One way to revive Etom

[zinkz.7045]

> @"Sarrs.4831" said:

> Why not just turn EOTM into a real WvW map, let it contribute towards the scoring and get rid of some of the sillier stuff

 

In a game mode that is competitively a complete joke and is so poorly designed that much of PPTing is contrary to a mass PvP mode (and terrible, dull "gameplay" at that), that it renders "winning" as meaningless, the scoring is the 'sillier stuff'.

[Lord of Rings.5371]

Since changes are coming to WvW,

 

for all who care about WvW, a separation of WvW from Etom would

 

preserve WvW while exploring new alliances ideas elsewhere.

 

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring

 

Details from the restructuring notes demonstrated seriousness and willingness for the changes to be committed.

 

Let's hope that everyone can have fun after the changes implemented.

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

I don't see any reason with the changes proposed that EoTM isn't just made a 5th map in the current weekly matches. Honestly if the balancing can work as hoped for then we don't need an overflow anymore since we shouldn't be over queued. Bring it in line and stop making excuses, it should never have been setup outside of the existing play, fix that oversight with these other changes.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

 

 

[TheGrimm.5624]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> > it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

> Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

>

>

 

I included write ups on the past in the old forums. It boiled down to having scoring from EoTM to add into the weekly scoring for the given worlds but would have involved more balancing when assigning colors in EoTM. Aka by making it it own entity is how we got into a situation where its hard to classify EoTM as WvW. That was a mistake. I don't use ultimates much but based on where we are now, it was. Overflow was fine but since only part of the equation was factored (send people there but don't let them add contribution to the weekly fight) in it was a band-aid and band-aids can quite often cause more harm than aid. And again, why did we have queues? Because players didn't self-balance and would prefer to come complain versus move to a server that needed more people and had open queues. Point is now, if the balancing is to prevent queues since people should be balanced, then let us use the map and remove the question of its WvW while also creating more land to fight over, again reducing queue times since there is more land to queue for. There were high expectations for more maps by this late in the life cycle, not having new maps was at least a factor in previous game burnouts.

[Slugonaut.9841]

Honestly, depending on how things play out, EOTM could see a resurgence due to map que's. If we end up with more balanced populations and fuller timezone coverage you may end up with longer que's that extend well into off times for a lot of us. If people want to hop into a WVW environment yet all maps are que'd then EOTM will be there at least to ride out the que.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said:

> > > it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

> > Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

> >

> >

>

> I included write ups on the past in the old forums. It boiled down to having scoring from EoTM to add into the weekly scoring for the given worlds but would have involved more balancing when assigning colors in EoTM. Aka by making it it own entity is how we got into a situation where its hard to classify EoTM as WvW. That was a mistake. I don't use ultimates much but based on where we are now, it was. Overflow was fine but since only part of the equation was factored (send people there but don't let them add contribution to the weekly fight) in it was a band-aid and band-aids can quite often cause more harm than aid. And again, why did we have queues? Because players didn't self-balance and would prefer to come complain versus move to a server that needed more people and had open queues. Point is now, if the balancing is to prevent queues since people should be balanced, then let us use the map and remove the question of its WvW while also creating more land to fight over, again reducing queue times since there is more land to queue for. There were high expectations for more maps by this late in the life cycle, not having new maps was at least a factor in previous game burnouts.

 

There were two reasons for EotM: to provide something WvWish to do while waiting in queue, _without_ being part of the match up directly, and as an opportunity for ANet to test stuff out. Your idea would have changed it into a fifth map, undermining its primary purpose.

 

Also, it's a misunderstanding to think we only had queues because players didn't self-balance. Originally, there were queues in all tiers, especially when the tiers were less stable (as they were for a while). The main reason for queues is that the vast majority likes to play WvW (a) at similar times and (b) when lots of people are fighting (for the increased number of encounters).

 

I agree with you that people burned out in part because the game mode didn't evolve very quickly and perhaps ANet should have figured out a way to add more maps or more something else rather than EotM. But we said we wanted to play rather than wait, so we got EotM, which was a sensible & scalable solution to making room without changing the nature of match-ups.

 

For a lot of reasons, it turned into k-train city and never recovered from that reputation.

[TheGrimm.5624]

Having it as a fifth map now simply stops it from being quasimodo of WvW. ANet never capitalized on using EoTM as a test bed, so leaving it to be one now, doesn't make sense. So yes, lets re-purpose it as a fifth map. Will we still need overflows, maybe but considering they might be launching a variable number of worlds divisible by 3 to try and create these balanced matches then odds should be lower we need it. Again re-purpose it. If it was to stay as is aka able to spawn multiple copies, then figure out an algorithm and add in for each skirmish period points from matches where sides were balanced and disregard Warscore for copies that weren't and have the existing WvW options available to it. Its not embraced as WvW because it was associated to a server, well we are moving away from that anyway, take the opportunity and bring it into the fold.