a number of small-scale guilds, and a handful of roamers, that also participate.

So youre insider? So what people say about boonballs? Are they satisfied? Maybe they dont talk about boonballs at all?

[Cameirus.8407]

7 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

because the WvW devs are part of big zerg guilds who just want to field fight, and are designing the entire game mode around that and making all other aspects of it impossible and irrelevant.

[Sheff.4851]

3 minutes ago, Gendalfs.7521 said:

So youre insider? So what people say about boonballs? Are they satisfied? Maybe they dont talk about boonballs at all?

I'm in it, though I can't vouch for people for the next six months, because the last few people I vouched for never participated. The only thread in the last six months about boonballs is a few hundred replies long, and is mostly how nobody likes the current four-support meta for organized groups (which is a general consensus that I've repeated here, multiple times). Organized group players don't like quad support any more than solo players do, but organized group players use the most effective tactics available to them, so it's what people run.

[igmolicious.5986]

24 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

It's not invite-only, but it does use a vouch system, which is what you're referring to later.

Sort of. It's not about disagreement, it's about participation. Anybody can join, but you need to be vouched for by existing members of the community. If you vouch for people and they end up not participating in any discussions, and never say anything (like I have), you lose your vouch perms. It's not about vouching for people who will agree with current direction, it's about vouching for people who can articulate clear, concise, and critical feedback.

There's a number of small-scale guilds, and a handful of roamers, that also participate.

Just to clarify, how do you feel requiring at least two people to vouch for you is different from being by invitation? Can someone join without being vouched for, and read everything but just not participate?

Edit: also curious to know about what percentage of that group is large-scale, small-scale, and roaming. Very hard to tell with "a number" if that's a significant percentage, or just a few.

Edited November 29 by igmolicious.5986

[Sheff.4851]

6 minutes ago, igmolicious.5986 said:

Just to clarify, how do you feel requiring at least two people to vouch for you is different from being by invitation? Can someone join without being vouched for, and read everything but just not participate?

Couldn't tell you, honestly -- it's not a Discord that I admin, and I'm not familiar with all of the ins and outs of how it works.

Quote

Edit: also curious to know about what percentage of that group is large-scale, small-scale, and roaming. Very hard to tell with "a number" if that's a significant percentage, or just a few.

Well over half, probably closer to 75%, play in squads between 10 and 30 people. There's only 2-3 GvG players that I know in there, and I'm reasonably familiar with the GvG scene.

[igmolicious.5986]

7 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

Couldn't tell you, honestly -- it's not a Discord that I admin, and I'm not familiar with all of the ins and outs of how it works.

Well over half, probably closer to 75%, play in squads between 10 and 30 people. There's only 2-3 GvG players that I know in there, and I'm reasonably familiar with the GvG scene.

Fair enough, though I'd argue if it's not publicly advertised and player's aren't encouraged to go there on their own to at least read, if not participate, it at least comes across as private/invite only, even if it's not. I'd also argue that at the very least 25+ groups are commonly running support-heavy boonball comps, unless they are pugmanders and not alliance/guild groups, but I'll concede that they are different from GvG groups.

[mungozen.2379]

8 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

Planetside 2 is possibly the game you want to try.  3 faction global war with multiple roles supporting solos to large comps.  It also is F2P as the base game with a monthly sub upgrade option.

As to why they changed it?  The devs are not in touch with the game.  Taking away Server Identities was the worst move, the mechanical changes have just forced big blobs into the predominant playstyle, at the expense of everything else.  The shortsightedness is probably caused by Anet or NCSoft funneling money away from development and trying to find cost effective alternatives to continuing to develop the game mode. 

If you have ever watched a company put a product into maintenance mode, you can see where this is going.  New game on the horizon (GW3), and a reduction in effort into improving the game, but more effort into monetizing it.  If you are putting money into this game and dissatisfied, you are being milked, and the company won't change it's stance until they have bled the players dry or they all leave.

I mean, this change has been in the work for 5+ years now, with 3+ years of actual game changes, and no signs that what we have today is better than 5 years ago, and no signs that this will end anytime soon, if ever.  The collateral has been active players not playing WvW, or outright quitting the game.  That is an abysmal track record for a product they are actively trying to engage people in.

 

PS - I know some of you love WvW and think some or all the changes have been great.  I am happy for you, enjoy it.  

Edited November 29 by mungozen.2379

[Shiyo.3578]

1 hour ago, Sheff.4851 said:

There's a number of small-scale guilds, and a handful of roamers, that also participate.

They can participate, but they are clearly ignored.

Proof: Perma stealth thief and Willbender are still running rampant.

If it's the same discord I remember, if you disagree with the majority you get muted because it's just 1 gigantic echo chamber.

Edited November 29 by Shiyo.3578

[Sheff.4851]

5 minutes ago, Shiyo.3578 said:

They can participate, but they are clearly ignored.

Proof: Perma stealth thief and Willbender are still running rampant.

If it's the same discord I remember, if you disagree with the majority you get muted because it's just 1 gigantic echo chamber.

Must be a different Discord you're thinking of then.

[Shiyo.3578]

6 minutes ago, Sheff.4851 said:

Must be a different Discord you're thinking of then.

Was the SPvP discord, had CMC in it. Doubt it's a different one.

 

[SlateSloan.3654]

9 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

dont know what change? i dont see any problem with wvw.

[TheGrimm.5624]

9 hours ago, Anov.4237 said:

Why did they change it?. What was the problem?. Now its a mess. Loved to defend when outnumbered. When u could close walls and gates behind enemy. Now peeps dont care anymore. Dont know why they made it so big fight friendly. Im only playing WvW. Looking for another game any suggestions?

Anet did not state a reason. Some of reasons given from players were:

• Walls were closed at the wrong times
• Closed walls created bottlenecks
• Walls were closed when comms wanted them open
• Closed walls prevented farming
• Closed walls increased time to take
• Closed wall decreased the fights at objectives

There were others. 

To me it came down to defense minded players versus offense minded players. But again that was forum speculation with little to no insight from Anet on the actual why of it.