Jeydra.4386

This change definitely had an impact, it's just that the impact was not big. It means that if you want to hold the ring, you have a smaller area to kite. But holding the ring is something that you can only do for a short amount of time, so it only matters if you're currently outnumbered but there's a friendly zerg coming. Which doesn't happen often. Hence impact was not big.

I'm not a fan either. One of the major problems of the format is when the other team has a large population advantage. If they have 40 vs 10 you are going to lose the keep anyway regardless of what you do, but with 40 vs 30 you have realistic chances of defending. Which gets harder after the nerfs to defense. I think WvW needs more defense, not less. However, having played with the changes for a while, I don't think they actually have much of an impact. In fact I don't think they've been decisive in any fights I've been in yet. The closest was one fight where an enemy server came to our T2 EBG keep and knocked down the gates. They were organized, we weren't. After a long fight we forced them out. Then they came back and this time flipped the keep. However, since they were barely downing, it doesn't feel like the changes had much impact (unless the extra power would've made a difference, which I doubt). If they were dying and their respawns still kept coming in because we didn't have the supply to patch the gates to 50%, then yeah, but that wasn't happening. So ultimately, I don't think the changes had much impact, but the motivation behind the changes is disturbing. PS: Maybe the biggest impact is a positive one - it's nice to be able to farm nodes while capping the circle.

See screenshot It seems impossible for my Artisan of Arms: Elementalist's Pistol to have more kills than Pistol Master. Bug?

Really miss the old Arcane Wave. I used it a lot too in WvW. New one doesn't seem useful in most formats, it might have some use in a PvP format but the cast time is too slow.

Then this is derailing OP's thread, so I won't be responding further either.

"Something to play for" would be by far the most effective way to stimulate my participation, but I remember the WvW seasons from many years ago when there was something real to play for, which led to people playing like crazy. At one point my server was queued on all four maps 24/7. ANet said afterwards that it led to a permanent decrease in player population, so we're unlikely to see this happen again. Without something to play for I doubt there's much/anything that will make me play more. I already play a lot of WvW, and it's enough.

You might be in the wrong thread. High level ZvZ or GvG is not a factor, because OP specified "Me and about 10 other people are up against 45-60 people".

The original word wasn't "safe". It was "safer". You are safer in a large group than a small one. Doesn't mean you are safe, but you are safer. So, your best bet is to run from them? What happened to "don't hit them head on, lure, flank, hit tail feathers" etc. as you wrote originally then? It honestly feels like you're arguing for the sake of arguing, so I'm done.

Are you seriously suggesting uplevels are safer in a small group? This makes me think you've never tried fighting 10v40. Have you? Would be nice if you can post a before-and-after screenshot of a time when you have 10 players and they have 40, and you somehow kill them.

Completely disagree. If you're new, start with large-scale stuff. After all, if you have 40 people and they have 30, you have a LOT more leeway to make mistakes. Comparatively if you are 1v1, you are toast against anyone who isn't new as well. #1 priority is to get appropriate stats (I imagine most people start with their PvE gear, and therefore are fully glass).

I think the biggest one is overpowering population advantage. This one takes precedence over everything else, because the game mode is simply not fun if you have 40 vs. their 10, or vice versa (if you have 10 vs. their 40). Some amount of imbalance is part of the WvW experience, but not to the point where the inferior side might as well log off and do something else. I still think dynamic balancing (where the number of players you can have is dependent on the number of enemy players playing) is the way to go. Otherwise: Celestial seems to be overpowered and dominates every other stat. Permanent boons should also be removed. Stealth needs to be nuked out of WvW small-scale. Same goes for extremely-high mobility builds. These are way too abusable at griefing opponents. Bans or suspensions for tactics trolls. Same for anyone who jumps/hacks into objectives. Make it an announcement so everyone knows it's coming. I'm also looking forward to alliances.

Certainly feels to me like part of the issue is too much boon application. Similar to how cc's got their damage reduced (so you use the skill for cc), it seems sensible to me to increase the cooldown of the boon skills such that you can boon up, but only for so long, and near-100% uptime does not happen.

If you're 10v40, the best thing to do is go play another game mode. If you insist on playing WvW, then don't bother defending, go roam instead. No, at 10v40 odds it's pointless to play. At 30v40, sure you can give it a go.

I don't mean to say you can't come up with something, you surely can, but rather that it will not be ideal no matter what you do (i.e. some people will complain regardless).

There is a pragmatic reason for the relic change. Currently there are several achievements tied to unlocking relics (e.g.: Relics - Secrets of the Obscure 1). If legendaries provided immediate access to all relic effects past and present and future, how would these achievements work? Do you instantly unlock all of them? That would also break new ground, since it trivializes the effort that some might already have invested into those achievements. Which doesn't mean that the new legendary relics are justified. If you ask me, ANet made the bed, now they have to lie in it. But reasonable people might disagree with me.