World Restructuring

[VAHNeunzehnsechundsiebzig.]

well, I am a bit torn. I value my server. A lot of great people are on that server. But almost all of those great people are in basically 3 or 4 guilds... so with the alliance system, not much will change. On the other hand, there are a couple of people I'd love to play with who are on the 'wrong' server at the moment. So this might be a great way to get them all together.

 

Time will tell, I think, it is worth a try.

[Comprissent.3856]

> @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said:

> Oh my! 18 pages!? Better start reading...

 

Yes, join us . Thank you for this

 

[Ardid.7203]

> @"Rampage.7145" said:

> > @"Ardid.7203" said:

> > > @"Phil.7369" said:

> > >! > Beatiful change, good job.

> > >! > But you should consider a few things, like popular worlds and dead worlds. Otherwise the same issues will arise again.

> > >! >

> > >! > So, what happens for example if Blackgate remains Blackgate-S1 = top server due to its fame and then Blackgate-S2 is then again the top and most populated server, obviously thanks to it's renown. You are basically, again, creating a loop where the experienced and knowledgable players pick out their favorite servers after the 8 weeks period and again create power and population differences. It is guaranteed to happen, the same servers after each 8-week reset, again and again being the top and the typical dead/empty servers where some unfortunate new WVW players happen to land on.

> > >! >

> > >! > Have you considered how to counter this? Perhaps by renaming the servers after each reset? In that case no one can possibly know which server is now the old Blackgate or the old Fort Aspenwood and hence no cherry-picking servers or no alliance-dominated servers, where you can't possibly join in, unless you are part of the alliance. Yes, what you thought that wouldn't happen?

> > >! > Always plan ahead.

> > >! >

> > >! > Second possible solution, remove a number of servers from the game and "squeeze" the Contintent's populations in a specified number of servers. Obviously account for new players by leaving room in the existing servers.

> > >! > Basically, instead of having say 10 servers:

> > >! > 3 with 90% capacity

> > >! > 2 with 80% capacity

> > >! > 3 with 50% capacity

> > >! > 2 with 15% capacity

> > >! >

> > >! > and suffering from unbalance, power issues and dead servers... you could instead leave 6 servers with a population percentage of say 80%+ in each server. Obviously the 6 servers in this example will never achieve perfectly similar populations, with the majority spiking towards the top 2 or 3, but it will serve as a better solution to servers who have absolutely no hope of ever facing a superior (in terms of rankings) server.

> > >! > You have seen what happened throughout all these years Anet. It's always been Blackgate, Blackgate, Blackgate. It hasn't changed and if you don't adapt there will then be a new "hot" server who will dominate again and again after every single 2-month reset.

> > >! >

> > >! > I hope this helps, keep making this the best MMO in existence thanks!

> >

> > But... servers will no longer exist. I don't understand your comment.

>

> Wrong, u did not read the original post didn't you? server will still exist they will be formed by multiple alliances multiple non alliance guilds, multiple random people during the match duration. they will be shaked up every "x" amount of weeks after the season ends, and from that former server the people you can chose to play with is basically the ones that belong to your alliance, people in your current alliance will still play together for the next match up but they will be paired up with different people this time arround (allies and enemies).

 

Ah, you mean "Worlds". I did read the first post, but they never mention "servers", but "worlds". Ok, got it.

Why don't you use the official nomenclature Anet proposes? It would be easier to discuss.

[Phyrexian GoD.1526]

Quick question about Alliances

Will it be possible to pre-determine / show what alliance will be part of which "world" before a matchup? So that for example when 2 of them will want to clash, they dont end up on the same world accidentally and be forced to "cooperate" until the matchup is over. Or alternatively, will Alliances be able to pick a lets say "unclaimed" worlds beforehand to better spread between worlds before the matchup?

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"Chaba.5410" said:

> I don't understand the logic of people who want to remain on some specific team but don't want to invest in being a team member by joining or making a guild or alliance. Why should you get preference over someone who is more dedicated to team-building?

 

Because imperfect, biased, self-interested, prejudicial, human players.

[lbcmak.8076]

If I have to pay to play world against world with my friends I leave the game and I think many will do the same

 

Si tengo que pagar por jugar mundo contra mundo con mis amigos me voy del juego y creo que muchos haran lo mismo

 

[grimshaw.5107]

SIGNAL to NOISE

 

In current WvW I've mostly managed the various map/team chat noise by blocking trollish (or excessively noisey) players (in some cases... large parts of guilds). This works for me today because the WVW groupings have some stability with the same server groupings.

 

What is coming will have a much larger variety of players mixing together and I don't think the current blocklist will suffice. Now, I'm not looking for chat police, but I am looking for a potential update to the blocklist options. For instance, trolly people seem to clump together (for reasons I don't understand), so I'd like to be able to block a whole guild. Really I just want to tune out noise in team/map chat and I wouldn't even mind seeing them messages in say or whispers.

 

So, please consider looking at the ui for friends and blocklists in advance of this wvw change. I'm going to be depending even more on these I think.

 

VOICE

 

The other part of communication is voice. Today I use a large WVW based teamspeak server which does it's best to vet players and ensure we anre't spied on by other servers (which still happens, but it is best effort). I don't see how the current voice options will work well in a dynamic set of server groupings.

 

I don't know that I like any particular answer on this issue, but it may be time to consider including voip directly into the gw2 game client for wvw play (with mandatory push to talk and some muting options) for some limited utility. Otherwise, every 8 weeks we have to get everyone in wvw to join some server (or multiples if different commanders use different services) to have voicechat. Guilds might still choose outside voice service, but onboarding all the people we are randomly paired each season will need to be overcome somehow. And Zeus help us all on the spying.

 

If we don't address voice SOMEHOW then pugs are being neglected. Quite frankly, we were all terrible pug players once and how else do we get them trained without voice? Trained pugs is more fun for them and way more fun for WVW veterans. So we cant't solely rely on guild teamspeak servers alone or pugs will never get better and be a nuisance to everyone forever.

 

 

[Chaba.5410]

> @"ham.8209" said:

> Gift of Mastery ,Gift of Conquering, Gift of War Prosperity, Gift of the Mists will these be removed from wvw . and put back into PVE for crafting where they belong ????

 

If you want to make Legendary WvW armor and backpiece, you need to play WvW. PvE already has different methods for obtaining those items.

[Vast Green.2369]

> @"Grim West.3194" said:

> > @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said:

> > Oh my! 18 pages!? Better start reading...

>

> Don't let the few naysayers stop this. Most of us really like your proposal. WvW needs this.

 

They have strong tendencies to run inside a resonance bubble anyway, speak for yourself please. Or let me answer by "100% of my server comrades that I got to speak to are rabidly against". Does not do much, right? We need LOTS of players to say aye or nay here.

 

[ham.8209]

> @"Loosmaster.8263" said:

> > @"ham.8209" said:

> > > @"Mini Crinny.6190" said:

> > > > @"ham.8209" said:

> > > > @McKenna Berdrow.2759

> > > >

> > > > 1. Gift of Mastery ,Gift of Conquering, Gift of War Prosperity, Gift of the Mists will these be removed from wvw . and put back into PVE for crafting where they belong ????

> > >

> > > >

> > > > 4. or will pve players still be forced to do wvw in order to get these items for crafting ?????

> > >

> > > This is a little off topic.. but just so you know, will they remove map completion for WvW players and give them something else in order to get legendary weapons?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > very off topic to my questions ask

> >

> > but still map completion far as that goes wvw was removed a very long time ago from wvw .

> > so i do not see them putting it back in again . and hope they do not do that at all

> >

> > it be nicer if they removed all that stuff from wvw that pve players like me would like to get but have no none not any at all interests at all in wvw game mode

> >

> > like to see them move that stuff to NPC vendor you go to any town and buy that stuff from them and do your crafting and go back to you fav game mode of choice B)

>

> I think they were countering you with removing PvE world completion to craft a Legendary. Which is in your statement that about playing preferred game mode.

 

honestly between you 2 i am a bit lost on this now :o :/ and not sure what it is fully your trying to get at .

maybe you both can make it more clear ??

 

me i just want to know if they will remove the gifts of battle and so forth and put them back into pve crafting !! even if they use a NPC .

 

 

as well as they make it more clear to us all and more so for us that pve and do not do wvw what server does not at all do wvw and for those

that do wvw to find their new server they want to move to .

 

feels like a hard question to get the answer to a easy question :o

maybe their is other pve players that like to know this as well too even tho they do not feel easy about posting these questions to the anet devs

and hope some one will ask these questions

 

[Blaeys.3102]

While this will likely make the game mode more competitive and give hardcore players a more balanced experience, I think it will also likely push your more casual WvWers out completely. I know dozens of players that enjoy 1-2 days a week in WvW alongside their more hardcore friends. With limited space in alliances, I don't see them making the room for those more casual players - creating a have/have nots dynamic in the game mode. So, while it may seem like a good thing for some, it may be the end of the game mode for many others.

 

It's also worth noting that those same casual players are unlikely to be as active in this subforum as the more hardcore WvWers. Anet really needs a better way to get their feedback on this issue.

[LionZero.3479]

Oh great killing server idenity and seeing familiar faces replaced by an EOTM system where stronger Alliances will get more push-over mu's.

This will obviously lead to those smaller groups and solo players playing less cause less familiar faces around, and then again even less playing cause of the Alliance forming leading to more one sided mu's.

Guess the current glicko and linking mu's weren't good enough despite bringing back activity and variation on EU side at least.

But hey EOTM with Alliance-powercreeping must go on, cause just like desert map people put a lot of time in making it so the show must go on even if it's inferior!

 

 

[Radymski.4987]

Intact you need to give people less chances to manipulate matchups imo reduce server movement or make it very very costly to do so to avoid people bandwagon different alliances just like they do servers or make it so one alliance per 6th months or something

 

Server swapping at cheap price to 500 gems to a t1 server with a link is what messed this up even more

 

Temporary solutions not a complete over reaction and unneeded rework of a game we like. Ull kill the remaining off like me if you so this method.

 

Dnt listen to casual pve scrubs that just want to play wvw for a little and not get farmed screw them l. Let them continue to enjoy pvp I know no respectable wvw main player or commander or pug that wants this chance. Only those people on low servers will. Just delete them merge perma and make it 3k gems to transfer and transfer max Quarterly or something idk

[NiffyinaJiffy.1532]

How is this going to impact those of us that are roamers? Those of us that don't go out to wvw for the ppt but rather the fights? Is this new change going to screw that up?

[Radymski.4987]

This isn't team death match cod.... Keep our servers or I'm out wvw is nothing without servers

 

Screw your alliances.

[primatos.5413]

Offtime capping finally solved ? Population balance solved ? I don´t get ist .. and what about if problems will show up withe these changes .. when will they get fixed ?

 

Or are there plans to put more work in wvw ? If not all these changes are just causing hype for nothing .. Adding some REAL gvg /rvr support instead of Guildhall Arena .. good 4 5vs5 max and making Guilds pay for it was a tragically decision imo

Alliances .. Servers .. don´t see the diference .. the "huge shakup" with merging servers failed imo and nothing was done to try to solve its issues ... it´s ging to be the same with this solution i guess .. and .. do i remember right that a lot of players left bcz of missing balance ? Hm ...not convinced so far .. we´ll see what happenz in the end .. hope for the best .. :)

 

Edit says : and what about the ones with 2 ore more accs? Logging on the one suiting them better will then still a place be locked for the other account(s) on different .. whatever .. faction ?

[Jski.6180]

Its good to have real choose of what team your going to play for i just like to know sizes of these teams and how it will work with the current wvw maps.

[ham.8209]

> @"Chaba.5410" said:

> > @"ham.8209" said:

> > Gift of Mastery ,Gift of Conquering, Gift of War Prosperity, Gift of the Mists will these be removed from wvw . and put back into PVE for crafting where they belong ????

>

> If you want to make Legendary WvW armor and backpiece, you need to play WvW. PvE already has different methods for obtaining those items.

 

with these new changes coming that is not made clear enough to the pve player base .at all

same goes for wiki that does not make it clear just only says you want gift of battle you got to do wvw and that is the only way you can get it

 

if their is some other spot on the wiki that is not maybe linked properly to this . maybe you be kind enough to maybe link that info

but still even with that info right now all that can and could change given the new wvw set up coming .

 

btw case in point i ask a while back about the best non wvw server. that answer was well mixed shale we say

in the new system for wvw it be a good idea to make these things more clear to us all no matter if we do wvw or not :)

do you agree ??

[Chaba.5410]

> @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> While this will likely make the game mode more competitive and give hardcore players a more balanced experience, I think it will also likely push your more casual WvWers out completely. I know dozens of players that enjoy 1-2 days a week in WvW alongside their more hardcore friends. With limited space in alliances, I don't see them making the room for those more casual players - creating a have/have nots dynamic in the game mode. So, while it may seem like a good thing for some, it may be the end of the game mode for many others.

>

> It's also worth noting that those same casual players are unlikely to be as active in this subforum as the more hardcore WvWers. Anet really needs a better way to get their feedback on this issue.

 

If the player is already that casual, there really is no change from what happens now. Those players barely make a blip on the radar of a week-long match.

[eldenbri.1059]

As someone who mostly has roamed solo in WvW, I think it will be a little sad to probably not see some of the other roamers that I've seen on NSP over the last few years. But I think this is an important change for the overall health of WvW, and I'm impressed with both the level of thought and willingness to invest in a change like this. Maybe I'll get a chance to meet and work with some of the roamers I've fought against over the years :)

[Namer.9750]

> @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said:

> Oh my! 18 pages!? Better start reading...

 

I'll make your job easier and say the vast majority of the unique responses is positive for Alliances =) Most of the unique naysayers cite community and 'small roaming' guilds, but I think you guys can go a long way by just reassuring them them they won't be left by the side.

 

> @"Swamurabi.7890" said:

> > @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said:

> > Oh my! 18 pages!? Better start reading...

>

> At least you added a comment on the 18th page instead of stopping after the first day like most other popular WvW threads in the past.

 

Don't disparage him, my dude. Seattle is PST, he's opened this thread first thing after getting to work this morning at 9:15 am.

[Loosmaster.8263]

> @"ham.8209" said:

> > @"Loosmaster.8263" said:

> > > @"ham.8209" said:

> > > > @"Mini Crinny.6190" said:

> > > > > @"ham.8209" said:

> > > > > @McKenna Berdrow.2759

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. Gift of Mastery ,Gift of Conquering, Gift of War Prosperity, Gift of the Mists will these be removed from wvw . and put back into PVE for crafting where they belong ????

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > 4. or will pve players still be forced to do wvw in order to get these items for crafting ?????

> > > >

> > > > This is a little off topic.. but just so you know, will they remove map completion for WvW players and give them something else in order to get legendary weapons?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > very off topic to my questions ask

> > >

> > > but still map completion far as that goes wvw was removed a very long time ago from wvw .

> > > so i do not see them putting it back in again . and hope they do not do that at all

> > >

> > > it be nicer if they removed all that stuff from wvw that pve players like me would like to get but have no none not any at all interests at all in wvw game mode

> > >

> > > like to see them move that stuff to NPC vendor you go to any town and buy that stuff from them and do your crafting and go back to you fav game mode of choice B)

> >

> > I think they were countering you with removing PvE world completion to craft a Legendary. Which is in your statement that about playing preferred game mode.

>

> honestly between you 2 i am a bit lost on this now :o :/ and not sure what it is fully your trying to get at .

> maybe you both can make it more clear ??

>

> me i just want to know if they will remove the gifts of battle and so forth and put them back into pve crafting !! even if they use a NPC .

>

>

> as well as they make it more clear to us all and more so for us that pve and do not do wvw what server does not at all do wvw and for those

> that do wvw to find their new server they want to move to .

>

> feels like a hard question to get the answer to a easy question :o

> maybe their is other pve players that like to know this as well too even tho they do not feel easy about posting these questions to the anet devs

> and hope some one will ask these questions

>

 

Maybe start another thread with that topic and not derail this one.

[Rampage.7145]

> @"Ardid.7203" said:

> > @"Rampage.7145" said:

> > > @"Ardid.7203" said:

> > > > @"Phil.7369" said:

> > > >! > Beatiful change, good job.

> > > >! > But you should consider a few things, like popular worlds and dead worlds. Otherwise the same issues will arise again.

> > > >! >

> > > >! > So, what happens for example if Blackgate remains Blackgate-S1 = top server due to its fame and then Blackgate-S2 is then again the top and most populated server, obviously thanks to it's renown. You are basically, again, creating a loop where the experienced and knowledgable players pick out their favorite servers after the 8 weeks period and again create power and population differences. It is guaranteed to happen, the same servers after each 8-week reset, again and again being the top and the typical dead/empty servers where some unfortunate new WVW players happen to land on.

> > > >! >

> > > >! > Have you considered how to counter this? Perhaps by renaming the servers after each reset? In that case no one can possibly know which server is now the old Blackgate or the old Fort Aspenwood and hence no cherry-picking servers or no alliance-dominated servers, where you can't possibly join in, unless you are part of the alliance. Yes, what you thought that wouldn't happen?

> > > >! > Always plan ahead.

> > > >! >

> > > >! > Second possible solution, remove a number of servers from the game and "squeeze" the Contintent's populations in a specified number of servers. Obviously account for new players by leaving room in the existing servers.

> > > >! > Basically, instead of having say 10 servers:

> > > >! > 3 with 90% capacity

> > > >! > 2 with 80% capacity

> > > >! > 3 with 50% capacity

> > > >! > 2 with 15% capacity

> > > >! >

> > > >! > and suffering from unbalance, power issues and dead servers... you could instead leave 6 servers with a population percentage of say 80%+ in each server. Obviously the 6 servers in this example will never achieve perfectly similar populations, with the majority spiking towards the top 2 or 3, but it will serve as a better solution to servers who have absolutely no hope of ever facing a superior (in terms of rankings) server.

> > > >! > You have seen what happened throughout all these years Anet. It's always been Blackgate, Blackgate, Blackgate. It hasn't changed and if you don't adapt there will then be a new "hot" server who will dominate again and again after every single 2-month reset.

> > > >! >

> > > >! > I hope this helps, keep making this the best MMO in existence thanks!

> > >

> > > But... servers will no longer exist. I don't understand your comment.

> >

> > Wrong, u did not read the original post didn't you? server will still exist they will be formed by multiple alliances multiple non alliance guilds, multiple random people during the match duration. they will be shaked up every "x" amount of weeks after the season ends, and from that former server the people you can chose to play with is basically the ones that belong to your alliance, people in your current alliance will still play together for the next match up but they will be paired up with different people this time arround (allies and enemies).

>

> Ah, you mean "Worlds". I did read the first post, but they never mention "servers", but "worlds". Ok, got it.

> Why don't you use the official nomenclature Anet proposes? It would be easier to discuss.

 

I think in the character selection screen actually says "world selection" my bad, if we go thecnical servers are physical machines where the game is hosted, so yeah worlds is what people know as "servers", they are not real servers; people on "maguuma" are not hosted on a specific physical location depending on what they are doing PvP, PVE, fractals, raids, WvW, they are all instances hosted on multiple servers with different IPs

[Honest John.4673]

> @"Blaeys.3102" said:

> While this will likely make the game mode more competitive and give hardcore players a more balanced experience, I think it will also likely push your more casual WvWers out completely. I know dozens of players that enjoy 1-2 days a week in WvW alongside their more hardcore friends. With limited space in alliances, I don't see them making the room for those more casual players - creating a have/have nots dynamic in the game mode. So, while it may seem like a good thing for some, it may be the end of the game mode for many others.

>

> It's also worth noting that those same casual players are unlikely to be as active in this subforum as the more hardcore WvWers. Anet really needs a better way to get their feedback on this issue.

 

They could simply join those alliances while they can if they cared. But since they're casual, seems like, by definition, they don't care as much. And I suppose heaven forbid hardcore be matched up against hardcore and casual be matched up against casual, that might make for more competitive matches, and I guess you can't have that in a competitive gamemode, right? And woe is me, I won't get to carry all the casual leeches, I'll miss them one-pushing in fights and contributing nothing to the group. But I suppose the casuals are being oppressed into being have-nots by the more hardcore players too, right?

[Radymski.4987]

Also wvw is competitive if you don't like it get lost. Don't pander to the needs of the minority of crap players that get a meta pve builds but refuse to I'm wvw then cry when they suck at it.

 

Tell you what... Give me access to your database on player time, I'll give you a report of top wvw play time and if they lead a squad then I'll send u a list of wvw actual players that you can discuss this with and not turn this into another pve fest....

 

God damn anet you really know how to piss off the wvw core lmao