Idea to change WvW Zergs

[phreeak.1023]

How about  a squad over 40 ppl gets +50% to magic find and extra +x% chance of lootbags 😍

Edited May 25, 2021 by phreeak.1023

[joneirikb.7506]

Any changes to rewards will not change zergs.

It will only make people quit if they feel negatively impacted by the change in rewards (it doesn't even have to be valid).

[Dawdler.8521]

7 hours ago, hobotnicax.7918 said:

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

Problem is objective areas still dont have the resolution to make that "punish" only the zerg. If there is a 50vs50 at south bay gate everyone within its area drops the aura, fine, fair and dandy... but is it fair for the 5 defenders trying to hold north gate against another 15?

 

If anything this will just cause zerging because if you're going to get punished for smallscaling anywhere close to a zerg you might as well join the zerg.

[XenesisII.1540]

20 hours ago, Bristingr.5034 said:

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

I keep seeing this suggestion, but I think you guys underestimate how many wvw players would just take the night off instead of playing through something like that. It'll just turn into a clouding pirate ship.

[ArchonWing.9480]

1 minute ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

I keep seeing this suggestion, but I think you guys underestimate how many wvw players would just take the night off instead of playing through something like that. It'll just turn into a clouding pirate ship.

Well, there's some people on my side I'd like to push off a cliff. So it'd be worth it for that.

 

Though that's not really a reason I guess.

[hobotnicax.7918]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Problem is objective areas still dont have the resolution to make that "punish" only the zerg. If there is a 50vs50 at south bay gate everyone within its area drops the aura, fine, fair and dandy... but is it fair for the 5 defenders trying to hold north gate against another 15?

 

If anything this will just cause zerging because if you're going to get punished for smallscaling anywhere close to a zerg you might as well join the zerg.

You mean the 50v50 with the defenders using 5 ACs and other siege?

You mean the 5 that can chain throw disablers on the 15? Build siege and also yolo their siege to destroy it?

[Bristingr.5034]

56 minutes ago, XenesisII.1540 said:

I keep seeing this suggestion, but I think you guys underestimate how many wvw players would just take the night off instead of playing through something like that. It'll just turn into a clouding pirate ship.

I mean, I take off the week that No-Down State is turned on, so god forbid some guilds and pugs want to try to spice things up in a different way.

[XenesisII.1540]

/shrug I usually take half of no down state week off too cause it's turns into a boring ktrain over newbs. Might actually be fun to kill  boon balls with their crutch gone this time around though.

 

Sure this might be a nice distraction, it could also be a disaster in griefing if this is turned on for team mates as well, and bumper car people off walls and cliffs. If this didn't involving "pushing" but instead prevented you from "invading their space" around them, I would be on board with it. But to me it would be fun for the first hour and then annoyance the rest of the time, see april fools bobble head and airplane jokes.

[Dawdler.8521]

3 hours ago, hobotnicax.7918 said:

You mean the 50v50 with the defenders using 5 ACs and other siege?

You mean the 5 that can chain throw disablers on the 15? Build siege and also yolo their siege to destroy it?

You mean the irrelevant scenarios that has nothing to do with the argument about the flaw in your suggestion? Yes.

[hobotnicax.7918]

9 hours ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

You mean the irrelevant scenarios that has nothing to do with the argument about the flaw in your suggestion? Yes.

OK. Looking at your post (spam) history, trying to reason with you is impossible. So I'll pass.

[Kontrolle.3514]

If you dont like zergs, dont play WvW?

[Sreoom.3690]

2 hours ago, Kontrolle.3514 said:

If you dont like zergs, dont play WvW?

I don't recall saying I don't like zergs...hanging around a couple of dozen team mates in a boon ball while spamming 1 can be engaging--sadly you almost have to play in zerg mode at higher tiers as smaller teams get rolled quick.

[Dawdler.8521]

7 hours ago, hobotnicax.7918 said:

OK. Looking at your post (spam) history, trying to reason with you is impossible. So I'll pass.

I argued the flaw in your suggestion - that objective aura areas are way to large to determine whether a fight there is actually a zerg fight or not since it can easily be both at the same time within that area and you made it about siege humping out of nowhere. When objective areas can be large swaths of open field such as north camp. Bay was just an example. You got massive areas on DBL as well. I didnt see any attempt at reasoning. But I guess I am the one spamming.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Dawdler.8521

[hobotnicax.7918]

59 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

I argued the flaw in your suggestion - that objective aura areas are way to large to determine whether a fight there is actually a zerg fight or not since it can easily be both at the same time within that area and you made it about siege humping out of nowhere. When objective areas can be large swaths of open field such as north camp. Bay was just an example. You got massive areas on DBL as well. I didnt see any attempt at reasoning. But I guess I am the one spamming.

I see no flaws, any possible issues coming from it would be very rare and situational, and the benefits outweigh them. But OK.

Also, 7390 posts, a true forum keyboard warrior. So please, let the suggestions come from people who actually play the game.

[Dawdler.8521]

32 minutes ago, hobotnicax.7918 said:

I see no flaws, any possible issues coming from it would be very rare and situational, and the benefits outweigh them. But OK.

Also, 7390 posts, a true forum keyboard warrior. So please, let the suggestions come from people who actually play the game.

No reasoning indeed, no flaws lol. Also I have more hours in the game than posts.

Edited May 26, 2021 by Dawdler.8521

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 5/24/2021 at 3:59 PM, Bristingr.5034 said:

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

I do miss tank walls. As Deeps if you want to get to the squishy under sides you had to put your neck on the line. Being able to just zerg ball here is a big issue with a lot of the game mechanics and more impactful on lag than I think collision would be. But without numbers and being able to test..it's all theorycrafting.

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 5/24/2021 at 6:15 PM, 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?

 

Please grant I use some of this in the short hand versus full scale ideas to make more of a point that there are other options to the OP and to reinforce that quite often zerging is the end all answer and I agree with the OP that it shouldn't be so. I think efficiency is quite underrated in the game. But that's me. I do believe the game mode should encourage all styles of play from zerging to solo roaming. To me that's where the strategy part of the game play fun comes in. How can you do more with less.  Because sooner or later you will be on the side with less numbers to work with. May not be today but odds are good it will happen. Now maybe it's because I rode a server from T1 all the way to T8 while living on SoR but I think it's more I think in terms of havocs and warbands versus full map zergs. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

On 5/25/2021 at 1:52 AM, kamikharzeeh.8016 said:

there just is not a lot of skill or brain necessary to flip a keep that isn't guarded at all. 

 

Not saying that either. In other posts it's been brought up that there should be even less reward for taking empty structures. Think it should be a little different, more rewards for both taking and defending structures where both sides are fighting it out. We want less encouragement to KTrain here. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

9 hours ago, Kontrolle.3514 said:

If you dont like zergs, dont play WvW?

 

The game mode plays better with more players. It also performs worse with more players all in the same spot. If everyone runs in a zerg ball ANet's solution has been to try and reduce the number of players on a map. That means more people waiting in queue and not playing. That leads to more people logging off. That means less people to play and population dieing. So.....we should all move on to another game?

 

Now I will admit to running with your one liner which is why the topic is a challenging one in general, but again, there is a role to play for all the various group levels. People will call roamers gankers, griefers and campers. They are also known as scouts and spotters. Havocs as well will be called the same but they and warbands also act as decoys and pincers. Zergs are needed to crack hardened targets with defenders. The wheels fall off the system when all we have are zergs avoiding each other and taking empty structures. KTraining is not something that should be strived for.

[Touchme.1097]

If roaming gave almost as much exp as playing in a blob I would reconsider WvW as a decent mode, right now it's useless to me. I enjoy sPvP better

[ArchonWing.9480]

3 hours ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

 

Please grant I use some of this in the short hand versus full scale ideas to make more of a point that there are other options to the OP and to reinforce that quite often zerging is the end all answer and I agree with the OP that it shouldn't be so. I think efficiency is quite underrated in the game. But that's me. I do believe the game mode should encourage all styles of play from zerging to solo roaming. To me that's where the strategy part of the game play fun comes in. How can you do more with less.  Because sooner or later you will be on the side with less numbers to work with. May not be today but odds are good it will happen. Now maybe it's because I rode a server from T1 all the way to T8 while living on SoR but I think it's more I think in terms of havocs and warbands versus full map zergs. 

I'm afraid that's a futile struggle and there's nearly 9 years of proof that most players don't care. I don't think you and OP really understand how many of those people think, and thus any premise is going to end in failure. This entire thread is simply based on a flawed premise, and that is material rewards direct behavior. If that were true, people would not spend thousands upon thousands of gems to stack servers, for example.

 

WvW was already designed to make people split up by design! If you blob in one place, you will lose structures where you aren't. It is very possible for servers to overrun one map (usually EB) but still have less score.  But, people have zerged. Even before WxP existed.  Now of course, scoring is meaningless, but even if it were, it still doesn't change what people think.

 

Winning means nothing. How will you get people that like only blob fights to care if some keeps on their BL got ninja'd by some door hitters? You can't. Heck, I can only bring myself to help in callouts about maybe 1/3 the time, and that's mostly out of pity.

 

As braindead as large scale combat is, the state of small scale combat is even worse since mobility is king. A lot of players, especially casual ones, are justifiably unwilling to take part in that, the moment when most combat is just people running away after they get hit. Just like how some people find zerging boring.  You just can't make them change how they play.

 

Furthermore, the reason you are seeing blobs is the symptom of the problem, rather than the cause of it. The problem is simply a lack of population compared to before for many different reasons, so people are bunching up to get whatever kind of content they can get.

 

Finally, any change will always be circumvented by big organized guilds, and most of the negative impacts will always fall under the casual players that are unwilling or simply ignorant about the new mechanics. The only result of that is a dead(er) game mode, because it just turns into another form of gakekeeping (see 8 hour mount grind)

 

Edited May 26, 2021 by ArchonWing.9480

[Overedge.2435]

My guild is a havoc guild and most of us actively have no interest in zerging, so I'm a bit biased. It's disheartening to be all but unable to play some nights because every time the eight of us poke something we're overrun by a group of thirty.

An idea I had plays off the ideas of wartime logistics: add a debuff that's something like "-10 to all stats for each ally within 1500 range" to reflect the struggle of getting wartime supplies distributed to a massive group of soldiers. It then becomes a battle of quantity over quality: a group of 10 has the advantage of higher stats while the group of 20 has the advantage of higher numbers. It adds a layer of strategy to guilds trying to find the perfect balance that works for them.

[joneirikb.7506]

4 hours ago, Overedge.2435 said:

My guild is a havoc guild and most of us actively have no interest in zerging, so I'm a bit biased. It's disheartening to be all but unable to play some nights because every time the eight of us poke something we're overrun by a group of thirty.

An idea I had plays off the ideas of wartime logistics: add a debuff that's something like "-10 to all stats for each ally within 1500 range" to reflect the struggle of getting wartime supplies distributed to a massive group of soldiers. It then becomes a battle of quantity over quality: a group of 10 has the advantage of higher stats while the group of 20 has the advantage of higher numbers. It adds a layer of strategy to guilds trying to find the perfect balance that works for them.

 

Think that one through a bit, if you have 100 players in a zerg, they would have -1000 vitality (for ex), so if you have a player in full zerk with no extra vitality, they'd be at 0 vitality, which also removes 10 000 health. This means a Guardian would be down to base health of 1645 health, where a Necro would be 9212 and much better off. The same applies to all the other stats, like toughness down to 0 will make you take a lot more damage from attacks, even if damage stats is also reduced most people still have higher damage stats from gear than defensive ones.

 

Besides, imagine how fun if your havoc group is fighting against 10 enemy players, you're all hurt, and suddenly a friendly zerg comes nearby and instantly plummet your stats, so you all instantly die against the enemy because -800 to all your base stats.

 

Also remember ANet's Care-bear-rule, they will never add a mechanic that punishes you for being near other players. They want you to always be happy when you see another player on your team (Never said it succeeded).

----

I think even -10% movement speed when more than 5 people are gathered would be enough to kitten off most people, but could have been a viable way to work around zergs.

I think the best idea I've heard in that regard was making the ground slight rumble (visual and audio effect) when a zerg was getting near. The more players the larger the effect. That way you could feel/hear it coming before spotting, and move/run off.

Edited May 27, 2021 by joneirikb.7506
typos

[Overedge.2435]

5 minutes ago, joneirikb.7506 said:

 

Think that one through a bit, if you have 100 players in a zerg, they would have -1000 vitality (for ex), so if you have a player in full zerg with no extra vitality, they'd be at 0 vitality, which also removes 10 000 health. This means a Guardian would be down to base health of 1645 health, where a Necro would be 9212 and much better off. The same applies to all the other stats, like toughness down to 0 will make you take a lot more damage from attacks, even if damage stats is also reduced most people still have higher damage stats from gear than defensive ones.

 

Besides, imagine how fun if your havoc group is fighting against 10 enemy players, you're all hurt, and suddenly a friendly zerg comes nearby and instantly plummet your stats, so you all instantly die against the enemy because -800 to all your base stats.

 

Also remember ANet's Care-bear-rule, they will never add a mechanic that punishes you for being near other players. They want you to always be happy when you see another player on your team (Never said it succeeded).

----

I think the best idea I've heard in that regard was making the ground slight rumble (visual and audio effect) when a zerg was getting near. The more players the larger the effect. That way you could feel/hear it combing before spotting, and move/run off.

-10 might be a bit heavy of a penalty. Or maybe only certain stats should be affected, like the offensive ones (pow/pre/fer/condi)? You're right though, this does go against their policy of encouraging being near other players. Nerf AOEs then maybe, like they did with CCs?

One of the guys in my guild has a crappy ISP so he just calls out his lag spikes, that always signals a big group nearby.

[AlexndrTheGreat.8310]

As said in an above comment, having penalties for grouping up will never be a thing. One of Anet’s major design philosophies is that you shouldn’t feel like you’re being punished for grouping up or even just being around other people. Just because other people nearby are trying to do similar content as you or are participating in the game should not be a detriment to everyone.