Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

A vision of WvWFollow

#1 Nov 24 2010 at 2:18 PM Rating: Decent
The following is a three part view on what WvW should be like in GW2. The first two parts can be done individually, but then in the third part I mesh them together to make a very deep and complex game.

Fun and sleepless night should ensue.

Potion Spots
Potions or whatever they turn into are going to be a long term resource in GW2. So for PvP, why not make it so that you can only use a PvP version of a potion instead of "normal" ones. The caveat them would be that you can only have one at a time and you can only get them from areas that are capturable.

In other words, for PvP energy would be a strategic resource that the sides would have to focus on controlling in order to push ahead. So if a fort is the main thing to conquer to gain territory than a fort would have and/or be near a potion drop point. With potion drops being made an important focus in pvp, that would give sides a clear goal on what to focus on for attack and defense.

To make things really interesting, maybe the quality of the potions from one drop could be effected by how many allied points you have. So the more point drop points you have linked up, the better off you are. This would make holding the line important. If you can split a drop point off from several of it's allies, you've weakened it. If you isolate it completely, you can then probably take it.

You can also have link lines if you want to add some sort of choke point effect. So if there's a key pass, bridge, or fort that has one of these drop points and it's the only route you can take to further advance, you've got to siege that point and hope you can dislodge the people there in order to move on.


Go: How GW2 would benefit from it
GO is a simple game that has a lot of strategy.

It works like this, you've got pieces and spaces. Your piece can be used to surround a space in order to gain you points, or to capture enemy pieces if you can surround them on all sides for points as well. However putting down a piece means that you don't get any points for the spot it is put on.

So how would this work in WvWvW?

You would have resource points that are all linked up. They don't have to be square and if you want, they can each have a different value (can be randomized before the WvWvW starts) for a different set of tactics for a new week.

Now you can do two things to these resource points. You can build bases on them (which is like putting down a piece). Or you can leave them empty. If you build bases around empty resource points so one or a group of them are completely surrounded, those resource points will start contributing a value, world points (WP), for your side. But once you build a base, your side can't remove it. You can also try to surround another side's bases. If you completely surround them, you capture them (for WP) and they revert back empty points and start contributing WP that way as well.

Basically for WvWvW to be fun, it really needs depth of tactics and strategy. And making it like a game like go would definitely help make it interesting. Also winning wouldn't only be about winning fights alone but to have the best strategy as well. So each side, in order to win, would have to have players who can be good generals online directing the actions of their side in order to produce the most WP which are what's needed for real victory.

And here's why this kind of suggestion is needed for WvW, it need you to have multiple strategies to be a good game. By forcing you to decide whether you want to build up defenses or to leave alone for points makes you have to think and plan ahead. You have to be able to have a risk vs reward decision to make and then go for it. However your world's ability for PvP would also influence your decision as well as your two opponents.

If you are too aggressive, you could lose big. If you aren't aggressive enough you won't be able to win.

Putting it all together: The vision of WvW
I have just made two posts regarding WvW that can be implemented individually, they are potion spots and WvW go. However if you put them together you would have a very interesting and dynamic situation for the WvW player and making it an interesting and rewarding place to PvP.

Why is this?

Well the answer to that is simple. The funnest and deepest games to play are inherently simple but have multiple strategies for victory as well as a risk vs reward decision to make. Putting these two things together would achieve that in GW2.

Take two separate systems each with its own importance. You have potion spots which keep your army going and you have a go like capture system needed to win WvW. Now if both of these are randomized prior to the beginning of WvW and if you have several maps as well, you have a dynamic battlefield.

In other words, WvW would make you analyze the map and then try to decide how you are going to win based on the placement of potion spots that you need to keep fighting and resource spots that you need to win. You'd have to strike a balance between keeping your army supplied with energy as it is the long term resource needed to keep going and the need to build up your territory in the correct manner to get and defend the area you need to gain the points you need to win.

You'd basically have to have people stepping up to the role of the generals of the server who have to set up a strategy as well as people being the sergeants who train the troops to be good pvpers and make sure the strategy is carried out. So you'd basically have to have the server working together if it really wants to win. The winning worlds would be ones that pick the best plans, carry them out, and win the fights, the losing ones would be the ones that don't.
#2 Nov 24 2010 at 3:54 PM Rating: Excellent
44 posts
I definitely like the idea of potions as a resource. That makes a lot of sense, as they wont win you a game, but they will give you an edge in a drawn out fight.

Regarding the GO style point capturing mechanic, I worry that it might be too complex for large scale random PvP. As a general type figure it would probably feel like herding cats, trying to get people to follow orders.

Perhaps if WvW mad you enter with teams of four, and a team of 4 would be enough to capture/take over a point. That would certainly help, and I always liked the micro-team play part of AB. Having 40 individual players would be a whole lot more chaotic than 10 teams of 4.
#3 Nov 24 2010 at 4:53 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
Unless a bunch of guilds decided to coordinate with one another, but that would take away the casual draw of WvW...
#4 Nov 24 2010 at 6:26 PM Rating: Decent
Well, EVE is implementing fleet mechanics which will allow you to coordinate up to 250 people (5 groups of 50, each group of 50 has 5 wings of 10 or something like that). I think their aim is to be able to get 1200 ships into a battle without lag.

So if you have the right army mechanics, it can be done. For example, you can have an army of 125, 5 divisions of 25, each division has a full 5 person party. If the rewards are there, the right mechanics are in place, and anet doesn't ***** things up so it isn't fun, you could definitely have something like this.

So if you can have one world with a coordinated army (hot joinable?) and two worlds with a bunch of groups that are mostly chaotic and doing random things, the coordinated ones should win out. However if they disband for the night and one of the other worlds gets its act together, tides could shift.

You know when I hear world vs world, I think of massive battles, group tactics, long term strategy, and resource management. Keep it simple, keep it easy to get involved for the casual player, give it depth for those seeking challenge and complexity, and you've got a form of PvP that's fun for all.

Going with the 125 number, let's say you know about 20% of the server is your hard core pvpers and everyone else is casual. Put those 25 in a division whose main goal is to either capture or defend key points and then try to direct your 100 casual players in a way that helps out and lets them have fun/relax.
#5 Nov 24 2010 at 7:58 PM Rating: Decent
36 posts
That sounds interesting (both the EvE thing and your idea), and I'm sure you can easilly find a good portion of casual players to get involved in the army tactics too. I'd like to see something that! :)
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 20 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (20)