[Random Thought] WvW Needs Losers!

[Psycoprophet.8107]

Guys would u stop typing soo darn small, just hold on now till I get my glasses. There we go now where did all the posts go?i didn’t even touch the darn screen and why’s there so many buttons.ugh I give up stupid cellular thingy :(

[DaFishBob.6518]

> @"Jeknar.6184" said:

> I think WvW actually need winners... Because I feel we're all losers for playing the most negleted game mode instead of doing something else...

 

You're right that WvW needs winners too, but that really goes hand in hand with needing losers else it turns into nothing more than a k-train I think it's called of people avoiding people and running over NPC guarded objectives unless Anet actually does something with this game mode.

 

> @"Biff.5312" said:

> I'm completely baffled by what point is being made here.

>

> I think most players are more concerned with personal goals that they can achieve in wvw than in whether their side wins, but yeah obviously in any contest where one side wins, the others lose. And?

 

If you will allow me to clarify, I'm not referring to sides winning the match up, that's something too nebulous and lacking impact for most players to care about. I'm referring to any encounter between enemies in this game mode that results in a defeat. There is no personal goal that aims at being defeated but there are personal goals that involve defeating others, would you agree with that?

 

> @"Clownmug.8357" said:

> The only winning move is not to play.

 

For some, that is true, which is what I'm getting at.

[subversiontwo.7501]

Well, it goes with saying as everything else ...

 

We can't have winners without losers.

 

We can't have winners and losers before there is balanced design to determine them properly and make people give a hoot.

 

The problem with the current system is that it is imbalanced to the point that no one cares (that's why we have the fight- and PPT divide), so no one who creates content cares about winning and as such content is not produced to whatever potential volume and end.

 

It's the perennial problems: guild content to make people create guilds to produce new commanders and population/scoring balance to make those commanders care about more than their guild. It is the two major things this mode needs yet never seems to get. It's weird to me that no one gets it.

[Onlysaneman.9612]

If your aim is a greater penalty for death, I doubt you'll see much of an improvement. All it would likely accomplish is fewer new people (however few there might be already) being willing to give WvW a shot and sticking around long enough to learn, fewer solo roamers, and maybe fewer people being willing to accept/form up with pugs in squad. One of the few upshots of being in an outnumbered (buff or no buff) matchup is that at least there's no penalty for getting jumped by twice your number, so you're free to keep trying with whatever it is your goal is (good fights? just doing dailies? whatever) even if you run into a bad matchup. Take that away and you encourage people to quit any time their server is in a rough situation, which is no fun for them OR opponents who probably still want someone to fight.

[Optimator.3589]

Wait, you mean I can't get a kill without somebody getting a death?! o_0

 

 

[Spartacus.3192]

> @"Clownmug.8357" said:

> The only winning move is not to play.

 

Are you quoting what i think you're quoting? If so ......nice!!

 

If not...well it made me think of the movie Wargames (1983)

[Clownmug.8357]

> @"Spartacus.3192" said:

> > @"Clownmug.8357" said:

> > The only winning move is not to play.

>

> Are you quoting what i think you're quoting? If so ......nice!!

>

> If not...well it made me think of the movie Wargames (1983)

 

Yeah, that was the intent.

[Biff.5312]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

 

> > I think most players are more concerned with personal goals that they can achieve in wvw than in whether their side wins, but yeah obviously in any contest where one side wins, the others lose. And?

>

> If you will allow me to clarify, I'm not referring to sides winning the match up, that's something too nebulous and lacking impact for most players to care about. I'm referring to any encounter between enemies in this game mode that results in a defeat. There is no personal goal that aims at being defeated but there are personal goals that involve defeating others, would you agree with that?

 

Sure, but I'm still lost as to what your point is. In an actual skirmish, one side will lose. But... so what? It's a competitive platform. I don't see any point here.

[DaFishBob.6518]

> @"Biff.5312" said:

> > @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

>

> > > I think most players are more concerned with personal goals that they can achieve in wvw than in whether their side wins, but yeah obviously in any contest where one side wins, the others lose. And?

> >

> > If you will allow me to clarify, I'm not referring to sides winning the match up, that's something too nebulous and lacking impact for most players to care about. I'm referring to any encounter between enemies in this game mode that results in a defeat. There is no personal goal that aims at being defeated but there are personal goals that involve defeating others, would you agree with that?

>

> Sure, but I'm still lost as to what your point is. In an actual skirmish, one side will lose. But... so what? It's a competitive platform. I don't see any point here.

 

Well the point I'm trying to make is that the ones who feel like all they do is get defeated by other players in WvW (the losers) have a choice to simply not play WvW or do everything possible to minimize encounters with enemy players in order to get what they wanted done. I figure that's lost potential for the game mode and wanted to see if anyone else thinks so too. It makes me think that if the losing or defeated experience could be improved, it might be an improvement to the game mode by retaining these losing players.

 

I'm getting the sense from this thread that consolation prizes after being defeated won't be a big hit, but what about just being able to pick up the loot that's assigned to you while you're lying down defeated? It's already set aside for you specifically so it won't really affect anyone else. I'm sure there are other things that could improve the experience.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> > @"Biff.5312" said:

> > > @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> >

> > > > I think most players are more concerned with personal goals that they can achieve in wvw than in whether their side wins, but yeah obviously in any contest where one side wins, the others lose. And?

> > >

> > > If you will allow me to clarify, I'm not referring to sides winning the match up, that's something too nebulous and lacking impact for most players to care about. I'm referring to any encounter between enemies in this game mode that results in a defeat. There is no personal goal that aims at being defeated but there are personal goals that involve defeating others, would you agree with that?

> >

> > Sure, but I'm still lost as to what your point is. In an actual skirmish, one side will lose. But... so what? It's a competitive platform. I don't see any point here.

>

> Well the point I'm trying to make is that the ones who feel like all they do is get defeated by other players in WvW (the losers) have a choice to simply not play WvW or do everything possible to minimize encounters with enemy players in order to get what they wanted done. I figure that's lost potential for the game mode and wanted to see if anyone else thinks so too. It makes me think that if the losing or defeated experience could be improved, it might be an improvement to the game mode by retaining these losing players.

>

> I'm getting the sense from this thread that consolation prizes after being defeated won't be a big hit, but what about just being able to pick up the loot that's assigned to you while you're lying down defeated? It's already set aside for you specifically so it won't really affect anyone else. I'm sure there are other things that could improve the experience.

 

Well, if you look at WvW and try to think about the most efficient strategies you can do for winning (ppt), the game mode gets really cynical and cold.

 

The Most Efficient Tactic Available is almost always to demoralize the enemy so much that they leave:

 

* Zerg them down over and over

* Destroy them in duels (latest 1 shot build)

* Run down solo/duo players with gank squads

* In the past: Zerg bust their 40-50 with 15-20

 

 

Make them realize that resistance is completely futile. That's when you guarantee the win for that night/week, You literally chase the opposition out of the game mode.

 

And the moment you/your team is in that position of being basically farmed, and you don't know how to roam/havoc, your best bet is usually to just leave the game mode, so you don't feed the enemy kill points and bags.

 

---

 

The actual rewards is honestly not that bad, as long as you can keep up participation you get rewards, same as everyone else. Which means as long as you can get in a few kills, even wiping to a stronger zerg gives you rewards.

 

I mean, if you look at this from another perspective, just change so Dying gives participation, and watch the hordes of players run into the grind to their death, for the easiest grinding the game will ever have!

 

---

 

The problem with this entire topic, is how the heck do you encourage players to lose and like it ? Most human beings will agree that losing isn't fun, we're genetically wired so we like wining and hate losing, it triggers these weird emotions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction in our brains (See, every bandwagon and server stacking in WvW's history).

 

There isn't really any way to change that.

 

There are some few players that actually enjoys the challenge of going against insurmountable odds to get better, but those usually stick with other games than MMO's (Fighting games, FPS, RTS, and more PVP directed games in general I'd say).

[DaFishBob.6518]

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> > @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

>

> Well, if you look at WvW and try to think about the most efficient strategies you can do for winning (ppt), the game mode gets really cynical and cold.

>

> The Most Efficient Tactic Available is almost always to demoralize the enemy so much that they leave:

>

> * Zerg them down over and over

> * Destroy them in duels (latest 1 shot build)

> * Run down solo/duo players with gank squads

> * In the past: Zerg bust their 40-50 with 15-20

>

>

> Make them realize that resistance is completely futile. That's when you guarantee the win for that night/week, You literally chase the opposition out of the game mode.

>

> And the moment you/your team is in that position of being basically farmed, and you don't know how to roam/havoc, your best bet is usually to just leave the game mode, so you don't feed the enemy kill points and bags.

>

> ---

>

> The actual rewards is honestly not that bad, as long as you can keep up participation you get rewards, same as everyone else. Which means as long as you can get in a few kills, even wiping to a stronger zerg gives you rewards.

>

> I mean, if you look at this from another perspective, just change so Dying gives participation, and watch the hordes of players run into the grind to their death, for the easiest grinding the game will ever have!

>

> ---

>

> The problem with this entire topic, is how the heck do you encourage players to lose and like it ? Most human beings will agree that losing isn't fun, we're genetically wired so we like wining and hate losing, it triggers these weird emotions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction in our brains (See, every bandwagon and server stacking in WvW's history).

>

> There isn't really any way to change that.

>

> There are some few players that actually enjoys the challenge of going against insurmountable odds to get better, but those usually stick with other games than MMO's (Fighting games, FPS, RTS, and more PVP directed games in general I'd say).

 

I get what you're saying here. Winning WvW is easiest when there's no resistance left. Of course winning that way is kind of self destructive since if they successfully wipe out the resistance, the game is essentially over until the next match up. I don't really feel like looking more into that side of things at the moment so I'll end this particular train of thought.

 

How to encourage players to lose and like it? Well I think an even stronger desire in humans is their desire to grow and progress. I feel like some cheesy motivational speaker saying this but winning feels like a more obvious indicator of growth or at least getting something right. Losing usually feels like a wasted effort at best in my opinion. What would be better is making a loss feel more like another opportunity presenting itself, and that it was not a wasted effort.

 

With that in mind, how's this for an idea: being defeated in combat with another player gives a small amount of participation, enough to provide a respite from the decay of participation that takes place over time. While defeated, you can turn into an invisible, invulnerable wisp similar to Southsun Survival. You can then wander around and just watch the rest of the battle if it was a larger battle going on, pick up the loot that is assigned to you if others are fighting in your place, or just take a breather until you respawn.

[Whiteout.1975]

So I'm really just curious (asking anybody)... **What exactly do we actually Lose in WvW and also... Win?** The Fight I'd assume firstly lol, but what else?...

I'm looking for things that have some sense of matter. Things that have some actual weight to them. Things that we actually _care_ about Winning or Losing as it Currently Stands.

 

**Transfers... The P2W Claim**

I ask this question because in the past I wanna say I've seen a couple forum post talking about Transfers. And specifically discussing whether or Not they are Pay to Win. Which seemed to lean heavily on No, that they were not P2W. At least because it wasn't seen as a form of winning that matters for many... I can agree on as well. When I win a match, I don't feel like I really accomplished much. Rather just on into the next fight we go. Like a Hamster on a Wheel.

 

So basically we can call each other Winners or Losers or however it comes about to us really, respectfully. But without the **care** behind the word "Winner" or the word "Loser". Each word, loses it's significance/overall Impact. Without "the care" that would otherwise give these words more value. So being called a Winner or Loser doesn't matter if there isn't a reason to care about it. So what reasons are there?

 

Also, for higher consideration. Here is some Wisdom from the Simpson's. When everybody is treated like a Winner and no one is made to feel like a Loser...

[KeyOrion.9506]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> So I had a random thought about WvW. WvW needs people to log in on allied and enemy sides to really reach its full game mode potential. The reason is because allied and enemy forces are supposed to fight each other at times and these fights sometimes go to the death. That means one side will end up winning the battle and the other will end up losing the battle, a group of winners and a group of losers. And to the winners go the spoils: participation level, wxp, loot bags, and maybe a reason to celebrate. To the losers: fill in the blank because I don't know, I doubt the benefits of losing an encounter are all that well known or common. I know that the losers should really take the loss as a reason to get better, but they also have a choice to just not play WvW to its full game mode potential (or at all!). I just wonder if this ever occurred to anyone else as well? To people who complain of lack of fights or activity, or an abundance of people using mobility builds, or gank squads and blobs chasing solo people and small groups. No one really WANTS to lose but someone HAS to lose when someone else wins so these behaviors people complain about just naturally occur.

>

> I just think WvW isn't going to be as fun as it could be when everyone has every reason to not lose at the forefront of their mind because the fact is, someone has to lose, or no one wins. It'd be like a show that can not go on because no one wants to play the character everyone loves to hate. Or the keep lord loading way beneath the map so that the keep cannot be captured. Or a side dominates the entire match to the point there's literally nothing to capture. Apparently that has happened before.

 

I'm not here to feed bags, when I know that i'm either outclassed or outgunned. I learned a long time ago to know when to hold them, know when to fold them. Know when to walk away, and know when to run. Now if you don't get the Kenny Rogers song The Gambler, then clearly your playing the wrong game.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> > @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> > > @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> >

> > Well, if you look at WvW and try to think about the most efficient strategies you can do for winning (ppt), the game mode gets really cynical and cold.

> >

> > The Most Efficient Tactic Available is almost always to demoralize the enemy so much that they leave:

> >

> > * Zerg them down over and over

> > * Destroy them in duels (latest 1 shot build)

> > * Run down solo/duo players with gank squads

> > * In the past: Zerg bust their 40-50 with 15-20

> >

> >

> > Make them realize that resistance is completely futile. That's when you guarantee the win for that night/week, You literally chase the opposition out of the game mode.

> >

> > And the moment you/your team is in that position of being basically farmed, and you don't know how to roam/havoc, your best bet is usually to just leave the game mode, so you don't feed the enemy kill points and bags.

> >

> > ---

> >

> > The actual rewards is honestly not that bad, as long as you can keep up participation you get rewards, same as everyone else. Which means as long as you can get in a few kills, even wiping to a stronger zerg gives you rewards.

> >

> > I mean, if you look at this from another perspective, just change so Dying gives participation, and watch the hordes of players run into the grind to their death, for the easiest grinding the game will ever have!

> >

> > ---

> >

> > The problem with this entire topic, is how the heck do you encourage players to lose and like it ? Most human beings will agree that losing isn't fun, we're genetically wired so we like wining and hate losing, it triggers these weird emotions of satisfaction or dissatisfaction in our brains (See, every bandwagon and server stacking in WvW's history).

> >

> > There isn't really any way to change that.

> >

> > There are some few players that actually enjoys the challenge of going against insurmountable odds to get better, but those usually stick with other games than MMO's (Fighting games, FPS, RTS, and more PVP directed games in general I'd say).

>

> I get what you're saying here. Winning WvW is easiest when there's no resistance left. Of course winning that way is kind of self destructive since if they successfully wipe out the resistance, the game is essentially over until the next match up. I don't really feel like looking more into that side of things at the moment so I'll end this particular train of thought.

 

This is also what people that lose have to consider constantly, because there will always be someone on the other side thinking like this, in order to "win". It's something you have to deal with in WvW, the only way to ignore it is to leave the moment you lose. And thus we have the "fair-weather" players, which one of the largest (if not the largest) problem with balance in the game.

 

> How to encourage players to lose and like it? Well I think an even stronger desire in humans is their desire to grow and progress. I feel like some cheesy motivational speaker saying this but winning feels like a more obvious indicator of growth or at least getting something right. Losing usually feels like a wasted effort at best in my opinion. What would be better is making a loss feel more like another opportunity presenting itself, and that it was not a wasted effort.

 

The feeling of "success" and "growth/progress" is often/usually linked. Which again could explain why "failure" is so frustrating for many. Now one of the primary motivations between most cRPG/MMO players is the feeling that you progress and improve (levels, gear, build, accomplishments/achievements), and to do that succeed. It gives a more straight forward feeling of progress and success than real-life, and many finds this enticing. Which is also why so many cRPG/MMO players tend to react so negatively to PVP and other ways to sabotage that feeling.

 

So it is completely natural for people to get frustrated/angry for losing in WvW, and leave and go do something to make them feel good/success by going into PvE instead.

 

> With that in mind, how's this for an idea: being defeated in combat with another player gives a small amount of participation, enough to provide a respite from the decay of participation that takes place over time. While defeated, you can turn into an invisible, invulnerable wisp similar to Southsun Survival. You can then wander around and just watch the rest of the battle if it was a larger battle going on, pick up the loot that is assigned to you if others are fighting in your place, or just take a breather until you respawn.

 

Regarding the "Participation on dying to other player", I think that in itself could be a good way to soften the "oh no it's another player!" feeling that a lot of players (here to farm reward tracks) feel. On the flip side, I can just imagine players using it to make "Gift of Battle Grinds" where they meet up say between red keep and SMC, and just run out and attack each others with no armor, to keep participation up (like the old UD farm in OS). (Funny how most players stop complaining about dying the moment they gets rewards for it!)

 

Regarding "The Wisp", well for one, with autoloot enabled that isn't a problem, just respawn as fast as possible and you get it anyways. But more than that, I don't think encouraging people to basically "die and sit and watch" is the best idea, you want them to feel engaged and get right back up and get back into the fray. Don't really see any good reason for this one.

 

---

 

Unfortunately a lot of these are problems with the WvW format, especially the 24/7 system and the completely random team compositions/population/coverage/skill etc. So difficult to deal with.

 

It also depends a lot on what ANet specifically "wants" the game mode to be. If they want to focus more on the Competitive/PvP aspect, then all of these things are basically going to get worse. And all the hardcore players are going to end up complaining that there isn't enough people to fight against.

 

A better idea then (for this demographic) would be to make the entire game-mode slightly more casual. Mainly by giving handicaps of various sorts. Give the losers advantages that can help them fight back, essentially "hope", as corny as that sounds.

 

Handicaps can come in many different ways, some examples, some could be mixed and matched:

 

* Outnumbered gives a stat boost (most obvious and most boring)

* Each side have X total npc guards divided on all captured structures. Own everything and you got 1-2 guards in each camp/keep, pushed back to only garrison you can have 100+ guards and 10+ lords in the capture ring.

* Bring back Siegerazer when outnumbered, and upgrade him/bring buddies.

* NPC factions (skritt, centaur, ebg ones) mass large groups and assault leading team, split their focus.

* Outnumbered gives you more supply, build/repair more/faster, let you rally.

 

Ah well, that's what I can come up with right now, gotta run for work.

 

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

The key is to encourage people to continue to play and get better. The way WVW is set up kind of does this already, but there should be more flavorful rewards the better you get at WVW. These rewards should mostly be cosmetic, but we can also spice things up with new mechanics.

 

1) being a good commander with a high level KDR, successful Objective capture and Defense ratio, and maybe a few other factors will grant you progress towards a unique commander tag with stable color and shape.

 

2) rewards for scouting, that will further help you able to scout...so for example, gaining access to a telescope or binoculars to help resolve distances further, or planting personal sentries to detect movement. Only trick is to figure a way to detect helpful scouting over worthless scouting, but none the less, figure something out

 

3) specific Omni buffs that only highly expierenced WVW players can use...like tactics for objectives but instead for a player. As you rank up or obtain specific titles and achievements, you gain access to very special skills that will help you assault or defend objectives. These skills are mostly to counteract the heaviest of siege bunkering or to defend yourself against the harshest of Zerg attacks. think of it like an EMP. A 5k radius of light that shuts down siege for 20 seconds and reduces existing siege damage output. Or a 5k radial rally that revives players and gives them a significant boost to stats and buffs, and a 5k radial screech that disables enemy skills for 20 seconds and applies negative stats and buffs. Only one of the three skills can be used and the cooldown is one every WVW matchup week. So basically, you want to strive to be the hero that can rally your forces to secure a victory or save yourself from absolute defeat and give your allies hope...

 

Well you get the idea.

[Swamurabi.7890]

By design, every WvW match has 1 winner and 2 losers.

 

Short history of WvW.

 

1. If you don't make losing fun your losing players will leave, or transfer to a winner.

2. Once the losing players leave the winners won't have fun and will also leave, allowing more losers to transfer to winners.

3. Combining winners and losers into smaller number of linked servers still leaves 1 winner and 2 losers.

4. Go back to step 1.

 

WvW is designed to fail if you don't have fun while losing.

 

[Chaba.5410]

All the losers just transferred to the winning server. Now what?

[DaFishBob.6518]

> @"Whiteout.1975" said:

> So I'm really just curious (asking anybody)... **What exactly do we actually Lose in WvW and also... Win?** The Fight I'd assume firstly lol, but what else?...

> I'm looking for things that have some sense of matter. Things that have some actual weight to them. Things that we actually _care_ about Winning or Losing as it Currently Stands.

All right, I can answer this quickly. People from opposing teams meet and fight. People win by defeating opponents. People lose by getting defeated by opponents. Winners earn loot, wxp, participation for their efforts. Losers earn nothing for their efforts. Both sides cared enough to put in time and effort and most people want something for their time and effort.

 

> @"joneirikb.7506" said:

> > @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> >

> > I get what you're saying here. Winning WvW is easiest when there's no resistance left. Of course winning that way is kind of self destructive since if they successfully wipe out the resistance, the game is essentially over until the next match up. I don't really feel like looking more into that side of things at the moment so I'll end this particular train of thought.

>

> This is also what people that lose have to consider constantly, because there will always be someone on the other side thinking like this, in order to "win". It's something you have to deal with in WvW, the only way to ignore it is to leave the moment you lose. And thus we have the "fair-weather" players, which one of the largest (if not the largest) problem with balance in the game.

>

> > How to encourage players to lose and like it? Well I think an even stronger desire in humans is their desire to grow and progress. I feel like some cheesy motivational speaker saying this but winning feels like a more obvious indicator of growth or at least getting something right. Losing usually feels like a wasted effort at best in my opinion. What would be better is making a loss feel more like another opportunity presenting itself, and that it was not a wasted effort.

>

> The feeling of "success" and "growth/progress" is often/usually linked. Which again could explain why "failure" is so frustrating for many. Now one of the primary motivations between most cRPG/MMO players is the feeling that you progress and improve (levels, gear, build, accomplishments/achievements), and to do that succeed. It gives a more straight forward feeling of progress and success than real-life, and many finds this enticing. Which is also why so many cRPG/MMO players tend to react so negatively to PVP and other ways to sabotage that feeling.

>

> So it is completely natural for people to get frustrated/angry for losing in WvW, and leave and go do something to make them feel good/success by going into PvE instead.

>

> > With that in mind, how's this for an idea: being defeated in combat with another player gives a small amount of participation, enough to provide a respite from the decay of participation that takes place over time. While defeated, you can turn into an invisible, invulnerable wisp similar to Southsun Survival. You can then wander around and just watch the rest of the battle if it was a larger battle going on, pick up the loot that is assigned to you if others are fighting in your place, or just take a breather until you respawn.

>

> Regarding the "Participation on dying to other player", I think that in itself could be a good way to soften the "oh no it's another player!" feeling that a lot of players (here to farm reward tracks) feel. On the flip side, I can just imagine players using it to make "Gift of Battle Grinds" where they meet up say between red keep and SMC, and just run out and attack each others with no armor, to keep participation up (like the old UD farm in OS). (Funny how most players stop complaining about dying the moment they gets rewards for it!)

>

> Regarding "The Wisp", well for one, with autoloot enabled that isn't a problem, just respawn as fast as possible and you get it anyways. But more than that, I don't think encouraging people to basically "die and sit and watch" is the best idea, you want them to feel engaged and get right back up and get back into the fray. Don't really see any good reason for this one.

>

> ---

>

> Unfortunately a lot of these are problems with the WvW format, especially the 24/7 system and the completely random team compositions/population/coverage/skill etc. So difficult to deal with.

>

> It also depends a lot on what ANet specifically "wants" the game mode to be. If they want to focus more on the Competitive/PvP aspect, then all of these things are basically going to get worse. And all the hardcore players are going to end up complaining that there isn't enough people to fight against.

>

> A better idea then (for this demographic) would be to make the entire game-mode slightly more casual. Mainly by giving handicaps of various sorts. Give the losers advantages that can help them fight back, essentially "hope", as corny as that sounds.

>

> Handicaps can come in many different ways, some examples, some could be mixed and matched:

>

> * Outnumbered gives a stat boost (most obvious and most boring)

> * Each side have X total npc guards divided on all captured structures. Own everything and you got 1-2 guards in each camp/keep, pushed back to only garrison you can have 100+ guards and 10+ lords in the capture ring.

> * Bring back Siegerazer when outnumbered, and upgrade him/bring buddies.

> * NPC factions (skritt, centaur, ebg ones) mass large groups and assault leading team, split their focus.

> * Outnumbered gives you more supply, build/repair more/faster, let you rally.

>

> Ah well, that's what I can come up with right now, gotta run for work.

>

This is certainly some good feedback here. A couple things though:

 

I'm quite certain that autoloot stops working upon defeat as I've seen loot bags pop up while I'm defeated even though I have autoloot leveled. If that is actually not the case then I can agree that the pick up loot as a wisp won't at all be needed. The wisp thing is also just an idea to make the defeated state a bit more interactive than just a greyed out screen over your dead body, and offer something that is not offered in the other game modes. I mean I intended the wisp form to be optional and the defeated can still respawn as normal with a waypoint or waiting for a ress. But I think your point is that it doesn't seem to serve a function which is understandable.

 

The "hope" via handicaps (or what I would consider "rubber band mechanics") has always been an interesting idea to me but at the same time it's something I would personally stand clear of suggesting out loud due to being a balance decision that may prove to be more annoying than fun for people to play around. I think these ideas would be if other measures not affecting balance prove to be ineffective. Though looking at your ideas so far, a lot of them deal with making the NPCs more prominent which could be a useful shift in this mode altogether, greater emphasis on this being sort of hybrid between PvE and sPvP.

 

> @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said:

> The key is to encourage people to continue to play and get better. The way WVW is set up kind of does this already, but there should be more flavorful rewards the better you get at WVW. These rewards should mostly be cosmetic, but we can also spice things up with new mechanics.

>

> 1) being a good commander with a high level KDR, successful Objective capture and Defense ratio, and maybe a few other factors will grant you progress towards a unique commander tag with stable color and shape.

>

> 2) rewards for scouting, that will further help you able to scout...so for example, gaining access to a telescope or binoculars to help resolve distances further, or planting personal sentries to detect movement. Only trick is to figure a way to detect helpful scouting over worthless scouting, but none the less, figure something out

>

> 3) specific Omni buffs that only highly expierenced WVW players can use...like tactics for objectives but instead for a player. As you rank up or obtain specific titles and achievements, you gain access to very special skills that will help you assault or defend objectives. These skills are mostly to counteract the heaviest of siege bunkering or to defend yourself against the harshest of Zerg attacks. think of it like an EMP. A 5k radius of light that shuts down siege for 20 seconds and reduces existing siege damage output. Or a 5k radial rally that revives players and gives them a significant boost to stats and buffs, and a 5k radial screech that disables enemy skills for 20 seconds and applies negative stats and buffs. Only one of the three skills can be used and the cooldown is one every WVW matchup week. So basically, you want to strive to be the hero that can rally your forces to secure a victory or save yourself from absolute defeat and give your allies hope...

>

> Well you get the idea.

My main take away from this is that there needs to be more progression allowed for all people in this game mode, which will make for some good motivation to keep playing.

 

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> By design, every WvW match has 1 winner and 2 losers.

>

> Short history of WvW.

>

> 1. If you don't make losing fun your losing players will leave, or transfer to a winner.

> 2. Once the losing players leave the winners won't have fun and will also leave, allowing more losers to transfer to winners.

> 3. Combining winners and losers into smaller number of linked servers still leaves 1 winner and 2 losers.

> 4. Go back to step 1.

>

> WvW is designed to fail if you don't have fun while losing.

>

That is an excellent summary of the problem with WvW I wanted to discuss in this thread.

[Whiteout.1975]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> > @"Whiteout.1975" said:

> > So I'm really just curious (asking anybody)... **What exactly do we actually Lose in WvW and also... Win?** The Fight I'd assume firstly lol, but what else?...

> > I'm looking for things that have some sense of matter. Things that have some actual weight to them. Things that we actually _care_ about Winning or Losing as it Currently Stands.

> All right, I can answer this quickly. People from opposing teams meet and fight. People win by defeating opponents. People lose by getting defeated by opponents. Winners earn loot, wxp, participation for their efforts. Losers earn nothing for their efforts. Both sides cared enough to put in time and effort and most people want something for their time and effort.

 

Oh okay, thanks for the reply. So in the context of the outcome of any given battle... Winners get the things you listed. Though, in the context of the outcome of a match between Servers... What does ether Winner or Loser get then?

Because that's the concern here too (@"DaFishBob.6518" said: Or a side dominates the entire match to the point there's literally nothing to capture.)

 

So for example: I could be on a losing Server, but still have had experience winning fight's. And still get the rewards of a Winner. Despite the ultimate outcome as being the Losing Server.

 

I'm still asking because I see them as different form's of Winning and Losing. Kinda like how they say... "You may have Won the battle, but you didn't Win the War". (Even though the Wars never end, but you get what I mean lol). You have the somewhat constant (in the moment) battles, that you can win or lose. Then you have the ultimate irreversible outcome (of Winning or Losing a Match) when all those battles are said and done.

 

Aside from that, I think part of it is because the more physical rewards amount to money mostly. And a Loser can just end up doing PvE and end up making especially more money from it. With generally far less stress as well.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"DaFishBob.6518" said:

> This is certainly some good feedback here. A couple things though:

>

> I'm quite certain that autoloot stops working upon defeat as I've seen loot bags pop up while I'm defeated even though I have autoloot leveled. If that is actually not the case then I can agree that the pick up loot as a wisp won't at all be needed. The wisp thing is also just an idea to make the defeated state a bit more interactive than just a greyed out screen over your dead body, and offer something that is not offered in the other game modes. I mean I intended the wisp form to be optional and the defeated can still respawn as normal with a waypoint or waiting for a ress. But I think your point is that it doesn't seem to serve a function which is understandable.

>

> The "hope" via handicaps (or what I would consider "rubber band mechanics") has always been an interesting idea to me but at the same time it's something I would personally stand clear of suggesting out loud due to being a balance decision that may prove to be more annoying than fun for people to play around. I think these ideas would be if other measures not affecting balance prove to be ineffective. Though looking at your ideas so far, a lot of them deal with making the NPCs more prominent which could be a useful shift in this mode altogether, greater emphasis on this being sort of hybrid between PvE and sPvP.

 

It's been a while since I tested this, but iirc Autoloot stops working the moment you get downed/dead, and starts working the moment you respawn, which will let you get any further bags that spawns from then on. So unless you think your team is going to win it fast, repspawn as fast as possible, to have the least down-time. Someone else can probably correct me on this.

 

---

 

Regarding Handicaps, in a game-mode with WvW's "restrictions" to balance around: (24h/7d, random player attendance/coverage, random skill level, random play length/hours, random player organization/coordination, random motivation, etc), I'm honestly amazed they haven't added some kind of handicap system. Leaving this kind of system entirely up to PvP would always end up imbalanced, as we've seen through every single year of WvW.

 

So the reason I've suggested things related mostly to NPC's is simply because it is something outside of the reach/control of players. And something that can be made to function "reliably" (as opposed to players in general). But the overall theme of my suggestions is basically "upkeep", the more you get, the more you have to look after, and the harder it gets to hold it. (Thus also making it easier for the outnumbered faction to capture things back, and cause some disruption.)

 

Another suggestion I've seen on the forum in the past that would work excellent with the mentality of upkeep, was to change Yak's paths. The idea was to spawn 2 Yak's from your spawn, that then walked and brought supplies to all your structures in a set pattern. If enemy disrupted this, you wouldn't get supplies for the rest of the map. Example Alpine SW spawn, Yak1: SWT, SWC, Bay, NWC, NWT, NC, NET, NEC, Hills, SEC, SET, SC, and return to spawn. Yak 2 the opposite direction. Capturing SWT would stop that team from getting any Yak's/supply to the rest of the map.

 

---

 

On the other hand, any kind of balance worked around the PvP section, is very unlikely to keep fair-weathers around, as such I don't really consider it an option. (Even then I'm for fixing up balance, and remove most of the power-creep, so people have actual time to see what they did wrong and how to improve, instead of 1shot boom! back to spawn)

 

Also I don't see rewards as a good option for increasing long term participation, only short term. If someone doesn't enjoy WvW, but wants the rewards, they're going to find the fastest/least painful way to grind it out and leave. Adding more rewards of any type, is just going to increase the amount of "painful gameplay" for those that already dislike the mode.

 

Thus why I find appealing to the PvE aspect of WvW to be the most logical approach.

 

Take another approach, try to list the reasons why players leave, and see what could counteract that.

 

---

 

I shouldn't write posts when tired, I rant too much.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> By design, every WvW match has 1 winner and 2 losers.

Except that really depends on whether you've hit a tier wall or not. Many matchups has 2 winners and 1 looser that can look forward to getting steamrolled the next week.

 

 

[Gop.8713]

I win a lot and I lose a lot and there really isn't much difference between the two, on any level. I think OP's contention is an imagined problem . . .