What's some WvW Redesign ideas you have?

[Knighthonor.4061]

What's some WvW Redesign ideas you have?

[Caliburn.1845]

Incentivize winning. Make people care about winning. By extension since winning will have tangible rewards, you'll need to create mechanics by which it becomes progressively more difficult to win.

To do this the way population is managed and segmented will have to be totally altered. You win a week, you lose 10% of your players for the next week for example, something along those lines.

[Lord of Rings.5371]

Give Etom its own pips, legendary armors, and subforum, making it completely independent from WvW.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Caliburn.1845 said:Incentivize winning. Make people care about winning. By extension since winning will have tangible rewards, you'll need to create mechanics by which it becomes progressively more difficult to win.

To do this the way population is managed and segmented will have to be totally altered. You win a week, you lose 10% of your players for the next week for example, something along those lines.So one server win and keep its players, the other 2 servers still loose and you're down 10% on 2 servers. Where are you supposed to put all those players? On the winning servers so they can win even more? Permadeath with deletion of account?

Edit: eh nvm I thought that was the reward, got it backwards. Instead, intentionally tank and never bother winning. Got it. Gonna be a hard fight to se who can loose the best.

[Malavian.4695]

Mobile siege equipment other than golems. I'd like to see some of the Charr tech incorporated. Also mounts in the Dessert Map.

[Caliburn.1845]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Caliburn.1845 said:Incentivize winning. Make people care about winning. By extension since winning will have tangible rewards, you'll need to create mechanics by which it becomes progressively more difficult to win.

To do this the way population is managed and segmented will have to be totally altered. You win a week, you lose 10% of your players for the next week for example, something along those lines.So one server win and keep its players, the other 2 servers still loose and you're down 10% on 2 servers. Where are you supposed to put all those players? On the winning servers so they can win even more? Permadeath with deletion of account?

Edit: eh nvm I thought that was the reward, got it backwards. Instead, intentionally tank and never bother winning. Got it. Gonna be a hard fight to se who can loose the best.

The incentive has to be there to win. Maybe 100 gems for winning a week or something. Titles or trophies or unique skins for winning multiple weeks in a row.

[LaGranse.8652]

The problem with server based rewards for winning in WvW is that you will feel forced to bandwagon to get better rewards. Not to mention that it is unfair, will the one that played for 30 hours that week get more than the one that zerged for 2?

No I much rather have individual rewards like we do right now. Keep it casual and keep the salt away.

[Dawdler.8521]

@LaGranse.8652 said:The problem with server based rewards for winning in WvW is that you will feel forced to bandwagon to get better rewards. Not to mention that it is unfair, will the one that played for 30 hours that week get more than the one that zerged for 2?

No I much rather have individual rewards like we do right now. Keep it casual and keep the salt away.Not to mention you have to keep it up week after week, day in and day out, every hour or you loose. Well not you since you can affect like... 0.001% of the server performance, but still. And its still your fault if you loose.

[Caliburn.1845]

You can create a scale of incentives and prizes to reward greater or lesser levels of participation and activity in WvW.As far as bandwagoning goes, thats an easy fix, but one that people will complain about. Servers that win are locked, no transfers so long as they're winning. And if they tank deliberately then they lose their victory awards(and hence the reason people would bandwagon in the first place).

[Sleepwalker.1398]

Make ArenaNet tell Amazon that their servers are shit and to fix that shit so we can all play with a little less lag.

[joneirikb.7506]

Hmm, it really depends on what one would want out of the WvW mode. Currently a good split of the playerbase wants more casual and other large split wants more competitive. The mode currently is in a weird position inbetween those two, where almost any change would pull it pretty strongly in one or the other direction. So anything that is to change first needs ANet to decide if they want to go one way or the other.

• Personally I want to see them do something about the maps themselves. Add a system for adding/disabling maps according to the active population at the time (ex 1 map at night, and 5 maps at reset prime time).
• Change all maps into full 3way maps like EBG/EotM, aka remove the borderland system. As this would make it easier for the above to remove maps and add them, as well as allow us to have more variety in maps when we don't need to have 3 identical maps. Example it would allow us to have 1ABG, 1DBG, 2EBG active at normal prime times.
• Give some maps special rules and variations to encourage different playstyles. Start easy with just disabling PPK, structure upgrades or just tier3 upgrades, upgraded PPT for upgraded structures, tactics, etc. Just shake it up a bit, and find different ones that makes certain play styles more enjoyable, thus creating unofficial maps for different playstyles.
• If going further on this idea, add more new maps specially designed to be smaller, but aimed at specific play styles. And move to a rotation system of maps (with the above in mind).

[Dawdler.8521]

@joneirikb.7506 said:

• Give some maps special rules and variations to encourage different playstyles.First, they tried that with ABL; The orb was broken and could be exploited so they removed it, promised to fix it, then erased all trace of it ever existing and gave us the ruins instead.

Secondly, they tried that on DBL; The cannon was broken and lagged the entire map so they removed it and copied the ruins from ABL.

There is a pattern there somewhere I just cant put my finger on it...

[Blodeuyn.2751]

Alliances before 2020.

[Knighthonor.4061]

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring

I don't believe Alliances alone will fix the WvW problem. The gameplay needs to be changed to be more fun for Casuals and Core WvW players. I made some suggestions a while ago.

[Knighthonor.4061]

I have some ideas on how to revamp WvW, and want to explain the idea behind these suggestions.

originally, WvW was a very hyped up feature on the MMORPG market place early on pre-release. It was looked at in the same space as RvR in Warhammer, Alterac Valley in WoW, and RvR from DAoC of course. But obviously WvW never reached that inflated goal regarding its hype. I figured lets examine some of these areas that people like these kind of game modes.

Large Scale Offensive Fights (Zerg vs Zerg)Players vs Buildings (aka Sieging)PvPvE ( PvP Themed NPC fighting)Smaller scale PvP Missions/Quest*Territory Defense

In a perfect world, all these roles would be equal. But nothing is perfect.But with WvW, there is a huge imbalance here.WvW looks more like this:Sieging>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Zerg vs Zerg >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Defense>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Missions/Quest>>>>PvPvE

Also when it comes to the combat, there are lots of limitations due to certain mechanics. I have some ideas and suggestions. Lets review some of them.

*-REZing-Right now, the way the gameplay works, you can revive downed players, or the down player can waypoint back to whatever Waypoint they have at their keep or starter area. This in my opinion is not a good design. Starter area is fine, since thats not a combat zone. But Keep can be contested. There isnt enough places on the map to revive at. I have an idea, which I call "Shrines". These Shrines automatically revive players on a timer basis like in most FPS games have. So all people in the Shrine will revive at the same time once the timer finishes. There will be multiple Shrines on the map per Team. You are sent to which ever Shrine is near your place of elimination. Shrines cant be contested, but they can be shut down and captured for your own team. This feature acts as a way to get people back into the large scale fights to promote more of it. While also adding a balance mechanism to the system so you cant just instantly come back. You have to wait a timer to be revived. These Shrines also can act as mini forts to rally from for these large scale fights, because they also have to be defended.

*-Healing-GW2 was originally meant to eliminate the concept of Healers, but that isnt the best idea for WvW. It would be impossible to make a change to classes now to have healing, and extremely hard to balance such a change to classes so that the WvW healing changes doesnt effect other game modes in the game. This is why I have a different solution for this. The game already has a Golem suit mechanic, and Environmental Weapons concept. My suggestion is to add a sort of Mobile Suit Golem that has the sole role of Healing/Support. Anybody regardless of Class can jump in and play the Healer Golem once its been made. Each Team would have a limited number of them they can have at one time on the map. Healing Golems will have much better output healing compared to the classes. Better support skills. But have a weak defense as a trade off. They need their team to help defend them during major fights. These Healing Golems could also have their own Trait line dedicated specifically to them, to have their own custom play styles. Some players may want more Barrier shielding focus, while others may want a more AoE focus, or even a more HoT(Heal over time) approach. They can customize their healing Golem accordingly. Once Destroyed, players have to remake them through an event.

*-PvPvE-Right now, most of the NPCs in WvW are nothing. The NPC factions seem weak, and same for the Bosses in the WvW maps that hold capture points. The Events in the game for NPC units are weak and not that valued enough for some of the Zerg players to want to wander off from the Zerg to want to do them. This is why I suggest NPC Units get a major buff in terms of Damage/CC/Health/Defense. The NPC units need to be harder to kill, and more of a threat. Need more Wandering NPC units that can be a threat to your team's defenses, or a large boost to your team's assault. Closes thing we have to this is the Outnumbered Captain events. WvW needs Neutral Bosses that are hostile to all teams, but benefit the team that defeats them. The Small Scale Quest/Missions need to important enough to change the tide of battle, but soloable for players to be able to leave the zerg to carry out these smaller objectives over a decent period of time depending on how many players your team puts to the task of doing these objectives. The NPC units that these Missions produce, should be a serious threat, and just as hard to kill. There should be Quest/Missions that have players gather a certain material from hostile NPC factions, needed to make Airship fuel which can be used to summon Mani Gyro Copters NPCs that fly around dropping timed explosives on nearby enemies that do serious damage. Each team also would have their own unique NPC summon Boss Legendary unit that can be invoked/conjured which will attack one of the main Keeps/SMC (based on perspective). These Summon require players to do task events and collection events on the map, that they can choose to leave the Zerg to do, or the zerg as a whole can focus on these task, leaving their defenses vulnerable for attack, but with quicker results as a trade off.

*-Destroy-able Buildings-Right now, buildings instantly repair themselves after being captured. Not saying that is a bad thing. That should stay honestly. But some buildings should also be destroyable and require players to rebuild them by manually doing some sort of collection mission. This like in the above PvPvE discussion, gives the PvE players more task to do that can help their team win and be useful to their team. These Buildings would have some major importance, such as providing a buff to allies, or producing certain unique Sieges or NPC Units. Once destroyed, they have to be manually repaired, which takes time, unless their team's Zerg wants to sacrifice offensive position to address the collection Mission/Quest to fix these buildings. Its a trade off again. Because of this mechanic, the maps start off more spread out with buildings like these also in need of defense, and over time the map space gets smaller due to the destruction of these kind of non-automatic repair buildings, which creates more choke points for more large scale battles consistently over time.

*-Zerg vs Zerg-This is a major part of the appeal of WvW. Lag is an issue like in most game features that have large scale multiplayer gameplay, thats why many of the above suggestions are meant to give importance to other areas of gameplay in WvW so other players would feel rewarded for stepping away from the zerg every now and then, and still contribute to their team's efforts at winning. But also how can we improve the Zerg vs Zerg gameplay and fun factor is another major part of improving WvW. I listed a few already, with the above Healer Golem Suit concept, and the Shrine revival concept. This will make large scale fights last longer and more consistent thing, while getting people back into the fight quicker. Other ideas here is for more open field Sieges. Maybe more Mobile Siege unit types. I was thinking about some kind of Mobile Siege beast that may have some nice AoE damage and AoE defense, but weak Direct Damage protection. Making it good at large fights in reducing numbers but weak in smaller scale fights and focused assaults. Another idea is a build-able small outpost tower that can be built in the open field like any other siege, but it functions as a tiny base of sorts that players can enter and attack from the top. This would be limited two 2 per team at any one time, and would need to be built using resources collected from Missions/quest. Think of this as similar structure to the Supply Bunker in Starhawk PS3 game http://starhawk.wikia.com/wiki/Supply_Bunker

for now thats some of the concepts I have that should be reviewed for improving WvW's experience.

[Aeolus.3615]

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring

I don't believe Alliances alone will fix the WvW problem. The gameplay needs to be changed to be more fun for Casuals and Core WvW players. I made some suggestions a while ago.

I bet they will allow player manipulation the matches... in a way or another...

[Blackarps.1974]

I'm with Cali and that we should see more incentives for winning. This should be tied to skirmishes and not week long matches as coverage becomes an issue. Even with the restructure they are doing, its still not going to be pretty. 2v1's and people running from fights so they can capture a tower with nobody in it. That's just not fun for anyone.

There are a lot of other things that need to be done as well. Lowering the siege cap for keeps, removing tier 3 and balancing upgrades around that (for example, lowering the health of all gates and walls across all the 3 tiers while also lowering the amount of yaks needed to upgrade to each tier), potentially remove some towers and redesign some of the maps where those towers used to be, remake the center of the borderlands again, balance siege further, remove boon and condi duration stats, remove banners, remove aura buffs around keeps and towers, discourage blobbing in some way, allow players a grace period where if their game crashes they can get back into a map and not be stuck in queue, allow players to swap characters and skip queues, find a way to reward support players who don't always "tag" enemies, introduce more things to buy with badges of honor, add interesting reward tracks that aren't just boxes of siege and account bound materials like obsidian shards, giving diamond legend rank a unique title, etc. There is so much they can do. Why they don't, I have no idea. Money/PvE, I guess.

[Aeolus.3615]

@"Blackarps.1974" said:I'm with Cali and that we should see more incentives for winning. This should be tied to skirmishes and not week long matches as coverage becomes an issue. Even with the restructure they are doing, its still not going to be pretty. 2v1's and people running from fights so they can capture a tower with nobody in it. That's just not fun for anyone.

There are a lot of other things that need to be done as well. Lowering the siege cap for keeps, removing tier 3 and balancing upgrades around that (for example, lowering the health of all gates and walls across all the 3 tiers while also lowering the amount of yaks needed to upgrade to each tier), potentially remove some towers and redesign some of the maps where those towers used to be, remake the center of the borderlands again, balance siege further, remove boon and condi duration stats, remove banners, remove aura buffs around keeps and towers, discourage blobbing in some way, allow players a grace period where if their game crashes they can get back into a map and not be stuck in queue, allow players to swap characters and skip queues, find a way to reward support players who don't always "tag" enemies, introduce more things to buy with badges of honor, add interesting reward tracks that aren't just boxes of siege and account bound materials like obsidian shards, giving diamond legend rank a unique title, etc. There is so much they can do. Why they don't, I have no idea. Money/PvE, I guess.

It has been 6years of that :....that's what wvw is ...

I dont think Anet dicourages blobing, since they have been enforcing as mostly the only solution... that's the path they are doing atm witht he current class design and aoe spambility.

Maps need more space between towers, it is usual for some to use 2nd gw2.exe with some bot to treb akf wars while they ktrain... if people want to capture a structure they need to go on the field rather than treb stuff witha bot.

[clone wars.9568]

FIX auto targetting.

Currently, the priority of Autotarget targets NPC, pets, Doors, walls, Seige before real players? Or targets people that are out of range and completely ignores the person standing right next to you killing you. I'm still unclear why auto target even targets walls since you can't even damage them.

Give us an option to HIDE wvw ranks which are used to gank people and pick out the drivers more.

Stop eles from being able to mistform into towers/keeps while in the downed state.

Allow us to pick something other than tomes in rank up chests or make tomes spammable.

Fix the servers.

Fix the code.

Start listening to the real wvw and not the bandwagoners.

Scrub the new world idea and simply delete the lower end servers and merge them perma to the others.

Stop doing nothing for years then having a REALLY REALLY BAD IDEA (and ignoring correct & neg feedback) and then keep us waiting years more before you add that idea to the game hoping hype alone will increase wvw numbers (It won't).

Stop basing wvw pop on the number of hours players play and instead keep it to numbers only, you've increased the balance issues with your bad system.

[clone wars.9568]

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring

I don't believe Alliances alone will fix the WvW problem. The gameplay needs to be changed to be more fun for Casuals and Core WvW players. I made some suggestions a while ago.

This is correct Alliance as anet knows full well are hype and will fail as they did in gw1. One GL falls out with another over egos and the whole ally falls apart not just killing the ally but the guilds themselves with all the new issues and drama. People are stuck together for 3 months at a time even after an ally collapses meaning no one will do anything until after a new ally is formed. This messes the whole game up for everyone else in the world and will kill wvw faster than anything else would have. I still have no idea why they didn't simple delete the bottom tier and merge the servers permanently. Which would help with balance and not remove the reason most ppl care to win (server pride). An idea that should have at least been tried before deleting everything. Linking is not the same because it wasn't permanent ppl didn't have server pride from linked servers and lacked voice comms etc.

Anet seem to like the hype train with promises of something better that is normally 10x worse idea and takes 10x longer to implement...