Israel.7056
-
Posts
1,349 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Articles
Gallery
Posts posted by Israel.7056
-
-
> @"Stand The Wall.6987" said:
> wvw would be dead already if it was just a 2d team deathmatch mode. why? cuz one side would lose repeatedly, get discouraged, and log off. this already happens but objectives and map design drag it out.
I don't think WvW needs to be a pure deathmatch but I do think kills should count for more than they do now.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > @"joneirikb.7506" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Gop.8713" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"juno.1840" said:
> > > > > > > > > KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PPT scoring is rewarded by the additional points you get for having upgraded objectives. The extra points given for taking upgraded objectives isn't enough to justify the grind to take them. I think that's one reason why PPT still beats out PPK.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 100 percent. Structures upgrade automatically and upgraded structures can just sit there accumulating points for hours during low activity spots with zero interference whereas farming ppk takes a lot of time and effort and the people getting farmed can just peace out and go build siege and force attackers to endure hours of long sieges just to get one or two fights and ain't nobody got time for that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, that's the problem. Ppl getting farmed aren't willing to stick around and get farmed. So inconsiderate . . .
> > > >
> > > > It's a problem if ppk is supposed to be an actual deciding factor in matches if people can just build siege and easily hide from fights.
> > > >
> > > > It's a problem if the winners are supposed to be the ones winning most of their fights.
> > > >
> > > > Its a problem because experienced ppt oriented players know that they don't actually need to be able to win fights to win matches so a lot of servers don't even try to fight much they just try to take stuff when everyone else is asleep upgrade them so they get as many points as possible and then defend them with siege and stalling tactics whenever they get attacked.
> > > >
> > > > This is the game were playing so let's not pretend fighting is half of what's needed to actually win when ppk is more like 10 to 15 percent of the total points in most matchups.
> > >
> > > You know, just an unformed idea in my head, but what if buildings slowly de-capped if you didn't have anyone around it (inside event range?)?
> > >
> > > I mean, that has the potential for so much problems, but could change the passive point gain a good bit. Or a slightly less version, don't have building upgrade unless there is a player within "range" or the upgrading pause.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Or just have NPC's (centaur hordes or whatever) come and attack towers/keeps that's been undefended for 30+ min or something, just a method to return "passive" buildings to un-claimed.
> > >
> > > Depending on perspective, I guess this would create more "active play", though others might see it as more "passive play" for those would would be "stuck" defending objects for keeping them.
> > >
> > > People would probably end up focusing on a couple of keeps, and ignore the rest, and rather just karma train to take them back.
> >
> > Timezone coverage would still be the trump card it currently is.
> >
> >
>
> No system will change that. Not in a 24 hour mode which is what WvW was designed to be.
>
Yeah the core of the coverage issue is the 24 hr game mode.
-
> @"Gop.8713" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"joneirikb.7506" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Gop.8713" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said:
> > > > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > > > @"juno.1840" said:
> > > > > > > > > KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PPT scoring is rewarded by the additional points you get for having upgraded objectives. The extra points given for taking upgraded objectives isn't enough to justify the grind to take them. I think that's one reason why PPT still beats out PPK.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 100 percent. Structures upgrade automatically and upgraded structures can just sit there accumulating points for hours during low activity spots with zero interference whereas farming ppk takes a lot of time and effort and the people getting farmed can just peace out and go build siege and force attackers to endure hours of long sieges just to get one or two fights and ain't nobody got time for that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, that's the problem. Ppl getting farmed aren't willing to stick around and get farmed. So inconsiderate . . .
> > > >
> > > > It's a problem if ppk is supposed to be an actual deciding factor in matches if people can just build siege and easily hide from fights.
> > > >
> > > > It's a problem if the winners are supposed to be the ones winning most of their fights.
> > > >
> > > > Its a problem because experienced ppt oriented players know that they don't actually need to be able to win fights to win matches so a lot of servers don't even try to fight much they just try to take stuff when everyone else is asleep upgrade them so they get as many points as possible and then defend them with siege and stalling tactics whenever they get attacked.
> > > >
> > > > This is the game were playing so let's not pretend fighting is half of what's needed to actually win when ppk is more like 10 to 15 percent of the total points in most matchups.
> > >
> > > You know, just an unformed idea in my head, but what if buildings slowly de-capped if you didn't have anyone around it (inside event range?)?
> > >
> > > I mean, that has the potential for so much problems, but could change the passive point gain a good bit. Or a slightly less version, don't have building upgrade unless there is a player within "range" or the upgrading pause.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Or just have NPC's (centaur hordes or whatever) come and attack towers/keeps that's been undefended for 30+ min or something, just a method to return "passive" buildings to un-claimed.
> > >
> > > Depending on perspective, I guess this would create more "active play", though others might see it as more "passive play" for those would would be "stuck" defending objects for keeping them.
> > >
> > > People would probably end up focusing on a couple of keeps, and ignore the rest, and rather just karma train to take them back.
> >
> > That might work.
>
> I feel like ppl would prolly just leave scouts in structures more often under that system. Or run from one to the next to prevent decay, similar to refreshing siege. In that way it would actually increase the gap between servers with pop/coverage and those without . . .
Hmmm I guess it would depend on how fast things decayed and how many people were required to "refresh" things.
-
> @"joneirikb.7506" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Gop.8713" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said:
> > > > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > > > @"juno.1840" said:
> > > > > > > KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > > >
> > > > > PPT scoring is rewarded by the additional points you get for having upgraded objectives. The extra points given for taking upgraded objectives isn't enough to justify the grind to take them. I think that's one reason why PPT still beats out PPK.
> > > >
> > > > 100 percent. Structures upgrade automatically and upgraded structures can just sit there accumulating points for hours during low activity spots with zero interference whereas farming ppk takes a lot of time and effort and the people getting farmed can just peace out and go build siege and force attackers to endure hours of long sieges just to get one or two fights and ain't nobody got time for that.
> > >
> > > Yes, that's the problem. Ppl getting farmed aren't willing to stick around and get farmed. So inconsiderate . . .
> >
> > It's a problem if ppk is supposed to be an actual deciding factor in matches if people can just build siege and easily hide from fights.
> >
> > It's a problem if the winners are supposed to be the ones winning most of their fights.
> >
> > Its a problem because experienced ppt oriented players know that they don't actually need to be able to win fights to win matches so a lot of servers don't even try to fight much they just try to take stuff when everyone else is asleep upgrade them so they get as many points as possible and then defend them with siege and stalling tactics whenever they get attacked.
> >
> > This is the game were playing so let's not pretend fighting is half of what's needed to actually win when ppk is more like 10 to 15 percent of the total points in most matchups.
>
> You know, just an unformed idea in my head, but what if buildings slowly de-capped if you didn't have anyone around it (inside event range?)?
>
> I mean, that has the potential for so much problems, but could change the passive point gain a good bit. Or a slightly less version, don't have building upgrade unless there is a player within "range" or the upgrading pause.
>
> ---
>
> Or just have NPC's (centaur hordes or whatever) come and attack towers/keeps that's been undefended for 30+ min or something, just a method to return "passive" buildings to un-claimed.
>
> Depending on perspective, I guess this would create more "active play", though others might see it as more "passive play" for those would would be "stuck" defending objects for keeping them.
>
> People would probably end up focusing on a couple of keeps, and ignore the rest, and rather just karma train to take them back.
That might work.
-
> @"Hesacon.8735" said:
> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:
> > This just in: if you have no use for a currency, it has no value _to you_. That goes for karma, unbound magic, and even gold. Obviously, it's pretty hard to be in a situation in which gold has zero value to a player, but it's incredibly easy for there to be no particular use for any specific other currency.
> >
> > The OP doesn't speak for me. There are things that I want that require skirmish tickets. That makes them priceless to me.
>
> Following that point to its logical conclusion, no spvp players should get any reward for playing spvp, because the game mode is agnostic to differences in resources. Except most spvp players are playing spvp because the league system does make it financially rewarding to play.
I think his point was just that value is subjective. Reducing every currency to its conversion in gold is only useful if one values gold more than the alternative uses for the currency. In this case skirmish tickets can be used to make legendary armor. Whether or not one places value on legendary armor is entirely subjective but to those who do place value on legendary armor skirmish tickets are very valuable indeed.
-
> @"Gop.8713" said:
> Then you should be lobbying for forced transfers to even out populations and coverage, stricter pop caps on maps to guard against blobbing, etc.
I'm all for both tbh. I even made a thread proposing forced transfers once but it was not well received at the time.
-
> @"Gop.8713" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Chaba.5410" said:
> > > > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > > > @"juno.1840" said:
> > > > > KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > > >
> > > > Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> > >
> > > PPT scoring is rewarded by the additional points you get for having upgraded objectives. The extra points given for taking upgraded objectives isn't enough to justify the grind to take them. I think that's one reason why PPT still beats out PPK.
> >
> > 100 percent. Structures upgrade automatically and upgraded structures can just sit there accumulating points for hours during low activity spots with zero interference whereas farming ppk takes a lot of time and effort and the people getting farmed can just peace out and go build siege and force attackers to endure hours of long sieges just to get one or two fights and ain't nobody got time for that.
>
> Yes, that's the problem. Ppl getting farmed aren't willing to stick around and get farmed. So inconsiderate . . .
It's a problem if ppk is supposed to be an actual deciding factor in matches if people can just build siege and easily hide from fights.
It's a problem if the winners are supposed to be the ones winning most of their fights.
Its a problem because experienced ppt oriented players know that they don't actually need to be able to win fights to win matches so a lot of servers don't even try to fight much they just try to take stuff when everyone else is asleep upgrade them so they get as many points as possible and then defend them with siege and stalling tactics whenever they get attacked.
This is the game were playing so let's not pretend fighting is half of what's needed to actually win when ppk is more like 10 to 15 percent of the total points in most matchups.
-
> @"Chaba.5410" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"juno.1840" said:
> > > KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
> >
> > Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
>
> PPT scoring is rewarded by the additional points you get for having upgraded objectives. The extra points given for taking upgraded objectives isn't enough to justify the grind to take them. I think that's one reason why PPT still beats out PPK.
100 percent. Structures upgrade automatically and upgraded structures can just sit there accumulating points for hours during low activity spots with zero interference whereas farming ppk takes a lot of time and effort and the people getting farmed can just peace out and go build siege and force attackers to endure hours of long sieges just to get one or two fights and ain't nobody got time for that.
-
> @"juno.1840" said:
> KDR is only half of the WvW game mode. There should be no reward for ignoring half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
Last I checked kills accounted for a relatively small percentage of total points and it's entirely possible to win the week with a negative kdr so I don't think kdr is even half of what you're supposed to do for a win.
-
Just pick one and play
-
The snail is dead team
-
> @"SkyShroud.2865" said:
> So happen that many guilds transfer to win under the disguise of fight. :)
Humans are very good at finding plausible moral justifications for anything they do.
-
> @"EmeraldNight.4307" said:
> So what do players play WVW for?
Glory and Pride and the fun of playing with friends.
-
> @"GrackFields.7805" said:
> Having it based purely on K/D would change the way people play on not for the better.
> - No reason to attack objectives. They are harder to take an often result in more deaths to your team. You are effectively feeding the other team points by trying to take fortified objectives
> - No reason to fight if outnumbered. You are punishing your team by doing so.
> - People will be more likely to run from fights.
> - People will be more likely to leave if losing further exasperating any population differences.
> - More toxic behave against players who are perceived to be low skilled or die a lot.
> - More reason to bandwagon and stack servers. From all the points above, if you aren't winning you won't be having fun.
>
> Quite frankly I think a score based upon K/D would absolutely decimate the game mode.
I could make the exact same arguments against the score being based off any quantifiable metric including ppt as long as players are allowed to transfer.
There is no purely logical reason for anyone to suffer any form of adversity whatsoever in this game when they could just transfer to somewhere more favorable.
-
WvW isn't supposed to be for bunnies, that's what PvE is for.
-
> @"geist.4126" said:
> KDR means kitten in any environment. You can have a great kdr by running over roamers 24/7. Or by sitting in your keep until you outnumber the enemy.
And you can have great PPT by taking stuff during coverage gaps or when the enemy is heavily outnumbered so PPT is also a meaningless number.
-
> @"Sovereign.1093" said:
> few reasons why players stay or go
>
> stay - friends go - going to friends
> stay - fighrs go - fights
> stay - win go - win
> stay - avoiding trolls go - avoiding trolls.
>
> how to make people stay - have a decent community
>
> why go - going to a decent community
Guilds are communities.
-
> @"Dawdler.8521" said:
> > @"DeadlySynz.3471" said:
> > The only reason people keep transferring is they're looking for easy wins.
> Amd the reason people move borders is either because they cannot win or because there is nothing to do. Your scenario *assumes* that a border is equally competetive for all 3 sides in equal numbers. That not reality. Getting locked down to a border isnt going to **force** people to "enjoy" the game any more than forcing them to play on a server they dont want to play on.
>
I think a fair number of players would tolerate strict measures if on balance it made matches feel more competitive.
-
> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:
> > @"TallBarr.2184" said:
> > > @"Rysdude.3824" said:
> > > > @"TallBarr.2184" said:
> > > > > @"LaGranse.8652" said:
> > > > > Because the points gained for killing enemy players are less than the ones gained from holding structures?
> > > > >
> > > > > A server might have a higher k/d ratio however winning the open-field battle means nothing when the enemy just took control of your castle.
> > > >
> > > > But there are some servers who dont focus on capturing objects at all and only fight, atleast on EU. Wouldnt it be better to pair these servers together because they dont focus on objectives.
> > >
> > > You can’t pair servers because all the virtual warriors bandwagoned to the same server and now have no one to fight.
> > >
> >
> > Maybe its time they release that alliance system reform hmmff
>
> Which.., won't change this occurrence. It will still be one up, one down, thus ensuring even the 'ideal' matchup will switch the following week.
>
> Will always be groups that are fights focused, and those that are PPT focused.
And perhaps more importantly players are going to look for a way to stack alliances to make whatever scoring system they come up with just as meaningless as PPT has been.
-
It would take a lot more heavy handed approach than just increasing the cost of transfers gold is very easy to make and many people will pay almost any price to win.
-
> @"TallBarr.2184" said:
> > @"LaGranse.8652" said:
> > Because the points gained for killing enemy players are less than the ones gained from holding structures?
> >
> > A server might have a higher k/d ratio however winning the open-field battle means nothing when the enemy just took control of your castle.
>
> But there are some servers who dont focus on capturing objects at all and only fight, atleast on EU. Wouldnt it be better to pair these servers together because they dont focus on objectives.
Yes but it won't ever happen
-
> @"Baldrick.8967" said:
> By your description it sounds like you spend a lot of time in downed state...must be a L2p issue!
Lol yeah but I don't need it to win it's just an easy carry once you understand the game's mechanics.
-
rev has decent stab uptime too but its different.
-
> @"Sylosi.6503" said:
> > @"Israel.7056" said:
> > > @"Sylosi.6503" said:
> > > I found no DS made the game lower skilled and more brainless (this is apparently what some like) in that you didn't need to pick skills or classes for stomps/rezzes, that there were no plays like banish into mesmer blink stomp and it also put less pressure on your cooldowns.
>
> > I also think you're as wrong as wrong can be about cd pressure because when you go down your cds keep ticking so the proper way to play gw2 with downed state is to go ham and blow your cds every chance you get because it's very likely that you will kill someone and get a rally if you do go down and most if not all of your stuff will be off cd again and your support will heal you to full. The absolute wrong way to play this game normally is to hold your cds and risk going down without pressing all your buttons at least once.
>
> And I disagree, if 3 of us go roaming as a small group and we end up in say 3v5, then if we focus one guy I might pull him before he goes down to get distance from the other 4 so there is more time to stomp, then use elixir S to stomp him to avoid getting interrupted.
>
> So I've just blown two cooldowns, one of which is my major defensive cooldown to stomp the guy, if there was no downstate then I wouldn't need to use those cooldowns, nor have had to engaged my brain to bother pulling him to make the likelihood of the stomp more successful, nor would I have had to communicate with the other two members of my group on Discord to hold off a little a bit before I pulled him, because we didn't want the guy to go down where he was right next to the other 4 players for a better chance of them rezzing. Nor communicate to boonstrip the target pre-pull just to make near certain, this is why you don't randomly smash your skills off cooldown.
>
> Downstate increases the skill cap by adding depth, teamwork and decision making to what in some ways is a relative shallow game and certainly a shallow game mode in WvW, it rewards better players.
>
>
>
Ah ok I see what you mean.
I wasn't trying to suggest that under normal playing conditions players should "randomly" use skills simply that if they see an opportunity to use something that can lead to an enemy kill that they should precisely because it can lead to a kill and a kill can lead to a rally and any time you spend downed is time you actually get back on your cds and you can rally multiple times in a fight without going full dead so the opportunity cost for using cds is actually fairly low particularly on 10-15s cds as long as they are used to generate kills.
You see what I'm saying?
One of the most common mistakes I found myself making during no downed state week was overspending cds precisely because I'm so used to being able to make the cd time back in downed state. Like I didn't even realize I was doing it at first but after six years of gw2 i instinctively know to play for the rally and it got me killed a lot during no downed state week because I'm so used to being able to be so careless with cds.
Why are matchups not based on k/d solely
in World vs. World
Posted
I think the term "weight" could just be swapped with "impact."
30 people consistently playing an otherwise dead time zone have far more of an impact on the final outcome of a match than 30 people playing during busy timezones even if the skirmish points gained are roughly identical.