Talk:World versus World/Archive 2

Bugs section

I'm new to editing so could someone please update the bugs section of this page correctly?

WvW, what a mouthfull!

I know the official term for this is World versus World versus World but it has been shortened to only World versus World and its abbreviation WvW but even as an abbreviation, it's not much better (its actually got more syllables). I also know that Im just being so lazy that I can't be bothered to say a few syllables but I also reckon that Im not the only one. So, in light of how lazy I am, I think im just going to call it WW or World Wars!

Righty, Im poofed! I think I need to go have a lie down, all that typing has done wiped me out. Titan Crow 20:04, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

The official term is world versus world. WvWvW is something the community came up with that just. Won't. Die. World PvP is a little easier to say, or world vee world, or you can just call it Wuv-wuh like ANet do internally. Eerie Moss 20:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Yea, I saw that they were calling it Wuv-wuh, sounds a bit daft if you ask me though lol. Think Im just going to stick with World Wars and hope people can work out what the heck im talking about. : ) Titan Crow 21:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

well going by the fact that it's going to be the guilds that are going to make the WvW go 'round, with keeps and organizing watches, and flooding it when important locations fall, i think calling it the guild wars works pretty good xD ~~ Kiomadoushi 22:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

From a lore perspective calling it the guild wars makes sense. It sounds a lot like the war that was officially ended by the Searing (and in reality just moved to the Mists, aka HA, and the Battle Isles). But for players that would get confusing. Personally I think WvW is easy to type, and World v World is pretty easy to say out loud. Or World Battles. 109.148.131.28 11:50, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I just call it wiggles due to seeing 'wvwvw' typed about. So conversationally: "Wiggles?" 'Yeah, I am so down to wiggle.' "What're you guys doin during the beta?" 'Wigglin' Quiznos 12:16, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

SOLUTION: Dub-vee-dub. 192.168.104.79 05:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Technically, it IS World v World v World, or WvWvW, but due to laziness in typing and saying WvW has become the name. 32.212.104.223 21:53, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Borderlands articles

That Sounds Risky created separate borderlands articles for red, green and blue. I think since they are all exactly the same aside from the location names, they could be one article, with a table of red/green/blue columns to show the different names. Would be a little non-standard, but also useful to indicate where stuff is in relation to the other borderlands. Thoughts? Eerie Moss 22:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Keep/Tower claiming

Thanks to this article + http://www.arena.net/blog/mike-ferguson-on-guild-wars-2-world-vs-world, we know that guilds may claim one (and only one) Keep or Tower after the Keep/Tower Lord has been defeated. But there are 2 things I don't understand:

1- Is there something that prevents a Lord from being defeated by a bunch of random people from 2 different attacking servers? It it happened, which of 2 servers would gain ownership? The one which last-hitted the boss?

2- after a server has gained ownership of a Keep/Tower, which guild will be able to claim it (say 2 or more guilds from the server would like to claim it)? Can a Keep/Tower be claimed by multiple guilds or something?

--The Evanescent 21:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

1- I don't know. My guess would be who ever is the majority in the keep when it's captured

2- Whichever guild has the majority of players inside the keep at the time of capture. That guild then has a few minutes to clam the keep before any other guild can.

--Mr McChew 23:51, 28 March 2012 (UTC) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.116.12.168 (talk).

They do say there will be a capture point that appears after the lord is dead so the 2 factions would have to fight it out to capture the point --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.46.222.141 (talk).

Rewriting

So I've spent the last little while rewriting this page to try and explain more concisely how WvW fits together and here's what I have so far: User:Eerie Moss/sandbox/WvW. Some stuff is incomplete and I've fudged up some references but I thought I'd see what people thought before I put more work into it. If there's no objections I'll finish it up, give it a few more goings-over and move it into place. Eerie Moss 12:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the segment under "enemy players" that stated there was no common chat channel to converse with enemy players as this is not true, "/local" can be heard by anyone in that 'world' irregardless of team, I experienced this literally less than 10 minutes ago in-game, its significant because some players were not using the 'team' chat and could be heard by the enemy when discussing things such as their current bearing, perhaps this is relevant enough to be mentioned for newbies etc? I would do it myself but I'm afraid I'm not a very experienced wikipedian in terms of writing. ~anonymous/a friend and player --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.137.178.157 (talk).

Format For WvW Locations

There are only two areas right now that have any documentation right now, but of course this will likely change post beta weekend.

Any suggestions for a standard format of WvW location page layout? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:LumiaWin (talk).

How to get into WvW

Took me forever to find how, but here it is:

1. Press H and go to the last option and click on "Be in the Mists".
2. There's a tutorial. May be able to skip it, I completed it, it's easy.
3. This brings you to a PvP preparation area. The portal at the west, near the part you warp in around, brings you to WvW.
Khono 08:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Can also to to Lion's arch, where there are 4 Asura gates to go to the relevant battlegrounds. Biscuits 16:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Can also press B and kut the wide button on top of the window and choose area, you get auto ported or queued 93.105.39.211 16:18, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Keep inner walls

The table with perks is wrong: At least some keeps definitely have inner walls. Not sure whether all keeps have them though. --Xeeron 15:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

name of the NPC "camps"

I am talking about the ogres, hyalecs, etc, everything that is marked by the two tiny spear's symbol on the maps. I found no article for them, and only a very glancing mention on this article. Trying to create an article, I stumbled up the problem of naming it: What is the name for all these locations? Is there an ingame name? If not, what is a good descriptive name for them? --Xeeron 14:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I think they are known as mercenary camps. Though I don't think that is a very good name since most of the time you earn their favor by helping them. They then help your side out while your side maintains their good favor. Loki146.6.208.16 19:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

pay to win system

← moved to User talk:151.199.34.243

How does "Repel enemy invaders" work?

At what point invaders are considered "repelled"?

I am not sure whether there are other conditions that work to finish the quest, but the only one I saw was holding the objective for a certain amount of time. --Xeeron 10:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Limit on Siege Weapons per Space?

In my experience you can only have so many of one type of siege layed down over a certain area (indetermined). If you lay more stuff down, the stuff you layed before disappears. (ex: I placed one trebuchet down, built it and then tried to place another down on the other side of the keep-top only to find that the first was instantly gone! Same thing has happened with arrow carts). Was this just by chance or expected, commonly recognized behaviour? If it's not a bug or anything, we should add that information to this page but before that I want to confirm that other people have experienced it 161.130.168.49 01:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Breaking Alliances / Balancing Areas

--67.10.109.128 20:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)I'm not sure how everyone feels about this, but I wanted to start a discussion on how to make WvW fun again for everyone. I've heard that in some battlefields, 2 out of the 3 worlds have worked together in an alliance against the 3rd world. How true that is, I'm not sure. While I can respect the ingenuity of that real world style tactic, I think it has ruined the fun and balance in WvW. Personally I liked it better when one side pushed forward only to be pushed back and there was some semblance of balance. With alliances happening, if you're in that 3rd world, you might as well not play WvW as you have virtually zero chance to survive, which last I checked, isn't fun. I think many players have used this as an excuse to transfer to other 'winning' worlds, if only to be on the winning team, or maybe just in an effort to finish achievements in the zones. I can certainly understand that, but I feel it was better when you had to storm that castle as a team to get to the vista or point of interest, even though you knew that shortly afterwards you would be pushed out of that castle once more. Maybe the game will naturally balance itself out over time and alliances fade. But I ask, what if it doesn't? What can Anet do, if anything, to bring back some of that balance? What about those people that just want to explore the map without having to transfer to the winning world just to do that? I have some ideas on it, good or bad. Many may not agree, and that's fine, I wouldn't expect everyone or anyone to. Now mind you, I will openly admit I don't know everything about WvW nor what efforts may have already been taken to balance it. These are just my thoughts:

Firstly, for those wishing to just explore the map for vistas, jumping puzzles and points of interest. My suggestion is to have a vendor in the beginning portion of each map that sells a soulbound 'white flag' consumable which could either permit the user unhindered travel for a set period of time or even unlimited for the length of time they spend in that instance. I would suggest that that the flag would only permit temporary 'diplomatic immunity' from enemy attack from any world invader, while the player would also not be able to attack. I would however suggest that any animals or other foes within the world would still be able to attack the player and vice versa to permit at least some challenge to the player. The flag could be pricey but not so ungodly that it isn't worth the effort. For instance, if the flag were to be a one time use per battlefield to permit unlimited immunity for the length of time a player remains in the instance, I think the price of 5 gold would be appropriate. Perhaps a lower cost flags may only permit 15, 30 or 60 minutes of immunity. Now I know someone might say that this could be exploited where an entire army could use flags to get into an enemy owned castle, then wait for the effects to wear off so that they could conquer the castle, and I can also see that as a possibility so should the effects wear of in such a manner, the player should immediately be ejected from the enemy castle, whether placed outside the castle directly or just sent back to the starting area. Either way, I think it would handle that exploit, but who knows. The point is, give players a the opportunity to explore areas without having to resort to world swapping. Another exploit would be to use the flag to escape a battle or a death. The flag would not be usable if a player is already engaged or being engaged just like they can't equip or unequip weapons so that exploit would not exist.

As for balancing WvW and breaking alliances, I know that would be much more difficult to do. Perhaps as one world begins to dominate more of the battlefield, the fewer npc support they receive, and more npc support the lesser dominate worlds receive and the more battle usable buffs they receive such as more armor or power? I'm not sure how, or if alliances could be prevented or broken apart, but here's my thought on discouraging it, possibly. When a world owns a control point that is adjacent to an enemy control point (i.e. enemy lands border one another), the longer those control points remain uncontested by either world, the fewer points will be rewarded, or possibly negative points will be awarded to reduce each world's overall score. Again, I admit I'm not yet up to speed on the scoring system so how or whether or not this would work I admit I'm not sure. The point is simply to discourage bordering worlds control points to remain idle and uncontested by any alliance. Alliances might still exist, but to keep the points up they would have to turn their attention to each other from time to time giving that 3rd world an opportunity to perhaps get back in the game. The only other option I could think of at the moment to break alliances is to make the battlefields soley two world conflicts, but I think that's too drastic and would require more retooling than I'm sure Anet would want to do. Not to mention it would ruin the dynamic and what was once interesting and fun 3 world battles. These are just my suggestions, so if anyone has any others I would like to hear them. --67.10.109.128 20:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussions like this need to be on the official forums, not on the wiki. —Dr Ishmael 21:33, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Points

Ok now i know we get points every 15 mins from what we own but what else contributes to the score. I have heard that killing a Yak supply can yield up to 250points depending on how far it has travelled, is this true? And what about points per player killed. Can someone more knowledgeable of such things add these into a table so people can see where the points are.86.150.25.228 15:47, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Orbs of Power

Someone kindly remove this section, as they no longer exist in the game and it appears very unlikely that ANet will ever reintroduce them. 74.77.193.158 11:16, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

The wiki should document the history of the game as well, it's not just a strategy guide. The content just needs to be updated to reflect what has happened. Also, Anet hinted at rebalancing the orbs later so it's entirely possible for them to return. 76.253.0.17 03:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Reset Day?

The page carefully mentions the time of day and that reset happens weekly, but it fails to mention the day of the week. I'm guessing it's 00:00 GMT Monday (ie. Sunday 16:00 PST). Someone that actually knows might want to edit that section. Okuza 11:02, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Done Jurrit 14:10, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

How to get out of WvW

I know you can gate out to Lion's Arch from the starting waypoints, and I know you can just go back to the character selection and go back in to end up where you were before you entered WvW, or simply wait until you get kicked out due to inactivity... but is there a way to simply exit WvW? I mean something similar to the "Leave the Mists" button in PvP that I might've missed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aaamos (talk • contribs).

I think that the options you mentioned to get out of WvW are about all there are. I always logout to character screen and log back in in order to get out. Jurrit

You can also press B and click the little door icon in the lower right corner, at least of the date of this post. 32.212.104.223 21:55, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Ranks

Ranks are as follows:

1-4 Invader

5-9 Assaulter

10-14 Raider

15-19 Recruit

20-29 Scout

30-39 Soldier

40-49 Squire

50-59 Footman

60-69 Knight

70-79 Major

80-89 Colonel

90-99 General

100-109 Veteran

110-119 Champion

120-149 Legend

150+ will repeat these titles with Bronze, Silver, and then Gold. Tops out at 1,920/Gold Legend. MadMaxx 03:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

World Experience is the place to put the rank information. May I ask what your source is? Jurrit 14:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Armor color

Since when does the rank system in the force overwrites my characters color on the armor? or is it just me going crazy?
http://s1208.photobucket.com/user/joemitch1/media/gw020_zps3693df56.jpg.html -in La armor shows up right.
http://s1208.photobucket.com/user/joemitch1/media/gw021_zps74345a9f.jpg.html -A Wvw Border Lands shows up blue.(blue this week)
Settings are maxed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 173.185.11.76 (talk • contribs) at 06:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC).

General Options, User Interface, Team Colors. If set to Everyone it will also change your armor's color to your team color. --zeeZ (talk) 07:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

How many points is a Dolyak worth?

Is there anyone, anywhere, who can show any kind of evidence about how many points you get for killing a Supply Caravan (Dolyak) in WvW? There are at least 3 wildly different theories floating around that would make a Dolyak worth anywhere from 1 point added to the server's WvW score no matter where or how the Yak is killed up to 10-15 points depending on either the number of people who tag the Dolyak or where along the path a Dolyak is when it is killed. The answer to this question is actually important, considering that a Dolyak being worth as much or significantly more than a Tower could be game-breaking. Does anyone have an answer to this question that is more concrete than "I heard that dolyaks are worth X amount of points"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Otokomae (talk • contribs) at 09:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC).

Zero points —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.251.125.248 (talk • contribs) at 9:45, 12 April 2013 (UTC).

From a Tarnist Coast WvW manual: "Taking out enemy Yaks and flipping sentries adds minimum 5 points to the total score. The closer you are to the Yak's destination the more points it supposedly gives." Jurrit

adding the wvw api to this page

I feel that a lot of users would find it use full to add something like this: http://mos.millenium.org/na/matchups to either this page or a sub page that people could easily see. on the wiki this goes back to what was brought up on the community page/ the redit thread. I have 0 experience working with api's and adding said api's to the wiki so someone who knows how to do that please teach me or do it? please?- Zesbeer 22:30, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

WvW guide project

Hi everyone,

I hope I can reach a few wiki editors interested in WvW. See the announcement I made yesterday: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/User:Stephane_Lo_Presti#WvW_guide

Please stop on my talkpage if you're interested, thanks! --Stephane Lo Presti talk 18:48, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Mercenaries skritt and Centaurus

Yandere how about instead of just reverting after I already reverted you add a discussion topic on the talk page? Any how they do effect game play and they should be mentioned regardless flipping them sends either skirtt or centaurs to the northern supply camps. this page is about wvw not just eb and game play mechanics that effect it so everything about wvw should be documented.- Zesbeer 21:27, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

This page is an overview page. Yes we can document every event on every wvw map here, but in my opinion this isn't helpful. The skritt and the centaurus camps are points of interest, the location for a few dynamic events and for skill challenges. They have no unique mechanic attached to them which needs to be explained. Only the quaggen were mentioned on this page before todays update because they used the mercenary camp mechanic which is unique to wvw and with todays update unique to the eternal battlegrounds.

This article is already a bit long. Explaining specific dynamic events only makes it unnesseccary longer. The overgrown grub is also not explained here even though its presens has an influence on certain battles. That is why I reverted without discussion. When I did offened you, I am sorry. - Yandere 21:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

except for the fact that as I already said the northern supply camps are attacked by skritt/centaurs on completion of the dynamic event so it dose effect game play. I am not offended but the general rule for reverting is once then if you disagree with the revert make a note on the talk page, to avoid revert wars.- Zesbeer 22:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah dynamic events usually effect a bunch of things. Contesting waypoints, triggering other events etc. I never said that these dynamic events don't effect game play that would be silly, but they are something a PvE player is already familiar with. - Yandere 22:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

"The skritt and centauers have no game mechanic attached to them they don'T need to be mentioned." my point is they do have a game play mechanic attached to them there are other de's like the grub that don't effect other parts of the game but this directly sends guys and contests the northern supply camps.- Zesbeer 22:25, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah yeah no game mechanic is obiviously wrong. No wvw specific mechanic is more correct. It is just a dynamic event which triggers a few mobs to spawn, there is nothing special about this. - Yandere 22:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

ok you could say the exact same thing about the eb Mercenaries they "just a dynamic event which triggers a few mobs to spawn, there is nothing special about this"- Zesbeer 22:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes that happens on the mercenary camps. A wave of mobs spawn and they will go to the next camp and try to capture it and than reenfore it. If they fail and are killed of a new wave will spawn, but that is not really what makes them special. These camps also have a change in alliance. They become friendly to one faction and hostly to the other two factions. This mechanic is really unique to wvw because PvE obviously lacks the other factions. When you enter wvw this will be the first time you encounter such a mechanic. The skritt and centaurus are always hostile to everybody. That is what you would expirance in an PvE enviroment and are really used to it, at least I am, but the fact that NPCs have diffrent reaction to diffrent faction is unique to capture points. Thinking about it perhaps it would be better to explain the mercenaries right after the sentries and include it into the war score section. - Yandere 08:43, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Queue

Perhaps someone can clarify this. Is the player limit (beyond which a queue is triggered) based on the total number of players in WvW, or only on each map? So, when you try to get into WvW, are you queuing for a particular map, or for WvW in general?

I'm pretty sure it's in general since you can move in between the maps freely once inside WvW. You can still end up queuing if you try waypoint to another map and WvW is full. I think that happens if the individual map is full even if the total player limit isn't.--Relyk ~ talk < 17:56, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

It is per map. Jurrit (talk) 22:03, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

queue is per map and per server. So for every map can have for example 100 players per side. So the map can in total contain a total of 300 players. If the others servers have already 100 players and your server has only 80 players you can still join the map without a queue. You can only queue for 1 map at the time. So usually I first try out all the maps to find a map without a queue, than I'll join that map and queue for the map I really wan't to join so that I can already start playing. Jurrit (talk) 18:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

WvW Map

It ist possible to get a Map that include the ruins an bloodlustbuff? --91.34.82.200 08:44, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Colour Selection

I don't see it anywhere; how is the specific worlds matched up with armour colours? For the past 6 weeks of WvW we has consistently been coloured red; does it ever change? I don't read it anywhere, and my world (Kaineng) rarely strikes far enough into Eternal Battlegrounds for myself to get map completion in enemy keeps... 174.92.48.30 14:07, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

See http://mos.millenium.org/eu/matchups/ Every week matchup is determined. The one who is 3th in rank of the group of three get's the color red. Green for 1st blue for 2nd. Jurrit (talk) 17:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

That's not actually true. As even when getting third place we have yet to be red. In fact it made us green.

He's not talking about what place you finished in last week. He's talking about what position you are in against the other 2 servers this week based on your ratings. —Dr Ishmael 14:12, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Swords on Garri!

Can we add a section on the sword map icons?

What are the specifics for contesting (popping swords) on map locations?

What triggers orange swords to pop?

Seems this is part of the mechanic that I'm not finding in the wiki.

--Moskimus (talk) 22:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

It's similar to Contested, but for WvW. Not much of an expert in the field, but if someone hits the door for enough damage, the swords will pop, which notifies enemies that that point is currently being taken, which is sort of a warning sign. Allies won't be able to waypoint, meaning that their only option is to quickly get to the point before the enemy captures it. --Ventriloquist 23:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

For white swords to appear on an objective, the walls/gates/guard NPCs have to be attacked/aggroed for a certain amount. (You can't damage walls with non-siege so that doesn't do anything - but if the guards engage you in combat, even if you immediately run, that's sometimes enough to cause swords. Hitting a gate with normal attacks will trigger swords, even though it does minimal damage.) There is a delay of maybe 30 seconds or so before swords show up on an objective, and they disappear for a short time after approximately 3 minutes (corresponding with the "defend this objective" event that will show up for the server that owns that objective). It's possible to capture an objective quickly without triggering swords, sometimes. Also, random NPC enemies can trigger white swords, such as skritt or centaur patrols (on the borderlands), or mercenary NPCs (in Eternal Battlegrounds).

Important to note: attacking *siege* (like cannons or mortars) of an objective doesn't trigger white swords. This is why using a ballista is a sneaky and stealthy tactic to disarm an objective before assaulting it.

For orange swords to appear, a certain number of players need to be fighting other players. This can appear anywhere on the map, not necessarily on an objective. I think the approximate number is 30 or so players. This is a total - it can be your 30 man zerg crushing 5 enemies, or two enemy zergs of 15 hitting each other. The key word is approximate; orange swords trigger when the game thinks there's "a lot" of players fighting in one area, but it's not particularly well defined, and orange swords move around as the fighting does. Players fighting purely NPCs does not trigger orange swords, only white swords.

Hope that helps. Vili 点 04:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

so can this info be added please

World vs. World Top Bar Explained

World vs. World Top Bar Explained: http://imgur.com/4tvdUO2 Reyana ATac (talk) 02:06, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Nice image. I believe that while it's on imgur, their ToS is in conflict with our GFDL, and we won't be able to upload it here. G R E E N E R 03:03, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Uploaded to GW2 Wiki instead: File:User Reyana ATac WvWTopBar.png Reyana ATac (talk) 01:58, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Feedback 2015/11/06

The weekly WvW reset should be corrected.--HiddenRage (talk) 03:11, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Feedback 2016/04/08

Insert feedback text here. -I think the weekly reset has changed

Changes to Alpine borderlands which need some wiki editing

They've split the Daemonspell Lake (Green) and Devilheart Lake (Blue) areas up [i.e. they're now historical] into identically named areas based on the shrines.

• Bauer's Estate
• Orchard Overlook
• Carver's Ascent
• Temple of Lost Prayers
• Battle's Hollow

I'm thinking they should have some kind of disambiguation text in the title, like "..._(Green World)".

The maps also got relabelled. Our WvW pages are a bit of a stub-fest tbh. -Chieftain Alex 19:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Let's not forget that:

• All gathering nodes are replaced with Synthesizers (I had managed to cover this for blue in a general case, but haven't figured out which tower/camp/keep has what; however, when I did this it was *before* they added cloth and leather synthesizers)
• NPCs and objects changed - removal of workers, addition of tactivators as well as gates/walls now being fortified sometimes.
• They messed with the hero challenges in a way that all three combat ones are present on all maps (this is a bug, I've managed to cover it).

And probably more I've forgotten. And then Desert BL remain so undocumented that it's just silly. Konig (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2016 (UTC)