World Restructuring

[Draeyon.4392]

**Question:** How will inactive players becoming active again affect alliances. E.g. An alliance is close to the max capacity and a few inactive guildies return, mark their guild as their WvW guild and put the alliance over the population cap.

 

Obviously a situation that will not affect a whole lot of people but information to work with when setting these things up is always appreciated.

[Mr Green.4157]

> @"Richard.8207" said:

> If the goal is handling population fluctuations and balance, why not just let people join the underpowered sides? Either let anyone from any server join the underpowered side through a different WvW entrance, or make some servers queueless mercenary/pug servers that join whoever is in need.

>

> I’d rather find a commander who wants to lead pugs than deal with needing to reorganize everything every 8-week cycle. And I’d definitely rather not have a system that virtually requires elitism.

 

Because who is going to want to play on the losing side over playing on their server?

 

[Mr Green.4157]

> @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > @"Namer.9750" said:

> > > @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > > > @"Nocturnal Lunacy.8563" said:

> > > > The adult in me is excited over what wvw is about to become, but the child in me is suicidal over what wvw will become.

> > > > But seriously anet, I'm feeling like this is going to push the last remaining roamers from wvw. What about the players that don't want to join guilds but like playing with certain individuals in guilds? Or like to run around with certain guilds but doesnt want to join any guilds? I feel we are being forced to join guilds and alliances or get thrown into the manure pile.

> > >

> > > I agree with you. I know of many others who do not want to join a guild but enjoy running with them and these people are not low-skilled newbies at all. Now, they will mainly be used as fillers and thrown into the dailies people. How do you satisfy their expectations?

> >

> > Have you never been in a guild with a 'friends' role? Just ask them "Yo, I enjoy running with you, can you invite me and give me a 'friend' role so I can stick with your alliance?"

> >

> > I know plenty of roamers who're members in bigger guilds and regularly cloud with them.

> >

> > What's the massive aversion towards joining guilds? You're assuming every guild is like... ☆ 100% REP ☆ ONLY PLAY WHEN COMMANDER IS ONLINE OR GKICK ☆ 5g/raid GUILD TAX OR GKICK ☆ NO ROAM ONLY MEGABLOB OR GKICK ☆ PM SSN FOR INVITE ☆. There are plenty of guilds who go casual for fights and almost every guild I know people in will let friends in. Yeah, there are some freak cases, but I can only name like 3-4 of those out of all the guilds in NA.

> >

> > Like, can you just _name a guild your and your friends run with without wanting to join, who won't let you in if you just ask_?

>

> Believe it or not, everything that you posted on the guild rules are true. lol.

>

> 100% rep; run only zerkers/maruaders; play this day and time only, commit to x days; no xx class allowed; call out every single skill you put on the battlefield; no voice-comm on button press allowed; gold tax; no girls allowed; no this and no that.

>

> And then of course you have to deal with toxicity where the elitists will determine that it is your fault the group lost the last fight.

>

> That being said, I am glad something is being done to balance the population (fingers crossed). I just want to point out that this is going the step of PVE raids and there will be a bunch of people who will lose out.

>

 

The entire point of the alliance system seems to be to give those who want to play together but don't want to join one single guild a means to do so. If the guild you are following likes you they should allow you into their alliance as that is what alliances are for. If they don't like you enough to do that that means they don't care if you are following them or not or don't know you. Which raises the question, are you following them because you like the people or because you like the bags?

[Richard.8207]

> @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > @"Richard.8207" said:

> > If the goal is handling population fluctuations and balance, why not just let people join the underpowered sides? Either let anyone from any server join the underpowered side through a different WvW entrance, or make some servers queueless mercenary/pug servers that join whoever is in need.

> >

> > I’d rather find a commander who wants to lead pugs than deal with needing to reorganize everything every 8-week cycle. And I’d definitely rather not have a system that virtually requires elitism.

>

> Because who is going to want to play on the losing side over playing on their server?

>

 

If your server is massively undermanned at a given moment, wouldn’t you rather join a random server that has a balanced fight? And if that doesn’t appeal to you, can you truly not imagine anyone would choose the balanced fight?

[Zackie.8923]

gw2 : a new hope

[Mr Green.4157]

> @"Richard.8207" said:

> > @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > > @"Richard.8207" said:

> > > If the goal is handling population fluctuations and balance, why not just let people join the underpowered sides? Either let anyone from any server join the underpowered side through a different WvW entrance, or make some servers queueless mercenary/pug servers that join whoever is in need.

> > >

> > > I’d rather find a commander who wants to lead pugs than deal with needing to reorganize everything every 8-week cycle. And I’d definitely rather not have a system that virtually requires elitism.

> >

> > Because who is going to want to play on the losing side over playing on their server?

> >

>

> If your server is massively undermanned at a given moment, wouldn’t you rather join a random server that has a balanced fight? And if that doesn’t appeal to you, can you truly not imagine anyone would choose the balanced fight?

 

at any given time there may be as many as 8 servers getting beaten very badly assuming one server from each matchup is dominating. so which of the 8 is the one that gets the bandwagon at the cost of the other 7?

 

And when everyone from the other losing servers flocks to the one server that becomes the bandwagon what are the people in the winning servers supposed to do sit there looking at empty bls? or abandon their winning server to help their enemy beat them?

[Roxanne.6140]

> @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > > @"Namer.9750" said:

> > > > @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > > > > @"Nocturnal Lunacy.8563" said:

> > > > > The adult in me is excited over what wvw is about to become, but the child in me is suicidal over what wvw will become.

> > > > > But seriously anet, I'm feeling like this is going to push the last remaining roamers from wvw. What about the players that don't want to join guilds but like playing with certain individuals in guilds? Or like to run around with certain guilds but doesnt want to join any guilds? I feel we are being forced to join guilds and alliances or get thrown into the manure pile.

> > > >

> > > > I agree with you. I know of many others who do not want to join a guild but enjoy running with them and these people are not low-skilled newbies at all. Now, they will mainly be used as fillers and thrown into the dailies people. How do you satisfy their expectations?

> > >

> > > Have you never been in a guild with a 'friends' role? Just ask them "Yo, I enjoy running with you, can you invite me and give me a 'friend' role so I can stick with your alliance?"

> > >

> > > I know plenty of roamers who're members in bigger guilds and regularly cloud with them.

> > >

> > > What's the massive aversion towards joining guilds? You're assuming every guild is like... ☆ 100% REP ☆ ONLY PLAY WHEN COMMANDER IS ONLINE OR GKICK ☆ 5g/raid GUILD TAX OR GKICK ☆ NO ROAM ONLY MEGABLOB OR GKICK ☆ PM SSN FOR INVITE ☆. There are plenty of guilds who go casual for fights and almost every guild I know people in will let friends in. Yeah, there are some freak cases, but I can only name like 3-4 of those out of all the guilds in NA.

> > >

> > > Like, can you just _name a guild your and your friends run with without wanting to join, who won't let you in if you just ask_?

> >

> > Believe it or not, everything that you posted on the guild rules are true. lol.

> >

> > 100% rep; run only zerkers/maruaders; play this day and time only, commit to x days; no xx class allowed; call out every single skill you put on the battlefield; no voice-comm on button press allowed; gold tax; no girls allowed; no this and no that.

> >

> > And then of course you have to deal with toxicity where the elitists will determine that it is your fault the group lost the last fight.

> >

> > That being said, I am glad something is being done to balance the population (fingers crossed). I just want to point out that this is going the step of PVE raids and there will be a bunch of people who will lose out.

> >

>

> -snip- If they don't like you enough to do that that means they don't care if you are following them or not or don't know you. Which raises the question, are you following them because you like the people or because you like the bags?

 

the entire point is that these 2 sentences matter now more so than ever. It's a game, not everyone wants PVE raid system. Those who think this way are liekly not even on these forums.

[LindaLinda.9106]

In the new setup, guilds will form alliances with other guilds so they can run together.

But if guilds form alliances with guilds on their current respective server, we'll essentially have the same guilds on one world vsing the same guilds on the other world.

Wouldn't this mirror the current system? i.e. BG aligns together; they'll eventually find themselves at the top?

How will this fix the coverage issues?

 

I'm confused.

 

[JoEWas.1409]

> @"Gaile Gray.6029" said:

> A message from McKenna Berdrow:

> The above graph displays an example of what makes up a world under the World Restructuring system. **Keep in mind, due to the algorithm used to keep worlds balanced, the number of alliances, guilds, and individual players can be wildly different between worlds, but the participation and playtime should be relatively the same.**

 

Stuck between 2 graphs and sales marketing 101 at its finest, this still basically is saying that you are keeping the same way world linking was determined but using players now. ANet is putting a Hail Mary out there that there can be a single large alliance that can be dropped into a new server when the season ends to fill a time gap in the next. EXCEPT ITS STILL BASED ON PLAYTIME. . . . .

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

Now its 10 players playing 1 hour during NA can equal 1 player playing 10 hours during OCX/SEA

[Liston.9708]

So does Mal have his alliance formed yet?

[Mr Green.4157]

> @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > > @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > > > @"Namer.9750" said:

> > > > > @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > > > > > @"Nocturnal Lunacy.8563" said:

> > > > > > The adult in me is excited over what wvw is about to become, but the child in me is suicidal over what wvw will become.

> > > > > > But seriously anet, I'm feeling like this is going to push the last remaining roamers from wvw. What about the players that don't want to join guilds but like playing with certain individuals in guilds? Or like to run around with certain guilds but doesnt want to join any guilds? I feel we are being forced to join guilds and alliances or get thrown into the manure pile.

> > > > >

> > > > > I agree with you. I know of many others who do not want to join a guild but enjoy running with them and these people are not low-skilled newbies at all. Now, they will mainly be used as fillers and thrown into the dailies people. How do you satisfy their expectations?

> > > >

> > > > Have you never been in a guild with a 'friends' role? Just ask them "Yo, I enjoy running with you, can you invite me and give me a 'friend' role so I can stick with your alliance?"

> > > >

> > > > I know plenty of roamers who're members in bigger guilds and regularly cloud with them.

> > > >

> > > > What's the massive aversion towards joining guilds? You're assuming every guild is like... ☆ 100% REP ☆ ONLY PLAY WHEN COMMANDER IS ONLINE OR GKICK ☆ 5g/raid GUILD TAX OR GKICK ☆ NO ROAM ONLY MEGABLOB OR GKICK ☆ PM SSN FOR INVITE ☆. There are plenty of guilds who go casual for fights and almost every guild I know people in will let friends in. Yeah, there are some freak cases, but I can only name like 3-4 of those out of all the guilds in NA.

> > > >

> > > > Like, can you just _name a guild your and your friends run with without wanting to join, who won't let you in if you just ask_?

> > >

> > > Believe it or not, everything that you posted on the guild rules are true. lol.

> > >

> > > 100% rep; run only zerkers/maruaders; play this day and time only, commit to x days; no xx class allowed; call out every single skill you put on the battlefield; no voice-comm on button press allowed; gold tax; no girls allowed; no this and no that.

> > >

> > > And then of course you have to deal with toxicity where the elitists will determine that it is your fault the group lost the last fight.

> > >

> > > That being said, I am glad something is being done to balance the population (fingers crossed). I just want to point out that this is going the step of PVE raids and there will be a bunch of people who will lose out.

> > >

> >

> > -snip- If they don't like you enough to do that that means they don't care if you are following them or not or don't know you. Which raises the question, are you following them because you like the people or because you like the bags?

>

> the entire point is that these 2 sentences matter now more so than ever. It's a game, not everyone wants PVE raid system. Those who think this way are liekly not even on these forums.

 

My point is that if people want to be able to play together there are options for that. if you just want the bags then there will always be tags to follow and blob behind.

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Xtc Soul Dragon.2067" said:

> I am not opposed to trying this idea, but I am fanatically opposed to having it forced onto me and my server with no recourse. Go ahead and replace the failed Edge of the Mists experiment; the lacklust rewards of that gamemode will not be missed. Do not delete 5 years of WvW rivalry and identity for shallow and foresight-lacking purposes, you as the developer do not write the history of your game, the players do. You make changes and introduce new ideas into the game world, but WE the players are the ones that experience the game, WE write the game's history, and WE decide what works, what's fun, what's exploitable, and what has got to go. WvW has been server-based since the beta weekends in 2012 (that we the masses were allowed to initially experience), and the moment you expunge that from the game is the moment that WvW ceases to have a reason to exist in a lot of our hearts and minds. Give your players choice, we've earned that. Do not take away something that gives us the pride, and some of us the reason, to log onto your servers each night and spend hours of our time holding a banner that is much more than a simple server name. It is a history that we the players have created on our own, for we have earned the right to keep our identity after over half a decade of dedication.

 

Create the BG alliance and your history will be retained. And just on anets supposed hate for BG if they really wanted to they could have broken up BG before now.

 

 

[Mr Green.4157]

> @"LindaLinda.9106" said:

> In the new setup, guilds will form alliances with other guilds so they can run together.

> But if guilds form alliances with guilds on their current respective server, we'll essentially have the same guilds on one world vsing the same guilds on the other world.

> Wouldn't this mirror the current system? i.e. BG aligns together; they'll eventually find themselves at the top?

> How will this fix the coverage issues?

>

> I'm confused.

>

 

I doubt the alliances will be large enough to contain every guild on a server as full as Blackgate. You'll end up with multiple alliances made up of various guilds on Blackgate that can be separated to allow for more balanced matchups.

[CETheLucid.3964]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> Well, so long old community... this will kill WvW for many, many people.

>

> Notice how its only *one* guild that determine where we are placed with our guildies?

>

> **That kitten over every single small guild in WvW, as if we wasnt kitten over already by the paywall of guild halls and objective creep**

>

> Why? Because in say a 5 man friends guild, you will probably be part of a community guild too, or a raiding guild. Well you can only go with one of them now. So kitten the community, kitten the raids or kitten your friends. Take your pick.

>

> I cant leave my friends guild. We roam every single day, usually only 2-3 people, alongside our raiding guilds, pug guilds and pug commanders. But we do it together and like playing WvW like that.

>

> With this change Anet is taking my WvW away from me, cause I cant follow my community. According to Anet I am no longer part of them.

>

> I am sad :(

>

> And yhis is before even mentioning that organized WvW with a community TS under this system... forget about it. Never gonna happen. WvW will be voiceless pug heaven. Welcome to EotM boys.

 

Okay so you have about ~10 people that you really like and want to do stuff with. Why can you not simply guild and then alliance together?

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> Why? Because in say a 5 man friends guild, you will probably be part of a community guild too, or a raiding guild. Well you can only go with one of them now. So kitten the community, kitten the raids or kitten your friends. Take your pick.

>

> I cant leave my friends guild. We roam every single day, usually only 2-3 people, alongside our raiding guilds, pug guilds and pug commanders. But we do it together and like playing WvW like that.

>

> With this change Anet is taking my WvW away from me, cause I cant follow my community. According to Anet I am no longer part of them.

 

You guys have to open your eyes and realise server identity is in the extreme minority now. Do you really think they would take this drastic action now if WvW was healthy, this action that they didn't want to take a year ago. Why can't your roaming friends join the community/raiding guild or form 1 alliance and you'll still be together and probably be able to play the way you do now. You have these options.

 

 

[Zhuul.1759]

> @"Gaile Gray.6029" said:

> **A message from McKenna Berdrow:**

>

**"Our current plans for alliance size are somewhere between 500-1000 members"**

 

 

So the same Hibergaters that fucked up the Game for 3 years now untill it was drastically emptied in all Tiers will get the chance to continue fucking up the Game in the new System with Alliances, that carry exactly their Size.

 

This Game has a limited organized Hardcore Player amount (500-1000).

If you don't mix them up they will just build another BG/MAG that will again bore everyone and emptying the Game in the name of ...Community? lol

 

Megaserver is definately a Step forward but Alliances are a step back to the same old boring Shit we have today, Organized Nerds against unorganized Casual Gamers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Richard.8207]

> @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > @"Richard.8207" said:

> > > @"Mr Green.4157" said:

> > > > @"Richard.8207" said:

> > > > If the goal is handling population fluctuations and balance, why not just let people join the underpowered sides? Either let anyone from any server join the underpowered side through a different WvW entrance, or make some servers queueless mercenary/pug servers that join whoever is in need.

> > > >

> > > > I’d rather find a commander who wants to lead pugs than deal with needing to reorganize everything every 8-week cycle. And I’d definitely rather not have a system that virtually requires elitism.

> > >

> > > Because who is going to want to play on the losing side over playing on their server?

> > >

> >

> > If your server is massively undermanned at a given moment, wouldn’t you rather join a random server that has a balanced fight? And if that doesn’t appeal to you, can you truly not imagine anyone would choose the balanced fight?

>

> at any given time there may be as many as 8 servers getting beaten very badly assuming one server from each matchup is dominating. so which of the 8 is the one that gets the bandwagon at the cost of the other 7?

>

> And when everyone from the other losing servers flocks to the one server that becomes the bandwagon what are the people in the winning servers supposed to do sit there looking at empty bls? or abandon their winning server to help their enemy beat them?

 

Not everyone could flock to a bandwagon server. The game would assign players to the match it wants balanced. Basic concept of load balancing. When it gets balanced, the game would assign new entrants to the next match it wants balanced.

 

Which match to balance would probably use mismatch sizes and expected inflow of players through the pug queue. The developers can also adjust queues to adjust size of mismatch allowed. This is all just basic load balancing. They’d surely have interesting issues to solve, but the basic concept is used a ton throughout the Internet.

[Dukotje.4382]

> @"DaniDemulator.2581" said:

> I guess this would make this project more successful, since those players wouldnt create imbalance only because they want to fight other guilds..

 

And yet they all stack on vabbi! Thats the issue right now. There isnt enough to spread those high end guilds anywhere so they cant fight each other

[Cobra.6509]

Something. Anything. Thanks Anet.

 

To spice up things in this new WvW :

1. A ladder board for alliances. A badge or a special outfit can be earned only while your alliance is in top 5.

2. An alliance can chose another alliance with who they will fight next season. (real guilds war)

3. A guild can leave his alliance during seasons, same guild can join the opponent alliance same season.

4. Guilds, players can join alliances after they have sorted during season. Seeing that players and small/non affiliated guilds can be sorted with 2 alliances in same world.

 

I know, last 2 suggestions can unbalance the worlds but imagine the drama hence the life such features will bring.

[FogLeg.9354]

I really love this idea, thanks Anet.

 

Sorry, did not read through every 450+ replies so this may have been suggested already, but beside having "alliances", can we also have guilds/alliances setting other guilds/alliances as "enemy". So not every fighting guild ends up in single server and has no proper guilds to fight for 2 months.

[CETheLucid.3964]

> @"Zhuul.1759" said:

> This Game has a limited organized Hardcore Player amount (500-1000).

> If you don't mix them up they will just build another BG/MAG

That's the idea. BG/MAG can't be the giant blobs that they are as big as they are now. With regards to the people saying this is going to kill muh identity, they're just posturing out of fear of change. You aren't "friends" with an entire server population. You have favorites. You have people you actually know and care about. You have guildies you actually care about. Building into that VS the blob is an infinitely better solution and fosters a better community in addition the obvious balance benefits.

[HealAlNite.9658]

looks good

[henchmen.1856]

alliance cap should be 500 members. majority of wvw guilds have less than 50 active players anyway. 1000 is too easy for bg to just recreate a "bg alliance" with all the current active bg players.

[HealAlNite.9658]

Consider making seasons shorter. WVW guilds are unestable and the amount of player in a guild can change during 2 months (ppl leaving the game, ppl leaving the guild, etc).

Also, matchups are most likely decided after 3 days of it, consider making matchups shorter too.

 

Season might be 3 weeks long with 7 matchups of 3 days each. Also, this way ppl wont get bored of fighting the same players for one week

[Rampage.7145]

> @"Roxanne.6140" said:

> > @"Nocturnal Lunacy.8563" said:

> > The adult in me is excited over what wvw is about to become, but the child in me is suicidal over what wvw will become.

> > But seriously anet, I'm feeling like this is going to push the last remaining roamers from wvw. What about the players that don't want to join guilds but like playing with certain individuals in guilds? Or like to run around with certain guilds but doesnt want to join any guilds? I feel we are being forced to join guilds and alliances or get thrown into the manure pile.

>

> I agree with you. I know of many others who do not want to join a guild but enjoy running with them and these people are not low-skilled newbies at all. Now, they will mainly be used as fillers and thrown into the dailies people. How do you satisfy their expectations?

 

if you enjoy running with a guild just join them for fuck sake, how is that hard for anyone? honestly if you wanna be a pug then nobody really cares tbh, guilds are the blood and soul of WvW, sure pug commanders exist but most players in those zergs do belong to some guild that is not raiding at the time. withotu guilds and commanders there would not be no WvW, you would be sitting in EBG randomly skirmishing arround SMC and T3 keeps 24/7 how is that fun? You have to understand WvW dynamic and mechanics revolves arround guilds/commanders flipping stuff without them there is no WvW so yeah changes need to be made into keep the game healthy interesting and fun for those poeple in order for the game mode to even exist.