potatocity.6470 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 anyone here want a new wvw map. one with new and different objectives and different goals. how about one with hidden pathways and tunnels with treasure and or relics you have to get and bring back for your realm. idk somthing that differs from the siege vs siege Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 I'm more interested in a different environment, like sandy tropical beach islands, than I am wonky new stuff like EotM tried to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Namer.9750 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 Well, so long as whoever designs the maps **understands WvW map design**. I wouldn't mind seeing a slow overhaul of the existing maps, like the EB Ogrewatch changes. The open field is really nice for the fights, tbh, if the stronger of Blue and Green own OW. It'd freshen things up a hell lot, and those complaining "they changed it, now it sucks!" can go suck one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamara.4187 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 I would love it but I'm afraid to ask for it lol. The deseret map was really dynamic and it brought some interesting tactics to the table, but in truth its really too big and has been from the beginning. Granted they put in some travel options that did help to a degree but it is still a very difficult map to defend. Before maps are discussed I would really like to have a sit down with Anet and ask what is feasible for the future of wvw. WvW is really the only game mode that draws me to GW2. That's the truth I haven't even tried to go get a single one of the new mounts yet because it has no impact on wvw...as of yet. I realize for Anet that this is a business and for a business to survive it has to make a profit. However the player side is to be entertained, challenged and to make friends along the way with whom they can have fun with. Many changes to wvw has harmed that to a grave degree. To be fair much was also player created problems which is why I would like to have an honest and civil sit-down and ask how we could all put wvw back on track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Kamara.4187 said: > I would love it but I'm afraid to ask for it lol. The deseret map was really dynamic and it brought some interesting tactics to the table, but in truth its really too big and has been from the beginning. Granted they put in some travel options that did help to a degree but it is still a very difficult map to defend. > Before maps are discussed I would really like to have a sit down with Anet and ask what is feasible for the future of wvw. WvW is really the only game mode that draws me to GW2. That's the truth I haven't even tried to go get a single one of the new mounts yet because it has no impact on wvw...as of yet. > > I realize for Anet that this is a business and for a business to survive it has to make a profit. However the player side is to be entertained, challenged and to make friends along the way with whom they can have fun with. Many changes to wvw has harmed that to a grave degree. To be fair much was also player created problems which is why I would like to have an honest and civil sit-down and ask how we could all put wvw back on track. I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. People don't like to play on that map because other people don't play on that map because the map doesn't feel chill. DBL feels like a rush between objectives because its a wasteland. ABL is a meadow where anywhere south of the northern towers feels like a place to park it and relax. A solid environment is key to drawing players. Meaningful PvEish objectives is key to hub player activity and that is key to creating random pvp encounters. Random pvp encounters is what wvw is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravezaar.4951 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 I want a new MMO to play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Justine.6351 said: > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deniara Devious.3948 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 NO! I want the OLD maps back. 3 Alpine borders together with the lake and quaggans. The central island could be made a bit bigger and more tactically important though. The ruins was already an ugly big spvp area slapped in the mid of Alpine border = design mistake. Now my server needs to play 2nd week in a row as red, which means Desert borderland. Constant outnumbered, because the vast majority of WvWvW players hate that map. Red now has disadvantage at EBG as well, because the other colors have 2 easily defended towers, but Ogrewatch is now moved to a new location, which just sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > @Justine.6351 said: > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. > Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. > > I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. And that would be an opinion not a fact. Is there more space? Sure. Does that mean the map is too big? No. People like to point to ESO as RvR done right. That map has massive area between objectives. I'm not an expert on ESO RvR but if I had to guess I'd say riding on a mount sprinting with major gallop it would take 15 min to cross it. Stringing together 2 alpine bl maps legthwise with ebg map in middle it might take a player with swiftness 10min to run that distance? DBL feels bigger in an important way because there are simply no small scale players on it compared to ABL. No small scale means no scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sovereign.1093 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 I do not want a new map. I want wvw tournament Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blodeuyn.2751 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Justine.6351 said: > > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. > > Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. > > > > I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. > > And that would be an opinion not a fact. Is there more space? Sure. Does that mean the map is too big? No. > > People like to point to ESO as RvR done right. That map has massive area between objectives. I'm not an expert on ESO RvR but if I had to guess I'd say riding on a mount sprinting with major gallop it would take 15 min to cross it. Stringing together 2 alpine bl maps legthwise with ebg map in middle it might take a player with swiftness 10min to run that distance? > > DBL feels bigger in an important way because there are simply no small scale players on it compared to ABL. No small scale means no scouts. We run into small-scale groups all the time on DBL. We also have scouts on DBL. The map is too big. The real question is, too big for what? Ask 100 players and you'll get 100 different answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Blodeuyn.2751 said: > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. > > > Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. > > > > > > I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. > > > > And that would be an opinion not a fact. Is there more space? Sure. Does that mean the map is too big? No. > > > > People like to point to ESO as RvR done right. That map has massive area between objectives. I'm not an expert on ESO RvR but if I had to guess I'd say riding on a mount sprinting with major gallop it would take 15 min to cross it. Stringing together 2 alpine bl maps legthwise with ebg map in middle it might take a player with swiftness 10min to run that distance? > > > > DBL feels bigger in an important way because there are simply no small scale players on it compared to ABL. No small scale means no scouts. > > We run into small-scale groups all the time on DBL. We also have scouts on DBL. > > The map is too big. The real question is, too big for what? Ask 100 players and you'll get 100 different answers. Lol ok... Well when I'm on DBL it's always empty. Never has scouts... The map is too wasteland... The real question is why anet thought making a desert borderland was going to be a sustainable pvp environment after the first couple months of novelty wore off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kapax.3801 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 It would not be necessary if they made good use of Edge of the Mists, this map that does not play almost nobody seems a waste. They could make everything that happens on this map have a direct impact on the other maps (not just on the supply) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamara.4187 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Justine.6351 said: > > @Kamara.4187 said: > > I would love it but I'm afraid to ask for it lol. The deseret map was really dynamic and it brought some interesting tactics to the table, but in truth its really too big and has been from the beginning. Granted they put in some travel options that did help to a degree but it is still a very difficult map to defend. > > Before maps are discussed I would really like to have a sit down with Anet and ask what is feasible for the future of wvw. WvW is really the only game mode that draws me to GW2. That's the truth I haven't even tried to go get a single one of the new mounts yet because it has no impact on wvw...as of yet. > > > > I realize for Anet that this is a business and for a business to survive it has to make a profit. However the player side is to be entertained, challenged and to make friends along the way with whom they can have fun with. Many changes to wvw has harmed that to a grave degree. To be fair much was also player created problems which is why I would like to have an honest and civil sit-down and ask how we could all put wvw back on track. > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. People don't like to play on that map because other people don't play on that map because the map doesn't feel chill. DBL feels like a rush between objectives because its a wasteland. ABL is a meadow where anywhere south of the northern towers feels like a place to park it and relax. > > A solid environment is key to drawing players. Meaningful PvEish objectives is key to hub player activity and that is key to creating random pvp encounters. Random pvp encounters is what wvw is all about. Well you are entitled to your opinion, but the fact is it takes longer to travel on that map than other bls. Polygons don't lie. The mesh for the desert bl is massive. As I've said developement did put in stuff that took the edge off of it but that is dependant on holding shrines unlike other bl maps that have no shrines w/ travel. Also what draws players to wvw is competitive play on an epic scale. That is the core of wvw along with team play. At least that is what draws me to the game mode and my friends. *shrugs* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasC.1056 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Namer.9750 said: > Well, so long as whoever designs the maps **understands WvW map design**. Here's my suggestion. A map made of 3 spawns at 12, 4 and 8 o'clock, with a small corridor leading to a huge empty area with nothing but room to fight and, in the middle, an insanely huge quaggan statue with a giant disco ball in the middle of its capture circle. The goal would be to capture and hold the place, because it'd allow you to /dance amongst all the corpses of your fallen enemies. Needless to had that it'd also be provided with colourful disco floor tiles ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamara.4187 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Kapax.3801 said: > It would not be necessary if they made good use of Edge of the Mists, this map that does not play almost nobody seems a waste. They could make everything that happens on this map have a direct impact on the other maps (not just on the supply) You know I was on a server that seemed to get stuck getting the desert bl every time I turned around then I transferred back to my old server and the same thing happened for a month! LOL I thought I was never going to get back to the alpine maps again :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Justine.6351 said: > > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. > > Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. > > > > I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. > > And that would be an opinion not a fact. Is there more space? Sure. Does that mean the map is too big? No. > > People like to point to ESO as RvR done right. That map has massive area between objectives. I'm not an expert on ESO RvR but if I had to guess I'd say riding on a mount sprinting with major gallop it would take 15 min to cross it. Stringing together 2 alpine bl maps legthwise with ebg map in middle it might take a player with swiftness 10min to run that distance? > > DBL feels bigger in an important way because there are simply no small scale players on it compared to ABL. No small scale means no scouts. No, it still isnt an opionion, it is fact. It doesnt "feel" bigger, it *is* bigger* because objectives are further apart in a ring configuration on a physically bigger map. On the below image you can see the ABL objectives superimposed on the DBL. Notice how the northern towers are literally *half* the distance to garrison and ABL bay/hills lordroom almost end up on DBL outer walls of the same keeps. Everything is much tighter. As I said this wouldnt be an issue if DBL had EB level density (4 keeps and 12 towers, as opposed to 3 keeps and 4 towers) but it doesnt. Because it's too big for the amount of objectives it have. There are tons of small scale players on DBL. Its **only** small scale players on DBL most of the time. And I bet you they think its too big too.  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
primatos.5413 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 As long as Anet is working out the WvW stuff against the needs of most players i´d say : thanx no ..pls no more new stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justine.6351 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > @Dawdler.8521 said: > > > > @Justine.6351 said: > > > > I really don't buy into that "DBL too big" argument people have against that map. > > > Even if you dont buy into it, its a fact. The towers and keeps are too far from each other, hence it feel "too big" and thats the easiest way to accurately describe it without going into details. That is a square map as opposed to a rectangle make it even worse. If it had EB density of objectives it would have been another matter, but it doesnt. > > > > > > I have an image that overlayed the rough outlines of ABL keeps and towers on DBL terrain and its a *massive* difference. Unfortunetly cant post it now, maybe in a couple of hours. > > > > And that would be an opinion not a fact. Is there more space? Sure. Does that mean the map is too big? No. > > > > People like to point to ESO as RvR done right. That map has massive area between objectives. I'm not an expert on ESO RvR but if I had to guess I'd say riding on a mount sprinting with major gallop it would take 15 min to cross it. Stringing together 2 alpine bl maps legthwise with ebg map in middle it might take a player with swiftness 10min to run that distance? > > > > DBL feels bigger in an important way because there are simply no small scale players on it compared to ABL. No small scale means no scouts. > No, it still isnt an opionion, it is fact. It doesnt "feel" bigger, it *is* bigger* because objectives are further apart in a ring configuration on a physically bigger map. > > On the below image you can see the ABL objectives superimposed on the DBL. Notice how the northern towers are literally *half* the distance to garrison and ABL bay/hills lordroom almost end up on DBL outer walls of the same keeps. Everything is much tighter. > > As I said this wouldnt be an issue if DBL had EB level density (4 keeps and 12 towers, as opposed to 3 keeps and 4 towers) but it doesnt. Because it's too big for the amount of objectives it have. There are tons of small scale players on DBL. Its **only** small scale players on DBL most of the time. And I bet you they think its too big too. > >  > Is it bigger? That is a fact. Is it too big? That is an opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetoII.3782 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 I thought the old center event for DBL was great, it just never worked. Actually fighting during the event caused massive lag issues which surely did the idea of playing on DBL at any time no good. But overall it was a good idea and made sense as an evolution for our late, beloved orbs. Maybe instead of bigger maps with more going on, a number of smaller maps with just one event? Quality over quantity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyafuji.1340 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 Yes I do want a new map, the current maps are so old and overplayed that it becomes less and less interesting to play them. However, no more DesertBL, aka the map must be made not to serve gimmicks and new features or events while being hard to travel and complicated, it needs to be done to serve WVW and create good fights at as many places as possible, and nothing else. No wear jumping, no weird birds, those are all gimmicks that get in the way of good fights cause oops I do not control that shrine so my group can never make it to the other side of the map in time, thus we miss the fight. Missed fight = missed fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonNeonite.1048 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 They mentioend years ago, they can't make the maps any bigger, they just added verticality to the Desert Borderlands, so it might seem bigger. I don't know if you can make a better or balanced map than the current ones, without drastically making it imbalanced or so difficult to fight in, like the amount of choke points and graphical effects on the Desert borderlands; which can effect your framerate, at least in terms of large scale fights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyper Cutter.9376 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 > @Dawdler.8521 said: >  > Those maps are almost the same size, you're pointing out that the DBL is wider but ignoring that the ABL is taller. The DBL just seems bigger than it actually is because the terrain is more complex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubi.4136 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 No, I want them to fix what is wrong with the current map in EB, than the imbalance of the 3rd place team in a matchup getting the worst BL to defend...desert. EB shortcomings (as it currently pertains to red): 1. Blue and green each have 4 well designed towers. Red has 2, one of which is Anz Pass which is so far away and horribly placed that it is undefendable (so red has 1 good tower now - Veloka). 2. Red has the only keep that the inner walls can be trebbed down from an outer tower (OW). 3. Blue and green each have 2 adjacent inner towers, red now has 1 (OW requires far more effort to get to and-you can be killed while gliding there). 4. Red has the only EB keep that can be trebbed from Stonemist (almost always controlled by the strongest server in a tier, yes it flips, but one server consistently has a waypoint in it). This puts red at a huge disadvantage. 5 With the exception of poorly designed walls and 1 Elementalist AoE ability (that for some reason is allowed to hit the stairs INSIDE a tower), high ground wins fights. Red has a giant hill overlooking it's keep so that blue and green can treb the outer and inner keep at the same time. It makes it much easier to hit all defending siege. When they figure out that these things are an issue and create imbalance, than I will trust them to make a new map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamurabi.7890 Posted November 11, 2017 Share Posted November 11, 2017 So how many matches does green lock down their own BL and nobody plays on red BL? If anything WvW should remove maps instead of replacing one that might be the next DBL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now