Remove PvP from WvW

[Eramonster.2718]

@sephiroth.4217 said:Thats all that needs to be done to have a vibrant PvE map.

Everything else is in place already, players don't want to fight each other anyway..

If you roam or kill anyone, you're a bad person and should feel bad is the general mentality now days.

The coffin is built, the lid is on and the nail is in place, hammer that nail in and be done with it.

Let's us all mount up and capture objectives anti clockwise! You and me, side by side! For the new Alliance, to Silverwaste! :lol:

[Psycoprophet.8107]

Remove pvp from conquest :) In the near future when a popular pvp item is unlocked via pvp conquest this will be our reality lol

[tobin.6754]

@sephiroth.4217 said:Thats all that needs to be done to have a vibrant PvE map.

Everything else is in place already, players don't want to fight each other anyway..

If you roam or kill anyone, you're a bad person and should feel bad is the general mentality now days.

The coffin is built, the lid is on and the nail is in place, hammer that nail in and be done with it.

i approved of this message

[Ralkuth.1456]

I know it's sarcasm from OP, just gonna talk serious...

But didn't you also sign up for the PvP aspect of WvW when you clicked that button to be sent into the battlegrounds?This peer-pressure threaten-social-ostracization self-enforced-non-violence thing is... wacky.

It's a struggle between 3 servers for map dominance and you want to turn heroic bloodshed into watered down "Mythic Invitational GW2 style"?For me it feels like taking out the core of something and leaving only what is supposed to be hard-earned and trying to make that freely-given.It's like asking for wages from a job without doing it.

Or to put it in gaming terms, like people who roll on a PvP server (knowingly because they want to kick kittens with friends) in WoW and crying about being ganked in the open world.

[sephiroth.4217]

@"Ralkuth.1456" said:I know it's sarcasm from OP, just gonna talk serious...

But didn't you also sign up for the PvP aspect of WvW when you clicked that button to be sent into the battlegrounds?This peer-pressure threaten-social-ostracization self-enforced-non-violence thing is... wacky.

It's a struggle between 3 servers for map dominance and you want to turn heroic bloodshed into watered down "Mythic Invitational GW2 style"?For me it feels like taking out the core of something and leaving only what is supposed to be hard-earned and trying to make that freely-given.It's like asking for wages from a job without doing it.

Or to put it in gaming terms, like people who roll on a PvP server (knowingly because they want to kick kittens with friends) in WoW and crying about being ganked in the open world.

its already been watered down but I was around before megaservers, server mergers, loot and siege on the trading post, a time where it was all about server pride and guild pride and the actual war itself..

but yes was being sarcastic due to the opinions of most since warkitty release.

[Kolisch.4691]

Will never log into gw2 on any of my accounts again until warclaw is gone. WvW was my only escape. Life, job is stressful as it is. I am only on servers that gets blobbed on everyday, every week. I go on tiny groups, even alone most times, being of what's left against huge numbers. We still put up a fight, and despite defeat, appreciate each other's efforts. We even know some enemies appreciate is defending and taking stuff too. And winning when greatly outnumbered is just as rewarding as winning a very hard video game level.

WvW isn't what it is anymore. Warclaw is a big reason but the most disheartening is that wvw doesn't cater to people like me anymore. I'm still hoping wvw gets better someday. Good luck.

[Kylden Ar.3724]

@Kovu.7560 said:

@sostronk.8167 said:We need more PvE in WvW as well. I would love some mini bosses like Wyverns to fight with unique mechanics. Maybe throw in some of the raid bosses like Gorsevaal and Vale Guardian!

Vinewrath as SMC's boss. Need to take that place from all three sides, one at a time. The defenders can have access to several variations of Mordrem tonics, complete with overpowered mechanics.Get some agony in there whilst we're at it. =)

~ Kovu

You monster! Not today Satan!

[joneirikb.7506]

@Kylden Ar.3724 said:

@Kovu.7560 said:

@sostronk.8167 said:We need more PvE in WvW as well. I would love some mini bosses like Wyverns to fight with unique mechanics. Maybe throw in some of the raid bosses like Gorsevaal and Vale Guardian!

Vinewrath as SMC's boss. Need to take that place from all three sides, one at a time. The defenders can have access to several variations of Mordrem tonics, complete with overpowered mechanics.Get some agony in there whilst we're at it. =)

~ Kovu

You monster! Not today Satan!

So, reaplace EBG with Tangled Depths, put the entire thing underwater up to the top of SMC tower, and put the tripple wurm as lord of every keep, tower, and camp ? Am I doing it right sempai?!

[Anput.4620]

Didn't they already do this at march 5th? My experience anyways.

[DaVid Darksoul.4985]

Not sure what to make of this discussion, is it to be satire or true crying about nothing. Meh I still love roaming, amd defending, als being a Zergling every now and then'( altho I am always off tag it seems). WvW is by far the best game mode and GW2 the bestest game.

[DaVid Darksoul.4985]

@DaVid Darksoul.4985 said:Not sure what to make of this discussion, is it to be satire or true crying about nothing. Meh I still love roaming, amd defending, als being a Zergling every now and then'( altho I am always off tag it seems). WvW is by far the best game mode and GW2 the bestest game.

ignore this, I was too lazy to read all the thread, too much hurry to get into WvW. Have fun, and also I like Pie

[Dawdler.8521]

@DaVid Darksoul.4985 said:Not sure what to make of this discussion, is it to be satire or true crying about nothing. Meh I still love roaming, amd defending, als being a Zergling every now and then'( altho I am always off tag it seems). WvW is by far the best game mode and GW2 the bestest game.And they say necros arent OP.

[enkidu.5937]

Remove PvP? How about starting to add PvP and replace PvGankgroup / PvFullzonescourgeballrollyafaceoverthekeyboard? ;)

[L A T I O N.8923]

@gebrechen.5643 said:

@"BlueMelody.6398" said:Sarcastic thread ignoring large-scale pvp, which happens despite suggestions otherwise. Zergs do attack other zergs, not just objectives, and zerg fights are often far less "brainless" than the roamers would like everyone to believe.

The problem with roamers is they are either looking for the 3v1 before they attack you or they cheese the game mode with classes like thief, soulbeast or mirage (pre nerf). These threads here a so ridiculous and not even funny anymore.

Yep the problem with the leftover roamers are that they are 'adjusting' to the current WvW stats. 99% are those people you mentioned because all others left on pof/mount release

[Gop.8713]

@L A T I O N.8923 said:

@gebrechen.5643 said:

@"BlueMelody.6398" said:Sarcastic thread ignoring large-scale pvp, which happens despite suggestions otherwise. Zergs do attack other zergs, not just objectives, and zerg fights are often far less "brainless" than the roamers would like everyone to believe.

The problem with roamers is they are either looking for the 3v1 before they attack you or they cheese the game mode with classes like thief, soulbeast or mirage (pre nerf). These threads here a so ridiculous and not even funny anymore.

Yep the problem with the leftover roamers are that they are 'adjusting' to the current WvW stats. 99% are those people you mentioned because all others left on pof/mount release

I am pleased that you have learned from my instruction in the other thread . . .

There does seem to be a large number of players in wvw who revel in avoiding combat, or at the very least avoiding combat that they might lose, either by adjusting their server, numbers or build. The primary focus of those of us on the forums who enjoy wvw should be geared towards creating a mode that encourages combat, not winning or losing . . .

[SoV.5139]

I thought I was at burning man again.

Then I realized that was the straw man argument burning to the ground.

[nthmetal.9652]

@"Gop.8713" said:There does seem to be a large number of players in wvw who revel in avoiding combat, or at the very least avoiding combat that they might lose, either by adjusting their server, numbers or build. The primary focus of those of us on the forums who enjoy wvw should be geared towards creating a mode that encourages combat, not winning or losing . . .

As I have said before, I will say again: There are a lot of fights you learn you (not as in you, personally - the general "you") cannot win. Either due to personal skill level, build, equipment, class you're on. Why would you possibly take a fight that you will most like not win? The game surely gives you nothing for it. No lootbag. No participation. No nothing.I sure as hell would not take such a fight.

I do realize there are some very good players out there, who know exactly what they can and cannot take, but a lot are like me. They do well in specific contexts (in my case zerg fights,guild fights, fractals, PvE) and do not well in other contexts (duels, roaming). The game teaches me again and again that I will do badly in certain situations. It provides no help and no incentive to improve, and I personally have decided that I am playing a game. I work on areas I feel I am having fun in - like those mentioned before - I am willing to sink time into that, but I am not willing to sink time into stuff that annoys me. THis is a game. This is not a job. And especially when the game gives nothing back in certain areas, I'll not be wasting my time.

So, maybe stop blaming other players, look to why things are as they are and ... you know .... accept them. There's good reasons for the things being as they are. And dragging the warclaw into it is just ridculous. It has little to nothing to do with that.

[Gop.8713]

@nthmetal.9652 said:

@"Gop.8713" said:There does seem to be a large number of players in wvw who revel in avoiding combat, or at the very least avoiding combat that they might lose, either by adjusting their server, numbers or build. The primary focus of those of us on the forums who enjoy wvw should be geared towards creating a mode that encourages combat, not winning or losing . . .

As I have said before, I will say again: There are a lot of fights you learn you (not as in you, personally - the general "you") cannot win. Either due to personal skill level, build, equipment, class you're on. Why would you possibly take a fight that you will most like not win?Bc fighting is fun. Fighting and winning is more fun than fighting and losing, but fighting and losing is still more fun than not fighting, and by a much wider margin . . .The game surely gives you nothing for it. No lootbag. No participation. No nothing.Whether this should be addressed is a debatable point. It wouldn't be good to reward losing, bc it risks turning players who run into players who lose on purpose, which is probably even less fun than not fighting. But at the same time anet has removed all of the costs from fighting and losing, but ppl are still afraid to fight, so that didn't seem to be enough . . .I sure as hell would not take such a fight.Why not though? What is your perceived cost . . ?I do realize there are some very good players out there, who know exactly what they can and cannot take, but a lot are like me. They do well in specific contexts (in my case zerg fights,guild fights, fractals, PvE) and do not well in other contexts (duels, roaming). The game teaches me again and again that I will do badly in certain situations. It provides no help and no incentive to improve, and I personally have decided that I am playing a game. I work on areas I feel I am having fun in - like those mentioned before - I am willing to sink time into that, but I am not willing to sink time into stuff that annoys me. THis is a game. This is not a job. And especially when the game gives nothing back in certain areas, I'll not be wasting my time.

So, maybe stop blaming other players,Where does the post you quoted blame players? If you read it I believe you will see it advocates changing the mode, not the players . . .look to why things are as they are and ... you know .... accept them. There's good reasons for the things being as they are.I don't believe there are. I believe there are bad reasons. Idk though, I could be wrong. Bc I can never get anyone to actually tell me how they feel they benefit from avoiding fights that are already completely free from consequence . . .And dragging the warclaw into it is just ridculous. It has little to nothing to do with that.I didn't mention the warclaw though. But if you wanted to bring it up it was actually a bit of a boon in this context, as it allowed players who like to avoid combat an easier way to do so, which wasted less time for the willing participants in the mode. Now with the lance we're kind of back to where we were before, but on balance the good probably outweighs the bad there . .

[GaijinGuy.8476]

Would be nice if attacking a player (engaging in combat with a player) refreshed participation. Sucks when you wanna keep trying to kill someone who you just can’t beat but have to give up because I gotta go down a sentry or lose out on rewards.

[Reztek.7805]

@Gop.8713 said:

@nthmetal.9652 said:

@Gop.8713 said:There does seem to be a large number of players in wvw who revel in avoiding combat, or at the very least avoiding combat that they might lose, either by adjusting their server, numbers or build. The primary focus of those of us on the forums who enjoy wvw should be geared towards creating a mode that encourages combat, not winning or losing . . .

As I have said before, I will say again: There are a lot of fights you learn you (not as in you, personally - the general "you") cannot win. Either due to personal skill level, build, equipment, class you're on. Why would you possibly take a fight that you will most like not win?Bc fighting is fun. Fighting and winning is more fun than fighting and losing, but fighting and losing is still more fun than not fighting, and by a much wider margin . . .

In theory that's true, but given the general power creep and the hilarious disengage abilities of some classes it can be rather boring. So it's utterly understandable that less people care about 1 vs 1 fights (besides we all know, nowaday "roaming" means 3 vs 1). As a result everyone runs with the big map blob which is boring too.

The game surely gives you nothing for it. No lootbag. No participation. No nothing.Whether this should be addressed is a debatable point. It wouldn't be good to reward losing, bc it risks turning players who run into players who lose on purpose, which is probably even less fun than not fighting.

If that would be true, then:a) There wouldn't be any gankingb) Everyone would be happy with the warclaw and the lance skill wouldn't existSo, well. Your theory ain't realistic. Zerglings haven't been fighting back for years now (there's a lot of old "pro" roamer footage on youtube where you can see that many "opponents" just keep moving on autorun ... lol). I'd call that losing on purpose. And as soon as zerglings were able to dodge fights in which they propably would lose on purpose ... the warclaw whining started. :)

But at the same time anet has removed all of the costs from fighting and losing, but ppl are still afraid to fight, so that didn't seem to be enough . . .Time. And time is money ... eh, reward track chests!

So, maybe stop blaming other players,Where does the post you quoted blame players? If you read it I believe you will see it advocates changing the mode, not the players . . .look to why things are as they are and ... you know .... accept them. There's good reasons for the things being as they are.I don't believe there are. I believe there are bad reasons. Idk though, I could be wrong. Bc I can never get anyone to actually tell me how they feel they benefit from avoiding fights that are already completely free from consequence . . .

Map completion on the wvw maps is also completely free from consequence ...Yeah, you could chase someone who's teleporting the map up and down ... press a reveal button now and then and feel totally entertained at the same time! Orrrrr ... you could press dodge once or twice and get to ppl who actually have to fight, because they are trying to defend their objectives.

fyi, you're supposed to find the sarcastic parts on your own.

[Gop.8713]

@Reztek.7805 said:

@Gop.8713 said:

@nthmetal.9652 said:

@Gop.8713 said:There does seem to be a large number of players in wvw who revel in avoiding combat, or at the very least avoiding combat that they might lose, either by adjusting their server, numbers or build. The primary focus of those of us on the forums who enjoy wvw should be geared towards creating a mode that encourages combat, not winning or losing . . .

As I have said before, I will say again: There are a lot of fights you learn you (not as in you, personally - the general "you") cannot win. Either due to personal skill level, build, equipment, class you're on. Why would you possibly take a fight that you will most like not win?Bc fighting is fun. Fighting and winning is more fun than fighting and losing, but fighting and losing is still more fun than not fighting, and by a much wider margin . . .

In theory that's true, but given the general power creep and the hilarious disengage abilities of some classes it

can

be rather boring. So it's utterly understandable that less people care about 1 vs 1 fights (besides we all know, nowaday "roaming" means 3 vs 1). As a result everyone runs with the big map blob which is boring too.Some fights are more fun than others, but you seem to forget that every Xv1 is also a 1vX. And I've found that jumping in on that 1v5 is one of the best ways to find fights roaming these days. You're not going to win unless the five is hopeless, but if you fight a lose a few times you a) get to fight and more importantly b) find that after a few of those players have logged off the remaining players are a bit bolder about engaging with that rando they've been killing all night, forgetting that they no longer enjoy the numbers advantage that allowed their success. So you get to fight and win too :)

The game surely gives you nothing for it. No lootbag. No participation. No nothing.Whether this should be addressed is a debatable point. It wouldn't be good to reward losing, bc it risks turning players who run into players who lose on purpose, which is probably even less fun than not fighting.

If that would be true, then:a) There wouldn't be any gankingI do not understand your point here. A 'ganker' exploits balance to cheese fights. A gankee is in a situation where they have no choice about whether they are getting ganked, or they are not getting ganked. Since a gankee cannot choose whether to fight or run, whatever rewards they might get from losing could not alter a decision they have no ability to make. I can't see any way that altering rewards for the loser would affect the ganker either, so this seems completely unrelated to the quote you are replying to here . . ?b) Everyone would be happy with the warclaw and the lance skill wouldn't existAgain not sure what you're saying here. Everyone who gets lanced off their mount loses on purpose? Rewarding losing would make the mount more/less valuable? It's possible you might in fact have have a point, but as I am unable to understand it in the way you have conveyed it, I cannot say . . .So, well. Your theory ain't realistic. Zerglings haven't been fighting back for years now (there's a lot of old "pro" roamer footage on youtube where you can see that many "opponents" just keep moving on autorun ... lol). I'd call that losing on purpose. And as soon as zerglings were able to dodge fights in which they propably would lose on purpose ... the warclaw whining started. :)I think the fact that there are players who come to wvw to avoid pvp was my point? And that to improve the mode we should attempt to discover the reasons behind that behavior and find ways to change the mode to address it? If that wasn't clear I am grateful that you gave me the opportunity to clarify . . .

But at the same time anet has removed all of the costs from fighting and losing, but ppl are still afraid to fight, so that didn't seem to be enough . . .Time. And time is money ... eh, reward track chests!This is perfectly valid. Many fights are best avoided in service to another goal. But that's not what we're talking about here. We talking here about players who come to wvw and see avoiding pvp as a primary goal, each avoided fight as a success, etc. . . .

So, maybe stop blaming other players,Where does the post you quoted blame players? If you read it I believe you will see it advocates changing the mode, not the players . . .look to why things are as they are and ... you know .... accept them. There's good reasons for the things being as they are.I don't believe there are. I believe there are bad reasons. Idk though, I could be wrong. Bc I can never get anyone to actually tell me how they feel they benefit from avoiding fights that are already completely free from consequence . . .

Map completion on the wvw maps is also completely free from consequence ...Wvw map completion hasn't existed in years . . ?fyi, you're supposed to find the sarcastic parts on your own.was it the part about the feature that hasn't existed in years . . ?

So after all that still another attempt that has failed to discover the reason that players come to wvw to avoid pvp :(

[ThomasC.1056]

Hello,

@"Gop.8713" said:So after all that still another attempt that has failed to discover the reason that players come to wvw to avoid pvp :(

Allow me to share a thought of mine. Some other day, I was playing PvE on ESO (yeah, another game, whatever), and this is what happenned. I was playing for story, so at a given moment, I had to go to some place, so I got onto my mount, and rode recklessly towards my quest marker, and perfectly ignored all the trash mobs that were on my path, eventhough they were trash mobs, and eventhough I don't mind fighting tons on them when I'm doing whatever quest I'm on.

I realized : "This is exactly the kind of behaviour GW2 players are complaining about."

So, why did I behave so badly, and didn't dismount at every mob that was here to just slay it down ? What could have taken me to do it ? It's not a matter of rewards. I wouldn't have wanted to do it, even for a huge pile of gold (well... Maybe for that). It's not a matter of enjoying fights. I usually do.

It's a matter of actually being focused on something else. At that moment, I was focused on reaching my quest marker, following with the quest and the story, meet my favorite friends to play etc. Mobs on the path where a distraction, a delay, and in the end : a disturbance. So it's only a matter of context, and what a players wants to do. Don't forget it's a game, and a moment of leisure. Most people don't appreciate being cornered to do something they don't want in such moments.

So, if I understand, you want to find fights and PvP whomever crosses your path, which is fine. This is what you're looking for, enjoy to do in your leisure time, and what you're focusing on when you're doing WvW. Nothing to blame you about. But you can't really blame others either when they're using the tools they're given to favor their own way of having fun.

There're many ways to enjoy WvW, and not enough to my taste. That's what makes that game mode great, but that's the source of the issue you're raising. Some ways to have fun just aren't really compatible. I'm not really sure there's a solution for that.

[Gop.8713]

@ThomasC.1056 said:Hello,

@"Gop.8713" said:So after all that still another attempt that has failed to discover the reason that players come to wvw to avoid pvp :(

Allow me to share a thought of mine. Some other day, I was playing PvE on ESO (yeah, another game, whatever), and this is what happenned. I was playing for story, so at a given moment, I had to go to some place, so I got onto my mount, and rode recklessly towards my quest marker, and perfectly ignored all the trash mobs that were on my path, eventhough they were trash mobs, and eventhough I don't mind fighting tons on them when I'm doing whatever quest I'm on.

I realized :

"This is exactly the kind of behaviour GW2 players are complaining about."

So, why did I behave so badly, and didn't dismount at every mob that was here to just slay it down ? What could have taken me to do it ? It's not a matter of rewards. I wouldn't have wanted to do it, even for a huge pile of gold (well... Maybe for that). It's not a matter of enjoying fights. I usually do.

It's a matter of actually being focused on something else. At that moment, I was focused on reaching my quest marker, following with the quest and the story, meet my favorite friends to play etc. Mobs on the path where a distraction, a delay, and in the end : a disturbance. So it's only a matter of context, and what a players wants to do. Don't forget it's a game, and a moment of leisure. Most people don't appreciate being cornered to do something they don't want in such moments.As mentioned above, avoiding a fight in order to reach another goal is perfectly valid and not the subject of my complaint. A good example would be a player running past enemy players in order to get back to their zerg. This behavior makes perfect sense and is a much closer parallel to your behavior that you describe in your example . . .

My concern is the proliferation of players who see avoiding combat as a desirable goal unto itself. To compare it to your experience, you would have to say that you didn't have to go someplace and just chose to ride around aimlessly on your mount. There's certainly nothing wrong with that either, but if that's the most entertaining thing you could find to do in that game week after week, I'd say that's a pretty poor advertisement for the quality of that game . . .

Now if you would like to further the conversation and introduce your example into a pvp environment, you would need to understand that the mobs in your example are other players, and they all rely on one another for content. So if a player chooses to enter the mode and avoid combat, that's a problem. Not a problem for the player, but a problem for the mode. So again, I will hopelessly ask if you or anyone else could consider how we might improve the mode by introducing changes that would discourage that behavior, rather than find reasons to excuse or justify it :)

So, if I understand, you want to find fights and PvP whomever crosses your path, which is fine.Just for the record and bc it's something ppl often lose sight of, what I or any other individual player wants isn't really important. As described above, when you create a pvp mode like wvw and discover that you have attracted a large number of players who see avoiding pvp as a primary goal, that should be a strong indicator that something has gone awry. Can you disagree . . ?This is what you're looking for, enjoy to do in your leisure time, and what you're focusing on when you're doing WvW. Nothing to blame you about. But you can't really blame others either when they're using the tools they're given to favor their own way of having fun.It's interesting to me that this is the second consecutive reply that has shown interest in assigning blame. How is that constructive? Why would it be important to blame someone in this situation? Why not just look for ways to create a better experience . . ?There're many ways to enjoy WvW, and not enough to my taste. That's what makes that game mode great, but that's the source of the issue you're raising. Some ways to have fun just aren't really compatible. I'm not really sure there's a solution for that.I would agree that a lack of definition and direction is at least a part of wvw's problems. Is it a pvp mode, or is it a pve mode that allows for pvp? Does it exist to service the large scale combat that spvp can't provide, or is it a solo experience that allows players to come together if they so choose? If you just want to say "It's all of these things and that's what makes it so super!" then we can all hold hands and skip along rainbows into the sunset. Pve works that way bc players can pick and choose for themselves what content they would like to enjoy. But if you want to improve a competitive mode you must first have some sort of definition of what the mode is, bc players aren't choosing the content, players are creating the content . . .

[Sovereign.1093]

wvw should be like eotm 100v100v100 always. anything less results to 1 side overpowering the other 2

[ThomasC.1056]

Hello,

Thanks for your kind reply.

@Gop.8713 said:

@ThomasC.1056 said:Hello,

@Gop.8713 said:So after all that still another attempt that has failed to discover the reason that players come to wvw to avoid pvp :(

Allow me to share a thought of mine. Some other day, I was playing PvE on ESO (yeah, another game, whatever), and this is what happenned. I was playing for story, so at a given moment, I had to go to some place, so I got onto my mount, and rode recklessly towards my quest marker, and perfectly ignored all the trash mobs that were on my path, eventhough they were trash mobs, and eventhough I don't mind fighting tons on them when I'm doing whatever quest I'm on.

I realized :

"This is exactly the kind of behaviour GW2 players are complaining about."

So, why did I behave so badly, and didn't dismount at every mob that was here to just slay it down ? What could have taken me to do it ? It's not a matter of rewards. I wouldn't have wanted to do it, even for a huge pile of gold (well... Maybe for that). It's not a matter of enjoying fights. I usually do.

It's a matter of actually being focused on something else. At that moment, I was focused on reaching my quest marker, following with the quest and the story, meet my favorite friends to play etc. Mobs on the path where a distraction, a delay, and in the end : a disturbance. So it's only a matter of context, and what a players wants to do. Don't forget it's a game, and a moment of leisure. Most people don't appreciate being cornered to do something they don't want in such moments.As mentioned above, avoiding a fight in order to reach another goal is perfectly valid and not the subject of my complaint. A good example would be a player running past enemy players in order to get back to their zerg. This behavior makes perfect sense and is a much closer parallel to your behavior that you describe in your example . . .

My concern is the proliferation of players who see avoiding combat as a desirable goal unto itself. To compare it to your experience, you would have to say that you didn't have to go someplace and just chose to ride around aimlessly on your mount. There's certainly nothing wrong with that either, but if that's the most entertaining thing you could find to do in that game week after week, I'd say that's a pretty poor advertisement for the quality of that game . . .

I agree with you. It was a misunderstanding of mine that you were pointing towards players that purposedly dodge fights without any other objective than this. I don't know whether this is a frequent behaviour though. The only explanation I could see in that is some kind of trolling, or maybe some kind of game mechanics hijacks from bored jaded players. I agree with you : that's a pretty poor advertisement for the quality of the game, if the only thing left to do is this.

On another hand, fights are more and more getting a reputation of being boring, for themselves, and from unbalance, and the PPT part doesn't seem to interest many, while it's also been taken down.

@Gop.8713 said:Now if you would like to further the conversation and introduce your example into a pvp environment, you would need to understand that the mobs in your example are other players, and they all rely on one another for content. So if a player chooses to enter the mode and avoid combat, that's a problem. Not a problem for the player, but a problem for the mode. So again, I will hopelessly ask if you or anyone else could consider how we might improve the mode by introducing changes that would discourage that behavior, rather than find reasons to excuse or justify it :)

and

@Gop.8713 said:

So, if I understand, you want to find fights and PvP whomever crosses your path, which is fine.Just for the record and bc it's something ppl often lose sight of, what I or any other individual player wants isn't really important. As described above, when you create a pvp mode like wvw and discover that you have attracted a large number of players who see avoiding pvp as a primary goal, that should be a strong indicator that something has gone awry. Can you disagree . . ?

That's a tricky point for any multiplayer game, and even more for competitive modes. Players rely on each others to create content. If indeed most players are jaded and refuse to actively take part in the core mechanic (ie : combat), that's a problem. Now, finding reasons (more than excuses) is also the first step to find solutions.

You can't twist a player's arm so that he'd fight. Because they're players, they won't engage in something if they're too forced too. It needs to be a positive action. Then, you can't turn WvW into the old courtyard PvP game mode : a map with only fights. You can't do something such as a no-exit circle when combat has been engaged from one side...

My opinion is WvW should be made so that the objective, as in "what to do" and "what gets you rewards" should be something that's not fights, but that may involve fights. That's the point of keeps, towers and such. You're more or less supposed to manage structures and prevent the opposite side from managing its, and as such, you're bringing fights, because you're supposed to protect your stuff, and go to enemy territory for that purpose. It's only my opinion, and I think other players might be looking for something else in the game mode.

Now, let's suppose that WvW is made for what I'm telling in my previous paragraph, just for reasoning purpose. If you think about it : zergs running in circles to PvD, gank squads, and other players fighting in the middle of nowhere for no other reason than the beauty of a duel aren't fitting in that definition of mine. Such playstyles are therefore already hijacking the game mechanics, very much like players choosing to enter the mode to avoid combat, and that's indeed a problem.

So, one can wonder why players would end up using WvW for something that it's not made for (still supposing it's made for what I'm telling, just for the hypothesis). I can see two answers : there's no other place for that playstyle (eg : duelling, eventhough there now are places for it), or the game mode doesn't work as intended. And with WvW, it's fairly obvious the latter is here. Time coverage and population imbalance make the whole objective management pointless, because everything built can be loss only because of these, which aren't "in game" mechanics, so are frustrating. The fact that walls are death traps, or the whole business around siege also goes that way. Also, the whole rewards system doesn't favor objectives management (what is called PPT, because that's the way it currently works). At the same time, zerging is made possible because of no stacking, or a great effectivity due to the linear scaling of skills.

Which brings me to...

@Gop.8713 said:

There're many ways to enjoy WvW, and not enough to my taste. That's what makes that game mode great, but that's the source of the issue you're raising. Some ways to have fun just aren't really compatible. I'm not really sure there's a solution for that.I would agree that a lack of definition and direction is at least a part of wvw's problems. Is it a pvp mode, or is it a pve mode that allows for pvp? Does it exist to service the large scale combat that spvp can't provide, or is it a solo experience that allows players to come together if they so choose? If you just want to say "It's all of these things and that's what makes it so super!" then we can all hold hands and skip along rainbows into the sunset. Pve works that way bc players can pick and choose for themselves what content they would like to enjoy. But if you want to improve a competitive mode you must first have some sort of definition of what the mode is, bc players aren't choosing the content, players are creating the content . . .

I agree on the fact that ANet should state clearly what WvW is made for, and where the cursor here between a RvR mode clearly oriented towards objective management and fights as a side effect, or a mode clearly oriented towards fights, and objective management as a sheer excuse for it. The first problem is they can't state it in a "take it or leave it" fashion, because the game mode isn't in such a good shape that it could afford players to leave from disagreement or resentment. The second problem is they may be torn what the game currently is, what the players have made it, and what they truly want it to be. And it'd also possible that the way to put it back in tracks can be frustrating (not to say painful) for veteran players because it's not what they're used to. You can't be too harsh when it's a game... But the more they'll wait and leave the ambiguity, the harder it'll be in the end. And most players here seem to agree that what the game mode has to offer is now old and boring.

Then, I don't fully agree with your idea of players creating the content. I'd rather say players create the action, but that action takes place in a specific frame that it's ANet job to define and provide. So, if I had to made some suggestion : ANet should state what WvW is all about. It doesn't forbid other playstyles in that frame, but a statement that development resources, balance and patches will be for that playstyle, and once said, develop it so that game mechanics will be in accordance with previous statement : it includes core mechanics, rewards scheme favoring the "official" gamestyle, and detering what'd be consider as side gamestyles, not to say undesirable.

I have derailed from the sole fight question, I apologize...

And on a side note :

This is what you're looking for, enjoy to do in your leisure time, and what you're focusing on when you're doing WvW. Nothing to blame you about. But you can't really blame others either when they're using the tools they're given to favor their own way of having fun.It's interesting to me that this is the second consecutive reply that has shown interest in assigning blame. How is that constructive? Why would it be important to blame someone in this situation? Why not just look for ways to create a better experience . . ?

Blame may be too harsh of a word. The thing is that conversation exists because something is putting a shade on your way to have fun, which is a pity. So, in some way, they'd be to blame. So, eventhough there's noone to blame in this situation, there're some situations where behaviours could be faulty. But it's more up to ANet to define it.

(edit : typos)