40 replies to this topic

[DreadlockrastaGW]

http://www.gamebreak...world-vs-world/

On the topic of World vs. World he teases this juicy nugget:
“It’s worth noting, while they said we’re not working on new versions of the home maps currently, they didn’t say anything about new maps in general…..”


Theories? Hopes?

IMO: I hope they make a new map where the team who won the last round match gets put at a disadvantage to prevent stagnation in the upper tiers.

Like a map where the Winning team from last time (lets say green) has their main base in the middle of the map, and it is sandwiched by the other two teams on either side.

I even drew my dream map, look at my 3rd grade skills

Edited by DreadlockrastaGW, 03 January 2013 - 01:33 AM.

[Ramanadjinn]

That map severely disadvantages the green team.

Am I wrong in thinking that would actually just prevent green from accruing as many points as they could in an even matchup.  Wouldn't this make matches more stale as green would rarely be able to move up a tier from such a disadvantaged position, even when they are ready to move.

Not only that but it would be that much easier for red to just hold out on defense while green and blue fight giving red the ability to sit in a tier longer than maybe they should.

I could be wrong, but I would imagine that would lead to tiers sitting with the same server for an extremely long period of time.

[1up]

Adding more maps would be nice, but like he said it would be hard to add them. Maybe more people will come back once optimization and culling gets better. Something that needs to be worked out down the road.

[Briar]

Good idea but the sandwich is a bit much... perhaps a triangle with a longer distance between the losing teams... or blue teams base takes a long time to get to but comes equip with portals for them to move faster

[Use Your Illusion]

What about 3 smaller, 1v1 maps? (one Green V Blue, other G v R, other B v R) that could be similar to GvG, but stil count towards the general score, so we could have maybe some smaller guilds take care of the map for the server.

[Impmon]

I bet one method to combat culling is to give everyone the same generic armor & weapon graphics so the game engine doesn't have to load all the different appearances.  While it might not appeal to the individual who likes to show off their swag it would probably help the system process large scale battles better.  It would also make portal bombs laughable.

[Wotah]

I believe that's how many online gaming companies do it.  They will put in a generic body and fill in detail later when it can.  This would go a long way to helping.

Edited by Wotah, 03 January 2013 - 02:17 PM.

[Impmon]

I recall in quake 2 days everyone had the grunt model as the default when playing online.  Unless you had the same model / skin your opponent had then you'd be able to see what they were using.  

I hope they've figured that out at least ?  If we all had the same generic models the systems wouldn't have to process every little detail and although we'd look boring we'd be fighting other characters not red triangles and spell effects.  The reason the spell effects and triangles show up is that we all have those models/skins already loaded.

Easy fix.  Surprised they've never bothered to try.

[Voradors]

I would VERY much prefer a triangle arrangement to the image in the original post.   Also, i would prefer that all 3 maps be the same, so that everything is even.
Even in a FPS or RTS one side is favored as the 'good' side shortly after a map is released (or the map is so generic that its not as fun to play on).  Even if it is just a common opinion, it will give a psychological advantage to one server.....and that does matter.

Doesnt mean we cant have some change though. i was thinking maybe setting it up so that a different set of borderland and EB maps get cycled each week....

As in:
Week 1 - Borderland map set A, EB map set A
Week 2 - Borderland map set B, EB map set B
Week 3 - Borderland map set C, EB map set C
Week 4 - Borderland map set D, EB map set D

Week 5 - Borderland map set A, EB map set B
Week 6 - Borderland map set B, EB map set A

Then every few months they can add 1 more set to the mix to liven things up.

[Piteous]

I think they should just combine all three maps into one big map and let us have at each other. Then make the EB map twice as big.

[DreadlockrastaGW]

Piteous, on 03 January 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

I think they should just combine all three maps into one big map and let us have at each other. Then make the EB map twice as big.

I can just imagine mass zergs of 300+ people x3 colliding into a lagstorm the likes of which this game has never seen before.

I'm just hoping they cycle the boarderland maps with some new stuff, and more keeps like stonemist, where it can hit everyone, and get hit by everyone.

[moomooo1]

I'd like to see the introduction of new maps, not additional, but to swap out with current maps, on some weekly rotational basis. This would help remove the staleness of WvW every week. Aside from that, guilds could have "favourites" when it comes to these and we may see different servers perform better or worse on different maps. That would definitely change it up

[lioka qiao]

I would like to see more tactical depth on the keeps they add, particularly for castles like stonemist.  That castle is the simplest design ever and has no depth to it.  This is also why SMC is so hard to capture and so easy to hold.  What if Stonemist had an underground section for each side styled to match what that side's design was.  Example, green's keep is in a lake.  What if stonemist on that side had a lake section either above or underground where there were water gates?  And what if it had a maze similar to blue's keep and a town like red's keep.  These would make the castle holder responsible for guarding all of these sections and make it much more challenging to hold the castle.

[Vihar]

I don't believe anything ANet says.

  Until I see it in the patch notes, I don't believe it...and even when in the patch notes I don't believe it....because even those have lied a few times.

  I think they are vague because they don't have any idea, and they need to come up with some ideas that they can do in a hurry.

  I'd be all for more extensive tunnels for WvW, though.

[Quietnine]

we need a hell of a lot more than maps. we need to kill swiftness sharing and commander icons to facilitate 5v5 and small group wvw like DAoC. we need darkness falls, and we need prog.

roaming group v group happened in daoc because of the buff system; only certain people had movement speed and it was only shared within the party. the current implementation of anyone who stands near some guy with swiftness can run with him leads to zerging, as does the whole commander icon nonsense. without commander icons, guilds would have to work together just to make a goddamn zerg, and godforbid, guilds would have a purpose.

you know what created inter-guild relationships? messages that say the keep you claimed is under attack by THIS MANY PEOPLE. that the guild than relayed to other guilds in alliance chat / map chat distress calls.

you know what created on-the-battlefield balance? Darkness falls. the winners get their own dungeon, so they leave the battlefield to go kill the people inside DF. this makes less winners on the battlefield, and the losers get supported by pve-heroes who just got evicted from the dungeon to go take it back.

Prog from warhammer, and areas like it (the pvp-daily areas in Rift) facilitate the creation of pvp "hangouts," where groups of 1 or 2 players go to kill similar sized groups in the open world.

you know what else DAoC had? better maps. the forest in albion was no joke. you couldnt see shit, it was awesome. emain was open field all the time. midguard was cold as shit my saracen never went there, but the point is: diversity created a dynamic experience, cloning BL maps for balance is boring bro.

WTB the 3 way battlefield endgame RvR greatness I've been waiting for forever. GW2 so close but so damn far.

[Straegen]

EB is pretty good IMO. I don't think the perceived problems of WvW are really related to the map design and had I a vote a new map would be way down on the list compared to other items.

[Moorecore]

You know from the start they said WvW wasn't meant to be balanced so why not be more creative with the maps instead of clone maps? I remember way before launch Anet stated the maps would be random each week what happened to that? Also, I want maps to be spread out more and I want something like Vihar said. More tunnels and more paths and I like what Quitnine says about making the maps more diverse and creative. You have wonderful artists, Its time to get creative. Use some of the mechanics from the fratals in WvW. What is there was an underground path you had to do the orbs retrieval to open. That would open up good ambushes for enemy players and interesting scenarios. GET CREATIVE ANET!

[AMIX_GW2]

things i would love to see

1) Guild Airships (High cost + High Supply to build), kinda like Tixx's golem ship (but smaller)..these can be deployed into WvW to take on various garrisons etc.

2) A city themed map, like Ascalon city where the environment/design has a big effect on the way one would zerg or capture territories.. i imagine ally ways and complex paths with lots of structures and a large castle in the middle with a large court-yard for a huge clash between servers

3) More artillery..I mean c'mon the black citadel's / Charr homeland weapons make the WvW artillery (aside from golems) look like 3rd world weapons..

Edited by AMIX_GW2, 03 January 2013 - 06:27 PM.

[Vihar]

Yeah, if the WvW maps were even half as interesting as the PVE maps, that would be pretty awesome.

   Imagine one map being mostly forest....limited visibility, especially at night! There could be lighted roads and paths, but what a scenario for ambushes or being able to hide from zergs.

  Imagine one map being islands, with underwater tunnel entrances into keeps....or underwater keeps!

   Imagine one map being glacial, with tunnels and bridges, and avalanches that can occur randomly and affect the ability to move for awhile, or even wipe out players caught in it.

  Why not a map that is essentially a mountain fortress in the dwarven tradition? A hollow mountain?

   They have all this great stuff in PVE maps, but the PVP maps were imported from the 20th century.

[RawNG]

Quietnine, on 03 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

you know what else DAoC had? better maps. the forest in albion was no joke. you couldnt see shit, it was awesome. emain was open field all the time. midguard was cold as shit my saracen never went there, but the point is: diversity created a dynamic experience, cloning BL maps for balance is boring bro.

Vihar, on 03 January 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

Yeah, if the WvW maps were even half as interesting as the PVE maps, that would be pretty awesome.

   Imagine one map being mostly forest....limited visibility, especially at night! There could be lighted roads and paths, but what a scenario for ambushes or being able to hide from zergs.

  Imagine one map being islands, with underwater tunnel entrances into keeps....or underwater keeps!

   Imagine one map being glacial, with tunnels and bridges, and avalanches that can occur randomly and affect the ability to move for awhile, or even wipe out players caught in it.

  Why not a map that is essentially a mountain fortress in the dwarven tradition? A hollow mountain?

   They have all this great stuff in PVE maps, but the PVP maps were imported from the 20th century.

This all sounds amazing and takes me back to my WoW days of open World PvP as a Rogue during the Vanilla days up until they added flying mounts which killed all World PvP.   WoW had some of the best World PvP I've come across in terms of actual PvP.  If there was a group going around ganking(which friends and I did often), you'd get people who will start telling their guildies and friends about the group going around ganking people and that would cause another group to form to counter our gank squad.  This would sometimes turn into HUGE fights as people from both squads recruit more to counter the other.  You were able to make a name for yourself and your group as well can be known depending on how ruthless you are.  I made a name for myself on my server by doing stuff like this often.  I had people making threads about me on the WoW forums and I loved every minute of it because I knew I was doing my job very well.  Stuff like that I really enjoyed and would love to see in this game.

We need name tags in WvW for this reason.  

Finding pro spots for ambushes or dark areas I could hide in etc as a Thief I feel I'm missing BIG TIME.  There's really no areas in WvW to be sneaky as a Rogue type class.  Everything is way to open in my opinion in WvW.  There needs to be more choke points, more ambush points, secret areas.  Also like you said, areas that are like a PvP hangout in WvW, where people know they can find some small good fights at.  
They need to make WvW on a much bigger scale.  If you look at the actual game zones you'll see how awesome it could be if they put a little more effort into maps.  
I'd love to see us fighting over city type maps.  Underground caves/tunnels would be my fav spot to hang out in.

Edited by RawNG, 03 January 2013 - 08:03 PM.

[Vihar]

Let's make a duplicate Lion's Arch, Devinity's Reach, and Blackgate Citadel for WvW!

Edited by Vihar, 03 January 2013 - 08:27 PM.

[CalmLittleBuddy]

New maps. Oh boy.

It's such a great thing to keep players interested, but unless they're just cookie cutters of current maps, HUGE balance issues will crop up and people will be more likely to flip out and quit than anything else.

They could add some small playground maps like EB Jump Puzzle, but anything with point objectives needs to be tested ad nauseum before release. Unless maybe they had a few other maps back in early beta that they tested and shelved.

Or maybe just clone the current maps, but change the folliage and cosmetic stuff, like give it a desert theme or a transylvania theme or something.

Brandy new maps tossed in are guaranteed to totally unbalance the power between the three colors.

[Quietnine]

CalmLittleBuddy, on 03 January 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

New maps. Oh boy.

It's such a great thing to keep players interested, but unless they're just cookie cutters of current maps, HUGE balance issues will crop up and people will be more likely to flip out and quit than anything else.

They could add some small playground maps like EB Jump Puzzle, but anything with point objectives needs to be tested ad nauseum before release. Unless maybe they had a few other maps back in early beta that they tested and shelved.

Or maybe just clone the current maps, but change the folliage and cosmetic stuff, like give it a desert theme or a transylvania theme or something.

Brandy new maps tossed in are guaranteed to totally unbalance the power between the three colors.

as some have already suggested (OP), creating map imbalance that favors the underdogs would be interesting. ontop of that, maps dont have to be one trick ponies. you could have a perma-dark area in an otherwise day/night cycle map, or a heavily wooded area in an otherwise open map. a section of the map that is a grand abandoned city.

right now, players arent actually running around looking for other players to kill. they are running around flipping camps, towers, etc, and the only time they run into the enemy is when one of them is beating on some door, and the enemy team decides that structure is worth enough points to bother defending. that is assbackwards. we should be running around looking to kill eachother to brag in eachothers faces (and gtfo out of here with this nameless invader bs) and only taking structures as an insult to the enemy when the enemy is refusing to come out and play.

[Voradors]

Quietnine, on 03 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

we need a hell of a lot more than maps. we need to kill swiftness sharing and commander icons to facilitate 5v5 and small group wvw like DAoC. we need darkness falls, and we need prog.

Sorry, but whenever someone implies that zergs werent a regular thing in daoc it makes me chuckle.
Also daoc had speed sharing as well.....1 bards per party = constant speed with less required coordination than speed sharing in gw2...though that doesnt require much either.

EDIT: Btw, Mythic did a better job with RvR in their game before daoc...just sayin....

Edited by Voradors, 03 January 2013 - 10:34 PM.

[DreadlockrastaGW]

Quietnine, on 03 January 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

right now, players arent actually running around looking for other players to kill. they are running around flipping camps, towers, etc, and the only time they run into the enemy is when one of them is beating on some door, and the enemy team decides that structure is worth enough points to bother defending. that is assbackwards. we should be running around looking to kill eachother to brag in eachothers faces (and gtfo out of here with this nameless invader bs) and only taking structures as an insult to the enemy when the enemy is refusing to come out and play.

If they made towers that block roads to keeps/other towers that would give people more incentive to kill eachother imo. More chokepoints, like how the Southeast tower is on the boarderlands, except that they should make that tunnel the only way to get past the tower, and make the tunnel like dip under the tower or something.

Then they should add like a dredge drilling siege weapon, to tunnel from under. OHGOD THE POSSIBILITIES.

[CalmLittleBuddy]

Quietnine, on 03 January 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

as some have already suggested (OP), creating map imbalance that favors the underdogs would be interesting. ontop of that, maps dont have to be one trick ponies. you could have a perma-dark area in an otherwise day/night cycle map, or a heavily wooded area in an otherwise open map. a section of the map that is a grand abandoned city.

right now, players arent actually running around looking for other players to kill. they are running around flipping camps, towers, etc, and the only time they run into the enemy is when one of them is beating on some door, and the enemy team decides that structure is worth enough points to bother defending. that is assbackwards. we should be running around looking to kill eachother to brag in eachothers faces (and gtfo out of here with this nameless invader bs) and only taking structures as an insult to the enemy when the enemy is refusing to come out and play.

Thats sPvP dude. WvW is about objectives. I always look to kill folks everywhere anyways. Open ened killing with no forts would be zerg vs zerg. Objectives offer some protection for undermanned forces. WvW is not kill centric. If it were, there'd be player ranks.

[Quietnine]

Voradors, on 03 January 2013 - 10:30 PM, said:

Sorry, but whenever someone implies that zergs werent a regular thing in daoc it makes me chuckle.
Also daoc had speed sharing as well.....1 bards per party = constant speed with less required coordination than speed sharing in gw2...though that doesnt require much either.

EDIT: Btw, Mythic did a better job with RvR in their game before daoc...just sayin....

in GW2, you dont have to know anyone to move with perma speed, you just need to stand next to someone. most days you dont even know the name of the people taxiing you around. in daoc, you had to get someone in your group who had a runspeed buff. then other people would want to be in your group for that buff too. making groups like that is how you get to know people, it creates community, and a need for guildmates.

i certainly wasnt implying that daoc didnt have zergs, but because you had no idea where friendlies were on the map because there were no commander icons, groups actually had to TALK to eachother to meet up and roll around together. commander tags remove inter-party communication requirements, and area swiftness removes incentive to make parties. this gives you a bunch of people who dont know eachother collecting on a blue dot running around, theres nothing personal or special and the only person held accountable is the poor tool with the icon. because of commander icons, because of the way buffs are shared, because you cant make a name for yourself over the bodies of your enemy and guild emblems dont tell you whose tag it is, there is no reason whatsoever to be in a guild in guildwars. they are killing community by making everything hyper accessible.

then there is etiquette; if you ran around in a zerg stomping groups of 8, you got laughed at and belittled all the next day. most of the time, if 8 albs were fighting 8 hibs and another alb group showed up, they would wait to see who won and let the victor recover before engaging. im afraid i will never see battlefield etiquette in a post-wow mmo, but things like being able to see player names and having a more social community made that type of etiquette so much more frequent. things like having to ask where deathspam was coming from let the small groups stay small if they didnt want company.

now we live in an mmo landscape where guildwars guru doesnt even let you call out exploiters on the forums because it might be falsefied, or it might hurt feelings, and companies are releasing games where people dont have names in wvw because god forbid somebody get a bad reputation for playing badly.  /rant

[RawNG]

Quietnine, on 04 January 2013 - 01:18 AM, said:

in GW2, you dont have to know anyone to move with perma speed, you just need to stand next to someone. most days you dont even know the name of the people taxiing you around. in daoc, you had to get someone in your group who had a runspeed buff. then other people would want to be in your group for that buff too. making groups like that is how you get to know people, it creates community, and a need for guildmates.

i certainly wasnt implying that daoc didnt have zergs, but because you had no idea where friendlies were on the map because there were no commander icons, groups actually had to TALK to eachother to meet up and roll around together. commander tags remove inter-party communication requirements, and area swiftness removes incentive to make parties. this gives you a bunch of people who dont know eachother collecting on a blue dot running around, theres nothing personal or special and the only person held accountable is the poor tool with the icon. because of commander icons, because of the way buffs are shared, because you cant make a name for yourself over the bodies of your enemy and guild emblems dont tell you whose tag it is, there is no reason whatsoever to be in a guild in guildwars. they are killing community by making everything hyper accessible.

then there is etiquette; if you ran around in a zerg stomping groups of 8, you got laughed at and belittled all the next day. most of the time, if 8 albs were fighting 8 hibs and another alb group showed up, they would wait to see who won and let the victor recover before engaging. im afraid i will never see battlefield etiquette in a post-wow mmo, but things like being able to see player names and having a more social community made that type of etiquette so much more frequent. things like having to ask where deathspam was coming from let the small groups stay small if they didnt want company.

now we live in an mmo landscape where guildwars guru doesnt even let you call out exploiters on the forums because it might be falsefied, or it might hurt feelings, and companies are releasing games where people dont have names in wvw because god forbid somebody get a bad reputation for playing badly.  /rant

Preach brotha PREACH

They should atleast give the player an option to show his or her name in WvW, I think this can solve the problem.

Edited by RawNG, 04 January 2013 - 01:46 AM.

[Antithesis]

I hope that the comment is not a "lets try and keep the population from falling further".

I am surprised that they didnt want to spend time making improvements to maps they already have but have time to develop entirely new maps.

Here's for hoping.

[Piteous]

What about an actual guild wars map where say two guilds of maybe 100 players each side could do battle. I haven't seen actual guild wars since the days when I played a game called Silkroad Online, which I'm sure no one here has even heard of.

What about alliances so more people can be in a party, say maby 16?