Adding More Waypoints to WvW - How To Potentially Increase Player Attention

[enkidu.5937]

I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

 

Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Twyn.7320" said:

> So perhaps the solution is to make people choose between the Scout Balloon and the WP? Add some tactical incentive behind it, so that people can't just have everything at once?

... sort of like having waypoints for keeps but not balloons, balloons for towers but not waypoints? Hmm.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Twyn.7320" said:

> > So perhaps the solution is to make people choose between the Scout Balloon and the WP? Add some tactical incentive behind it, so that people can't just have everything at once?

> ... sort of like having waypoints for keeps but not balloons, balloons for towers but not waypoints? Hmm.

 

Heh.. I see what you did there. :smile:

[Twyn.7320]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Twyn.7320" said:

> > So perhaps the solution is to make people choose between the Scout Balloon and the WP? Add some tactical incentive behind it, so that people can't just have everything at once?

> ... sort of like having waypoints for keeps but not balloons, balloons for towers but not waypoints? Hmm.

 

That's not remotely what I've suggested. As in, for Towers and Keeps, you get the choice between having a Balloon there or a WP. So, you can either have lots of vision, or lots of waypoint potential, or a blend of the two.

[Twyn.7320]

Overall, from this discussion alone as it's gone in so many different angles, I get the impression that WvW only needs reasonable balance and people will be fine with it? Is there a need for ANet to make additional features for WvW, or is it just the balance that needs fixing? I think that's the point to establish, generally.

[joneirikb.7506]

What I take from this idea is:

 

* Running back sucks.

* I want a tanglible way to see that what I've done matters.

* Alternatively: Capturing/Holding should feel important, not numbers.

 

---

 

Running:

 

One side of the coin is that it isn't fun to run back from say Citadel to Bay because someone tapped Garrison as well. But on the other hand the placements of waypoints also serve to create attrition.

 

If we're fighting over Bay and attacker got a WP in SWT, while the defenders has a WP in NWT, that siege will likely not come to an end any time soon. Now I know some would like that, but it kind of wrecks havoc on actually trying to win, and not just wanting a pvp-meat-grinder (which I know some would like). This would have negative impacts for the actual points, and those that wants to play for that.

 

What I guess that you want, is basically a map with instant action, and ignore the strategic aspect of wvw. I think there are merits in that, and personally wish they made more varied maps for WvW, so people could enjoy different play-styles.

 

While reading your post, I was reminded about a map idea someone asked about a while ago, Basically making the map a circle, where keeps and towers blocked/walled off parts, so you had to break through/take one to get to the next area. Basically a 2 front war. With stronger defensive positions the further back you got pushed, until you basically could stand in your spawn area and roll boulders down to auto-break the walls of your home tower. That kind of map would basically create 2 fronts, so you could always just go there to find action.

 

Ironically, I like what EotM did there, auto WP in your home keep. This gives you good mobility to reach a good portion of the map, and if its tapped or taken, you spawn close enough to have attrition in your favor anyways.

 

---

 

Feeling of Progress:

 

I think this is one of the largest problems with WvW as it is, very few people take it very serious because all you do is lose a few points, perhaps lost the week match, yay 1 instead of 3 boxes of random blue+green loot. Most players probably don't feel very engaged by watching PPT numbers.

 

The problem with his is that if you put anything valuable/good/important etc to controlling a point, then you're going to get even more stacking problems than we got now.

 

So they will have to come up with some sort of "advantage" you have while holding specific buildings, that people would want, but doesn't give a combat advantage to the team owning them. That's a very difficult thing to pull off, I honestly have no suggestions for how to pull that off.

 

DaoC was famous for locking one of the best farming dungeons behind winning realm vs realm, imagine the outrage if they did something similar to GW2, and then imagine all the screams, in PVE forums.... for opening BlackGate or whatever other server is perceived as the strongest.

 

---

 

@coro.3176

 

Love the idea!

 

 

[Twyn.7320]

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> If we're fighting over Bay and attacker got a WP in SWT, while the defenders has a WP in NWT, that siege will likely not come to an end any time soon. Now I know some would like that, but it kind of wrecks havoc on actually trying to win, and not just wanting a pvp-meat-grinder (which I know some would like). This would have negative impacts for the actual points, and those that wants to play for that.

>

> What I guess that you want, is basically a map with instant action, and ignore the strategic aspect of wvw. I think there are merits in that, and personally wish they made more varied maps for WvW, so people could enjoy different play-styles.

 

I feel bad for only highlighting this bit because the wider post could solve a few issues! So basically, this is a valid, teething issue. Essentially, the only fixes for this are to make the 'time-to-capture' shorter on points OR make it so you can only WP once you've respawned fully. So you still have to die and go through that 10s punishment of not being able to take part.

 

As for what I personally want, I want a map that allows me to hop around and benefit from things, due to the work of others on my team and vice versa. There needs to be more variety in the strategy of WvW because overall, there isn't much strategy involved in WvW at the moment. You run to a Tower, upgrade to get a Scout Balloon. Read the map, engage in team-fights and hope that you can capture more objectives than others to 'keep a number ticking over'. I think the best way to put this is: I want a map that gives instant engagement, rather than instant action.

 

If I log in and I see that a Tower near our base has been stealth-capped which denies a WP that could be tactically used to help in an assault, I could gather a group of people up to retake it and feel like I'm helping the 'war effort'.

 

Another example is if two Towers/Keeps with waypoints are being attacked, Commanders will have to decide which ones they're going to try and save, thinking about wider strategies. You could split the numbers in half, but run into a full zerg of 50 people and get ruined because you chose to have a Waypoint instead of a Scout Balloon. You could make your own 50-person zerg and try to counter one of the two locations, but another one falls to 10 people who are roaming about and allows another team to capture two camps without you being able to intervene.

 

If anything, the two examples inspire more strategy and team-play, purely from an injection of variety. Commanders have to work together to place Scout Balloons in the right locations and Waypoints in the right locations, depending on how the other teams are playing. This inspires more communication within teams (voice or text) because if a guild sticks a Waypoint at a terrible place, it could really hurt a team.

 

If the idea needs a limitation to stop people from swapping between the Scout Balloon and Waypoints at will, to keep Camps active, the swap between a Waypoint and a Balloon could have a high supply cost. If suddenly, you feel like a Guild is hampering your chances at winning as a Team, you could be able to 'buy out' their ownership with supplies to prevent trolls and toxicity.

 

[aspirine.6852]

More waypoints and even mounts in wvw would suck balls.

[Twyn.7320]

> @"aspirine.6852" said:

> More waypoints and even mounts in wvw would suck balls.

 

If Waypoints were added with no adjustments to other areas, it wouldn't work. So, unfortunately, we don't have a working model of WvW to assess that would benefit by adding more Waypoints. For instance, if they just added Waypoints tomorrow, and nothing else was done to fit them in, it'd be a really unpopular move. But as part of a wider move to inject more strategy and tactics in WvW, such as increasing the progression time of upgrading Towers and Keeps so that you don't unlock Waypoints or Scout Balloons in the early game, I believe that it'd be highly beneficial and would add more depth to WvW. And overall, if a Tower/Keep is captured, the upgrades are removed and it starts again, and the same when the round ends. At the start of a new round, there wouldn't be any Waypoints. They'd likely only start coming into play at around the halfway mark, maybe even 75% of the way through a round of WvW. I'm not saying that it should be instant access and just by capturing a Tower, you unlock a Waypoint. I'm saying that there needs to be progression on top of capturing a Keep/Tower that unlocks Waypoints and Scout Balloons and makes players choose between the two for variety and tactics. To me, that's a strategic move, and benefits WvW.

[joneirikb.7506]

Short reply (because I'm tired):

 

* I think part of what you want could be achieved with simple changes to the upgrade system, like having 1 optional upgrade for towers/keeps, with a list of different ones that where mutually exclusive. And I'm going to point out that that could be very interesting if it came at the cost of T3 fortifications. Either get Waypoint OR T3 fortifications on that keep.

* Irrelevant of map etc, there still doesn't feel like any point to most structures (other than points).

* I think it would be better to replicate most of what you're asking for with just designing a new map based around it. (closer/smaller, shorter time to reach activity etc) But obviously that is not going to happen.

 

[Kylden Ar.3724]

> @"enkidu.5937" said:

> I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

>

> Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

 

You know what, that would be actually kinda fun. I'm down.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:

> > @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

> >

> > Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

>

> You know what, that would be actually kinda fun. I'm down.

 

Just put the ‘cattlepault’ there. It’s already in PvE

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:

> > > @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > > I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

> > >

> > > Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

> >

> > You know what, that would be actually kinda fun. I'm down.

>

> Just put the ‘cattlepault’ there. It’s already in PvE

 

Cattlepult for life!

 

Question is, would it also let you land inside objectives ? I can just imagine the pain of a mesmer or thief cattlepulted into your keep :p

[Kylden Ar.3724]

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:

> > > > @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > > > I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

> > > >

> > > > Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

> > >

> > > You know what, that would be actually kinda fun. I'm down.

> >

> > Just put the ‘cattlepault’ there. It’s already in PvE

>

> Cattlepult for life!

>

> Question is, would it also let you land inside objectives ? I can just imagine the pain of a mesmer or thief cattlepulted into your keep :p

 

I think we got our next WvW weekend boys!

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"Kylden Ar.3724" said:

> > > > @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > > > I could imagine a huge cannon at the spawn. You can climb into the cannon, and got shot to some random location on the map.

> > > >

> > > > Maybe you'd trop south of the bay, maybe north camp, maybe the ruins, you never know. But you would save the time, to run there by yourself ;)

> > >

> > > You know what, that would be actually kinda fun. I'm down.

> >

> > Just put the ‘cattlepault’ there. It’s already in PvE

>

> Cattlepult for life!

>

> Question is, would it also let you land inside objectives ? I can just imagine the pain of a mesmer or thief cattlepulted into your keep :p

 

No gliding, and it would need to be like a catapaukt shot: so if direction or height is off.... ***splat***