Mil.3562 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"subversiontwo.7501" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > I wonder when we’ll get another snippet to keep us strung along? > I, your friendly neighbourhood shitposter, will deliver: > > This is yesterday btw, in case the date isn't clear, and wherever Alliances are at, I guess they're not confirmed to where Raids are. > > Finally they changed the carrot at the end of the stick! Yes, that will keep us going! Wait.. It's the same rotten one, they just washed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 No disrespect intended here. For some reason...these comments made me think about this movie scene. Deja vu all over again... Match-Ups need to encourage Healthy Competition that's "Wholesome" for the players...imho This is your last chance. After this there is no turning back. You take the blue pill, the story ends; you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill, you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember, all I’m offering is the truth, nothing more. Caution - glitch anomaly detected - There's ongoing work Fight Club: The First Rule of Fight Club 1999 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vier.1327 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"Diku.2546" said: > Deja vu... > I've just been in this place before Higher on the street And I know it's my time to go Calling you and the search is mystery Standing on my feet It's so hard when I try to be me uoooh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vier.1327 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"subversiontwo.7501" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > I wonder when we’ll get another snippet to keep us strung along? > I, your friendly neighbourhood shitposter, will deliver: > > This is yesterday btw, in case the date isn't clear, and wherever Alliances are at, I guess they're not confirmed to where Raids are at least. So however short and sweet, this is better than nothing and its the first tiny bit of confirmation on it since Mike Z's saga announcement. > > The same; we are working on Alliances, be patient and buy gems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLys.5380 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > **A message from McKenna Berdrow:** > > I want to update everyone on the design we currently are investigating to help achieve population balance between worlds, and the goals we hope this new World Restructuring system can achieve. > > The goals of the World Restructuring system are: > > - Create great matches > - Handle population fluctuations > - Balance teams > - Diversify WvW experiences > > # Transitioning to this System > > This system is going to take time to make. As mentioned in the WvW FAQ, part of the reason we did World Linking was because it utilized a lot of existing tech and did not require a considerable amount of time. This allowed us to address the growing population issue quickly, while also being able to address other WvW issues. This new system is going to take considerably more time to make. We do not have a release date, but this is going to require several months of work and it will share resources with any other WvW changes that we work on. > > Transitioning to this system is going to be slow and we want to make this transition as smooth as possible. Once this system is ready, we plan to give everyone several weeks to form their WvW guilds and alliances. We also want to give titles related to the worlds on which players currently are playing when World Restructuring goes live. If there are other transition ideas, we would love to hear them! > > We will continue with World Linking until World Restructuring is ready to ship. > 2.5 years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"DeLys.5380" said: > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > **A message from McKenna Berdrow:** > > We will continue with World Linking until World Restructuring is ready to ship. > > > > 2.5 years later. > Hate to tell you this, but Gaile & McKenna had to "ironically" abandon ship due to a Company Restructuring. I pray they've found a better path in life. Our WvW community here has somewhat recovered...but it's still missing the heart & soul feel that they gave us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subversiontwo.7501 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 Sometimes I struggle really hard to understand what Diku says. It's like he communicates through poems :3 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted July 25, 2020 Share Posted July 25, 2020 > @"subversiontwo.7501" said: > Sometimes I struggle really hard to understand what Diku says. > > It's like he communicates through poems :3 . --- Haiku Syllables Count - 5/7/5 Life is subjective Senses are deep or shallow Meaning can be found It's odd to say this We struggle to pick the hard The fix is simple WvW Haiku :) --- You took the red pill, you stay in Wonderland and I'm showing you how deep the rabbit hole goes. Remember, all I’m offering is the truth, nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBravery.9615 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 it's been almost 3 years lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLys.5380 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 > @"Diku.2546" said: > > @"DeLys.5380" said: > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > **A message from McKenna Berdrow:** > > > We will continue with World Linking until World Restructuring is ready to ship. > > > > > > > 2.5 years later. > > > Hate to tell you this, but Gaile & McKenna had to "ironically" abandon ship due to a Company Restructuring. > > I pray they've found a better path in life. > > Our WvW community here has somewhat recovered...but it's still missing the heart & soul feel that they gave us. I knew this. It's still 2.5 years later. They are (supposed to be) a business. Enough said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 > @"DeLys.5380" said: > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > @"DeLys.5380" said: > > > > @"Gaile Gray.6029" said: > > > > **A message from McKenna Berdrow:** > > > > We will continue with World Linking until World Restructuring is ready to ship. > > > > > > > > > > 2.5 years later. > > > > > Hate to tell you this, but Gaile & McKenna had to "ironically" abandon ship due to a Company Restructuring. > > > > I pray they've found a better path in life. > > > > Our WvW community here has somewhat recovered...but it's still missing the heart & soul feel that they gave us. > > I knew this. It's still 2.5 years later. They are (supposed to be) a business. Enough said? It seems that you & I have both been loyal fans of WvW for a very long time...so you're correct...enough was said in your statement. Your comment provided the grilled steak & my comment was there to give it the umami. Still hanging in there as a die hard fan of WvW & hope this game mode will get the recognition it deserves & allow ANet to prosper. My reply was meant for the newer WvW players...who might not be able to appreciate the irony. --- TLDR version Gaile - Original Author of thread McKenna - WvW Developer Gaile quotes - McKenna's announcement - We will continue with World Linking until World Restructuring is ready to ship 2.5 years later. Gaile & McKenna had to "ironically" abandon ship (not continue) due to a Company Restructuring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vier.1327 Posted July 26, 2020 Share Posted July 26, 2020 This post will survive us all.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiteCrossx.3790 Posted July 27, 2020 Share Posted July 27, 2020 The current model is dangerously close to pay to win. I can easily pay money to transfer to the winning server each relink. And many do, because people don't like losing or being farmed, and are happy to get a quick fix and be on a winning team. A philosophy/model I thought Anet was against. Seems when the $$ starts flowing their principles take a back seat :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLys.5380 Posted July 28, 2020 Share Posted July 28, 2020 > @"KiteCrossx.3790" said: > The current model is dangerously close to pay to win. I can easily pay money to transfer to the winning server each relink. And many do, because people don't like losing or being farmed, and are happy to get a quick fix and be on a winning team. A philosophy/model I thought Anet was against. Seems when the $$ starts flowing their principles take a back seat :angry: I don't think it's that people can't stand losing and want to be on a winning team necessarily. I think it's that they want to have a fighting chance. What currently makes their re-linking system so stupid is that they do re-links based on their "server population" algorithms, then a week later, guilds move around and you have a few servers left with hardly any population, or population stacked in one or two time zones up against two servers who are stacked with huge amounts of population, or evenly distributed ones. You can see this by just watching the servers that move between High, Very High, and Full on a nearly weekly basis. At this point, I'm not sure why Anet even bothers wasting time re-linking the servers at all. It's just really stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subversiontwo.7501 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 I'll bump this thread with a rehash of something noted in another recent thread (or I guess, I've been saying some version of it for years): The saddest part about the state of the WvW population systems is that if ArenaNet had not been sleeping on the job (or reinventing the wheel) they could have solved everything by just adding a proper GvG Arena and a scoring system based on live and tuned "outnumbered" status. * That would have stopped the GvG guilds from transfering just to match up against each other * That would have made equal-number scenarios determine the matchups on the ladder (fight guilds / server ID socials) * That would have made stacking any timezone for sense of winning or rewards pointless (anons) It really is that simple. It really has been that simple all along. * Thus they could have introduced more result-based per server rewards (everyone) * It inherently encourages the population to spread out even if that doesn't slate out stacks overnight (regardless of scale or time) * It even allows people to still stack a language or timezone or a full server to get their personal time-spent rewards without affecting the ladder * It could even potentially encourage roaming in off-hours or off-maps by letting them contribute equal score or score when other maps wouldn't and * It could be used as a platform to launch other systems, like doing away with the queue system, through overflow copies that lets you start pips etc. * It could let you do away with the border/home advantage style maps and only make balanced/mirror style maps prone to better facilitate content * It could let you rework the existing EotM and/or OS maps to lobby maps with the existing side-join tech to house things rather than be things * EotM today is intended as an overflow but never was because it doesn't facilitate transitions or balanced rewards - map copies would do that better * OS today is an FFA arena, GH is a GvG arena with PvE physics, EotM houses an FFA arena etc., so the ideas are all there, but none of them are GvG arenas. Armistice bastion also proves that combinated tech exists but that map is just a big fook you to us players in good old neglect-WvW style. Want some of what the others get for free? Well, you have to pay because you are WvW. Honestly, no single thing in this game makes me fume as much as AB, because I can not fathom how anybody could be so stupid as to actually build a proof of concept only to dangle it and not deliver. What kind of company spends time and resources to prove to their customers that they can give them what they want, only to not give it to them? It's pretty much the same thing with Strongholds etc. It proves that they can but will not. It throws any form of complexity-defense out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrimm.5624 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Honestly this one feels like: * Problem is accepted as an issue * Expansion was discussed internally * Issue was acknowledged since it could be part of an expansion * Expansion idea was cancelled * Communication stops * Living World was pushed hoping to be a replacement to expansion, didn't work * Numbers and income falling * Expansion idea re-opened * Alliances once again planned to be part of expansion selling point but free change for all * Alliances will release in 2 years with expansion release I admit I side with the group that likes server pride and view the alliances as killing that. But not a fan of community engagement and then community dis-engagement when something is shelved, just say its shelved and move on. Since I do see it as much much more complex then sPvP match making I have made the argument that data has been being collected and numbers tested during server relinks. But again if that was true, come out and say that. Silence just lends weight to arguments that its shelved. That said wasn't asking for the linking system but have gotten to play with some people I did not before and it was fun and I look forward to potentially playing with again. The key is can the alliance system track enough attributes to actually create reasonable matchups, and is it even in works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subversiontwo.7501 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 > @"TheGrimm.5624" said: > I admit I side with the group that likes server pride and view the alliances as killing that. But not a fan of community engagement and then community dis-engagement when something is shelved, just say its shelved and move on. >/.../ >The key is can the alliance system track enough attributes to actually create reasonable matchups, and is it even in works. The problem with that viewpoint is that it has never been the players with server-identity who has created the things that the server is proud about. It has almost exclusively been players with guild-identities who have created content that the server is proud about and then shared it with the server. I am not saying that having some sort of server pride is a bad thing. I believe that the vast majority of players have it to some degree. The guilds are apart of the servers too. It is just bad not to aknowledge the processes leading to the result. There is no mutual exclusivity in guild-identity and server-identity, there is just a priority. Like I said in my previous post above, had this been aknowledged earlier we may not have needed something as drastic as Alliances to solve problems that were rising. Considering that Ray confirmed it as still being in the works last week, we will have to assume that it is. We can debate the details of that, but the baseline is there in black and white. As far as the system itself goes, I think it is mostly a question of understanding the system and treating it for what it is at this point. It is pretty much just a system that is even more open than the linking system. The linking system shuffles some servers while Alliances will shuffle all servers. The main selling point of the system is no longer necessarily balance (the mode's player-structures have devolved past a point of the intended balance) but rather that it may open for players to rebuild over time by providing alternatives to gem/gold transfers, by opening up full entities so we can recruit both in the game and from outside the game again, etc. Those more fundamental things are now the main sales point and not the possible social- and balance results of them. Alliances made up of 1-2 fight guilds and 3-4 GvG guilds are going to wreck the battlegroup entity as much as they do server entities now. However, at least more guilds and alliances can be created to fill up the battlegroups. Even if balance won't be stellar it will at least be better. The issues with the current system isn't necessarily that entities aren't balanced, but rather that the ladder/matchups are not representative of the balance. At least not in the minds of the vast majority of players with plenty of good arguments as to why or how problems are related to that. The transition for server-identity players may be rough, but I'm pretty sure that once they understand the system they may form server-alliances and end up in the right place on the ladder where they get the kind of matchups and content that suits them (whereas the fully anonymous will drift, but not necessarily have any group pride at all). A player with server pride usually at least has enough identity to socially interact in that likely >500 community. Also, given battlegroups, any such server-community will now and then be hitched to a more competetive alliance and then their pride will have to be similar to that of a link server: to provide some sort of support and help pull weight. No doubt it will create some drama and infighting but you already have that now, that is apart of the content and with an Alliance model you get more control over that meta-game since you can kick people from guilds and guilds from Alliances. That gives incentive to work on your group's social aspects too and not just its organisation or performance. That is content, even if it is meta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrimm.5624 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 > @"subversiontwo.7501" said: > > @"TheGrimm.5624" said: > > I admit I side with the group that likes server pride and view the alliances as killing that. But not a fan of community engagement and then community dis-engagement when something is shelved, just say its shelved and move on. > >/.../ > >The key is can the alliance system track enough attributes to actually create reasonable matchups, and is it even in works. > The problem with that viewpoint is that it has never been the players with server-identity who has created the things that the server is proud about. It has almost exclusively been players with guild-identities who have created content that the server is proud about and then shared it with the server. > > I am not saying that having some sort of server pride is a bad thing. I believe that the vast majority of players have it to some degree. I think mileage will vary here. You are correct in your statements but for me, I do fight for my guild but I also fight for my server. And it's less what people have built for the server and moreover we fight since its home. Therefore it translate to, if you take our stuff, that won't do. I agree more likely for others it's exactly what you said, but I wouldn't rule out us oddballs that fight because the servers been our home for so long and we see familiar peeps. And when you see a familiar peep get attacked, you engage since they also live in your home. Some servers have elaborate external community tools and some just might have a common Discord/TS3/Voice-of-Choice-Here. I do know a lot of guilds also usually run their own as well. I agree there are strengths in the Alliance system, but as always new dark clouds will find silver linings. Side note: I missed the comment from Ray. Will have to go look for that later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subversiontwo.7501 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 > @"TheGrimm.5624" said: > I think mileage will vary here. You are correct in your statements but for me, I do fight for my guild but I also fight for my server. And it's less what people have built for the server and moreover we fight since its home. Therefore it translate to, if you take our stuff, that won't do. I agree more likely for others it's exactly what you said, but I wouldn't rule out us oddballs that fight because the servers been our home for so long and we see familiar peeps. And when you see a familiar peep get attacked, you engage since they also live in your home. Some servers have elaborate external community tools and some just might have a common Discord/TS3/Voice-of-Choice-Here. I do know a lot of guilds also usually run their own as well. I agree there are strengths in the Alliance system, but as always new dark clouds will find silver linings. Like I said, as far as I am concerned people can be however oddball they like. The issue here is that no amount of community tools, guides or help would compensate for the 2-3 top commanders on a server picking their tent up and leaving. This is especially true in any balanced scenario (where there is coverage, presence or content on a map). I know of no server where those players were not either born in guilds and aquired their status with the backing of a guild or are still members of a guild (that still has a guild-first identity). If people then have other guilds, do other things or helps out either directly or indirectly... awesome! Yet, it doesn't change the fact. If a single player like Bez or James decides that they want to hop server, that effect ripples through their entire server's organisation and identity. The server's conception of identity then changes. It shows just how vulnurable the system is. If I designed a game it would be a sore mistake to overlook that and assume that other forms of organisation were equal to- or more important than that, especially if I wanted to design systems reflective of- or rooted in content, balanced content. Whatever people then like to do or choose to do is something they can do freely, as long as they do not misjudge their own importance to where it misrepresents and negatively affects those design decisions. That mistake has been made for WvW and it is in everyone's interest that it isn't perpetuated. > Side note: I missed the comment from Ray. Will have to go look for that later. It's the video plastered all over this page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vier.1327 Posted July 29, 2020 Share Posted July 29, 2020 Do you think Arenanet's developers use the Alliances Meme in the office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 > @"vier.1327" said: > Do you think Arenanet's developers use the Alliances Meme in the office? The laughing guy one? Now THAT never gets old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thornwolf.9721 Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 Likely to come with the next expansion as a selling point... or as a "potential" addition for "down the road" when they are "Ready to talk to us" once it gets off the sticky "table" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xion.5694 Posted July 30, 2020 Share Posted July 30, 2020 I think you forgot about 'laying the groundwork', they for sure doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waxx.3619 Posted August 1, 2020 Share Posted August 1, 2020 > @"KiteCrossx.3790" said: > The current model is dangerously close to pay to win. I can easily pay money to transfer to the winning server each relink. And many do, because people don't like losing or being farmed, and are happy to get a quick fix and be on a winning team. A philosophy/model I thought Anet was against. Seems when the $$ starts flowing their principles take a back seat :angry: Exactly. They make lot $$$ from transferring accounts IMO. why lose that opportunity with Alliance. This decision was probably made in haste and they realized how much money they will be losing thus discarded. BTW server transfer in this game more expensive than any MMO I have seen and if people still keep buying them why stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calisanna.8732 Posted August 4, 2020 Share Posted August 4, 2020 Thread was way to low on my page this morning ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now