New Maps for WvW for restructuring.

[SweetPotato.7456]

What the title says:in order to reduce the work load of creating new maps, but off course shiny new unseen before maps are good too, in order to reduce the work load and to maximise your existing assets. i suggest adopting pve map for WvW , off course the normal pve maps still running, find a section of the pve map each week for wvw fights in another server instance, players will enter the instance like Living story would, you find the portal and enters from there and fight for your guild to hold the land.

pros of adopting pve maps for WvW,1) potentially inviting more pve players to participate in wvw, as it is their familiar terrain, enters thru pve map.2) dynamic impact on the tyrian world map to boost Guild Particiaption. as the world map will show who is winning where everyone can see.

Everyone is welcome to discuss.thank you.

[Blockhead Magee.3092]

Interesting idea, but I imagine the technical hurdles of making this happen would be to much for them to undertake.

[XenesisII.1540]

I had suggested they copy the pve maps and convert them to wvw ebg type maps years ago. All the land work would be done, just need to move the pve npcs and place the wvw structures.

Your idea seems to isolate pvp fighting on pve the maps to an instance, which could be good to control population in those instances for more even numbers, but it may feel disjointed from wvw.

I would prefer full blown maps used entirely for wvw to replace the borderland type maps, like Frostgorge sound, Fireheart rise, Brisban wildlands, Timberline falls, Metrica province are examples to convert.

[Dawdler.8521]

@"XenesisII.1540" said:I would prefer full blown maps used entirely for wvw to replace the borderland type maps, like Frostgorge sound, Fireheart rise, Brisban wildlands, Timberline falls, Metrica province are examples to convert.

No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Anyway, the problem here is that its not so easy. It would still be alot of work adding spawns, camps, towers and keeps to the maps. They would be unrecognizeable to the PvE version.

Sometimes I wish that Anet had actually planned this out in advance, making a "war" and a "peace" version of whats basicly the same map. In the peace version its all PvE, towers/keeps/camps are still there but are NPC camps, new towns with ruined fortifications or overgrown keeps filled with bandits, whatever. In the war version its like "20 years earlier". And it would be even nicer if a guild hold a tower or something for a certain amount of time at the end of a matchup, the town there in the peace version become claimed by the guild for the next week, guards wearing their insignia, banners and all.

But alas, one can only dream of PvE and WvW being closer together. Most PvErs will get a hissyfit and roll around on the floor crying that their PvE mode somehow has a link to PvP.

Its not sonething that can happen for GW2. GW3, well theres hope until there is no hope anymore.

[XenesisII.1540]

@Dawdler.8521 said:No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Anyway, the problem here is that its not so easy. It would still be alot of work adding spawns, camps, towers and keeps to the maps. They would be unrecognizeable to the PvE version.

What do I care if it's unrecognizable to pve?Make a copy of the pve map to use as a wvw map.Add wvw structures and npcs.This cuts down on more than half the work by using an existing map, they only need to add structures which they also already have.The only real work needed is figuring out the perfect spots to place each point of interest, preferably with alpine/ebg not desert structure relations in mind.The pve version stays where it's at with no changes.

The original poster wants instanced areas in the pve maps for wvw game play. It's not something I agree with.

[GDchiaScrub.3241]

I don't really see how this reduces "work" at all. I mean, the instanced combat is already a lot of coding to be done for probably little benefit. The only thing that is saved, I guess, is not having to make more art assets. Copy pasta a pve map that was designed for...pve is a going to be a bad idea. We need a map designed for pvp combat, not a haphazardly implemented pve map.

[starlinvf.1358]

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Anyway, the problem here is that its not so easy. It would still be

alot

of work adding spawns, camps, towers and keeps to the maps. They would be unrecognizeable to the PvE version.

What do I care if it's unrecognizable to pve?Make a copy of the pve map to use as a wvw map.Add wvw structures and npcs.This cuts down on more than half the work by using an existing map, they only need to add structures which they also already have.The only real work needed is figuring out the perfect spots to place each point of interest, preferably with alpine/ebg not desert structure relations in mind.The pve version stays where it's at with no changes.

The original poster wants instanced areas in the pve maps for wvw game play. It's not something I agree with.

Sounds good on paper, but doesn't work in practice. The key problem here is that PvE maps are NOT designed for even basic PvP/WvW requirements. While it doesn't look like it at first, EBG is a Symmetrical map with the terrain modified to control player movement. In fact, EBG, Edge of the mists and Dessert BL is 3-way symmetrical. Alpine boarder lands are 2-way symmetrical with a 3-way push. This is critical to understand and think about, because both Symmetrical and Asymmetrical have a very hard to tackle concept of Pathing. When pathing works, the maps are usually great. But if even one flaw exists in pathing, and the players become aware of it, it can destroy the flow of the entire map.

Theres entire thesis' written about map designs for TF2 and Overwatch, because of the insanely high level of consistency their maps produce. Or discussions or articles about Dungeon crawler design challenges. PvE maps in GW2 are designed to be 1-way pushes or radial control, with a fair amount of open transit. Neither of these work for even basic WvW use, because it automatically favors either Offensive or Defense positions without a complimenting number of map assets to balance out each team's advantages.

If you really want to explore the ramifications of large scale mostly-asymmetric map layouts, dig deep into Planetside 2's map evolution since beta, followed by the shift created by Nanite construction. It looks like chaos at first.... but upon closer inspection, there is a huge amount of lane control going on given how big the maps are.

[XenesisII.1540]

Why do you think I listed the maps I did and not something like Wayfarer foothills? A map like fireheart rise has plenty of chokes and open fields to work with, and has room to make it a 3 way symmetrical map. Obviously most of the pve maps won't work for an equal 3 way symmetrical design, but feel free to also turn the maps to the side if you need to see the 3 way symmetrical designs like timberline falls.

You all do know they can also tweak maps right? like they've already done to ogrewatch on ebg? I'll remind you guys that wvw has pve elements in it, If I wanted a map built strictly for pvp I'd go play spvp instead. It still saves them a lot of time having to build a map from the ground up, plus having maps that looks like the pve versions might even be appealing to new players that leveled through pve and are familiar with the map.

[X T D.6458]

I thought we already had pve maps like Desert bl and eotm.

[Dralor.3701]

I would be afraid of new maps since they tend to go for huge, beautiful maps, with poor design as far as actually encouraging fights.

Some smaller maps like thidraki (or w/e) from daoc would be cool though, just a mini smc or something to fight over.

[Kaiser.9873]

I think making a WvW map out of Divinities Reach would be dandy. The OPs idea smacks of the PvP lakes from Warhammer, which, if active were awesome, but too often were empty.They need to go ahead and make a Plains or Swamp map to go along with the Alpine and Desert.

[aspirine.6852]

Because the last map was such a great succes you mean? I can't stand that desert map, nobody does, It's always the least defended bl because of the hate for it.

[Blocki.4931]

The hell?

PvE maps have no objectives on them. Adding them in, restructuring them entirely in the process.. yeah, might as well make a new map. We don't need a new map, existings ones should instead be updated to be on the quality level of the desert. Alpine Borderlands simply have 0 interesting on them. Have a flat land with a few rocks and trees.. no ty.

[Raizel.8175]

WvW already suffers from having too large (and maybe even too many) maps. So why add even more?

[Curunen.8729]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:I would prefer full blown maps used entirely for wvw to replace the borderland type maps, like Frostgorge sound, Fireheart rise, Brisban wildlands, Timberline falls, Metrica province are examples to convert.

No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Underwater Tangled Depths.

Yes, the whole map.

;)

[Rasp Sabreblade.5421]

I have stated in other posts that the Living World Story maps could be used as borderlands WvW maps. the issue would be placement of keeps, garri, tower and camps, but I don't think with the size of the maps that it would really be that big of an issue.

This way the PvE'ers would already know their way around the map and for the WvW'ers we get ne maps. So there might be some minor placement issues, but when it goes out of rotation small adjustments can be made at that time.

It would help keep the map rotation fresh, plus then the DBL map should get an exalted stonemist castle in the center. Which would give EBL map a rotation.

[X T D.6458]

Layout of objectives drives player activity, its not hard to understand. WvW incorporates PvP into the gamemode but it is entirely separate from being a purely PvP mode. In games such as shooters you can take the regular pve maps, and use them for multiplayer purposes because they are not designed for fighting over objectives. You can just have people hunting each other on any map. This is not the same as PvP in WvW, you cannot simply look at a map and think oh this would be fun. WvW requires a special design. You have to balance out many factors, you have 3 sides, you need to look at the traveling distances between objectives and how they are intertwined with each other. For example, how long a yak takes to carry supply or if a tower can be used to siege a keep. There are many factors involved with WvW design that make it much more complex than simply focusing on aesthetics.

[XenesisII.1540]

Don't worry they still currently don't have plans for a new map and they will probably never bother making another wvw map because of half the responses in here. Generally seems like pve players will be more accepting of a new map anyways, while wvw players seem to just want a giant arena because they're not happy with any or all the current maps or don't want another map at all. Probably why there's also 15 spvp maps wasting away in storage.

[Aeolus.3615]

@XenesisII.1540

Maybe cause WvW map ended way to much gimmick and not fit for the game at that time.... with decent and small changes/tweaks on some mechanics DBL can be a really "go go" map.

@Raizel.8175 said:WvW already suffers from having too large (and maybe even too many) maps. So why add even more?

Map size isnt the issue here, it is WvW gamemode that lacks decent mechanics and map looks and feels way to much empty. anet added meanwhile stupid stuff to it like the jumpu shrines, the transmorgriffer in fire.... , rather than improve the game mode at that time, it felt liek they were adding stuff w8 understangin why game was needing new WvW maps, wich i stil lbelieve dev's are mostly clueless in some game development here.

Lets w8 and see what placebo are they throwing with the aliances in first place then lets cry for new map :P in a game where its all about stack spam and run away to hide in closest tower when get arse kicked. XD

[HazyDaisy.4107]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:I would prefer full blown maps used entirely for wvw to replace the borderland type maps, like Frostgorge sound, Fireheart rise, Brisban wildlands, Timberline falls, Metrica province are examples to convert.

No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Yes! I know most of the TD shortcuts and hiding places now, being marked while a zerg relentlessly hunts my 1 dot would be do much fun.

[Crius.5487]

We definitely need new maps but the PVE maps aren't designed for WvW and the desert BL is just down right horrible. Personally I think all three of the borderland maps should be identical but have multiple maps that can be rotated through weekly. Maybe even a new EB map that can be rotated through on a weekly basis. Make some tweaks to the EotM map and it might be able to serve as a secondary EB map.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Curunen.8729 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:I would prefer full blown maps used entirely for wvw to replace the borderland type maps, like Frostgorge sound, Fireheart rise, Brisban wildlands, Timberline falls, Metrica province are examples to convert.

No. We all know what we truly want. Tangled Depths for WvW.

Underwater Tangled Depths.

Yes, the whole map.

;)

Add a drowning mechanic if you dont come up to surface with certain intervals and you got a deal.