Suggestion:Replace Ruins with a Capture the Fort Event

[X T D.6458]

This idea is pretty simple, it adds a central structure in Borderlands similar to Stonemist Castle that players can fight over for Bloodlust. This would remove the ruins which are not very fun or engaging. However this would not be the same as SMC, it would not upgrade, it would have no siege, and gates/walls are not fortified or reinforced (paper). It is basically a simple fort in the middle of the map that you fight over to gain bloodlust tiers for your server. The idea is to promote fights, especially if everything on the map is t3 which discourages a lot of people from attacking objectives. This could also encourage more players to play on borderlands rather than staying on EB all the time.

Thoughts?

[Sovereign.1093]

id try it. =) also bloodlust shouldnt be stat upgrade. id like it if bloodlust = more loot bonus and more ppk

[Infusion.7149]

Bloodlust requires splitting people up. Putting a fort in the middle would just exacerbate blobbing.

[Sovereign.1093]

@Infusion.7149 said:Bloodlust requires splitting people up. Putting a fort in the middle would just exacerbate blobbing.

bloodlust requires 2 ppl on mount and just 1 on red bl

[steki.1478]

@Infusion.7149 said:Bloodlust requires splitting people up. Putting a fort in the middle would just exacerbate blobbing.

Not if you bring blob fights there.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Sovereign.1093 said:

@Infusion.7149 said:Bloodlust requires splitting people up. Putting a fort in the middle would just exacerbate blobbing.

bloodlust requires 2 ppl on mount and just 1 on red blJust like how saying a blob requires 80 people, when in fact 70 is enough. Its easier though.

[Strider Pj.2193]

@X T D.6458 said:This idea is pretty simple, it adds a central structure in Borderlands similar to Stonemist Castle that players can fight over for Bloodlust. This would remove the ruins which are not very fun or engaging. However this would not be the same as SMC, it would not upgrade, it would have no siege, and gates/walls are not fortified or reinforced (paper). It is basically a simple fort in the middle of the map that you fight over to gain bloodlust tiers for your server. The idea is to promote fights, especially if everything on the map is t3 which discourages a lot of people from attacking objectives. This could also encourage more players to play on borderlands rather than staying on EB all the time.

Thoughts?

I do like it.

I wonder if within that structure, there were three circles close to each other (just out of max range for ranger bow) which you would be required to hold two out of three to control the buff...

[Baldrick.8967]

I like Strider's addition to the idea, making it much harder to cap and hold when the opposition is there too, could make for some interesting fights....if there are enough people on to compete on 2 maps.

Sadly the liklihood of any design changes on any map are close to zero.

[X T D.6458]

@Infusion.7149 said:Bloodlust requires splitting people up. Putting a fort in the middle would just exacerbate blobbing.

The idea is to promote fights and encourage activity on the borderlands. One of the roadblocks to that for some groups is the lack of motivation they have for attacking tier 3 objectives and dealing with all the siege. Ruins requires 3 people to split up and stand on a circle for 2 minutes, often without resistance. This is not engaging or fun, at least in my opinion. Now whether you or an enemy group wants to bring a blob or 10 people, it doesn't matter...we need more ways of promoting fights and activity.

[X T D.6458]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@X T D.6458 said:This idea is pretty simple, it adds a central structure in Borderlands similar to Stonemist Castle that players can fight over for Bloodlust. This would remove the ruins which are not very fun or engaging. However this would not be the same as SMC, it would not upgrade, it would have no siege, and gates/walls are not fortified or reinforced (paper). It is basically a simple fort in the middle of the map that you fight over to gain bloodlust tiers for your server. The idea is to promote fights, especially if everything on the map is t3 which discourages a lot of people from attacking objectives. This could also encourage more players to play on borderlands rather than staying on EB all the time.

Thoughts?

I do like it.

I wonder if within that structure, there were three circles close to each other (just out of max range for ranger bow) which you would be required to hold two out of three to control the buff...

I originally considered the idea of having more than 1 capture ring in the structure, but this would probably require it to be much larger and would make it harder to capture. The way I see it, it should promote fast and fluid engagements rather than encouraging players to camp it. Also if you have multiple capture points it will make it harder for smaller groups to claim it which would marginalize some guilds that prefer to run on their own.

[Dawdler.8521]

WvW maps would have had so much potential had they just scrapped the "unique" borders and went all-out with 3-way EB in different climate zones and structural/enviromental designs, still following the golden rule of towers covering keeps. This would have left a equidistant central area on all of them that could be used to focus battles in various ways, not just a keep. And we would have already had 4 "unique" maps with grassland, alpine, jungle and desert because they would have been trivial for Anet to build - they already have the basic foundation, they just change objective designs, visuals and tweak the terrain a bit, instead of spending years designing an utterly flawed border.

But I digress.

[X T D.6458]

@Sovereign.1093 said:id try it. =) also bloodlust shouldnt be stat upgrade. id like it if bloodlust = more loot bonus and more ppk

While Ive never been a fan of the stat boost from bloodlust, it does give an incentive for players to actually go for it. I think they should replace the points from finishing opponents into a general PPK boost though.

[Sovereign.1093]

@X T D.6458 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:id try it. =) also bloodlust shouldnt be stat upgrade. id like it if bloodlust = more loot bonus and more ppk

While Ive never been a fan of the stat boost from bloodlust, it does give an incentive for players to actually go for it. I think they should replace the points from finishing opponents into a general PPK boost though.

stat boosts just make it hard for the lesser number to do much. i mean my 15 can almost handle 30+ in a surprise attack in defending keep with full buffs. but we cant attack theirs. :/

[Stand The Wall.6987]

I like the idea but how about the walls and gates are reduced to rubble. would attract roamers that way.

also it would be cool if it acted like a king of the hill type deal. once your team gets a full capture and hold it for 5 min you get the buff for half an hour or something like that.

[Kovu.7560]

Ruins bring fights when its a daily.And by 'fights' I mean salty pve'ers.

~ Kovu

[Chaba.5410]

Want the quaggans that damaged and destroyed siege back.

[Kovu.7560]

@Chaba.5410 said:Want the quaggans that damaged and destroyed siege back.

If they do come back I still have some of those pearls in my bank.

~ Kovu

[Strider Pj.2193]

@Kovu.7560 said:

@Chaba.5410 said:Want the quaggans that damaged and destroyed siege back.

If they do come back I still have some of those pearls in my bank.

~

My first foray (accidentally) into WvW I stepped out of a fort (likely Garry) and got hit with quaggan lightening.,

I was like what the heck!! Ran back in and waited another couple of weeks.,,

[Kovu.7560]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Kovu.7560 said:

@"Chaba.5410" said:Want the quaggans that damaged and destroyed siege back.

If they do come back I still have some of those pearls in my bank.

~

My first foray (accidentally) into WvW I stepped out of a fort (likely Garry) and got hit with quaggan lightening.,

I was like what the heck!! Ran back in and waited another couple of weeks.,,

Yeah I remember when I was a kid I couldn't beat Donkey Kong Country 3 because I was too afraid to play the lightning level near the end of the game. Had to rent the game several times before I finally got past that level and was able to finish the game, (I was SURE to grind lives to finish the game because I knew I wouldn't get past there again =p).

Anywho, I can't say I'm either for or against the idea of a keep in the middle of the map. The whole idea of the ruins is to force groups to split up, but they're usually ghost towns because people don't really care about the bloodlust buff -- if they really wanted to a zerg could swing in and take it and there's no "splitting up" the roamers could do about it. (Apart from, of course, taking it back once the zerg got bored and left.)

Perhaps an event in the middle of the map that grants an advantage to the siege aspect of the game might be an idea? Like maybe siege does 10% increased damage for each tier of bloodlust your server owns? -- And I don't mean a laser that both wins the game for you and dcs the map.

It has been the bane of this gamemode to find a mapwide event that:

• Doesn't lag the map.
• Can't in some way be abused.
• Encourages small-scale pvp engagements that favor not blobbing.
• Provides a buff that is meaningful but not intrusive.

[Dinas Dragonbane.2978]

Yes I miss the quaggan lake too, nowadays it would be even better than the old days to help destroy those fortifications bristling with siege, not to mention keeping things flagged and players in combat even briefly so they wouldn't be able to mount if the lightning was hitting them :P

The desert event actually was perfect in those middle tiers because people did not ZERG THEM, as far encouraging a server to split up it did a great job if people used it the correct way. A couple times trying to take t3 structures in a heavily defended map we used that event as a decoy, sending a few people just to slow down the larger server that had all of their people there....while we had people hitting the tower we'd been trying to capture instead of doing the event. It was a great way to give options on how you can attack or defend things, but those top tiers apparently were zerging it like stonemist or something, oh well :(

[Justine.6351]

The alpine bl ruins are the best wvw change still all these years later, and there is much fun to be had in them if you put effort into learning your underwater skills.

Your idea isn't bad, just put it in the desert bl and leave alpine alone.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Justine.6351 said:The alpine bl ruins are the best wvw change still all these years later(ignoring the period when it was so grossly OP it was like having 50 stacks of perma might)

[X T D.6458]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:I like the idea but how about the walls and gates are reduced to rubble. would attract roamers that way.

also it would be cool if it acted like a king of the hill type deal. once your team gets a full capture and hold it for 5 min you get the buff for half an hour or something like that.

If there are no walls or gates, then it is essentially the same as ruins where there is just a capture circle. At least with walls/gates it gives players a chance to defend and time to run to the fort. The problem with having a buff for too long is that it will deter players from continuously fighting over it. The idea is to promote a continuous flow of fights.

[Acheron.4731]

@X T D.6458 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:I like the idea but how about the walls and gates are reduced to rubble. would attract roamers that way.

also it would be cool if it acted like a king of the hill type deal. once your team gets a full capture and hold it for 5 min you get the buff for half an hour or something like that.

If there are no walls or gates, then it is essentially the same as ruins where there is just a capture circle. At least with walls/gates it gives players a chance to defend and time to run to the fort. The problem with having a buff for too long is that it will deter players from continuously fighting over it. The idea is to promote a continuous flow of fights.

Perhaps a constant watchtower effect?Color specific would be great too

[X T D.6458]

@Acheron.4731 said:

@X T D.6458 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:I like the idea but how about the walls and gates are reduced to rubble. would attract roamers that way.

also it would be cool if it acted like a king of the hill type deal. once your team gets a full capture and hold it for 5 min you get the buff for half an hour or something like that.

If there are no walls or gates, then it is essentially the same as ruins where there is just a capture circle. At least with walls/gates it gives players a chance to defend and time to run to the fort. The problem with having a buff for too long is that it will deter players from continuously fighting over it. The idea is to promote a continuous flow of fights.

Perhaps a constant watchtower effect?Color specific would be great too

Oooh a watchtower effect would be really nice, lets you know where the action is. Can you expand on the color idea?