What do you think , if ANET recognize a reward to all the WvW server players that win the matchup

[Duca di Ebonhawke.1045]

I do think that WvW would need a revamp and some new fresh ideas or small implementation could help the game play and increase the motivations. One of the easy way could be for example to recognize a reward at the servers that won the matchup.

[Sovereign.1093]

There can be only one. But to have this, anet must let go of 1 up 1 down and return glicko.

 

1 up 1 down was wrong. I see my errors in supporting it. Come come

[joneirikb.7506]

A reward for winning, would just make players stack servers even more. We saw it clearly during the seasons, and we've seen it often enough with human nature as it is. There is a reason why they went with personal reward when they updated wvw rewards, instead of realm-rewards. Besides you already get extra bonus chests for winning, any more, and people would start aiming for it (aka transfer and try to stack).

[Sovereign.1093]

There can be only one. Let's go.

 

[Hannelore.8153]

Only if all warscores are divided by the average number of active players, so instead of like, 10k, 5k, 3k, you get, 0.9, 1.0, 1.3, Its a bad example but it shows how drastically it'll change when you look at player counts instead of just score.

 

Otherwise this will just rewards stacking even more than the game already rewards stacking.

[Dayra.7405]

If you want a server reward, it should be a real server reward. 1.000.000 for the 1st server, 990.000 for the 2nd server, ...

And each player on a server get equal share of the servers price, the more entered wvw for a server the less each get. A player that changed server get nothing.

[Dayra.7405]

> @"Sovereign.1093" said:

> There can be only one. But to have this, anet must let go of 1 up 1 down and return glicko.

>

> 1 up 1 down was wrong. I see my errors in supporting it. Come come

 

Glicko is broken, since we have linking and skirmish rewards of 5,4,3. Just 90pts between 1st and last in EU, 120 in NA and the random was 0.5*Deviation (100-150) => Much to high random, 1st against 15th is not unlikely.

 

And the Glicko's of servers switching from minor to main are complete nonsense and the Glicko of the new links every 2 month is mostly meaningless as well.

[Dawdler.8521]

Stupid leading poll aimed at glorifying the "correct" choice, as usual. Sprinkle in 3 negative answers just to make the "correct" answer look better in terms of percentage.

 

Rewards for winning opens up a can of worms that should remain closed. All it will cause is even more server stacking.

[Excursion.9752]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> All it will cause is even more server stacking.

I didn't take this into consideration when making my selection and probably should have.

I really wish they would put in place that you can only switch servers once every 12 months. But then how would Anet earn money from WvW?

 

 

[XenesisII.1540]

Motivation to super stack again.

/slow clap

It's like no one bothers with history anymore.

[Diku.2546]

Told you so

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1093088#Comment_1093088

 

History never mattered here, but the fix hasn't changed in the years predicted...imho

 

Joins in slow clap.

/slow clap

 

[Lan Deathrider.5910]

150 gold paid out, an extra 365 skirmish tickets paid out, 10 Grandmaster Mark Shards paid out, and a lovely trophy that stacks and can sit in my inventory (worth 10s a piece).