WvW Content Updates?

[NeroBoron.7285]

I'm not sure if this is part of your team, but I'll post it anyway

 

Are there any true wvw content updates planned? And I'm not talking about the new matchmaking system with alliances or siege changes.

 

More like new maps, map rotations, mounts, new siege weapons or what ever awesome ideas you came up with? :)

 

Since HoT there hasn't been a content update for wvw.

 

PvE got new maps to explore, new raid wings, new fractals.

PvP has seen new maps and will get more tournament options.

It currently feels like wvw is left a bit behind.

 

So actually the new content distribution between those is not balanced hahaha ;)

[Blocki.4931]

Jungle Borderland incoming

 

Six layers

 

Tangled Depths on steroids

 

[NeroBoron.7285]

> @"Blocki.4931" said:

> Jungle Borderland incoming

>

> Six layers

>

> Tangled Depths on steroids

>

 

Excellent ??

God I hated tangled depth for it's complexity. I never found the way ?

[Ben Phongluangtham.1065]

New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

 

Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

[NeroBoron.7285]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

Aww :/ and I hoped one day we will have many maps and each weak those will be rotated and shuffled.

 

Still great to hear that you have other new stuff planned :) I hope it brings more diversity in so it won't be always the same. :Blush:

 

If you cannot tell us what it is can you tell us how long do we still have to be patient till we get teased?

 

Core specs only event? :Lol:

[Klypto.1703]

I was hoping for an Ocean borderland with attack dolphins and super mega shark ranger pets. Along with golem submarines and torpedo sieges to spam at dolphins and stuff. Oh and wvw swimming infusions yes it has been confirmed!

[Karnasis.6892]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

New maps would have been more likely if the feedback of the Desert BL's weren't so awful (some of which was justified, but a lot of it wasn't). The biggest complaints I've seen of the current iteration of the desert bl have been "I can't figure out my way around the map" and "It's too large to find fights on". I'm a big fan of the desert bl and while yes the map COULD use a shrink as far as Zerg vs Zerg is concerned, I've always loved big spaces with less players in games (which is why I hate maps like Nuketown in CoD because it's too hectic and preferred some of the larger maps in that particular game/genre).

 

Even though new maps are not happening, I'd love to see a rotation of the desert bl's so that instead of it being 2 alpine and 1 desert bl, it would rotate to being all desert or all alpine for a couple of weeks. Though I also understand that the haters would probably just stop playing because why learn a more interesting map when in two weeks or whatever the rotation could be play exclusively on the alpines. But the desert bl is MUCH better than the original iteration ever was (and less lag inducing XD)

[Arlette.9684]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

I think what you guys have failed to achieve with WvW and a lot of why we have these influx and deflux of players there is the fact that the game design fails to incentivize players to commit long term to a unified goal. A lot of this is the casual nature of the game (you can join 10 guilds, you don't have to communicate with other players as much as the game would like you to think, etc). The lack of something, a tool to unify the communities and make them have a sense of purpose and drive is what needs to be targeted for future improvements, not new game modes, or maps. We need an identity!

[Darlgon.9273]

> @"NeroBoron.7285" said:

> I'm not sure if this is part of your team, but I'll post it anyway

>

> Are there any true wvw content updates planned? And I'm not talking about the new matchmaking system with alliances or siege changes.

>

> More like new maps, map rotations, mounts, new siege weapons or what ever awesome ideas you came up with? :)

>

> Since HoT there hasn't been a content update for wvw.

>

> PvE got new maps to explore, new raid wings, new fractals.

> PvP has seen new maps and will get more tournament options.

> It currently feels like wvw is left a bit behind.

>

> So actually the new content distribution between those is not balanced hahaha ;)

 

You did notice that the Desert BL actually looks a lot like the PoF world... So.. it was an early version of the "new map" that PVE got to explore, WAY before PVE got it.

[ProverbsofHell.2307]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

Just knowing that you're talking to us and that stuff is on the way is good enough to keep me hopeful personally... the special WvW events sound good, no downed state was a lot of fun for example.

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Karnasis.6892" said:

> > @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> > New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

> >

> > Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

>

> New maps would have been more likely if the feedback of the Desert BL's weren't so awful (some of which was justified, but a lot of it wasn't). The biggest complaints I've seen of the current iteration of the desert bl have been "I can't figure out my way around the map" and "It's too large to find fights on". I'm a big fan of the desert bl and while yes the map COULD use a shrink as far as Zerg vs Zerg is concerned, I've always loved big spaces with less players in games (which is why I hate maps like Nuketown in CoD because it's too hectic and preferred some of the larger maps in that particular game/genre).

 

You mean the part where you could walk into almost every objective?

You mean the part where the map had an event which literally made the map unplayably laggy, also making it impossible to actually compete for the event and get it done due to its own self-generating lag, every 2 hours? Not fixed until half the dedicated wvw guilds that CAME BACK FOR THE EXPANSION left again?

You mean the part where 2 years later I can still walk / jump into some objectives and fall through the map?

You mean the part where the progression of the map is significantly worse than alpine for equalizing combat?

You mean the part where the map is extremely inbalanced in terms of difficulty of objective upgrading and capping compared to alpine?

 

Yeah I'm sure the feedback was "not justified". I'm sure they didn't ignore 99% of the complaints between the several beta's the map went through to release something into the game which should frankly NEVER have been there.

 

Frankly anyone stating desert is better than alpine doesn't understand how good alpine's layout is for equalizing action in an uneven environment... And how terribly desert fails at doing this.

 

The lag from the event alone is honestly unacceptable. If at that point ANY anet devs were actually playing WvW somewhat regularly, they'd have noticed and fixed this much sooner.

 

The main issue with the map was far from "it's too big". It looks nice, but other than that it's much much worse for healthy gameplay, especially group play, than alpine maps.

 

> Even though new maps are not happening, I'd love to see a rotation of the desert bl's so that instead of it being 2 alpine and 1 desert bl, it would rotate to being all desert or all alpine for a couple of weeks. Though I also understand that the haters would probably just stop playing because why learn a more interesting map when in two weeks or whatever the rotation could be play exclusively on the alpines. But the desert bl is MUCH better than the original iteration ever was (and less lag inducing XD)

 

They should remove desert BL from a balance point of view. Having desert bl rather than alpine is a huge difference. Even if they keep it, it should not change in amount of bls weekly. The map might be "more interesting" for your style of play, but many many many dedicated WvWers disagree. And from their point of view, they most definitely have legitimate concerns - many of which are and will never be adressed.

[funassistant.6589]

Not going to talk about Desert BL because Forumtheri explained everything 100% accurately.

 

Thing is about WvW is that it's so varied and and uncontrollable that I personally believe it's hard to create content for. I get that the Devs have had a content drought because heck, I sure as well can't think of anything except what I'd personally like.

I remember quite a while back devs took part in a community outreach where they joined certain guilds in EU and NA to play with one of the most dedicated group of players Guild Wars 2 HAD: The raiding/"GvG" guilds. As far as I know, and correct me if I'm wrong, nothing came of that. Water under the bridge.

 

What's so unbelievably frustrating is that I've seen hundreds of dedicated players who enjoyed the game to the fullest they could leave because of 3 condensed reasons:

1. Balance changes that favored _unfavourable_ meta changes. (Standing around casting skills at other players more than 1.2k range away for 4-5 minutes (RIP Pirateship/Venomwells), or unkillable sustain groups that overhealed to the point where 15s could facetank maybe 30 players at once (RIP Ballmeta, you made Guardian the best that it could be) and Scourgebubble colorful d e a t h (I dont like this, oh no no no no)

2. No incentive or reason to play apart from the amazing fun you could have with the combat system

3. Population changes and ABSOLUTELY NO GUILD SUPPORT WHATSOEVER

 

Idk lads

 

This game /was/ fun

[Loosmaster.8263]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

There was a poll back when to allow the DBL to remain under the threat guise that if we removed it there would be no new maps. How many years has that been and still the answer is no new maps?

[archmagus.7249]

> @"Klypto.1703" said:

> I was hoping for an Ocean borderland with attack dolphins and super mega shark ranger pets. Along with golem submarines and torpedo sieges to spam at dolphins and stuff. Oh and wvw swimming infusions yes it has been confirmed!

 

I'd love for them to do more aquatic stuff. It's something not any other major MMO that I'm aware of has pulled off. And it was a major selling point of the game; a game with underwater combat.

[LucianTheAngelic.7054]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

That's disappointing to hear about the borderlands, right now it really feels like there needs to be at least one more just to round out the experience

[Karnasis.6892]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

 

> You mean the part where you could walk into almost every objective?

I don't play as much WvW as you probably do, but I played a fair amount back when the map launched and is still my favorite bl. I know there's a few issues with that now but it wasn't something I've seen widely used back then.

 

> You mean the part where the map had an event which literally made the map unplayably laggy, also making it impossible to actually compete for the event and get it done due to its own self-generating lag, every 2 hours? Not fixed until half the dedicated wvw guilds that CAME BACK FOR THE EXPANSION left again?

 

Yes the removed the meta event for lag reasons, sucks about those WvW guilds, but new ones came in to replace them, whatever opinion you have on that is fine, but the map still had a fix (eventually)

 

> You mean the part where 2 years later I can still walk / jump into some objectives and fall through the map?

 

Wow, you have some bad luck because I have not once ever fell through the map ever on the DBL's, or prior to this post heard of anyone doing so.

 

> You mean the part where the progression of the map is significantly worse than alpine for equalizing combat?

 

Meh? I like the progression, hence why I would like all 3 being the same map as opposed to having 2 alpine and 1 dbl. Rotation is better in this case.

 

> You mean the part where the map is extremely inbalanced in terms of difficulty of objective upgrading and capping compared to alpine?

 

I dunno, I've not had that many issues upgrading anything on either map as long as your willing to put some work into it

 

> Yeah I'm sure the feedback was "not justified". I'm sure they didn't ignore 99% of the complaints between the several beta's the map went through to release something into the game which should frankly NEVER have been there.

 

They took a lot of the stupid things of the map out (random barriers that you have to damage first for example). Sorry I don't think "getting lost" is a valid complaint, or "It's too big". A lot of the complaints at that time were that along with "It's not the alpines so it is awful"

 

> Frankly anyone stating desert is better than alpine doesn't understand how good alpine's layout is for equalizing action in an uneven environment... And how terribly desert fails at doing this.

 

And that isn't important to every player of WvW. I'm not even saying I speak for everyone (obviously) but different players seek different experiences from the same game mode. And I never said we would take the alpines away permanently, so people would have their alpine bl fun sometimes and folks like myself would have the desert bl fun.

 

> The lag from the event alone is honestly unacceptable. If at that point ANY anet devs were actually playing WvW somewhat regularly, they'd have noticed and fixed this much sooner.

 

It's gone, so who cares?

 

> The main issue with the map was far from "it's too big". It looks nice, but other than that it's much much worse for healthy gameplay, especially group play, than alpine maps.

 

I don't see how, I've run in big groups and small groups, and have not personally seen a problem with the desert bl's. I will chalk this up to higher tier servers, but in t4 this has been a non-issue.

 

> They should remove desert BL from a balance point of view. Having desert bl rather than alpine is a huge difference. Even if they keep it, it should not change in amount of bls weekly. The map might be "more interesting" for your style of play, but many many many dedicated WvWers disagree. And from their point of view, they most definitely have legitimate concerns - many of which are and will never be adressed.

 

Oh boy, remove the only interesting map from from WvW, that's what we need *rolls eyes*. I know a lot of WvW'ers that agree that rotation is the best option for folks who do like the map over the alpines. I have found I prefer the desert bl over the alpines because there is more interesting ways to engage with attacking objectives, defending objectives and just overall design. The alpines are generic and honestly a good first attempt at map making for the game mode, but the DBL's are in their current state imo superior to the alpines. But to each their own I suppose.

 

[Karnasis.6892]

> @"Loosmaster.8263" said:

> > @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> > New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

> >

> > Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

>

> There was a poll back when to allow the DBL to remain under the threat guise that if we removed it there would be no new maps. How many years has that been and still the answer is no new maps?

 

Aside from supposed other problems with the DBL's, a lot of the WvW'ers didn't even KNOW about the vote or how it would effect things. At that time (and I guess even now) A.net had a problem with communicating with folks about the poll/votes, let alone properly communicate what each option in the poll/votes ACTUALLY meant. We had like 3-4 votes before they even started sending in game mails to tell people there was votes even happening.

 

The vocal forum goers (I wasn't as vocal then, but I did lurk on the forums) were the "majority". And the "majority", even knowing the cost, voted against having the dbl's rotate, opting for the 1 dbl/2 alpine system we have now. But that also cost us any future maps because why bother developing a new map when the first one in 2-3 years of the original map to only have the "majority" hate the map and call for it's removal. It's not like they didn't tweak the map after launch to solve some problems, but by then the "damage" was done.

 

Also, the votes were open to everyone, even players who didn't play WvW at all (or only played for Gifts of Battle) were voting, skewing the voting even more. That was a big criticism of that time period, and people were trying to get A.net to find a away to restrict the votes to folks that had a certain rank or time played in WvW so the votes would be less skewed.

[Ben K.6238]

I can't say I've ever found Alpine to be superior in "equalizing" anything. It takes more effort for invaders to reach the north end of the map, and the keeps are considerably harder to break into, but that's down to two factors:

 

* Alpine keeps are much smaller and generally have limited avenues of approach.

* Barricades, which previously provided control over terrain, were removed from DBL because players found them confusing.

 

There have been problems with glitching into keeps in DBL, but I've seen similar exploits in both EB and Alpine a few years ago. Getting teleported under the map used to be a constant problem at launch.

 

Can't really comment on balance too much, because I have rarely played in circumstances where the map layout was more important than the off-hours coverage of the other servers. I've certainly found DBL is a better place to be when you're outnumbered and dodging karma trains though.

[Cronos.6532]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> New borderlands are pretty unlikely at this point. They take a huge amount of time and resources. We have some new stuff for WvW planned, but I can't talk about it yet. I know you guys get tired of hearing that.

>

> Other new plans for WvW mainly contain new special events and continuing to revise existing things we'd like to make better.

 

just one more

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Karnasis.6892" said:

> > @"Etheri.5406" said:

>

> > You mean the part where you could walk into almost every objective?

> I don't play as much WvW as you probably do, but I played a fair amount back when the map launched and is still my favorite bl. I know there's a few issues with that now but it wasn't something I've seen widely used back then.

>

> > You mean the part where the map had an event which literally made the map unplayably laggy, also making it impossible to actually compete for the event and get it done due to its own self-generating lag, every 2 hours? Not fixed until half the dedicated wvw guilds that CAME BACK FOR THE EXPANSION left again?

>

> Yes the removed the meta event for lag reasons, sucks about those WvW guilds, but new ones came in to replace them, whatever opinion you have on that is fine, but the map still had a fix (eventually)

 

New ones came to replace them? Pro tip : no they didn't. WvW was at an all-time low for more than 6 months. After that rewards were increased yet... we still have FAR less guilds than before. Also took them that long to fix epi so I had every reason to harass any ranger that would come remotely near a group for killing their allies ;). And no, the guilds did not come back. There's less than 5 high end guilds left in EU right now. We lost far more than 5 guilds which reformed and quit again in sub 2 months because the game was ... actually not playable.

 

>

> > You mean the part where 2 years later I can still walk / jump into some objectives and fall through the map?

>

> Wow, you have some bad luck because I have not once ever fell through the map ever on the DBL's, or prior to this post heard of anyone doing so.

 

Wow you not knowing about it must mean the map is only too big and too hard to navigate!

 

I'll post several different screenshots of me falling through the map later - not at my home pc now. Just because you don't know about it because you play casually and willfully ignore any flaws doesn't mean they aren't there. It's not about bad luck, it's about falling through the moment you open T3 gates or walls. I figure you don't usually open much T3 gates on desert. Not suprised - the amount of stalemates that map produces and promotes are pretty damn high.

 

>

> > You mean the part where the progression of the map is significantly worse than alpine for equalizing combat?

>

> Meh? I like the progression, hence why I would like all 3 being the same map as opposed to having 2 alpine and 1 dbl. Rotation is better in this case.

>

> > You mean the part where the map is extremely inbalanced in terms of difficulty of objective upgrading and capping compared to alpine?

>

> I dunno, I've not had that many issues upgrading anything on either map as long as your willing to put some work into it

 

It's not about "issues" upgrading. It's about balance. Upgrade speed between north towers is off by factor 4 or more depending on which camps you can hold and upgrade. It can take less than 90 minutes on desert to upgrade north tower to T3. It takes more than 4 hours on alpine, always. Desert is a LOT faster. Garri on desert upgrades 2 to 3 times faster too. All outers on keep are much, much stronger to defend. All gates on desert BL keeps have AC spots that can't be countered on both outer and inner. Progression on the map is not logical nor promotes healthy gameplay : on alpine natural progression from tower to your side south keep to northern towers is progressively harder and riskier. As you move on the map the weaker side gets more and more chances. Likewise when going down. This isn't true for desert, where there's a huge mismatch between strength of keeps and towers and this natural progression doesn't exist. Alpine has treb spots. Bay and hills are cata-able through both walls and garri isn't (altho you can cata the gate after which is pretty slow). Desert? Neither keeps can be cata'd straightforward but somehow garri can. Lordsrooms? Garri lordsroom has easiest lord and by far the easiest lordsroom to control in entire desert bl. Balance? Hahaha just kidding. Alpine has treb spots from south towers to south keeps and north towers to garri to force fights around those areas of the map in a stalemate. Desert has? None of those too. :)

 

On desert this does not exist at all. Everything is mismatched with defense and upgrading being heavily, heavily buffed. The ONLY thing about desert where it's "easier" for offenders hilariously enough is garri lordsroom. If you manage to get in, it's by far the easiest thing in the game. Funnily enough it's easier to control than fire and air keep lordsrooms. But who cares about progression or difficulty of upgrading or balance right? ;)

 

What does it lead to? Frequent stalemates that can't be broken. . One side has garri and tower defended. The other side has fire keep defended. You can fight over tower as you would in alpine, but once it flips you're locked in a stalemate with nothing but a T0 tower to flip between you. Neither side can touch eachothers keep or has any leverage to bait eachother out, nor the space or locations to give the enemy side a "favored" fight.

 

>

> > Yeah I'm sure the feedback was "not justified". I'm sure they didn't ignore 99% of the complaints between the several beta's the map went through to release something into the game which should frankly NEVER have been there.

>

> They took a lot of the stupid things of the map out (random barriers that you have to damage first for example). Sorry I don't think "getting lost" is a valid complaint, or "It's too big". A lot of the complaints at that time were that along with "It's not the alpines so it is awful"

>

> > Frankly anyone stating desert is better than alpine doesn't understand how good alpine's layout is for equalizing action in an uneven environment... And how terribly desert fails at doing this.

>

> And that isn't important to every player of WvW. I'm not even saying I speak for everyone (obviously) but different players seek different experiences from the same game mode. And I never said we would take the alpines away permanently, so people would have their alpine bl fun sometimes and folks like myself would have the desert bl fun.

 

You don't even understand what I'm talking about. No offence but... Keep in mind that if you force EVERYONE to play desert, all those players which generally avoid playing on desert will be forced to quit or play there. And either way, that negatively affects you just as much as it does them. No matter how you like to play.

 

>

> > The lag from the event alone is honestly unacceptable. If at that point ANY anet devs were actually playing WvW somewhat regularly, they'd have noticed and fixed this much sooner.

>

> It's gone, so who cares?

 

So are the guilds "yeah but other guilds replace them!!" ok name me 5 new EU guilds that are replacing them? Oh wait I can't.

The commanders are gone boys! New commanders will come to ... JUST KIDDING.

 

>

> > The main issue with the map was far from "it's too big". It looks nice, but other than that it's much much worse for healthy gameplay, especially group play, than alpine maps.

>

> I don't see how, I've run in big groups and small groups, and have not personally seen a problem with the desert bl's. I will chalk this up to higher tier servers, but in t4 this has been a non-issue.

 

Because you don't see an issue = there cannot be an issue? Again, you look at the map from a casual point of view where you run around, ignore almost all balancing and gameplay aspects and say "look it works". You don't even adress issues I tell you that are there. "I don't fall through the map so its fine". No shit you don't, you don't take defended T3 garries either. But I do, and again I do. You can't just go "oh hey these aren't existing issues because I don't encounter them / don't know about them".

 

If I close my eyes I don't become invisible and i definitely don't stop existing.

 

 

>

> > They should remove desert BL from a balance point of view. Having desert bl rather than alpine is a huge difference. Even if they keep it, it should not change in amount of bls weekly. The map might be "more interesting" for your style of play, but many many many dedicated WvWers disagree. And from their point of view, they most definitely have legitimate concerns - many of which are and will never be adressed.

>

> Oh boy, remove the only interesting map from from WvW, that's what we need *rolls eyes*. I know a lot of WvW'ers that agree that rotation is the best option for folks who do like the map over the alpines. I have found I prefer the desert bl over the alpines because there is more interesting ways to engage with attacking objectives, defending objectives and just overall design. The alpines are generic and honestly a good first attempt at map making for the game mode, but the DBL's are in their current state imo superior to the alpines. But to each their own I suppose.

>

 

Oh boy. I get it, you like desert. I find it hilarious that you say you enjoy how the objectives are engaging in attacking / defending and overall design. How often do you flip defended T3's on desert? "yeah but you gotta make them not get to T3" while upgrading to T3 takes... 1 hour with just northcamp? Less if it's already upgraded? :trollface:

 

If I go on alpine and want to lure enemies / flip stuff / progress the map, you start with bay or hills or even south tower depending on strength, and go further as you please.

If I go on DESERT, here's where you should go if you have a stronger group than the group on desert (which you do by default, almost every group that plays on desert is PPT-oriented) you go straight to garri. There is no other progression and fire keep / air keep are NOT easier. Towers are irrelevant and don't help you other than bullying the last server. They're not there for progressing towards garri. So your first step is going... actually straight to garri as long as you can get inside. And if it flips? You get everything else for free 9/10 times.

 

 

This was posted here during the beta's. Almost none of these were fixed on release. There are still ways to jump into several objectives on desert bl. Just because "you" don't know about them doesn't mean they do not exist.

 

Desert BL is a complete failure, it consistently has less player interaction looking at KDA yet a higher PPT contribution through tick across almost all MU's in both EU and NA. It's not balanced, it does not promote healthy gameplay or interaction at any level other than pure defending and avoiding enemies,at which it is great. I know that most players that just play the game don't think about map movements, capping and defending, how to find situations where both sides have an "even" fight despite having mismatched group strength, and so forth. But alpine was created with these things in mind, and for veteran players who think about these things that's very very clear. Desert was NOT designed with this in mind, and as a result fails miserably at this. You will see that if you have 2 even groups on a desert map, they will only flip things if they avoid eachother. Defense is on so much steroids even on objectives which should be "simple" that it almost always produces a stalemate; made even worse by the insane upgrading speeds.

[Karnasis.6892]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

Lol, I've taken lots of keeps that are t3 on the desert bl's, including t3 garris. Not ONCE have I seen anyone EVER fall through a gate, wall, or whatever phantom object you feel would cause you to fall through the map. Bad luck for you I guess.

 

Then those WvW guilds must not have had the fortitude or patience to stick it out then, because if they can't handle a map that isn't the alpines, flawed or not, I say good riddance.

 

The map HAS improved by a large degree compared to when it launched. IT DOES have some flaws however. I know about people being able to get in air without knocking down walls and such, but the amount of times I see it abused are like .1% of the time. Yes it should be 0% but what can you do

 

The people that would be FORCED to play the Desert BL's might actually learn and enjoy the map. It's a VERY good map compared to the alpines. And if everyone had one it would be balanced as everyone would have the same potential upgrade times. Balanced, problem solved. If people couldn't handle the desert being around for a week (or two) then sucks for them if they quit. Doesn't affect me at all (whatever you think I could care less about t1 "top wvw" guilds)

 

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Karnasis.6892" said:

> > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> Lol, I've taken lots of keeps that are t3 on the desert bl's, including t3 garris. Not ONCE have I seen anyone EVER fall through a gate, wall, or whatever phantom object you feel would cause you to fall through the map. Bad luck for you I guess.

>

 

"it doesnt happen to me so it doesn't exist." I'll post you screenshots later. Again; why am I even discussing how a map is objectively bad with players who clearly don't even know the map they're defending.

 

> Then those WvW guilds must not have had the fortitude or patience to stick it out then, because if they can't handle a map that isn't the alpines, flawed or not, I say good riddance.

 

"Damn guys why didn't you continue playing if the entire map, every single map, got 200-500 ping every 2 hours and it wasn't fixed for more than 2 months. You should have just kept raiding daily". Yeah how dare they. Good riddance indeed!

Perfect attitude for a healthy wvw you got there. If people disagree, dislike my favorite content to the point of leaving they should leave and I'll be happy for it!

 

> The map HAS improved by a large degree compared to when it launched. IT DOES have some flaws however. I know about people being able to get in air without knocking down walls and such, but the amount of times I see it abused are like .1% of the time. Yes it should be 0% but what can you do

 

People not knowing the map =/= map being good. You not knowing about things =/= those things not happening.

 

>

> The people that would be FORCED to play the Desert BL's might actually learn and enjoy the map. It's a VERY good map compared to the alpines. And if everyone had one it would be balanced as everyone would have the same potential upgrade times. Balanced, problem solved. If people couldn't handle the desert being around for a week (or two) then sucks for them if they quit. Doesn't affect me at all (whatever you think I could care less about t1 "top wvw" guilds)

 

"If people couldn't handle the desert being arond for a week or two". Yeah sorry we were forced to play there what.... 6 months? What did it do to the population? Right - strongly diminished.

Even now when players have a CHOICE of which map they'd prefer to play, we notice considerably more activity on ALPINE maps.

Half the map needs to be reworked from the ground up to form a balanced more strategic map than alpine. You still clearly do not see why progression across a map with increasing difficulty for both sides is healthy for the gamemode, but that's OK. You also clearly don't care about ANYONE that doesn't agree with your style of play.

 

"a week or two"... 6 months + of which 2+ months were unplayably laggy AND half the structures on the map couuld literally be jumped / walked into...

 

Yeah lets selectively just not care about any real issues and pretend it's great because it's great for meeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

 

I agree. Everyone for themselves. Spread that elitism!

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Karnasis.6892" said:

> > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> Lol, I've taken lots of keeps that are t3 on the desert bl's, including t3 garris. Not ONCE have I seen anyone EVER fall through a gate, wall, or whatever phantom object you feel would cause you to fall through the map. Bad luck for you I guess.

>

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/wTWZZft

 

Here's some screenshots of me and othesr falling through the map on desert bl at different occasions. I'm sure it's my godawful luck that makes it so that you've never seen this, and not just you not being very knowledgable about the map you're so fervourously defending.

 

>The people that would be FORCED to play the Desert BL's might actually learn and enjoy the map. It's a VERY good map compared to the alpines. And if everyone had one it would be balanced as everyone would have the same potential upgrade times. Balanced, problem solved

 

I'm sure if I played the map MORE, I'd encoutner LESS bugs and suddenly ENJOY AND RESPECT THE MAP for how amazing it is. That was your argument no? :trollface:

[coro.3176]

I know I'm in the minority of WvW players, but I think Desert is the better map:

 

* objectives are larger, so allow for bigger fights inside them

* there's more space between objectives, so opponents can't run back into the nearest tower or keep when the fight goes badly

* the terrain is more varied and interesting - lots of hills, stairs, rock features, etc. The newer part of Alpine (central ruins) is also great in this regard, but the map doesn't encourage fights there

* both east/west desert keeps have safe treb spots from the south that force defenders to come out and fight the attackers or lose the outer wall. Alpine has no safe treb spots from the south on its keeps and Alpine East in particular is a MASSIVE pain to take without a huge blob because the defenders can turtle inside with defensive siege.

[Karnasis.6892]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

 

> https://imgur.com/a/wTWZZft

 

> Here's some screenshots of me and othesr falling through the map on desert bl at different occasions. I'm sure it's my godawful luck that makes it so that you've never seen this, and not just you not being very knowledgable about the map you're so fervourously defending.

 

> >The people that would be FORCED to play the Desert BL's might actually learn and enjoy the map. It's a VERY good map compared to the alpines. And if everyone had one it would be balanced as everyone would have the same potential upgrade times. Balanced, problem solved

 

> I'm sure if I played the map MORE, I'd encoutner LESS bugs and suddenly ENJOY AND RESPECT THE MAP for how amazing it is. That was your argument no? :trollface:

 

Lol, sucks to be you but I have NEVER seen or heard of anyone falling through the map prior to now, so yes, YOU HAD BAD LUCK lol.

 

Maybe you would know what to avoid on the dbl's that "caused" you to fall through them if you played them more. I almost exclusively play the dbl in multiple group sizes and not once over the entire existence of the dbl's had anyone complain that they fell through the ground (and have never experienced that myself for that matter, which given the amount of time I spend on the map I would have had happen at least once). But yeah keep hating the best BL in the game because it's not the alpines.

 

They left the game mode because people kept getting lost. I was on during that time playing the game mode and had people whining in map chat they couldn't find their way around the map so they got frustrated and left. That was in part due to the god awful (and removed) barriers that barred access to the map. But by then the damage was done. On higher servers yes the event lagged people out, sucks it happened every two hours. But it's not like the lag lasted forever and if they couldn't handle a little lag from time to time, then good riddance to them I suppose.

 

If your unhappy with something, you have two choices. You can stop doing whatever it is and move on (which the "big" wvw guilds did) or you can persevere, adapt and move on. Maybe things change, maybe they don't. If those WvW guilds never came back, then they didn't really care that much did they. They didn't bother to go "Oh man I hear they did some updates to those awful maps, let's see how it got better... and if they are I'll let some old guildies know!". Instead they dropped playing the game permanently (or found other game modes) and never went back. The whole point of the 2 alpines and 1 dbl was to compromise, but it didn't bring those big guilds back.

 

We "compromised" and it didn't give us a net increase. So I say we just compromise again and rotate the dbl's. It's not like I'm asking for the alpines to be removed, I'd just rather everyone be on an even playing field along with not wasting the resources already put into two distinctly different maps. The DBL's aren't wasted either currently, but you want balance. That's how you balance. You make all the maps the same. Rotation just encourages variety.