Closed servers are demoralising much of the WvW player base.

[zhonnika.1784]

That's for our own personal enjoyment of the game. Nobody wants to fight against them, so why do it? The fights were actually better in t3 last week than even right now in t2. They shouldn't sit around and cry that nobody wants to play with them and maybe MAYBE hold up a mirror to themselves to find the problem.

[DeadlySynz.3471]

The threshold is too low, and realistically, all servers should be open and stay open until they reach the pop cap of BG (and no despite what Anet says, no server is remotely close to it). Of course this will never happen, because even if they did do that, nobody is going to do it as nobody wants to play an opponent that runs from fights and hide in towers/keeps on siege. It's not a fun style to play, and I can't even begin to count how many times commanders have logged off when "said" server continues that style of play. With that said:

 

- No guild is going to move down to empty "linked" servers. There is no point; they are trying to find things to do, and they won't find it, especially when the links keep changing

- Guilds don't have the option to move to many of the T2/T3 servers as is as they're mostly full

 

So Anet's hands are tied... or are they.. well no they aren't, because they can either:

 

- Take every server that's over the threshold, delete them, then force the players to pick servers that aren't at the threshold yet (this is about 5 servers at least)

- Make it Red vs Green vs Blue or (Faction vs Faction vs Faction), because quite frankly, server pride is long gone, thanks to guilds and their itchy transferring fingers

 

Will they do this? Nope, so we're stuck with what we got. If players were smart, they'd keep their CC's in their wallets and stop transferring.. it's useless. Then whoever ends up in T1, the other 2 servers should simply just ignore BG, fight each other, and if BG decides to come out, just WP, rinse & repeat. Basically treat T1 as a 2 server tier.

[Evolute.6239]

T1 is effectively a 2 server tier anyway. One of the servers usually just gives up and flops over dead in order to get out of it, so you're left with BG and whoever played less (ie usually the server with less SEA players lol)

 

[Sovereign.1093]

they should change thei minds because we the players demand it.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Grim West.3194" said:

> > @coglin.1496 said:

> > > @"Grim West.3194" said:

> > > The server imbalance issue has existed since the game launched. ANET has never addressed it and never will. WvW is a joke.

> >

> > Locking servers. Linking servers. Adjusting cost of transfer based on server statice. All steps to minimize or control imbalances. But sure, let's go with dishonesty and claim that never addressed it. I mean, can agree there are issues, but lying about aspects certainly will not resolve the issue or motivate those you are lying about into action.

>

> Since the imbalance is worse now than it has ever been the things you mentioned have been an absolute failure. After 5 years of this BS it's pretty safe to say ANET is completely incompetent when it comes to server balance.

>

> Addressing the issue means getting positive results. THAT HAS NEVER HAPPENED.

 

That's actually not the definition of 'Addressing'

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @zhonnika.1784 said:

> That's for our own personal enjoyment of the game. Nobody wants to fight against them, so why do it? The fights were actually better in t3 last week than even right now in t2. They shouldn't sit around and cry that nobody wants to play with them and maybe MAYBE hold up a mirror to themselves to find the problem.

 

Crying?

 

Let's assume you mean the topic: he isn't 'crying' about the fights. He is crying about the server being locked.

 

Or maybe you mean people in full servers are crying about no fights: where in this thread is that even remotely suggested?

 

[Rei Hino.5961]

> @Djamonja.6453 said:

> YB vs BG will be interesting next reset. YB is a lot bigger than SoS/Mag right now and has a lot better coverage.

 

I think Yak might be trying to tank to get away from BG I dun wana fight BG what good is wvw if BG wins just by showing up and that even if the other servers try. I Dun wana fight BG Ever I use to send a bug report every time we started to play them and a thank you wvw gods bug report when we drop back to t2 or lower BG basically breaks wvw and it been this way for how many years now? If I was on BG I would not be able to take joy in any victory winning is good and all but plowing over 30 people with a 70+ man zerg is basically cheating or a bug as there zerg busting guilds that can take on BG but that is some dedication level that requires payment like a job level and no longer become a fun game..and I have been on the win train with kaineng back when WarMachine(WM) was on our server and we pretty much owned everyone for months it was boring so every time were fighting BG they win and a BG player is like (Laughs) im like seriously....your actually proud or think you can actually play because you have more people. I pretty much disqualify BG form T1 2nd place is first and 3rd place is 2nd and 3rd is Well NA (disclamer...lol I dun blame BG for anything as there is players on there server that been there since the beginning and the hype train but the system of wvw in witch allowed this to happen as even if they are a big blob they have a right to play wvw also)

 

 

[Grim West.3194]

WvW could be fun if it were even close to competitive. But after 5 years of ANET's failures it is absolutely clear that nothing will ever be done to fix the imbalance issues that plague the very core of the game mode's horrible design.

 

ANET doesn't care about WvW, they sold it as a DAoC clone but that was a lie.

 

What ANET really loves are all of the suckers who pay gems to transfer to the server of the week. So much so that they specifically keep servers from being competitive just so they can milk more suckers.

[Phoebe Ascension.8437]

Agree. Desolation today is officially dead, after crawling and crawling for months for survival. The only reason is simpel: both lock from transfers and links for ages while, VERY active server get both (open server and link).

 

I wasn't gonna post, because you know just play it, deal with it, hope for the best. But Anet has now officially way to long ignored the crazy wrong algorythm, that decides that desolation is a super active server (a la blackgate) wich it totally isn't anymore. We got a few veterans (who play much less then past mind you) and we just lost third last (but best) commander. Even the other two commanders play less, quit faster, play much more 'pff enemy stronger lets just sit it out' way.

Deso had a vabbi link, and then it shut down.

Evaluation of algorythm to calculate server population:

 

First weeks (with Vabbi): Good, we lost some, won some (generally won just the match up. We might have been a tiny bit to strong then, but tbh the server in our matchups were close matches (wich would not be case without vabbi). Evaluation: Population correct or slightly underestimated.

 

Weeks after vabbi (about a month): Correct estimation. We started loosing, and going to tier two often, but hey matchups were good, and there were no blowouts against us. This is more then i could dream for now.

 

Another month after: We started a drop, and loosing people. First weeks really bad blowout losses, then in tier 4-5 matchups got more balanced. You could look at it two sides: first weeks glicko estimated us to high, or server wrongfully estimated us high pop. That being said, being mid of the pack means link chance + open up chance should increase! I can live without either, but then all servers above us must have same treatment, this was not the case by far.

 

3 months after: Free fall. All german servers (including the weak kodash, and abadon's mouth+link) raped us generally, unless we had a morality increase. Talk was big of leaving server/gw2, quitting for good, the wrong estimation of Anet alghorytm.

 

We hanged on for nother 1-2 months. We still lost people (mostly people not loggin in anymore, rather then bandwagon). We still had just by a tiny stretch enough people, commanders to keep deso alive, but it was by a hair, and at the bottom of the barrel for certain.

 

The end (aka now). The biggest guild left (most other ppl are just loners who join commanders, a big problem of desolation not estimated by algotyrhm). Everywhere outmanned. We loosting by bigger then double the point versus 2nd in rank, points. Still locked from both transfer and a link.

 

Conclusion: Anets algorythm is way off. Without saying wich servers they are (basically almost every server above us tbh), many server with for already 6 months better then us 'situation' still got links and open ups while we kept bieng pushed down.

 

Responsibility? Arenanet, and their algotyrm. 100% certain. Also the ignorance that Na (wichh has much more link flexibility since all servers within same pool) will be as good as EU with same setup. Eu with 3 locked (4 with baruch bay as loner) pools locked, it makes linking very hard. Some manual override HAS to happen. Desolation was such example. But alas Anet. Some people say 'wxp' earned factors in world population. Are you serious? Desolation has many pve lovers (high achievement etc). Lots of them have candy corn gobbler for very high wxp income (same for birthday booster). If this is what sets up apart from other servers omg... what a fail. ONly BASE WXP counts, not the boosted levels. And we never have queue's. I asked several other friends on other servers how much queue they have, it's high! even for non locked servers. Your calculation suck Anet. Period. Fix asap, or kill wvw (in EU). Your choice.

[Cerby.1069]

Tl:DR; I can't play on a server that has the ability to win. Plz fix.

 

 

I cant either, so plEASE FIX!

[Chaba.5410]

Guilds leave and then the server is left Full with it's large amount of unorganized pug players that fill up playhour totals. Sounds about right. I saw the comparison to Blackgate, but that server's advantage is they've always been good at organizing pugs. I'll repeat: WvW needs to be organized around guilds like the battlegroup idea would have done otherwise WvW is going to turn into a pug wasteland.

[Reaper Alim.4176]

> @"Grim West.3194" said:

> WvW could be fun if it were even close to competitive. But after 5 years of ANET's failures it is absolutely clear that nothing will ever be done to fix the imbalance issues that plague the very core of the game mode's horrible design.

>

> ANET doesn't care about WvW, they sold it as a DAoC clone but that was a lie.

>

> What ANET really loves are all of the suckers who pay gems to transfer to the server of the week. So much so that they specifically keep servers from being competitive just so they can milk more suckers.

 

I mean anyone who has played more than one or two different RvR MMOs. Can come to the same logical and rational explanation.

 

This recently happened in ESO. Guess what ZOS did with in 2 months time. They completely shut down the servers that are just used to farm lower pop players. Even NC Soft did this when BnS had it's huge decline in population.

 

ANet could obviously do the same here. But as others have concluded ANet loves to gain easy money from purposely setting up lopsided FoTM servers. With the links as their tool of choice. The only proof one would need is here http://mos.millenium.org/na that has been the entirety of the story since links.

 

You guys are just getting farmed by ANet. Thus expect no positive population change in WvW. As long as server transfer is how ANet monetize WvW in GW2. ANet has to eat, and this is how they harvest food from WvWers. Through purposely imbalanced servers, simple as that.

[Strider Pj.2193]

Wait... so this isn't about BG???

[SugarCayne.3098]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> Wait... so this isn't about BG???

 

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[Lahmia.2193]

BG wins every t1 matchup by miles.

Open BG please

...

What?

[HazyDaisy.4107]

I'm suprised this thread is still open (unlike most hosts).

 

Anyway, as a guest server member, I'm sorry you guys feel demoralized, that must be really tough.

[Nidome.1365]

Desolation is "Full" according to Anet.

Yesterday I did not see a queue on any border in prime time and 15 mins ago we had 3 people across all borders.

That is not full, it is a joke.

[biofrog.1568]

Personally I think server devotion died out when PvE introduced mega-server systems. I think it should die out in WvW also. The heavy handed approach might work.

 

Get rid of all current worlds. Create a new selection of W1Z1, W1Z2, W1Z3, W2Z1... W3Z3. Each week at reset, when the leader of any Guild or permissable Guild Rank logs in (or when they first enter WvW) they are presented with an option to choose the World/Zone for that __week__. Once the total player population reaches a fixed amount, that world is full for the *week*.

 

Rewards are given according to the rank each World places at the end of week.

 

I guarantee there will be organised WvW guilds planning before hand to choose a specific 'World Zone', but if you ever want a change of pace, all that is needed to agree on is choosing a different world zone the week after.

 

Oh and quick edit regarding monetization for ANet, they already hit on that. Make non-p2w buffs purchasable for gems, such as buying a magic-find boost for the week or WXP boost. Hell make it cosmetic, introduce a few new skins for BUILDINGS that a Guild can purchase/unlock so they can customise their captures with *flair* & *style*

[IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII]

You can't have everyone on the same server. If anything, more of a server merge should be added to make for less tiers and therefore more active WvW in every tier.

Its not about being in the top that motivates people, its about having people to conquer to get to the top that motivates people.

[Seffen.2875]

Another Post ignored by devs.

Another cry for help echoing in vain.

Another one who "does not know the full data" and therefore cannot be right.

Another step downwards on the stairs into the doom of WvW.

[Spurnshadow.3678]

Until this thread came up, I had no idea how many servers were closed. I'm on BG, and I gotta say, the fights I've had lately (haven't played for 2 weeks) don't feel like I'm going up against closed servers with a link. After seeing this, it's obvious they're trying to force people into the lower population servers. Population is low across the board, as someone who's played since launch. Forcing players into lower pop servers is wrong (I'm not advocating opening BG, but some of these other servers should be open) as if they want to be in a particular tier, odds are they're gonna be moved in a couple months. Server links were a good fix, but they should have been temporary until a new, better solution was implemented. It's been, what, 1.8 years now? It's not working and we need something new or at least better. I personally think that they should just delete 12 servers, maybe even 15, and end linking.

[Roxanne.6140]

Eventually wvw will have only 1 server and then you will know that everybody has paid gems

[CrimeMaker.8612]

There is a solution. Just blow up BG.

[minion.1987]

alright. T1 is most likely going to stay the same for the rest of the game unless people quit the game or jump server. which if you're lower tier start questioning what's the point? as for wvw i never saw the point in it other than to get dailies done. cause to me at the end of it wvw is just server dominance.

[Subversion.2580]

This is my third post in three related topics tonight (in a very long time): The meta, the stacked servers and now the locked servers. When it comes to servers people tend to mention hard resets, battlegroups (akin to EotM) and alliances (some guild-oriented season system) quite often. The issue those ideas have is that, besides EotM (which kind of both works and does not work - I'd say the map and how it affects popularity and reasons to keep it integrated into WvW proper is more at fault than the server system but that's another topic) the ideas requires both building new tech and/or actively managing the systems more intensively.

 

Instead, Anet already have the tech to deal with the social component of the WvW server issues: How PvE maps work. If you only look at the social aspects of it, access to content and being able to play with your friends, it is undoubtedly a functional system. The issue with it in WvW is that it doesn't work with how the mode handles score and win conditions to make it a "game". It really puts the finger on the population-imbalance issues and how scoring favours the numerous. If you are able to open up more maps to farm, a numerically superior group could obviously exploit that and just farm more score broadly. However, if scoring was adressed and tied to active numbers (for which the outnumbered tech is already in place) that becomes a non-issue. It's a simple question of splitting personal rewards and war score and making imbalanced maps not (or less) contributing to war score - for everyone wether over- or undermanned.

 

Then players could play and PPT wherever they want, at whatever time they want for their personal rewards but would be incentivized to spread thin for server rewards. Players and groups who wants to fight (and fight for their server) already try to find each other and a system like that would simply reward their behaviour making war score only (or dominantly) relevant at any time there are actual, balanced, fights (regardless of their scale). I'll crawl back to my has-been irrelevance now. Happy posting!