An idea to make Roamers matter in WvW: Bounty system

[PistolWhip.2697]

OP I must say this is an amazing idea!

 

Perhaps it could use some tweaks but the premise is such a cool addition. I would actually go as far as to say whether you sign up or not should be debated, as I could see a mechanic that would compliment this is "Notoriety". Real bounties get more rewarding (for PPT) and appear when an individual is notorious. Why not make it so the more people a player kills the more notoriety they accumulate, (in a sense, a second participation track which could multiply normal participation by a small percantage or something while also providing PPT to add to server contribution), which actually increases the reward for killing them. The bounty board could reveal more the more notoriety they get, as their infamy spreads so will information be discovered. So lets say Player 1 is the bounty, and they are down as "Mark Dingleheimer", their character name, perhaps the next kill they get, the information becomes "Mark Dingleheimer, Human Thief" and so on. The reward would increase in tandem.

 

This puts into question whether it should be sign up or not, but perhaps sign up is fine as the incentive is more reward.

 

@Everyone who has posted about outnumbered/ ganging up:

This is more realistic and very normal. IF you were hunting a notorious individual, famed for being dangerous, you would sure up the kill by bringing people. WvW Roaming isn't purely about fair 1v1 duels on even ground. Heck, nothing in WvW is really that fair due to inflated stats, and more allowance on broken aspects of each profession so hardly any duel regardless of number is fair to begin with. Plus there is nothing stopping those who are being hunted from gathering their own friends to assist them. In fact this could be rewarded by having your own notoriety go up further by being near the higher notoriety bounty player, as it would in any 'in-universe' scenario anyway.

 

I fully support this idea, and think it would had huge flavour and play value to not only roaming but strategic small hitman squads. Yes it could be abuse ina few ways but what feature can't be? Normal WvW is abused all the time with backcapping and such, so why does it even matter as long as it isn't game breaking?

 

The only issue I don't know a solution for as far as I can see is that there would be a huge number of players with bounties so how do you keep it feasible in terms of number. Perhaps a queueing system for the board?

[schloumou.3982]

> @"Malferian.7205" said:

>"But balance is so bad in WvW weh weh weh". That's like saying you shouldn't add new raids, because some classes do far more dps than others.

 

 

I like the idea in general but that's a rather bad comparison. What are you actually going to do if your target is a decent teef or mirage? Not even talking about full troll-builds.

 

 

 

[PistolWhip.2697]

> @"schloumou.3982" said:

> > @"Malferian.7205" said:

> >"But balance is so bad in WvW weh weh weh". That's like saying you shouldn't add new raids, because some classes do far more dps than others.

>

>

> I like the idea in general but that's a rather bad comparison. What are you actually going to do if your target is a decent teef or mirage? Not even talking about full troll-builds.

>

>

>

 

Hunt them down? They have to engage in combat to raise notoriety level in my system idea and to do that leaves them open to dying. Otherwise they don't get much out of being a bounty.

 

If anything the only abuse I could see would be from zergs.

[schloumou.3982]

> @"PistolWhip.2697" said:

> > @"schloumou.3982" said:

> > > @"Malferian.7205" said:

> > >"But balance is so bad in WvW weh weh weh". That's like saying you shouldn't add new raids, because some classes do far more dps than others.

> >

> >

> > I like the idea in general but that's a rather bad comparison. What are you actually going to do if your target is a decent teef or mirage? Not even talking about full troll-builds.

> >

> >

> >

>

> Hunt them down? They have to engage in combat to raise notoriety level in my system idea and to do that leaves them open to dying. Otherwise they don't get much out of being a bounty.

>

> If anything the only abuse I could see would be from zergs.

 

Vague. In your model they could easily kill lone staffeles wandering to zergs the whole day and still be untouchable for any other profession. What if they switch gear afterwards and go full sustain?

[PistolWhip.2697]

> @"schloumou.3982" said:

> > @"PistolWhip.2697" said:

> > > @"schloumou.3982" said:

> > > > @"Malferian.7205" said:

> > > >"But balance is so bad in WvW weh weh weh". That's like saying you shouldn't add new raids, because some classes do far more dps than others.

> > >

> > >

> > > I like the idea in general but that's a rather bad comparison. What are you actually going to do if your target is a decent teef or mirage? Not even talking about full troll-builds.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Hunt them down? They have to engage in combat to raise notoriety level in my system idea and to do that leaves them open to dying. Otherwise they don't get much out of being a bounty.

> >

> > If anything the only abuse I could see would be from zergs.

>

> Vague. In your model they could easily kill lone staffeles wandering to zergs the whole day and still be untouchable for any other profession. What if they switch gear afterwards and go full sustain?

 

Well assuming we have a cap on the number of bounties active at once, a small squad couldbe dispatched to hunt them down. Here is the thing:

 

1. Hunting a high notoriety target would be worth the ppt and worth the commanders attention. No amount of sustain on a Thief or Mirage is gonna outwit/outdo a number of players specifically hunting that target down, which would have a tell on their locaiton the more infamy they gather.

 

2. If you spend too long in a keep or tower, you could lose your bounty status, and lose it entirely if you go back to spawn so they couldn't just run into a tower or a keep for long.

 

There are definitely ways to alleviate that. As for raising notoriety by killing staff eles, I don't see why we need to set a boundary for that specific scenario? To be frank, Staff ele's would have to make sure they don't roam alone anyway as to feed such roamers (as in any war scenario, don't be a target which is a detriment to your side), also, notorious individuals aren't always above cutting down the vulnerable. I don't see this particular point as a system abuse, as much as it is taking advantage of player folly, which has and is actively encouraged in many parts of the game already. (I.e. baiting random dodges, or discouraging thoughtless gear setups etc).

[Fluffball.8307]

This sounds hysterically fun, but also pretty impractical.

 

Maybe a more refined version could be tested on one of those crackhead days where the devs make golems do 8000x more damage or whatever.

[Aeolus.3615]

I desagree with balance on point 3 will always be bad... it just deppends for how long Anet want to continue to be a sucky developer company, they are being know the be one of the most awfull teams for pvp gameplay due how stupid gw2 pvp and pve are.

 

If Anet make more single target autos and less cleave aoe spam stuff to carry the badies, game balance will be far better than it is, now it they rather change the boon stacking gimmicks to similiar what skill categories had in difference from gw1 rather than stack to hope to reach zero effort, game will be real good.

And will probably make roamers matter even more...

 

Now Anet just need to get rid of the easy gimmicks gameplay mentality, and bring back what was working wonderfully on gw1 and wich is what makes gw1 real a competent game.

[PistolWhip.2697]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> I desagree with balance on point 3 will always be bad... it just deppends for how long Anet want to continue to be a sucky developer company, they are being know the be one of the most awfull teams for pvp gameplay due how stupid gw2 pvp and pve are.

>

> If Anet make more single target autos and less cleave aoe spam stuff to carry the badies, game balance will be far better than it is, now it they rather change the boon stacking gimmicks to similiar what skill categories had in difference from gw1 rather than stack to hope to reach zero effort, game will be real good.

> And will probably make roamers matter even more...

>

> Now Anet just need to get rid of the easy gimmicks gameplay mentality, and bring back what was working wonderfully on gw1 and wich is what makes gw1 real a competent game.

 

Gotta say, GW1 had it's issues too. Gotta be careful here, as we don't want it to turn into "build wars" where there little to no room to counterplay against a counter build,

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"PistolWhip.2697" said:

> > @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> > I desagree with balance on point 3 will always be bad... it just deppends for how long Anet want to continue to be a sucky developer company, they are being know the be one of the most awfull teams for pvp gameplay due how stupid gw2 pvp and pve are.

> >

> > If Anet make more single target autos and less cleave aoe spam stuff to carry the badies, game balance will be far better than it is, now it they rather change the boon stacking gimmicks to similiar what skill categories had in difference from gw1 rather than stack to hope to reach zero effort, game will be real good.

> > And will probably make roamers matter even more...

> >

> > Now Anet just need to get rid of the easy gimmicks gameplay mentality, and bring back what was working wonderfully on gw1 and wich is what makes gw1 real a competent game.

>

> Gotta say, GW1 had it's issues too. Gotta be careful here, as we don't want it to turn into "build wars" where there little to no room to counterplay against a counter build,

 

yeah but that required team work as well, as in invencibuilds, worked way more like rock paper scizor in gw1 than any time in gw2, those monk boon bots on FA i never had problem with them on the kurzik side with my necro and some decent mesmer on luxon side, build wars was en excuse to the delayed time that counters apears, OFC there was some lazy team builds out there, iways, the 4 ele echo invokers on TA, the 8 eles team on GvG eurospike??? if i recall, that were forbiden to play that comp on championchip etc.

But even all that required way more game knowledge and teamwork that gw2 requires.

[Sesbog.8705]

This mode is for large scales. If you enter this very controversial venture, you radically change the current mode to solo and all who come here for big battles will be forced to look for a new map because of the queue of romers. Limit the number of hunters and victims by creating a new queue? The queue of hunters in the queue map in prime time? Only the stupidest developers can do this.

These maps are not for duels for the sake of reward. If this is not a duel, then this is a new train for treasure instead of karma. We run on check-points and collect treasures. We can run like a zerg of romers. Yes, in this situation, we will return to the big battles, but this will not have a presentable appearance and the head of global marketing anet curses all the nuts, in attempts to correctly present this farm chaos.

 

The idea with extra treasures for killing will not work in the current mode. The main reward is the victory itself over the enemy, but not the chest with the underpants of this victim.

[Barak.2709]

If you want roaming to be really a thing in wvw, you dont have to think very hard. Just give roamers more purpose to the general scheme of things, like adding events to each tower/keep/camp and SM which is similar to map progress in pve, the more you do the more rewards you get when you finish the event. Every player would get the regular cap/defence reward if they would have just capped doing nothing, but players who actually destroyed/repaired the walls, killed defenders/attackers inside get extra rewards that are meaningful. That way roamers have a reason to go on skirmish on small scale rather than blobbing. and there would be no drama if for example 3 ppl took bay and the blob came to join the final cap, those 3 ppl would still get the max rewards while the blob get the regular one.

[Fluffball.8307]

> @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> This mode is for large scales. If you enter this very controversial venture, you radically change the current mode to solo and all who come here for big battles will be forced to look for a new map because of the queue of romers. Limit the number of hunters and victims by creating a new queue? The queue of hunters in the queue map in prime time? Only the stupidest developers can do this.

> These maps are not for duels for the sake of reward. If this is not a duel, then this is a new train for treasure instead of karma. We run on check-points and collect treasures. We can run like a zerg of romers. Yes, in this situation, we will return to the big battles, but this will not have a presentable appearance and the head of global marketing anet curses all the nuts, in attempts to correctly present this farm chaos.

>

> The idea with extra treasures for killing will not work in the current mode. The main reward is the victory itself over the enemy, but not the chest with the underpants of this victim.

 

It's very narrow minded to think WvW is specifically for one type of player. If you've been around a while you'll remember a dev causing a kitten storm because he tried to tell WvWers how the mode was meant to be played.

 

Roaming is fine, GvGs are fine, zergs are fine. None of them are wrong no matter how much you like your particular was of playing.

[Sesbog.8705]

> @"Fluffball.8307" said:

> > @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> > This mode is for large scales.

>

> It's very narrow minded to think WvW is specifically for one type of player. If you've been around a while you'll remember a dev causing a kitten storm because he tried to tell WvWers how the mode was meant to be played.

 

The introduction of improved rewards for romers is a factor of crowding out large groups. WWW for control objects and big battles. This mode is used differently, because there are no specialized places for other purposes.

Adding all ideas to one place can not be a good idea, since everyone on the map will interfere with each other, believing that this map is only for them. If it were possible, I would grow carrots in the garrison, periodically watering it, cutting the lawn and reading the chat, that somewhere on the map "problems", paying no attention to them, because carrots require periodic watering.

 

 

[Fluffball.8307]

> @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> > @"Fluffball.8307" said:

> > > @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> > > This mode is for large scales.

> >

> > It's very narrow minded to think WvW is specifically for one type of player. If you've been around a while you'll remember a dev causing a kitten storm because he tried to tell WvWers how the mode was meant to be played.

>

> The introduction of improved rewards for romers is a factor of crowding out large groups. WWW for control objects and big battles. This mode is used differently, because there are no specialized places for other purposes.

> Adding all ideas to one place can not be a good idea, since everyone on the map will interfere with each other, believing that this map is only for them. If it were possible, I would grow carrots in the garrison, periodically watering it, cutting the lawn and reading the chat, that somewhere on the map "problems", paying no attention to them, because carrots require periodic watering.

>

>

 

That's absurd. Zergs already have way more rewards than roaming. Roaming needs more rewards to be on par. Not necessarily this, but your premise is wrong. People are always going to flock to the lowest effort with highest rewards, both of which are zerging.

[Mysteriax.6049]

Thanks OP. This idea is interesting and something I never considered beforehand.

Here's what I'm thinking:

 

Hunted

 

Signing up to be hunted gives you a small boost in reward track or wxp and puts you in a pool with other players from Server B and Server C which appear on the bounty tab on Server A. The bounty tab includes a "Hunted" section on the left side which allows you to sign up to be hunted, and a "Hunter" tab on the right side.

 

Hunter

 

There is no sign-up to be a Hunter. Instead, there is just the name of certain "Hunted" players, their last known location, and the reward for killing them. The 5 players with the most camp captures and sentries taken while alive appear on the "Hunter" side as target players.

 

Notifications

 

When a "Hunted" player is killed, their face appears as an onscreen notification and their server color as well as "Player X has been executed" OR the Hunter's face appears as a notification along with their server color and the text, "Player X has executed an enemy." Whichever is more appropriate.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"Fluffball.8307" said:

> > @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> > > @"Fluffball.8307" said:

> > > > @"Sesbog.8705" said:

> > > > This mode is for large scales.

> > >

> > > It's very narrow minded to think WvW is specifically for one type of player. If you've been around a while you'll remember a dev causing a kitten storm because he tried to tell WvWers how the mode was meant to be played.

> >

> > The introduction of improved rewards for romers is a factor of crowding out large groups. WWW for control objects and big battles. This mode is used differently, because there are no specialized places for other purposes.

> > Adding all ideas to one place can not be a good idea, since everyone on the map will interfere with each other, believing that this map is only for them. If it were possible, I would grow carrots in the garrison, periodically watering it, cutting the lawn and reading the chat, that somewhere on the map "problems", paying no attention to them, because carrots require periodic watering.

> >

> >

>

> That's absurd. Zergs already have way more rewards than roaming. Roaming needs more rewards to be on par. Not necessarily this, but your premise is wrong. People are always going to flock to the lowest effort with highest rewards, both of which are zerging.

 

zergs need more aoe, and needs to melt walls and gates as well..... noobs love it and this game is built for noobs that dont like effort.

[Cerby.1069]

There's been tons of other posts proposing similar if not the exact same systems in the past. Urs is no different.

 

 

Go play a different game if you don't like it. nothing is going to improve.

[Aeolus.3615]

> @"Cerby.1069" said:

> There's been tons of other posts proposing similar if not the exact same systems in the past. Urs is no different.

>

>

> Go play a different game if you don't like it. nothing is going to improve.

 

lies.....expect next expact, more boon stacking more aoe spam, more power creep to carry badies... that all that blob's and gw2 players want.... for them that is a great evolution.

[Optimator.3589]

Why not just increase rewards for doing regular WvW stuff by x% for how few people are doing it? Like solo-capping towers, camps, guardposts, etc is worth 4x as much as capping them with 10 people. Capping with 5 worth twice as much, and so on and so forth. Just pulling numbers out of my posterior here, but it'd probably be less problematic and easier to implement while making roaming comparatively as rewarding as blobbing.

[Curunen.8729]

> @"Razor.6392" said:

> This doesn't have to be that complicated. Just add a bounty board in the main towns or keeps. If a solo player gets camps, realm score or map objectives in a play session then he appears in the board. Only 5 can appear at a time in the board, the credit is lost upon joining a squad or party, the people that kill him get increased rewards and the roamer also gets increased rewards as he continues to stay on the board wrecking havoc.

>

> As for the location hint, you could highlight in the map the zones where you are prone to find him (based on the last 15 minutes of gameplay) as opposed to their predicted *current* location.

 

I like this idea a lot - simpler and could be easier to implement than the OP's idea.

[Shizlam.4310]

> @"Vavume.8065" said:

> > @"Shizlam.4310" said:

> > You people need to read. Properly read the things people write, don't just give your uninformed opinion after reading the first paragraph.

> > Read:

> > > If you sign up, you get into a pool with other people that signed up and thus you and your enemy are both interested in this.

>

> The OP stated sign up was mandatory... I assume you understand what that means...

>

> > @"Malferian.7205" said:

> > 1) Sign up would be mandatory.

>

>

 

Pretty sure, as everyone else already mentioned, that was a mistake, as you can see from the line I linked.

[XenesisII.1540]

If you make it about just hunting a person down they would just go back and sit in spawn.

You would have to implement the chest idea, but hey guess what classes are going to win a foot race to wherever.

The idea needs a lot more details to flesh it out for all scenarios.

 

In any case roaming has gone to crap the past couple years because of more and more broken one shot stealth op builds entering wvw from the elite specs. Players are running around in gank group because hey guess what players have been telling them for years when they complain about certain classes.... run with more people.. and so now they are. This won't bring more roamers out, it'll just bring more roaming gank groups out.

 

 

 

[Artaz.3819]

I'm not sure this encourages roaming playstyle per se though. It would be fun for a while but would get old quickly getting ganked over and over by that x vs. 1 hunt (because voice comms). Stealth/escape classes would further rule too the new roamer pool. And to be the "bait" for persistent attempts.

 

A more appropriate roamer bonus is simply to give +% on wxp and magic find % loot for less than 4 (scale it) taking or "tagging" of objectives/enemy player kills. It doesn't actually have to be much maybe start at +100% incremental to wxp/magic find, +75%, +50%, +25% for solo tagging, 2, 3, 4, respectively. It'd be still be way less than zerging unless your zerg keeps getting flattened.

[KrHome.1920]

This kind of bounty system would only work for gank groups of thieves. Only they have the mobility to find and chase the target and the mobility to escape if they are chased. For everyone else this will become extremely frustrating pretty quick.

 

Interesting idea, but too many issues if you look at it twice. I don't even like it if it's optional to sign in, because I don't want to accidently run into thief gank groups every few minutes - as these groups will show up everywhere when such a system goes online.

[JustDemons.4358]

would love it, saw u talking about it on strim :) 100% am i up for some more avtivites on the borderlands. esp for solo roamers. as much as i love solo raoming though i think new activities need a proper balance to still encourage ppl to group up in squads, else we would face guerilla wars 2 with ppl only running around on there own and not care to much for group play anymore.