Suggestion: More maps like silverwastes, please

[Goettel.4389]

+1 SW love

[Adenin.5973]

> @"Dark Blue.4530" said:

> I'm not sure how many people would agree with me on this, but I feel that the new maps of PoF lack a certain build up. I've recently gone back to farming in silverwastes for gold and the shovels to help my guild, but it made me realise how unique that map is and how it would be good for the game to have more like it.

>

> I don't just mean that it's good for farming gold, but that the map has a really nice fluidity to it. There is always something to do, and when finished, there's straight away something else. Even after taking down the main boss, there isn't a dead calm for the map that you find in most other maps. You have the champions to kill, a labyrinth with fast action, and even a nice big jumping puzzle to complete. Then as soon as the countdown ends, it all starts again.

>

> The best part for me is that the build up for the meta, is that you can look on the map and see what needs doing and even completely events on your own makes a difference. The map doesn't need as much taxying like with other maps. The reason why Dragon's stand annoys so many is that literally nothing can be done until it has enough people to start it. As much as I love Auric basin, it's not as obvious on the map what needs doing, even with the fight for Tarir, and once the big fight starts, there are many variables that can make the fight less appealing to most to keep repeating it. Silverwastes map can start small and end big, with many boss fights in between. Everything on the map and fewer variables to make it annoying.

>

> There is also other elements that make the map more appealing: Finding the chests. Failing to complete events also leads to another, just like with success. No real time restraint for the map until big boss fights. Many boss fights that give variability, not just with the end bosses. You stick to an area and protect it or roam to help. There isn't a forced flow of how things need to go for individual players.

>

> I could be missing out on a lot of things and not considering certain maps, but I feel the game could do with more maps that don't rely so much on being in the right place at the right time and waiting for events to happen. As cool as bounties are or the choice of activities, the PoF maps lack real meta events from build ups of continual action. It would've been great to have had a PoF map with a silverwastes style. Like forge forces continuously pushing against the entire map, rather than just a few areas for events, and we heroes have to hold the forts and push back until the factories and portals have been destroyed.

 

This. Silverwastes is right now probably my favorite map in the entire game. Not because I love the environment so much or the enemy types. No, it's just like you said. The game flow is there, everything you do in the map feels rewarding. You as a player can have an impact even when you're just running solo around and defend stuff.

 

That's what I really miss about PoF. I would kill to get just one PoF map that has a meta similar to SW, with all the new mobs, maybe even with some bounty missions integrated and at the end with a cool new endboss.

 

Right now I see no reason to come back to PoF.

[WeedyZeGreedy.8635]

I was considering making a similar topic but since it's already here. I still think silverwaste is the best map in game because of eternal cycle that's going on. I don't want all expansion maps be like SW but I think all the maps from last LW season were very disappointing in terms of replayability and if not because i want viper trinkets for alle my characters i don't see any point going there again. I think SW is such a good map cause the Meta is mapwide and all events going on are related to the meta. I hope there will be something similar in next LW season. The problem with the HoT maps are the timers, whereas SW can be joined whenever

[Erasculio.2914]

LOL please noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

 

The Silverwastes are the worst designed map in the entire game:

 

* The entire map is about a single thing. There are the two token Skritt and Hylek events, but the Silverwastes as a whole is about the meta, nothing else.

* The entire map is filled by the same enemies. It's Mordrem, Mordrem and Mordrem (and the v1 Mordrem only). There is a massive lack of enemy variety.

 

Someone could say, "ah, but the HoT maps are just like that!". Sure, they share some of those issues, but the main differences are:

 

* The four event hubs in the Silverwastes are exactly the same. The four fortresses have the same layout and the same events.

* There is no tangible story in the map. That's completely the opposite of the HoT maps, in which each event hub tells a story with a beginning, middle and end. The four fortresses not only are the same in this regard, but they tell no story.

* The entire map is basically the same three events being repeated over and over (escort, defend, rebuild). For the great majority of the time, there is no variety, nor any complexity.

 

Really, I wish that were not true, but it's not possible to claim it's anything other than a massively lazy design. It's just the same thing repeated over and over.

 

"Ah, but it's a very popular map!" - yes, it is. Not because it's a good design. Rather, because it's an extremely farmable map. If the events there were given the same timer between each other that we see in the HoT maps, or if the rewards followed the same model of "only once per day" we see in the "vanilla" GW2 maps, the Silverwastes would be empty. If a HoT map was changed to be in such a tight schedule and had its rewards changed to have no daily limit, it would be as popular as the Silverwastes are, if not more.

 

The Silverwastes are a great cautionary tale about how players love bad content. It's the worst aspect of MMORPGs - the drive to farm irregardless of how poor the content that is being farmed is. I applaud ArenaNet for not following the easy path and making all HoT maps like this, and I hope we never get to see something like the Silverwastes again.

 

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> LOL please noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

>

> The Silverwastes are the worst designed map in the entire game:

>

> * The entire map is about a single thing. There are the two token Skritt and Hylek events, but the Silverwastes as a whole is about the meta, nothing else.

> * The entire map is filled by the same enemies. It's Mordrem, Mordrem and Mordrem (and the v1 Mordrem only). There is a massive lack of enemy variety.

>

> Someone could say, "ah, but the HoT maps are just like that!". Sure, they share some of those issues, but the main differences are:

>

> * The four event hubs in the Silverwastes are exactly the same. The four fortresses have the same layout and the same events.

> * There is no tangible story in the map. That's completely the opposite of the HoT maps, in which each event hub tells a story with a beginning, middle and end. The four fortresses not only are the same in this regard, but they tell no story.

> * The entire map is basically the same three events being repeated over and over (escort, defend, rebuild). For the great majority of the time, there is no variety, nor any complexity.

>

> Really, I wish that were not true, but it's not possible to claim it's anything other than a massively lazy design. It's just the same thing repeated over and over.

>

> "Ah, but it's a very popular map!" - yes, it is. Not because it's a good design. Rather, because it's an extremely farmable map. If the events there were given the same timer between each other that we see in the HoT maps, or if the rewards followed the same model of "only once per day" we see in the "vanilla" GW2 maps, the Silverwastes would be empty. If a HoT map was changed to be in such a tight schedule and had its rewards changed to have no daily limit, it would be as popular as the Silverwastes are, if not more.

>

> The Silverwastes are a great cautionary tale about how players love bad content. It's the worst aspect of MMORPGs - the drive to farm irregardless of how poor the content that is being farmed is. I applaud ArenaNet for not following the easy path and making all HoT maps like this, and I hope we never get to see something like the Silverwastes again.

 

I'm going to simply say I see 0 difference in Silverwastes and Dragon's Stand except I can at least admire how the map of Silverwastes look and not on a stupid clock to the point I don't fully know how Dragon's Stand look or feel even after doing the map (I would say meta but the meta is the map), about 7 times.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> I'm going to simply say I see 0 difference in Silverwastes and Dragon's Stand except I can at least admire how the map of Silverwastes look and not on a stupid clock to the point I don't fully know how Dragon's Stand look or feel even after doing the map (I would say meta but the meta is the map), about 7 times.

 

### Dragon's Stand:

 

* The meta event follows three different paths, each with different mini events and different bosses that are fought multiple times during the event

* Each lane has different layouts and, other than the Modrem, there are also different enemy types

* It's a map with a full story - it combines everyone from the previous maps to show the final fight between the Pact forces and Modremoth, and it takes the time to show how each of those allies has an impact on the meta

 

### Silverwastes:

 

* The meta event follows four fortesses that look the same and have the exact same events. The only difference are the bosses, that are only fought at the end.

* Each fortress has the exact same layout as the others. Each fortress is attacked by the same enemies.

* There is no story on the meta event other than "the Modrem attacks and the Pact defends". No NPC, no link to previous parts of the story, nothing.

 

Those two maps are very different. And really, you don't have to admire how Silverwastes look - if you have seen one fortress, you have seen what most of the map looks like.

 

 

[Goettel.4389]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> LOL please noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

>

> The Silverwastes are the worst designed map in the entire game:

[...]

The Silverwastes are a great cautionary tale about how players love bad content.

>

SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

[Erasculio.2914]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

Uhu. Why?

 

 

[Dashiva.6149]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> Uhu. Why?

>

>

 

can't speak for others, but my 2 cents: Most of the times i check in on Dragons Stand, there is absolutely nothing going on. In SW, there is ALWAYS something going on.

 

Instead of twiddling my thumbs and wait until a meta _might_ start, I rather jump into the action direct.

[TexZero.7910]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

 

Stop. Like please, stop.

 

Players only like SW for the loot.

If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

 

 

 

[Ayumi Spender.1082]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> > @"Ayumi Spender.1082" said:

> > I'm going to simply say I see 0 difference in Silverwastes and Dragon's Stand except I can at least admire how the map of Silverwastes look and not on a stupid clock to the point I don't fully know how Dragon's Stand look or feel even after doing the map (I would say meta but the meta is the map), about 7 times.

>

> ### Dragon's Stand:

>

> * The meta event follows three different paths, each with different mini events and different bosses that are fought multiple times during the event

> * Each lane has different layouts and, other than the Modrem, there are also different enemy types

> * It's a map with a full story - it combines everyone from the previous maps to show the final fight between the Pact forces and Modremoth, and it takes the time to show how each of those allies has an impact on the meta

>

> ### Silverwastes:

>

> * The meta event follows four fortesses that look the same and have the exact same events. The only difference are the bosses, that are only fought at the end.

> * Each fortress has the exact same layout as the others. Each fortress is attacked by the same enemies.

> * There is no story on the meta event other than "the Modrem attacks and the Pact defends". No NPC, no link to previous parts of the story, nothing.

>

> Those two maps are very different. And really, you don't have to admire how Silverwastes look - if you have seen one fortress, you have seen what most of the map looks like.

>

>

 

Dragon's Stand and Silverwastes are technically 3 different paths too for the "big meta". The problem is Dragon's Stand map IS the "big meta"

 

Silverwastes you're taking people and split them into 3 groups into 3 paths and defending an NPC to head towards and to deal with 3 bosses that is a soldier of one giant plant boss.

Dragon's Stand you're taking people and split them into 3 groups into 3 paths and defending an NPC to head towards and to deal with 3 bosses that is a soldier of one giant plant boss.

 

Each lane are pretty much Modrem on both too. Yeah there's little ambient hostile enemies in Dragon's Stand/Silverwastes around the map but they're never considered worthwhile or important.

 

I have no clue what the story is for any of the two.

One is "Stop Modrem from taking our camps." the other is "Stop Modrem... and.... STOP MORDREM!"

 

They both have their little quirks on how to take on the 3 liutenants. The only difference I can tell is Silverwastes you don't fight the big bad final plant boss and in Dragon's Stand you do.

 

Oh and after the final fight on both you go deal with a maze area (the depths in Silverwastes or.... Dragon's Stand mazy map) and opening chests/noxious pods for loot for a certain time.

After the timer is up you're kicked back to the beginning of the maze and have to start the whole meta again... for both.

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @Shiyo.3578 said:

> > @Ayrilana.1396 said:

> > SW is only relevant because you can make decent gold. If this was not true, it’d be fairly dead most of the time.

> >

> > If Anet were to add a map like SW without a gold farm, it’d die fairly shortly. If they added a gold farm comparable to other areas of the game, it’d stay active.

> >

> > What I prefer is an engaging meta that is fun to play, gives purpose to the map, and is rewarding to continue to do.

>

> This is completely wrong. The map is the best designed map by far and we need more maps like it.

 

That’s your opinion. I was just expressing mine.

 

I personally find the map itself boring. In particular, the defending of the bases. If the farm wasn’t there, I’m pretty sure the map would be *dead* like the others.

[Goettel.4389]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

>

> Stop. Like please, stop.

>

> Players only like SW for the loot.

> If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

>

>

>

Sorry, didn't realize you speak for everybody.

[TexZero.7910]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> >

> > Stop. Like please, stop.

> >

> > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> >

> >

> >

> Sorry, didn't realize you speak for everybody.

 

After you claimed it was popular ? Isn't that just a tad bit on the hypocritical side there....is it objectively popular or are the rewards popular ?

In my very educated opinion having spent enough time in and around games, i can safely come to the conclusion that the map itself isn't the reason why it's popular.

[Goettel.4389]

> @Erasculio.2914 said:

> > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> Uhu. Why?

>

>

Clear objectives, diverse events, some need to coordinate, lanes to break up blobs and a map that just jells together well (IMO). I love support, so I want groups: the bigger and more focused, the better. SW squads are usually up when I spend my limited gaming time. That alone makes it great content for me. Of course the loot is good, because otherwise they won't come *cough* PoF *cough* events.

[Ashen.2907]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

>

> Stop. Like please, stop.

>

> Players only like SW for the loot.

> If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

>

>

>

 

Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

[maddoctor.2738]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

 

Question for you: is the meta event style of SW popular or the chest farm?

Do you think the popularity of SW would be so high without the chest farm?

 

[TexZero.7910]

> @Ashen.2907 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> >

> > Stop. Like please, stop.

> >

> > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> >

> >

> >

>

> Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

 

I'm not the one making a claim of the maps inherent popularity either.

I'm merely debunking the popularity claim with easily provable game trends. Most players go where the money is, hence why you rarely see players in Lornar's Pass for example.

[Ashen.2907]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > >

> > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > >

> > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

>

> I'm not the one making a claim of the maps inherent popularity either.

> I'm merely debunking the popularity claim with easily provable game trends. Most players go where the money is, hence why you rarely see players in Lornar's Pass for example.

 

He said, "evidently popular," and then stated that he personally enjoyed it. You then claimed to know the thoughts of other people, made a claim that he did not enjoy what he stated he enjoyed.

[TexZero.7910]

> @Ashen.2907 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > > >

> > > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > > >

> > > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

> >

> > I'm not the one making a claim of the maps inherent popularity either.

> > I'm merely debunking the popularity claim with easily provable game trends. Most players go where the money is, hence why you rarely see players in Lornar's Pass for example.

>

> He said, "evidently popular," and then stated that he personally enjoyed it. You then claimed to know the thoughts of other people, made a claim that he did not enjoy what he stated he enjoyed.

 

Not once did i make that claim, i said people would play SW a lot less if other maps had as good reward for little effort.

 

[Ashen.2907]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > > > >

> > > > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > > > >

> > > > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

> > >

> > > I'm not the one making a claim of the maps inherent popularity either.

> > > I'm merely debunking the popularity claim with easily provable game trends. Most players go where the money is, hence why you rarely see players in Lornar's Pass for example.

> >

> > He said, "evidently popular," and then stated that he personally enjoyed it. You then claimed to know the thoughts of other people, made a claim that he did not enjoy what he stated he enjoyed.

>

> Not once did i make that claim, i said people would play SW a lot less if other maps had as good reward for little effort.

>

 

Weird, I thought that it was you who said, when he stated that he enjoys SW, 'stop, just stop, players only like it for the loot.'

 

 

[Goettel.4389]

> @TexZero.7910 said:

> > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > >

> > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > >

> > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > Sorry, didn't realize you speak for everybody.

>

> After you claimed it was popular ? Isn't that just a tad bit on the hypocritical side there....is it objectively popular or are the rewards popular ?

> In my very educated opinion having spent enough time in and around games, i can safely come to the conclusion that the map itself isn't the reason why it's popular.

 

But it IS popular...don't you see? It doesn't matter why you (or I) think that is.

[TexZero.7910]

> @Ashen.2907 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > > @Ashen.2907 said:

> > > > > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > > > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > > > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Perhaps you only like SW for the loot, but you certainly dont speak for the player base as a whole.

> > > >

> > > > I'm not the one making a claim of the maps inherent popularity either.

> > > > I'm merely debunking the popularity claim with easily provable game trends. Most players go where the money is, hence why you rarely see players in Lornar's Pass for example.

> > >

> > > He said, "evidently popular," and then stated that he personally enjoyed it. You then claimed to know the thoughts of other people, made a claim that he did not enjoy what he stated he enjoyed.

> >

> > Not once did i make that claim, i said people would play SW a lot less if other maps had as good reward for little effort.

> >

>

> Weird, I thought that it was you who said, when he stated that he enjoys SW, 'stop, just stop, players only like it for the loot.'

>

>

 

Context is important. If you only read half of whats there you only get half the picture.

[TexZero.7910]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> But it IS popular...don't you see? It doesn't matter why you (or I) think that is.

 

I doubt that.

I think it entirely matters why something is being used. I am highly suspect that the map is the popular element, and believe the rewards are.

 

 

 

[Ayrilana.1396]

> @Goettel.4389 said:

> > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > @TexZero.7910 said:

> > > > > @Goettel.4389 said:

> > > > > SW is evidently popular, and I for one find it great content.

> > > > > Let's not pretend personal preference is somehow fact.

> > > >

> > > > Stop. Like please, stop.

> > > >

> > > > Players only like SW for the loot.

> > > > If VB was a mind numblingly easy to get the loot as SW, you'd be there instead.

> > > > This is exactly why SW was a baron wasteland during the days of AB multi. Players go where the gold is for the least effort. They always have and they always will.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > Sorry, didn't realize you speak for everybody.

> >

> > After you claimed it was popular ? Isn't that just a tad bit on the hypocritical side there....is it objectively popular or are the rewards popular ?

> > In my very educated opinion having spent enough time in and around games, i can safely come to the conclusion that the map itself isn't the reason why it's popular.

>

> But it IS popular...don't you see? It doesn't matter why you (or I) think that is.

 

Reduce the loot people can get from it down to the amount of loot people can get from meta events on the core maps. How popular will it be without it being a gold farm?