Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * - - 4 votes

Why WvW will never become what we hoped it would

wvw anet arena net disappointment fail improvement rant

  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 Eclipses

Eclipses

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Location:http://theroyalguardclan.enjin.com/home
  • Guild Tag:[TRG]

Posted 12 February 2013 - 02:44 PM

WARNING: LONG POST, skip to TL;DR for major points

TL;DR:

1. Commander is an absolute mess
2. The roles/rewards/recognition of Guilds in a game called 'Guild Wars' is lacking
3. WvW has devolved into ZvZ (ZergvZerg)
4. The lack of Rewards/Progression/Depth/Consequence
5. The devs, their implementation of and lack of commitment to Wvw

Hey all,

I'd like to share with you some of the viewpoints I have with WvW, what it's become and why it will never reach (not in its current state and with the level of developer attention) what we (many of those who bought gw2 primarily for WvW) had hoped it would become during pre-release and the BWEs.

First of all, to establish my credentials (not bragging just establishing experience): I was the founder and GM of 'The Royal Guard', in its heyday a midsize (~60 members) T1 WvW guild and Titan Alliance member (for those of you who remember what THAT was). I've fought and led many, many battles; seen tips and tricks galore; been a part of and observer to scandals and drama; took part in server community building and all that good stuff.

Why WvW will never amount to what the Open World PvP Die-Hard fans wanted


1. Commander is an absolute mess

The implementation of the Commander mechanic is an absolute mess. So let's get this straight - players who grinded PvE or paid cash for gems > gold (as being an all out WvW participant wouldn't net you that type of wealth at all) pay 100g and get to lord over other players in WvW? This is ridiculous. I have seen commanders make the absolute shittiest calls only to get rebuffed when calling them out, because "they're Commanders."

Back in beta they were called on over and over again to change this mechanic: require badges instead, or kills, or tower captures - ANYTHING that was actually related to WvW and showed you had experience. We were rebuffed and instead we have a system that discourages the devs to create a guild raid system, encourages inexperienced individuals to lead WvW, encourages zerging and hobbles tactical play and engenders an attitude of petulance that simply because you have a blue icon - you know what's best.

The WvW devs should honestly be ashamed that Commander is in the game the way that it is right now.


2. The roles/rewards/recognition of Guilds in a game called 'Guild Wars' is lacking

Spare me the lore argument. The game is called guild wars and the guild component as it relates to WvW is undercooked. The buffs and the siege weapons you can get from the guild upgrades are great, truly they are, but that's where it stops.

If we take bay, garri, sm or what have you - does that do anything for our guild? So our banner is hanging from some paownts, what of it? Do you know whose banner that is? Are the NPCs named after us? Do we get influence or gold or karma over time for holding onto an objective? Does it announce in map chat that xxx guild has captured and claimed xxx objective? Do we have a system that allows us to form groups larger than 5 or at the very least see all guildies on the map? Is there any mechanic at all, other than an indistinguishable banner, that recognizes guild achievements in WvW? is there anything - at all - that truly benefits WvW guilds and significantly encourages guilds in this gameplay?

The answer to all of these questions are No. The guild buffs do not significantly encourage guild gameplay in WvW as they apply to pugs as well. They're a 'set-it-and-forget-it' mechanic. No one knows which guild just gave them 5 different types of buffs neither do you need to be in that guild to get them. I'm not advocating that you should - but it just goes to show that guilds really lack scope and purpose in WvW.


3. WvW has devolved into ZvZ (ZergvZerg)

When I first started playing WvW in the BWE's and the weeks and months after launch, zergs were a valid tactic, a tool to be used, but could be tactically outplayed using coordination. More often than not, at launch the guilds in TA were outnumbered vs the guilds from other alliances, notably Ascension Alliance, due to HoD bandwagoners and queues. What this usually meant was, while our maps were packed, Alliance members made up only a handful of that total and due to Ascension's  server moves, they were able to usually field a greater ratio of their alliance than we were (at least on my assigned map).

I remember going against devastating, brutal zergs; even when you beat them they'd come back again and again knocking on your door over and over and over like a battering ram. Like a heavyweight boxing match they'd just keep bashing you again and again until you felt like you couldn't take anymore. As soon as you finished the last of a zerg, regrouped and got your bearings - they were on your doorstep again. It was awesome.

Once when our homeworld garrison was occupied by Ascension, my guild and 2 other TA guilds were assigned to take it back. Due to queues, our combined numbers were like 1/3rd of Ascension's on the map. Using about 5 guys to attack Bay and draw swords, the rest of our motley crew hit garrison for all we were worth. We got wiped, over and over. But the thing was, they were responding to the 5 guys at Bay AND the crew hitting garrison with their ENTIRE 40 man zerg. Eventually they were too slow getting back to garri and we ninja'd it from them. It was a great feeling.

I told this long story because the WvW pop has consistently dwindled now to where ZvZ is the *only* way to play. Sure, you can try to play tactical with a small group and ninja an obj. A zerg can take it faster though. Sure, you can try and defend your only remaining objective on the map with the handful of people you have. A zerg will just ram right through you and your defenses though. Due to culling and the way the maps are designed, a zerg will get to a location just as fast and stealthily as a small tactical group (and maybe even more so).

Zergs even have the advantage in fights vs smaller groups, due to the AoE limitation. The AoE limitation is so utterly idiotic I cannot wrap my head around it. Zergs are a valid tatic - they shouldn't just be the ONLY tactic. AoE limit needs to be lifted/increased and some other mechanics need to go into place to dull the power of zergs and ecourage more tactical play.


4. The lack of Rewards/Progression/Depth/Consequence

This is probably the biggest reason why my once thriving, very competitive WvW guild is dead. WvW has no rewards, progression, depth or consequence. During the span of Titan Alliance, we had 31 straight wins. What did we get for it? We got burnt out, member attrition, guilds dropping the game after one month and a whole bunch of other stuff. Now I know you might say, 'Well that's your fault, you should have played more casually'. No, that's wrong. Any great online game caters to both the hardcore and the casual and those in between. You can not blame the participants who competed in a competitive event and say they tried too hard.

The progression is WvW is nonexistent, though they are attempting to fix that with the WvW only abilities. That still doesn't address the lack of depth and consequence in WvW. At the end of our run in WvW, we looked at our wins and thought, 'What now?' What do we get for winning? Surely we must get SOMETHING, since those in sPvP get something for winning and those in PvE get something for their efforts (and for our's). We got nothing, there was no difference between winner or loser; they got the WvW bonuses too, even if only a few % less than us. WvW had nothing to mark that you and your guild were there and that you fought for the glory of your server. In the end, WvW simply doesn't matter.

Furthermore, the game simply does not reward those in WvW *ANYWHERE NEAR* the same that they do those in PvE. and even the rewards in PvE suck. Check it:

- BoH award you a total of 1 variety of gear set, out of how many in the game?
- BOH drop  incredibly sparingly, the drop rate on these need to increase dramatically. When you need to play for hours and kill dozens of players to get the same # of BOH you get from opening a jumping puzzle chest, your rewards are *ed
- For many of those who truly bought this game for WvW, WvW is a massive money sink and not at all as gold positive as PvE. Adding a WP in WvW costs 1.5g. Fortifying walls is 2g. Buying a cannon upgrade is 40s. Repairing is 11.5s. You only get about 1.5s from taking/defending an objective and 98 copper for taking a sentry. You do the math.
- Dolyak XP/gold was temporarily removed at launch due to being too lucrative, but never balanced and re-added back to the game.
- Spikes
- Barbs

I could go on and on.


5. The devs, their implementation of and lack of commitment to Wvw

I don't want this post to be removed, so I will be very choice with this part, despite my massive disappointment with Mike Ferguson and his WvW team. Honestly, you guys have to know that WvW is so far from their priority right now that it's kind of sad. And if it is a group's priority, they're not doing a good job. Let's review the course of events :

- They always (even 6 months post launch) use the excuse that they had no idea how popular WvW would be. This is hogwash, Wvw was one of the most popular, talked about content pre-launch. The vast majority of the guilds pre-launch were WvW guilds
- It took them MONTHS to remove free transfers, ruining countless server communities in the interim
- Culling has gotten worse since launch. Yes, I know they're working on it, that doesn't make it better nore does it make it any less suck during the meantime. The fact that it is like it is in the 1st place is absolutely embarassing
- They have removed rewards from Dolyaks
- They removed the orbs rather than switching the outmanned and orb buffs
- In March, it will be approx 4mo since the introduction of Ascended gear and it's ability to be earned in WvW
- They are looking to tone down AoE's, thereby increasing the effectiveness of zergs even more

Mike Ferguson is on record as saying they cannot create larger maps, that the maps we have are the largest they're technically able to create. And this is the crux of the issue and has root causes in all the others.  Not the map size, but the scope of the gametype itself. WvW is a mini-game. A sideshow, a thing you do when you want to knock some heads together for a couple hours then go back to playing the 'real game' (pve) or log off. WvW is completely cut off from the rest of the game and while I can understand +WHY+ they did that, you other diehard Open World PvP'ers must understand that because it is cut off, all these other problems exist. Because WvW is a mini-game, they were ok with creating a shitty Commander system, with guilds being unnecessary, with zerging and casual non-competitive play taking over to the exclusion of all others and also ultimately why it's ok our rewards suck, there's no lack of depth or any consequences.

Near launch, Colin Johanson was quoted as saying that the scope of their content releases were going to be 'impressive'. Let's be honest here guys, from the past several months this game has been  out - are ANY of you impressed with the quality of attention the WvW community has seen? Anyone? There is a reason WvW and sPvP are limping along as it is and the reason for that is that it does not cost $15 to log on. If it did, if you're honest to yourself, you know that this game would be on its way to a plane of fail rivaling TorTanic proportions.

Edited by Eclipses, 12 February 2013 - 03:02 PM.


#2 DeagarFA

DeagarFA

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 418 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:20 PM

agree 100%. Those points encapsulate what's wrong with WvW.

#3 lalangamena

lalangamena

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 180 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:26 PM

1- agree, commander title should go with WWW achievements (like complete  www t2) and not just with moneZ
2- agree, although player names can be used for griefing, player guild should be shown.
also i don't understand why in W v W v W   all the enemies are red... invaders and attackers... you should see the enemy soldiers in their map colors (one green, one blue one red respectively)
3- this is actually a community issue, but AOE limitation is a contributing factor, I would like to see the damage split rather than capped on five opponents.
4-agree, I would suggest that if you can keep a major construction for some time (1-2 hours?), you get t6 nodes spawn under the keep etc...

5-not sure, I understand you are frustrated, but i believe they are working towards better www game.

#4 kidawk

kidawk

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 207 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:47 PM

Agree overall, found point 3 to be interesting. In the past, I could see why they implemented a AoE cap due to WvWvW and carebearing for zergs. Being considerate of both sides, it is a bit ridiculous how they are considering nerfing AoE damage even at this point. I understand that they stated AoEs that are as strong as single target attacks, it is a wait and see at this point.

#5 Speno

Speno

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 81 posts
  • Guild Tag:[StD]
  • Server:Borlis Pass

Posted 12 February 2013 - 03:58 PM

This is the only RvR game I have tried that does not lie the dye color of armor be part of a strategy. In DAOC people would pay to die all the gear black because it helped you hide when scouting or soloing. I don't know how they can't add bigger maps, that kinda nonsense. DAOC had maps over 3-4 times the size with the frontier, they had a dungeon built into RvR. Rank ups and level caps per battle field every 10 levels to keep things competitive.

These are all things that Anet should and still does need to look at.

#6 Alex Dimitri

Alex Dimitri

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1203 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 04:15 PM

1. Commander is an absolute mess
Agree absolutely, this should be rank you EARN in WvW not something everyone with enough cash can buy (Anet fault)

2. The roles/rewards/recognition of Guilds in a game called 'Guild Wars' is lacking
Agree, this is almost non existing, very strange for game called GUILD wars  (Anet fault)

3. WvW has devolved into ZvZ (ZergvZerg)
Agree, but this is due to player "mentality" and easy way to do something (get kills, defend or attack)  (Players fault)

4. The lack of Rewards/Progression/Depth/Consequence
Agree, this should have been fixed by now, but got delayed (for proper testing) again long time overdue  (Anet fault)

5. The devs, their implementation of and lack of commitment to Wvw
Agree, state of the WvW looks like only two (possibly one) dude is working on it, so far only major change was remove of Orbs  (Anet fault)

#7 Thaddeuz

Thaddeuz

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 561 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Guild Tag:[TRAP]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 12 February 2013 - 07:18 PM

I agree with you.

1) The commander system is just stupid. It should be based on WvW content not PvE or Real money transfer.
2) Guild in guild war 2 are pretty much only to regroup player and nothing more. You got some bonus, but like you say nobody really check that.
3) ZvZ can be nice and this lack diversity. This is all the players fault and Anet job is to find way to balance that for the player. We can't really put the fault on Anet if they don't fix that quickly (because it something really hard to change).
4) You can't only play WvW. The price of stuff in WvW is way to much compare to the income you got. What is the good fix for that? Get more gold from WvW can unbalanced the PvE economy, maybe use Badges as the main currency in WvW. You could get Badges from kill and from event in WvW. I don't know what would be best, but something need to be done.
5) True that we see an unbalance between the attention PvE/SPvP got versus WvW.

Where i don't agree with you is on your last point. You can't expect that each month they give us content like an expansion would. If you compare the content Arenat Net give us each month (without any monthly fee) versus any other MMO content (with monthly fee) well ya I'm pretty impress. The majority of the problem with WvW is because of bad choice from the dev team (or at least not the choice the players had expected) and more money (monthly fee) would only make the correction of these error more faster.

#8 RawNG

RawNG

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 125 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:11 PM

Hopefully people from Anet read this.

#9 ChuckS117

ChuckS117

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 96 posts
  • Server:Sea of Sorrows

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:32 PM

Let's see if TESO does massive PvP right ...

#10 r3fl3kT0r

r3fl3kT0r

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 09:52 PM

I think best option for WvWvW is simple : Just need to be changed from WvWvW to GvGvG with  ranking and every top 5 Gulds from GvG can join in battle for WvWvW and get more rewards for server and guilds and alliance maybe/OR G with higher poinst got more ppl on WvWvW/.  

That's only a suggestion, in GW2 now all players got alot of issues with WvWvW/ ZvZvZ/ isn't fun,smart  and we all know that, we need major changes in that WvWvW

Edited by r3fl3kT0r, 12 February 2013 - 10:25 PM.


#11 Katsumi Kei

Katsumi Kei

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 198 posts
  • Location:Bulgaria
  • Profession:Thief
  • Guild Tag:[WvW]
  • Server:Gandara

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:16 PM

Its the same in every topic about WvsW problems. The players think alike, but Anet doesnt show anyy attention to the matter. There is a lot to be done about WvsW to make it as good as it can be. Adding individual rewards, guild recognition and fully fixing culling will make the mode rox. The other changes are welcome, but not urgent IMO.

#12 Dark

Dark

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 567 posts
  • Profession:Ranger
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:20 PM

Post this on the gw2 forums. No matter how much they delete it, it must be seen.

#13 RawNG

RawNG

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 125 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:02 PM

View PostChuckS117, on 12 February 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

Let's see if TESO does massive PvP right ...
Luckily for us, "culling" won't be in ESO since their game engine already supports 200 people fighting on screen at any given moment.  Also I think faction driven RvR will be a big boost.
*crosses fingers*

#14 ritsuko

ritsuko

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 103 posts
  • Guild Tag:[SYN]

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:02 PM

Can relate to how you feel Eclipses. It's sad/disappointing/frustrating. We have lost almost all of our WvW core over the past months as well. Now we're just playing filler games until ArcheAge.

#15 Lakust

Lakust

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:24 PM

View PostThaddeuz, on 12 February 2013 - 07:18 PM, said:


3) ZvZ can be nice and this lack diversity. This is all the players fault and Anet job is to find way to balance that for the player. We can't really put the fault on Anet if they don't fix that quickly (because it something really hard to change).


they can fix it quickly;
As said by Eclipses, they just have to remove the AOE target limit. when arrowcarts, ballista or catapult will damage 50 people or more at once, zerg won't be as efficient and we will finaly see something else then zergs. at the same time, they should make it impossible to build siege weapon inside the lords rooms, to balance things out.
with this done, there will be smaller zergs and it will also help the culling issue

#16 beadnbutter32

beadnbutter32

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 618 posts
  • Location:Highway 61 Central US
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:35 PM

I had high hopes for WvW when I bought the game, but quickly lost interest in it.  There is really no point to the competition other than bragging rights which is just not going to keep people around long term.

Anet will ignore this at worst or whitewash it with PR.  They have some total control freak in charge of all media communication and nothing gets said unless it has be pre-approved and re-written by a PR hack.  I appreciate your effort, but I will be really surprised it Anet really addresses these issues.  i think WvW and PVP in general are a lost cause.

Edited by beadnbutter32, 12 February 2013 - 11:37 PM.


#17 MrZero

MrZero

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1086 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:06 AM

Are TA players actually bitching about the whole zerg tactic? Seriously? You guys invented that shit. Before our first match against you guys in T1, we used to have 3 or 4 forces on the field. The calls were like, "XX IOJ at Greenbriar" they changed to "Zerg at Greenbriar". Don't get me wrong, I think that something like a keep should be an effort undertaken by most of the players on a map. I also think it should be because it's just that difficult, that is a different discussion though.

The only thing that is going to stop zerg tactics is players. Lifting aoe on siege is just going to make people wait until the door is down to zerg on in. Lifting the aoe cap and splitting the damage is actually going to encourage zerging because the more people in that area, the less damage they take.

Other than that, I agree with you.

#18 Perm Shadow Form

Perm Shadow Form

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 412 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:09 AM

Regardless of how bad it is, there will always be hardcore fans who will never admit that WvW is a failure.

#19 MrZero

MrZero

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1086 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:12 AM

View PostPerm Shadow Form, on 13 February 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

Regardless of how bad it is, there will always be hardcore fans who will never admit that WvW is a failure.

I agree. What it is and what it could be are two very different things. Right now, it's the only thing I've got.

Wow. That was a sad statement on the quality of games when you think about it. People are just playing what they've got instead of what they want.

#20 Eclipses

Eclipses

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 30 posts
  • Location:http://theroyalguardclan.enjin.com/home
  • Guild Tag:[TRG]

Posted 13 February 2013 - 03:31 AM

View PostMrZero, on 13 February 2013 - 12:06 AM, said:

Are TA players actually bitching about the whole zerg tactic? Seriously? You guys invented that shit.

I'm not bitching about zerging, I'm bitching about the fact that there is nothing but zerging.There really isn't anything that a small tactical team can do that a big ass zerg can't do better and faster.

I know that this is a longshot, but I've also included this thread on the official forums:

https://forum-en.gui...e/2#post1428029

If you have a moment. please feel free to go over and post a line or two of your thoughts. Perhaps a dev might see and respond to a point or two.

#21 Cirus

Cirus

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 196 posts
  • Server:Sea of Sorrows

Posted 13 February 2013 - 03:51 AM

View PostEclipses, on 13 February 2013 - 03:31 AM, said:

I'm not bitching about zerging, I'm bitching about the fact that there is nothing but zerging.There really isn't anything that a small tactical team can do that a big ass zerg can't do better and faster.

I know that this is a longshot, but I've also included this thread on the official forums:

https://forum-en.gui...e/2#post1428029

If you have a moment. please feel free to go over and post a line or two of your thoughts. Perhaps a dev might see and respond to a point or two.

I don't really understand this.

A zerg can only be in 1 place at 1 time, smaller groups can be everywhere at once.

A smaller group can hold a zerg at bay for a long period of time inside the walls.

A zerg without organization is asking to be slaughtered by an organized group of 1/3 their number.

An organized zerg is unstoppable in open field, but then they're not really a zerg anymore, they're an army. An army is unstoppable unless they are faced with attacking walls or facing another army.

Having an army of players in a World vs World is how it should be, we want epic scale battles! What's denying this though is that WvW has been dying since it's been launched,  I agree that changes need to be made to entice players back, zerging as you put it definitely isn't one of them. The game is what you make it, and how you approach a challenge is up to you.

Edited by Cirus, 13 February 2013 - 03:53 AM.


#22 Tellia

Tellia

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 379 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:04 AM

your post is well written and i agree with you completely. but are we really discussing anything new here? these are the same problems weve had and have discussed since the beginning (a problem in of itself i know). i guess i just dont see the point beating the horse another time on these issues. especially when there is an imminent update next month. or next year, who knows. but its coming, ill reserve my complaints until after that update when i have something new to complain about.

#23 RivenVII

RivenVII

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 329 posts
  • Location:California
  • Guild Tag:[KnT]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 13 February 2013 - 04:51 AM

Cirus raised an excellent point. Is a guild of 40 organized, specifically built, soldiers all in the same voice program a zerg, or is it an army? WvW is large scale PvP. There are uses for smaller numbers, but it is the boots on the ground en masse that really make the difference on a map.

The main thing I see is everyone calls it a zerg and that is somehow supposed to be insulting or demeaning to the members of that battlegroup. I'd agree there should be balancing so that a small group can murder a larger group, but in order for that to happen, the larger group has to be inferior from the start. No force of 10 is going to wipe an organized force of 40. I don't care how well drilled or talented you are at PvP, they will roll you.

Organization, builds, synergy, strategy, communication. That is the difference between a zerg and an army. Learn it and you may understand WvW. No large guild group in VoIP is a zerg. If you call them one after they kick your ass, then you have much to learn. Wars aren't won by a team of 6-8 Call of Duty players, they are won by hundreds of soldiers on the ground with tanks, mortars, and air strikes. Small groups accomplish things, but, big picture, it is going to be the large groups that win the war.

#24 Pusha

Pusha

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 72 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:01 AM

View PostRawNG, on 12 February 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

Luckily for us, "culling" won't be in ESO since their game engine already supports 200 people fighting on screen at any given moment.  Also I think faction driven RvR will be a big boost.
*crosses fingers*

I'll believe it when I see it. Arenanet promised the same thing so only time will tell but I'll cross my fingers with ya.

#25 Jackiepro

Jackiepro

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 260 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Guild Tag:[VoTF]

Posted 13 February 2013 - 05:59 AM

Zerging isnt that much of a problem. The rest I agree with.

Also this game will totally break if they remove the aoe cap, I am going to be honest here and say I feel if you think there should be no aoe cap on damage then you simply dont know much about game balance. Unless you want damage to be split amongst all the players it targets in which case I am not sure if that would solve anything in particular.

If the AoE cap were to be removed, my engineer could solo an entire portal bomb with absolutely no problem what so ever.

Edited by Jackiepro, 13 February 2013 - 06:00 AM.


#26 lalangamena

lalangamena

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 180 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 06:41 AM

View PostLakust, on 12 February 2013 - 11:24 PM, said:

they can fix it quickly;
As said by Eclipses, they just have to remove the AOE target limit. when arrowcarts, ballista or catapult will damage 50 people or more at once, zerg won't be as efficient and we will finaly see something else then zergs. at the same time, they should make it impossible to build siege weapon inside the lords rooms, to balance things out.
with this done, there will be smaller zergs and it will also help the culling issue

actually a very good idea.... :)

#27 RivenVII

RivenVII

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 329 posts
  • Location:California
  • Guild Tag:[KnT]
  • Server:Blackgate

Posted 13 February 2013 - 06:59 AM

Dev posts from Habib have already confirmed that all siege weapons can hit 50 players at once, with the exception of a Ballista only being able to hit 10, which makes sense (Flame Ram #2 if you are wondering).

#28 Cirus

Cirus

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 196 posts
  • Server:Sea of Sorrows

Posted 13 February 2013 - 08:31 AM

View PostRivenTheValorous, on 13 February 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

Dev posts from Habib have already confirmed that all siege weapons can hit 50 players at once, with the exception of a Ballista only being able to hit 10, which makes sense (Flame Ram #2 if you are wondering).

Precisely this,.

Build and man the Arrow carts, watch the zerg around the gate crumble from just a small group.

It's like an insect repellent.

Just last night for example, had 10 pugs inside a tower and a 60+ organized tier 1 army came, they lost 8 battering ram sites, 4 catapults and were receiving constant damage, they then decided to go somewhere else after 2 failed attempts.

If you don't man the siege until the gate is already 50%, you're probably too late. You need scouts and defenders that can take the sites down or attack the siege weapons from the beginning to apply pressure.

Edited by Cirus, 13 February 2013 - 08:34 AM.


#29 Impmon

Impmon

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 666 posts
  • Location:Behind you
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Server:Jade Quarry

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:57 PM

Most of you people complaining now were foaming at the mouth about how awesome WVW was early on and rabidly attacked any sane people who were critical of WVW back then.  Now you complain...

This is probably why Anet said they won't work on WVW very much because so many people were babbling about its supposed quality.  You reap what you sow.

Edited by Impmon, 13 February 2013 - 12:58 PM.


#30 Thaddeuz

Thaddeuz

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 561 posts
  • Location:Canada
  • Guild Tag:[TRAP]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 13 February 2013 - 01:23 PM

View PostRivenTheValorous, on 13 February 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

Organization, builds, synergy, strategy, communication. That is the difference between a zerg and an army. Learn it and you may understand WvW. No large guild group in VoIP is a zerg. If you call them one after they kick your ass, then you have much to learn. Wars aren't won by a team of 6-8 Call of Duty players, they are won by hundreds of soldiers on the ground with tanks, mortars, and air strikes. Small groups accomplish things, but, big picture, it is going to be the large groups that win the war.

Yup, but try to make that work. Only commander can make a squad of 50 and they gonna come from so many guild, gonna have no guild or a PvE guild. You can neither put 40 people in a Ventrilo or TS and expect them to work perfectly together event if its a guild where everybody know  each other. AT one point you are not gonna recognize several voice on the chat and so many different discussion at the same time. For now our best shot at creating an ''army'' is by organizing several party of 5. The commander giving order to a party leader and the party leader, well leading the party. That is some serious organization, really hard to implement except with really big guild oriented to WvW.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: wvw, anet, arena net, disappointment, fail, improvement, rant

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users