Idea to change WvW Zergs

[Sreoom.3690]

What if...your WvW experience and drop rates decrease as the size of your zerg increase?

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

For me, about nothing because the loot is crap either way. Most guilds don't care about wxp and loot either-- they've maxed out their abilities long ago. So this just lands on top of the casuals.

 

However, it may increase toxicity because then people will accuse others of scaling things up and reducing the loot. People will fight over scraps to begin with.

 

I don't think penalizing people for coming in will lead to anything good.

Edited May 20, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Sreoom.3690]

4 minutes ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

For me, about nothing because the loot is crap either way. Most guilds don't care about wxp and loot either. So this just lands on top of the casuals.

 

However, it may increase toxicity because then people will accuse others of scaling things up and reducing the loot. People will fight over scraps to begin with.

 

I don't think penalizing people for coming in will lead to anything good.

 

It would depend on the size of the group you are in....not how many people are on the map.

[ArchonWing.9480]

1 minute ago, Sreoom.3690 said:

 

It would depend on the size of the group you are in....not how many people are on the map.

 A guild group is not going to split up because of rewards, especially if they run fat. Pugmanders won't have that kind of coordination either.

 

This is doubly true if the enemy has similar numbers.

Edited May 20, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Sreoom.3690]

Just now, ArchonWing.9480 said:

 A guild group is not going to split up because of rewards, especially if they run fat. Pugmanders won't have that kind of coordination either.

Their call.

 

Also, commanders would need to get the ability to manage the number of people they could have in their squads.

[idolin.2831]

What's the problem with drop rates and WvW exp? Why is there a need to nerf them?

[joneirikb.7506]

For one thing, this would never, and I repeat never, pass anet's Care-Bear-Rule. So no matter what it will never happen.

 

The practical effect is just more toxic and elitist behaviour in general. The more skilled players will in general split off and do things with smaller groups. The less skilled players still need groups/numbers to compensate. So this would split the good and the bad into different groups, which would largely make the bad players leave, since they would keep losing, without the good players to carry their groups and lead. Then add a bunch of people screaming "don't follow us! You ruin our rewards!", and you got a spicy cocktail.

In-fact, I consider this to be one of my top 3 ways to wreck wvw, together with "Friendly Fire" and "Collision Detection".

 

-----

 

But on a more serious note. Without violating the Care-Bear-Rule, I'm not sure if there are any way to accomplish splitting up zerg gameplay. 

 

People are naturally reward driven, to the degree that most will do what they gain something from without even thinking about it. So as long as Zerg play is the most rewarding, people will do that. And there is no way that will change. Similarly a very large section of players prefers the safety in numbers of a zerg, and also that you don't really see individual participation in a zerg. These serve as a safety net in many ways, and makes many players more comfortable. And that won't change even if rewards did.

I believe the best way to change up zerg gameplay from being the main focus, would be to actually engage players into the match-ups again. Make people invested in the week/match, winning/losing. Once you start looking strategical/tactical on the map, you see a lot more good uses of roamers and havoc squads, everything from 1-5 players, instead of loading everyone into a single squad just to karma train the map.

 

But, as we know, fat chance of that ever happening. Because most of the ways to encourage the majority of players to win/lose, would also just encourage more Bandwagoning. Which just further wrecks the very same motivation for everyone involved.

 

Quite a hurdle.

Edited May 20, 2021 by joneirikb.7506

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

2 hours ago, Sreoom.3690 said:

What if...your WvW experience and drop rates decrease as the size of your zerg increase?

 

this... idea isn't even thought around the next corner. what does us stop from making simply 10 squads with 5 ppl each and one visible tag who commands on voice @ discord   ... as it is just right now. the tag would have less direct overview over his group but that's that.

 

there's even a chance that coordinated groups would become stronger and more effective by your glorious plan. bc u would see your own firebrand as a tag as well then kekw

 

 

... and yeah, those newer players would be less able to get direct feedback, bc we'd have less options to check what they run and what they do and where/why they die etc.

[lodjur.1284]

What if everyone stacking inside the red circle was actually a bad idea and would get you killed?

 

Imagine that 40 players being huddled together would still take full damage from every red circle they stood in, instead of 1/8th of normal damage.

[hanabal lecter.2495]

Rather than taking away from one , it would be healthier to just give the smaller groups more rewards. 

[ArchonWing.9480]

23 hours ago, Sreoom.3690 said:

Their call.

 

Also, commanders would need to get the ability to manage the number of people they could have in their squads.

 

This call has been overwhelmingly in favor of one side.

 

Even when WvW was a gold sink and servers had to work together with a pve contingent, there were still blobs. The scoring system is already designed to favor splitting up, and so does lord scaling. That was from the very start. This mode was designed for  big fights. This whole game is. This is why content like raids is dead.

 

This is why changes like these and other ones such as limiting squad size are simply not in tune with reality at all.

 

Most people that seriously WvW are only going to pursue things that give actual in-game advantages. WvW rank ceases to give new abilities after lvl 1226 except that pointless God title and a lot of the abilities aren't even that useful if you don't get on some types of siege.

Edited May 21, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Sreoom.3690]

14 hours ago, hanabal lecter.2495 said:

Rather than taking away from one , it would be healthier to just give the smaller groups more rewards. 

I like that, give higher WvW experience & drop rates to smaller teams.  

[Ronin.4501]

7 hours ago, Sreoom.3690 said:

I like that, give higher WvW experience & drop rates to smaller teams.  

Anet already does this. It's called the "Outnumbered" buff. 😉

[Sreoom.3690]

8 hours ago, Ronin.4501 said:

Anet already does this. It's called the "Outnumbered" buff. 😉

Yes, and it does an awesome job in incentivizing team play versus mindless zerg play.  🙂

[Sreoom.3690]

Another idea...no down state for larger parties (aka "Zergs"). 

[Dawdler.8521]

6 minutes ago, Sreoom.3690 said:

Another idea...no down state for larger parties (aka "Zergs"). 

How do you define a zerg in a way thats not wide open for griefing or easily worked around?

[Talindra.4958]

Haha.. wont help to decrease squad size. Wvw current reward rate / time is very low compare to other game mode in gw2 .. so those who are still heavily paticipate in wvw, are playinh not for the loot .. they wont care if dev spend few sleepless nights to figur out the equation for loot scalling vs squad size.. lol.. 

A more specific solution is required for the balancing of game play in wvw.. eg..  reconstructing a new world where all players from different time zone can meet in one place 😛

Edited May 22, 2021 by Talindra.4958

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 5/21/2021 at 5:05 PM, Sreoom.3690 said:

I like that, give higher WvW experience & drop rates to smaller teams.  

 

It's been brought up in the past. I think another way to think about it is in diminishing returns. Keep is worth 5000 WxP. Use 50 to take it, you each get 100 WxP. Use 5 and you each get 1000 WxP. Player's worth x WxP, use 1 to kill him you get full amount, if 20 jump them then each get 1/20. That is if the goal is to address risk vs reward and efficient play. Now what you have to be careful is the opposite effect and people excluding people from playing because they want to make more themselves. Hey get off my map we are taking this. So some baselines would need to be in place as well. In an ideal environment there should be room for all style of gameplay from solo, havocs, warbands and zergs. But zerging shouldn't be the most efficient system in rewarding and WxP, which currently it is. 

[Infusion.7149]

22 minutes ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

It's been brought up in the past. I think another way to think about it is in diminishing returns. Keep is worth 5000 WxP. Use 50 to take it, you each get 100 WxP. Use 5 and you each get 1000 WxP. Player's worth x WxP, use 1 to kill him you get full amount, if 20 jump them then each get 1/20. That is if the goal is to address risk vs reward and efficient play. Now what you have to be careful is the opposite effect and people excluding people from playing because they want to make more themselves. Hey get off my map we are taking this. So some baselines would need to be in place as well. In an ideal environment there should be room for all style of gameplay from solo, havocs, warbands and zergs. But zerging shouldn't be the most efficient system in rewarding and WxP, which currently it is. 

You do know that the lords scale with players right? That's why it such a slog to hit a keep lord or SMC lord with a full blob.
I and another mesmer used to sneak keeps when the main zerg was hitting the other one and we would 2 man it...

Not sure about the player kills thing, there's already diminishing returns after the player dies multiple times. If I recall correctly, the WXP is largely based on how long that player was alive.

[TheGrimm.5624]

2 minutes ago, Infusion.7149 said:

You do know that the lords scale with players right? That's why it such a slog to hit a keep lord or SMC lord with a full blob.
I and another mesmer used to sneak keeps when the main zerg was hitting the other one and we would 2 man it...

Not sure about the player kills thing, there's already diminishing returns after the player dies multiple times. If I recall correctly, the WXP is largely based on how long that player was alive.

 

I do, not complaining about the scaling here. Its more, is it easier to take a keep with 20 or 5? Why should they pay the same? Should a 1v1 fight pay the same as a 5v1 or worse 10 v 1? We use a tagging system which encourages zerg play versus more efficient play. If the OP's goal was to encourage people to play more efficient then you have address that zerg play will always reward more since it requires less effort to earn that reward. Diminishing rewards wasn't teh best word choice here since its already a game concept. Another way to think about it as pool of rewards for doing a thing. If the objective is worth 5000 then the more hands used to complete it, the less for all because they passed a point that more was overkill that could have been doing other things that would have better helped their side. This is also part of the intent and why we have to keep an eye on the balance between PPK and PPT since PPT should also reflect on efficiency but it doesn't reward for it since we all know wining means just bragging rights at best and night capping means you had better coverage. 

[Bristingr.5034]

On 5/20/2021 at 4:23 PM, joneirikb.7506 said:

"Collision Detection".

I seriously want the Fractal's "Social Awkwardness" turned on for 24 hours in WvW. Just for the sheer chaos. MAKE IT HAPPEN ANET.

[ArchonWing.9480]

3 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

I do, not complaining about the scaling here. Its more, is it easier to take a keep with 20 or 5? Why should they pay the same?

 

It's easier 20 vs 5, but not necessarily much easier 20 vs 10, due to lord scaling. 10 or so is often the sweet spot for ninjaing stuff as they can build enough siege and still take down the lord fairly quickly without generating any orange swords or something

 

Also if there should be 20 defenders, then you'd be punishing the 20 for working together to take the keep if we scale the rewards down for that reason.

 

Not that the rewards are of much value anyways. I think reducing them in any circumstance is not acceptable. Honestly, who takes towers for wxp?

Edited May 24, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Bristingr.5034]

6 hours ago, ArchonWing.9480 said:

 

It's easier 20 vs 5, but not necessarily much easier 20 vs 10, due to lord scaling. 10 or so is often the sweet spot for ninjaing stuff as they can build enough siege and still take down the lord fairly quickly without generating any orange swords or something

 

Also if there should be 20 defenders, then you'd be punishing the 20 for working together to take the keep if we scale the rewards down for that reason.

 

Not that the rewards are of much value anyways. I think reducing them in any circumstance is not acceptable. Honestly, who takes towers for wxp?

My WvW Guild does... we like taking stuff.

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

10 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

I do, not complaining about the scaling here. Its more, is it easier to take a keep with 20 or 5? Why should they pay the same? Should a 1v1 fight pay the same as a 5v1 or worse 10 v 1? We use a tagging system which encourages zerg play versus more efficient play. If the OP's goal was to encourage people to play more efficient then you have address that zerg play will always reward more since it requires less effort to earn that reward. Diminishing rewards wasn't teh best word choice here since its already a game concept. Another way to think about it as pool of rewards for doing a thing. If the objective is worth 5000 then the more hands used to complete it, the less for all because they passed a point that more was overkill that could have been doing other things that would have better helped their side. This is also part of the intent and why we have to keep an eye on the balance between PPK and PPT since PPT should also reflect on efficiency but it doesn't reward for it since we all know wining means just bragging rights at best and night capping means you had better coverage. 

there just is not a lot of skill or brain necessary to flip a keep that isn't guarded at all.  took air keep even post dps nerf with only a scourge, a holo and a reaper (which was a pretty kitten combo). all by a theif porting us straight to inner from that one glitch spot near the shrine.

 

so yeah, this ninja'ing can be "fun" sometimes, but in the end it is nothing but tedious and annoying. it is absolutely no accomplishment and doesn't deserve to get good rewards. u basically play mostly pvE in these cases. bc once there are actually defenders, the lords on certain keeps can mess u up very easily

 

this whole thread is basically pointless.

while yes, there need to be a mechanics change, but rather towards largescale, not freaking against it. people need to be forced again to learn how to play. guess back in the day, the money price for upgrading objectives gave them "worth". and u also had to repair your gear with money afaik?

 

and till not long ago, the mistforged armor was worth something. i'm incredibly annoyed that Anet set the cap for them lower. rank 2000 was not a big barrier anyways, and u basically trashed it to 500? like wtf.

[hobotnicax.7918]

On 5/20/2021 at 11:38 PM, Sreoom.3690 said:

What if...your WvW experience and drop rates decrease as the size of your zerg increase?

 

This won't work.

To "punish" huge blobs, remove objective auras when there's more than X people in objective zone, also remove bloodlust.

Blobs of 40 players or more that are within 900 range gain a debuff - 20% reduced movement speed, 33% reduced boon duration.

Remove sniff from mounts.