Claim buff is the BANE of WvW

[Strider Pj.2193]

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

[Riba.3271]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

The buff is busted. Walls are down and enemy group is holding the entrace, with choke/siege/ewp ready, with 800 extra stats, 2 extra sets of runes. They failed to take your siege down before you breached inner, maybe respawned a few times, and they still have a massive advantage. Numbers don't lie. PvP game.

Doesn't matter if your guild/commander is having the best raid of its existance, overcoming the 800 stats and other defender advantages multiple times is kinda too much to ask. Winrates favor defenders too much.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

The buff is busted. Walls are down and enemy group is holding the entrace, with choke/siege/ewp ready, with 800 extra stats, 2 extra sets of runes. They failed to take your siege down before you breached inner, maybe respawned a few times, and they still have a massive advantage. Numbers don't lie.

PvP game

.

Doesn't matter if your guild/commander is having the best raid of its existance, overcoming the 800 stats and other defender advantages multiple times is kinda too much to ask. Winrates favor defenders too much.Quite strange then that most objectives fall to 50+ zergs once supplies run out because for some reason, the largest and most organized zerg usually wins.

[Riba.3271]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

The buff is busted. Walls are down and enemy group is holding the entrace, with choke/siege/ewp ready, with 800 extra stats, 2 extra sets of runes. They failed to take your siege down before you breached inner, maybe respawned a few times, and they still have a massive advantage. Numbers don't lie.

PvP game

.

Doesn't matter if your guild/commander is having the best raid of its existance, overcoming the 800 stats and other defender advantages multiple times is kinda too much to ask. Winrates favor defenders too much.Quite strange then that most objectives fall to 50+ zergs once supplies run out because for some reason, the largest and most organized zerg usually wins.

Well, if you put new roaming players against WvW group players, thats what happens. Objectives are supposed to be lost against much stronger group, but just a bit stronger groups should stand a chance against enemy group inside it. Guilds should be fighting guilds over objectives. Maybe they wouldn't breach the inner due to running out of attacking supply or constant respawns but that is how WvW used to work.

Draining 1100 sups from presieged keep + with some upgraded objectives nearby, if the defender is smart regarding supply usage, takes hours anyways. Braingame, attackers have to be smart regarding supply, defenders too.

If you had to choose between buffing and nerfing claim buff by 50 stats each, which would you choose? Which one would have positive impact for WvW regarding longetivity and fun?

[KrHome.1920]

The attribute buff has only a small impact most of the time. It is comparable to a fight where one side uses exotic gear and the other side uses ascended gear. Only in smallscale this makes a significant difference. In ZvZ other things are more important.

The 25% speed buff is redundant as pretty much everyone in wvw uses movement speed traits/runes/utility skills or swiftness ... and the warclaw of course.

/based on 7 years of wvw experience

[Riba.3271]

@KrHome.1920 said:The attribute buff has only a small impact most of the time. It is comparable to a fight where one side uses exotic gear and the other side uses ascended gear. Only in smallscale this makes a significant difference. In ZvZ other things are more important.

The 25% speed buff is redundant as pretty much everyone in wvw uses movement speed traits/runes/utility skills or swiftness ... and the warclaw of course.

/based on 7 years of wvw experience

Well as long as you agree that claim buff isn't healthy for the smallscale. Don't know how many players you mean but if it matters a lot up to 5v5 near anything claimed (which is everything except ruins/borders JP and EB NPCs), you can imagine it making everything else worse too, especially when combined with Presence of the keep and all other defender advantages. Especially for guilds, sniper groups, off-prime and new commanders that aren't running 60 people.

In summary: Claim buff is bad!

I disagree with small impact though, 400 stats has massive difference in GvGs, 800 in ZvZs.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Threather.9354 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

The buff is busted. Walls are down and enemy group is holding the entrace, with choke/siege/ewp ready, with 800 extra stats, 2 extra sets of runes. They failed to take your siege down before you breached inner, maybe respawned a few times, and they still have a massive advantage. Numbers don't lie.

PvP game

.

Doesn't matter if your guild/commander is having the best raid of its existance, overcoming the 800 stats and other defender advantages multiple times is kinda too much to ask. Winrates favor defenders too much.Quite strange then that most objectives fall to 50+ zergs once supplies run out because for some reason, the largest and most organized zerg usually wins.

Well, if you put new roaming players against WvW group players, thats what happens. Objectives are supposed to be lost against much stronger group, but just a bit stronger groups should stand a chance against enemy group inside it. Guilds should be fighting guilds over objectives. Maybe they wouldn't breach the inner due to running out of attacking supply or constant respawns but that is how WvW used to work.

Draining 1100 sups from presieged keep + with some upgraded objectives nearby, if the defender is smart regarding supply usage, takes hours anyways. Braingame, attackers have to be smart regarding supply, defenders too.

If you had to choose between buffing and nerfing claim buff by 50 stats each, which would you choose? Which one would have positive impact for WvW regarding longetivity and fun?"New roaming players", lol? I've seen 50 mans take garrison on queued borders. Its not strange, or uncommon. The stronger zerg wins because you are vastly overstating the impact of the buff and vastly understating just how kitten tanky zergs are. WvW is working the same as it "used to work".

Whether there is an actual point to having the buff at all can be argued, sure. I would prefer an active defense boost instead of passive. But I really dont care one way or another.

[Yasai.3549]

I guess people these days find something to complain about no matter what huh.What's next?

"I HATE MERCS ON EBG - REMOVE THEM!"

"I HATE AMBIENT MOBS, NECROS KILL THEM FOR LIFE FORCE!"

" I HATE SIEGE, REMOVE THEM, ONLY BANGING ON GATES WITH BARE HANDS IS VIABLE!"

[Riba.3271]

@"Yasai.3549" said:I guess people these days find something to complain about no matter what huh.What's next?

"I HATE MERCS ON EBG - REMOVE THEM!"

"I HATE AMBIENT MOBS, NECROS KILL THEM FOR LIFE FORCE!"

" I HATE SIEGE, REMOVE THEM, ONLY BANGING ON GATES WITH BARE HANDS IS VIABLE!"

Lets talk about winrates. Lets say Pre-HoT quite a bit stronger group had 60% winrate against weaker group, which still had mortars, cannon, and other defender advantages.

Now it is quite standard for attacker having to beat the defender THREE times (outer, inner, lord) before they can cap the keep. *So before the chance they cap the keep was (0.6 0.6 0.6 100%)=21.6%**

So a group that is much stronger than enemy and achieving 60% winrate against enemy despite all enemy advantages only took the keep 1 times out of 5. These 5 times was doable in 3 hours. And this is talking about weaker keeps like Bay and Hills, not Garrison or EB keep.

Now post HoT, the same group has maybe 40% (if I am being generous, reality is more like 20%) winrate fighting in the situation. *Now this 40% winrate with 3 fights becomes 0.4 0.4 0.4 100%) = 6.4% chance to take the keep.** This would 15.6 so 15 attempts to take the keep. 15 serious attempts with a much stronger group would require way longer time than a commander/guild would lead.

The balance before was more acceptable as people won't stick around as long as that, guilds don't raid as long as that, defenders lose numbers more slower than attackers (as they win the outcome). Defenders can always hit the attackers on other map to pull them away. And don't forget that this was in case where stronger group was a lot stronger than defending one.

Defending is busted, pre-HoT balance was much better

WvW is supposed to be about epic fights for objectives, not epic fights or objectives

[Riba.3271]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Threather.9354 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The only time I pay attention to claim buff is if it’s to be an outnumbered fight. As in: I have 5 they have 12. If they also have the buff I may back up. But 5 v 10 or less? The buff is easy to mitigate.

Yes it is a passive buff that affects WvW in large scale. It makes defending too favourable in general. It isn't as rough on 5-10 player groups that focus on camps and towers, but makes keeps a terror. So they could either remove Presence of the keep (that is obviously much stronger than Auto turrets) or nerf claim buff in general. I am pretty sure even you wouldn't take a 5v5 fight these days near enemy keep which was possible in old days. This might even make you alter your walking routes and make you get less fights in general...

I am pretty sure having extra sets of runes are felt in stronger roaming scene and might have caused roaming dying a bit due to not being able to have powerranking between roamers. The great players usually hate losing, and overcoming extra 1 or 2 sets of runes against a measly decent player, might just lead them to dying too often in WvW against inferior players

without even understanding what caused it

.

I am talking about taking a keep. Once the walls are down, the buff is less an issue. Again, the buff isn’t our underlying issue with balance.

The buff is busted. Walls are down and enemy group is holding the entrace, with choke/siege/ewp ready, with 800 extra stats, 2 extra sets of runes. They failed to take your siege down before you breached inner, maybe respawned a few times, and they still have a massive advantage. Numbers don't lie.

PvP game

.

Doesn't matter if your guild/commander is having the best raid of its existance, overcoming the 800 stats and other defender advantages multiple times is kinda too much to ask. Winrates favor defenders too much.Quite strange then that most objectives fall to 50+ zergs once supplies run out because for some reason, the largest and most organized zerg usually wins.

Well, if you put new roaming players against WvW group players, thats what happens. Objectives are supposed to be lost against much stronger group, but just a bit stronger groups should stand a chance against enemy group inside it. Guilds should be fighting guilds over objectives. Maybe they wouldn't breach the inner due to running out of attacking supply or constant respawns but that is how WvW used to work.

Draining 1100 sups from presieged keep + with some upgraded objectives nearby, if the defender is smart regarding supply usage, takes hours anyways. Braingame, attackers have to be smart regarding supply, defenders too.

If you had to choose between buffing and nerfing claim buff by 50 stats each, which would you choose? Which one would have positive impact for WvW regarding longetivity and fun?"New roaming players", lol? I've seen 50 mans take garrison on queued borders. Its not strange, or uncommon. The stronger zerg wins because you are vastly overstating the impact of the buff and vastly understating just how kitten tanky zergs are. WvW is working the same as it "used to work".

Whether there is an actual point to having the buff at all can be argued, sure. I would prefer an active defense boost instead of passive. But I really dont care one way or another.

Well as long as you're okay with shifting the claim buff power from raw stats to other defender helping things (AC damage, wall/gate/ram health, attacker supply cost), I believe it better way to balance the game in favor of increasing the quality of sieging objectives for both sides and thus commanders.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Threather.9354 said:Defenders can always hit the attackers on other map to pull them away.Attackers are incapable of hitting targets on other maps at the same time to draw defenders away or take those other targets due to few defenders?

[Riba.3271]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:Defenders can always hit the attackers on other map to pull them away.Attackers are incapable of hitting targets on other maps at the same time to draw defenders away or take those other targets due to few defenders?

Yeah, you're right, both sides can do it. Attacking/smaller group commanders will tag down fast regardless due to how hard it is to take things (often just random pugs can kill small side groups at objective). Attackers are on reliant on 2-way attack though, defenders aren't, so for one it is desperation, for one it is strategy. And capping a keep when enemy is distracted elsewhere includes very little fights.

And lets be honest, 2 commanders at same time isn't happening outside primetime when guilds are camping objectives to farm anyone trying anything too elaborate.

WvW is supposed to be about epic fights for objectives, not epic fights or objectives

Anyways, 800 extra stats broke the whole attacking-defending balance post-HoT and should be reduced massively ASAP. Best RvR game out there but people don't wanna lead to assault objectives because you're reliant on enemy groups leaving their upgraded objectives to have decent PvP experience. Lot of commanders want to play WvW for a lot of hours a day but leading and suiciding is kinda meh experience. Attackers need better experiences.

WvW servers will adapt to there being more enemy groups. More commanders will tag up to match the new attacking commanders. More keeps will be lost but it will be on both sides. Less T3 objectives, especially SM and sidekeeps home BL, for everyone is better balance.

[Dawdler.8521]

@Threather.9354 said:And lets be honest, 2 commanders at same time isn't happening outside primetime when guilds are camping objectives to farm anyone trying anything too elaborate.Well lets be honest too, that's mostly because of zerg commanders wanting everyone on their tag and on discord or they wont even leave spawn as they tell any other random commander that happen to be there to tag off and get the kitten off their border because they are there to skillfully win with 70+ on tag.

[Dinas Dragonbane.2978]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Threather.9354 said:And lets be honest, 2 commanders at same time isn't happening outside primetime when guilds are camping objectives to farm anyone trying anything too elaborate.Well lets be honest too, that's mostly because of zerg commanders wanting everyone on their tag and on discord or they wont even leave spawn as they tell any other random commander that happen to be there to tag off and get the kitten off their border because they are there to skillfully win with 70+ on tag.

All too true, which is why small havoc groups like mine are always private. Few tags actually want keeps opened up or softened unless it is by their own group when they try to rush it.

If the claim buff is so strong why don't more people defend t0 and t1 keeps and towers at all? You have the buff immediately when it's yours, same goes for camps.