WvW Work In Progress

[Shining One.1635]

@Grim West.3194 said:The point is to give people points for having a high KDR and for having a high kill count and for having a high activity level (while fighting). Everything that is involved in fighting should be rewarded and encouraged. Engaging the enemy even if you lose should be rewarded. There isn't any need to penalize people.Rewarding people for fighting and dying will encourage fights. However, giving points for high KDR still discourages fights, unless fighting and dying is more rewarding than maintaining a high KDR. I think rewarding kills and deaths (to a less extent than kills) would be sufficient motivation. However, it can't be too rewarding or we would have kill trading.@Grim West.3194 said:Right now people are penalized for fighting and having a high KDR if they don't go pound on doors ad nauseum.How exactly are people penalized for fighting and having a high KDR?

[Vova.2640]

Some posts here did give me an idea.What if when there is a fight large enough to pop OJs, all who participate in that fight (do dmg, get kills, do healing, res etc) will get some sort of reward similar, for example to how you get a reward from flipping a camp or defending a tower.Both sides participating will get something regardless who won.Idk just a thought. Personally I do not really believe something like this is even needed.

[GUFF.5692]

I do not agree with making siege weaker. Instead I feel you should be looking into making the smaller, less popular tasks more important and rewarding such as defending camps/dolys, etc. This will help allow smaller groups to contribute more (and be rewarded) instead of only rewarding the larger zergs with faster tower, keep, castle flips.

[Grim West.3194]

@Shining One.1635 said:

@Grim West.3194 said:Right now people are penalized for fighting and having a high KDR if they don't go pound on doors ad nauseum.How exactly are people penalized for fighting and having a high KDR?

Ask Maguuma. Right now if you fight and don't pound on doors you lose, no matter how many of the enemy you kill. It's that simple. And that is as boring as it is wrong.

[Shining One.1635]

@Grim West.3194 said:Ask Maguuma. Right now if you fight and don't pound on doors you lose, no matter how many of the enemy you kill.I would argue that Maguuma loses because they choose not to fight the people repeatedly k-training their borderland.

[Baldrick.8967]

Thanks for the post op, letting us know that something might be worked on as time on other projects allows and that items might change or be removed from the list depending on what other projects are being worked on, and that world changes are many months away at least.

WvW looks pretty far down the list of priorities - whole new living world chapters, constant tweaks in other game modes and issued fixed, new maps for living world, etc whilst wvw gets 'some changes some time in the future, maybe'.

[shiri.4257]

Ninja PPT is WvW Strategerie. Some find it fun, others find it amusing. Similar to the preference for an omniblob or nut hug guild.

[Voltekka.2375]

How did this thread end up being turning into a matchup thread? I hope we will see more changes, changes for the better, but wvw, sadly, is not a top priority...

[Kekkei Genkai Kage.5930]

Last Stand? Part of the Proposed Skirmish scoring system?

[Nuka Cola.8520]

You guys need to rework your reward system completely. Until that's done, wvw will stay dead. I mean, who wants to choose between, say, five reward tracks that all give you the same useless garbage aka Blues and Greens? Do you guys think its exciting having 30 chests in your inventory, open all of them, and get nothing else but crap you salvage? Is salvaging supposed to be exciting???

Its such an easy fix too. Create new GOOD LOOKING (this is important, no one needs Obsidian 2.0 skin) weapons AND armor pieces that can br acquired RANDOMLY in any of the reward tracks. This will give everyone a meaningful grind, and opening chests wouldn't be just "oh look, another Green crap i salvage automatically". It'd be the same as grinding Fractals. You do it for the rare drops, not the pitiful 2g (or whatever it is per chest) inside a chest or garbage you'll be salvaging.

I want to have an RNG goal (yes, RNG! getting X skin at the end of the reward track is too easy.). Farming those Fractal skins back in 2012 was the ONLY grind i enjoyed in this game since launch.

[LetoII.3782]

@Shining One.1635 said:

@Grim West.3194 said:Ask Maguuma. Right now if you fight and don't pound on doors you lose, no matter how many of the enemy you kill.I would argue that Maguuma loses because they choose not to fight the people repeatedly k-training their borderland.

They'd hop map if mag did.We've all done that dance before, on one side or the other.Better to limit choices for action of any sort.

[Zetsumeii.7629]

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 Sorry I had missed you QoL discussion! Would you ever consider tomes of knowledge to award WvW levels if they were to be used within a borderland? Maybe it could award 1/4 of a level or something; that way people won’t feel cheated if they already had a high rank?

[Lehrling.1472]

@"Diku.2546" said:Ben,

In the history of Sports...Team Spirit is at the heart of what drives many players & fans to fanatically support them...this is what's missing from our current Match Making process for WvW.

Players need & want an emotional reason to fight for...

Without this reason...WvW will be like "meh"...it's another shoot-em up game mode with no deeper meaning to drive players to engage it.

WvW could be the next eSport SuperBowl with the right design & vision driving it forward.

Before investing heavily into coding this "Upgrade" to WvW...

Consider this concept - Eternal Team Spirit & Ephemeral Guilds

Team Spirit needs to be at the heart of WvW...while Guilds are the souls tasked with making this eternal heart to beat.

Remove the Fixed 3 Tier structure in WvW...instead of re-designing Match-Ups to systematically destroy Server communities that in the past allowed players to enjoy a more stable & broader sense of Team Spirit in the "Long Term". WvW desperately needs a re-design of its Heart & Soul in order to make it properly thrive.

Haven't you noticed that the current 3 Tier Match-Making design often encourages an 800-pound gorilla in the room scenario that consistently follows a boring pattern despite efforts to manipulate things through complex coding?

Why not Change the WvW Match Making design so that it naturally leads All Servers into a King of the Hill type Match-Ups?

Why not Reward & Encourage players to attack a higher ranked server in relation to their Home Server...while exponentially Reducing their Rewards for attacking any lower ranked ones?

Why not Implement a Match-Up process that naturally balances itself out using a simple design?

Why not Create a Competitive game mode that encourages a long term solution that actively engages players to be emotionally invested in their Server's Team?

Why not Change the Flawed 3 Tier Match-Making into a simple King of the Hill design for NA & EU regions.

How difficult is it to Re-purpose our existing "Server-Guesting" mechanic & let players pick for themselves which Server that they want to fight against using "Weekly Limits" on How Many & Which Servers (both NA and EU) to fight against?

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/guesting-is-coming

Server Guesting is already deployed....why not tailor it for WvW to use?

Yours truly,Diku

p.s.Any Vote for Helpful or Thumbs Up would be appreciated to help tell ANet they should re-consider their Work In Progress before it's too late.

Highlander - MacLeod receives The Prize

You would make a good Politician.You managed to say so much but at the same time completly nothing of worth.

WvW could be the next eSport SuperBowl with the right design & vision driving it forward.

You actually believe this? And how many people actually want this even?

Why not Implement a Match-Up process that naturally balances itself out using a simple design?

And how you want to do it?You cant just ask questions without telling us how exactly this should change.

What simple design?Enlighten me.

Why not Change the Flawed 3 Tier Match-Making into a simple King of the Hill design for NA & EU regions.

Why do you not tell us first why we should first.

Why not Reward & Encourage players to attack a higher ranked server in relation to their Home Server...while exponentially Reducing their Rewards for attacking any lower ranked ones?

So you want to force people to attack the strongest server.Removing any thought of tactic and free decision.

How difficult is it to Re-purpose our existing "Server-Guesting" mechanic & let players pick for themselves which Server that they want to fight against using "Weekly Limits" on How Many & Which Servers (both NA and EU) to fight against?

You seem to think this is easy to do. But hey , you formed the sentence in a question form.So maybe you want an answer to this. But i doubt you want any.

Any Vote for Helpful or Thumbs Up would be appreciated to help tell ANet they should re-consider their Work In Progress before it's too late.

Sorry but nothing is helpfull here.Like i said , you are only asking questions without any form of advice or idea HOW to change WvW.

Before investing heavily into coding this "Upgrade" to WvW...

So you say your ideas would not need "heavy coding" , but you dont tell Arenanet what you exactly want to be coded.

"Facepalm"

[Jski.6180]

Target caps is a must to look at for both support effect and dmg effects. Right now scorge hits 10 targets dmg/support but not many other classes have any effects that hits this many targets so you see a lot more scorges because of this. Its 5 targets or 10 targets caps do not allow haves and have nots with this type of effect or you will destroy this game mood.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Grim West.3194 said:

@Shining One.1635 said:

@Grim West.3194 said:Lol. Which would be much better than what we have now. The "winning server" hugs doors all day and all night. Sooo much fun. That isn't victory, it's pathetic. We have servers running from T1 to get to actual fights. Yeah hugging doors is such a winning design.

Obviously KDR shouldn't be the only component in winning. So should kill counts, number of fights, etc. They all should matter. Everything that is about actually fighting each other should matter. And should be encouraged. That means making KDR, etc matter more than it does now.How will making KDR matter encourage the "winning server" to not hug doors and come out and fight? As I said before, people avoid fights now when the cost of death is only 2 points. If you increase the cost of death by making KDR matter, people will go to further extremes to avoid uncertain fights.

Just to be clear, I support any initiative that encourages fighting. However, I think anything that penalizes death, such as your suggestion of making KDR matter, will only serve to discourage fighting.

The point is to give people points for having a high KDR and for having a high kill count and for having a high activity level (while fighting). Everything that is involved in fighting should be rewarded and encouraged. Engaging the enemy even if you lose should be rewarded. There isn't any need to penalize people.

Right now people are penalized for fighting and having a high KDR if they don't go pound on doors ad nauseum.

That doesnt really make any sense as this "activity" assumes that the enemy is more active than you are, since they die more. Without the enemy being active you wouldnt be active or get any kills.

They

are the ones coming back to fight, not you.

... so...

those with less KDR get more points?

Killing someone is easy.

Dying and coming back to fight the enemy killing you the last time, that takes more courage and should be rewarded, dont you think? Or you dont want fights?

[Euryon.9248]

@Grim West.3194 said:

@Shining One.1635 said:

@Grim West.3194 said:Right now people are penalized for fighting and having a high KDR if they don't go pound on doors ad nauseum.How exactly are people penalized for fighting and having a high KDR?

Ask Maguuma. Right now if you fight and don't pound on doors you lose, no matter how many of the enemy you kill. It's that simple. And that is as boring as it is wrong.

I would argue that Mag is being rewarded rather than penalized. They don't want to move up, as they are constantly tanking to stay out of T1. Ask people on Mag whether they want KDR to count for more in the warscore.

I almost think that to encourage fighting you'd want to scrap KDR and just reward kills, with minimal penalty for death (aside from what we already have: losing out on kills/bags, having to wp and run back to the fight, possibly getting ganked on the way, etc.). If you reward kills only, I suspect more people would be willing to jump into the fray since death wouldn't directly hurt your warscore. Might have to be tiered though, due to disparate coverage (ie., the first 10 kills would add more to warscore than the 3000-3010th kills).

[joneirikb.7506]

Regarding the argument about how to reward fighting against enemy players:

One option would be to give no, or much less, rewards for taking an objective that isn't defended by enemy players. Basically link the rewards of all the things in WvW to having players of at least 2 sides into the same event/situation. could even scale it that way, 20 vs 5 gives less rewards for the 20, but more for the 5.

[Chops.1472]

Not sure if this is the correct thread to raise this but I've had this thought for a long while. Why not provide additional skirmish points for certain activities? The more mundane tasks can be the ones that reward more Skirmish points. E,g, escorting yaks, defending camps.

In addition, capturing T3 vs T0 objectives can also reward more points to the attackers. The longer an objective held, the more points it will provide to the attacking team who captures it. The max number of skirmish points awarded can be limited by a time frame, say, 24 hours. Capturing an objective that has been held for 36 hours will offer the same amount of points as capturing an objective that has been held for 24 hours.

This may ¯_(ツ)_/¯ offer players more reason to defend Towers and Camps.

[Dawdler.8521]

@joneirikb.7506 said:Regarding the argument about how to reward fighting against enemy players:

One option would be to give no, or much less, rewards for taking an objective that isn't defended by enemy players. Basically link the rewards of all the things in WvW to having players of at least 2 sides into the same event/situation. could even scale it that way, 20 vs 5 gives less rewards for the 20, but more for the 5.The problem with the later part (scaling points on numbers) is that it create a toxic enviroment where people will basicly say dont come play with us we dont want you scaling down our rewards. Thats really, really bad for a game that thrives on group play and random encounters. We already have the soft version of this kind of elitism (guild raids that dont want people near them cause they are too elite or duelists ranting about you interfering), we dont need Anet to encourage it across the whole gamemode.

[DeceiverX.8361]

@Grim West.3194 said:

@Shining One.1635 said:

@Grim West.3194 said:Right now people are penalized for fighting and having a high KDR if they don't go pound on doors ad nauseum.How exactly are people penalized for fighting and having a high KDR?

Ask Maguuma. Right now if you fight and don't pound on doors you lose, no matter how many of the enemy you kill. It's that simple. And that is as boring as it is wrong.

If you 10v1 someone 10 times, you're still 10-0 and all 10 players get loot ten times. And it's even dumber to increase that potency.Maybe if they divided the PPK by the number of players that dealt any amount of damage to the player it'd be better. But then Mag would still get rolled in PPT because their KDR would mean nothing as far as points because most of their kills come from outnumbering in ganks.

Mag claims it chooses not to win PPT so I do not understand this argument to begin with. They literally let their BL's get attacked and captured and don't respond because they claim they want to fight in EBG and not deal with the siege-humping and coverage wars in T1.

If you're not interested in playing WvW which is designed to be oriented around the concept of siege warfare (slow assaults and resource denial), consider playing something entirely different. It's asking to change WvW into something it isn't even supposed to be.

[synergy.5809]

i know your answer will probably just be "the balance team handles the balance" but how much longer will you keep using that excuse? You do know other than server / world balance issues, the class / skill balance is the other major problem with WvW. Maybe its about time the WvW team does the balancing or the balance team communicates more with the community.

[joneirikb.7506]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"joneirikb.7506" said:Regarding the argument about how to reward fighting against enemy players:

One option would be to give no, or much less, rewards for taking an objective that isn't defended by enemy players. Basically link the rewards of all the things in WvW to having players of at least 2 sides into the same event/situation. could even scale it that way, 20 vs 5 gives less rewards for the 20, but more for the 5.The problem with the later part (scaling points on numbers) is that it create a toxic enviroment where people will basicly say dont come play with us we dont want you scaling down our rewards. Thats really, really bad for a game that thrives on group play and random encounters. We already have the soft version of this kind of elitism (guild raids that dont want people near them cause they are too elite or duelists ranting about you interfering), we dont need Anet to encourage it across the whole gamemode.

I agree on that. But at the same time, without some sort of scaling, a system like that would really encourage "spy accounts" to just run around and stand in a tower, to get full participation.

The scaling wouldn't need to apply to everything though, could be limited to specific things (most notably points).

[shiri.4257]

As a proud member of PETA, I would love to see more guild images. We can start with bunnies, the playboy bunny in particular. Pandas too, cuz everyone loves pandas.

[Redponey.8352]

Hi there , Ladies and Gentlemen,I follow this post and others about WvW because i'm aware about what coming on !But i'm asking questions, when could we have a WvW real balanced patch? Most of fights because i would not say all fights, are won by number/condition dmg tank (for most of player, i exclude hardcore players).For example , resistance debuff into immobilize is far too strong, because if you want to get close to ennemies , they just will back and dmg/debuff and win the fight.You should also be able to see that most of people that have expansion(HoT/PoF) play only new specialization and corebuild are so behind them , then we have not that most possibilities to play others builds( skill/specialization/stuff).I would love to see that combo area a more rewarding than passive heal/buff/bonus/skill
I also dont understand why all that content from dungeons and coregame GW2 (runes/sigil/food/key) doesnt have an update this will also bring variability.

i'm trying to communicate here , because i actually no more fun on this game because we're not able to have fun fight in WvW because of number effect (small team wont come and big one , just one push you)

we should have more update, because at the moment , when you dont like that update patch because you dont have content for your gamemode , you tell yourself "Oh ok i'll play another game for few months (4months) " until a new update.

Taking risks is a part of life, great discoveries also carrieds risks

[Blocki.4931]

Is there a possibility for people who have maxed all WvW abilities to get something to do with them?