CETheLucid.3964 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. You should understand that such a metric is difficult to measure since players who command tagless are willingly opting out of the metric they would use to measure this. It is something Anet should consider though as it certainly is something that happens. Something along the lines of: If this player has an ungodly amount of time in WvW + owns a tag, but with fewer hours on tag than should be expected, player is potentially a tagless commander. Something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50? > > > > > > They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"CETheLucid.3964" said: > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. > > You should understand that such a metric is difficult to measure since players who command tagless are willingly opting out of the metric they would use to measure this. It is something Anet should consider though as it certainly is something that happens. > > Something along the lines of: If this player has an ungodly amount of time in WvW + owns a tag, but with fewer hours on tag than should be expected, player is potentially a tagless commander. > > Something like that. Or they'll see who in a tagless squad is throwing siege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"CETheLucid.3964" said: > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. > > You should understand that such a metric is difficult to measure since players who command tagless are willingly opting out of the metric they would use to measure this. It is something Anet should consider though as it certainly is something that happens. > > Something along the lines of: If this player has an ungodly amount of time in WvW + owns a tag, but with fewer hours on tag than should be expected, player is potentially a tagless commander. > > Something like that. Yes such a metric is difficult to measure which is my entire point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormPE.8201 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 I'm seeing quite a few concerns brought up very regularly as I try to keep up with this conversation, and I'd like to see some more explanation from the individuals with these concerns so that I can understand their positions better (and hopefully the development team as well). I'll try to keep my questions concise and worded clearly when possible. **1. While guilds and alliances will have something to fight for (their own reputation), players that choose to play alone or avoid guild association will lose a sense of community with the server/world they've been a part of for so long.** * Why do you choose to play WvW alone? * What benefit do you gain from avoiding guild association that you do gain from server association? * What would be the difference between your current situation if you were to join a 'casual/community' guild/alliance for shard placements only and not rep a guild tag? * What specific parts of WvW do you enjoy most or feel are the most rewarding as a solo player? * What options exist for the proposed WvW changes to be implemented while addressing your concerns for losing your identity? **2. There will be guilds/alliances that will use performance metrics to trim their rosters and create elite fight squads.** * As this already happens on every server I've played on in WvW, why is this suddenly a serious concern? * If you aren't interested in joining an elite fight squad with strict regulations, why would this effect you? * Since 'stacked' alliances will likely be matched against each other because of algorithm metrics, what prevents you from joining a large casual alliance to avoid them? **3. There are some players that belong to multiple WvW guilds or already have full guild slots, and these changes would be difficult for those players to embrace.** * Would your issue be resolved if there was an extra guild slot added with the changes to compensate for the more strict 1 guild/alliance requirement for shard placement? * Would you be better able to accommodate your multiple guilds if WvW tagged guilds were more easily able to aquire the WvW buffs? * How open are your multiple guilds about forming an alliance to allow their players to play WvW together? * Would you be better off being sorted based on your friends list rather than a guild? **4. Role players exist in World vs World and their ability to find each other is being called into question.** * For those of us that don't participate in RP, what is WvW used for by your community? * Is creating a guild or alliance possible by your community to help you stick together and possibly create an even more close-knit group? * Would creating a Teamspeak or Discord server help the RP community stay in touch and interact more in game? * If a toggle for RP was added to the hero menu to help sort you into maps, would your concerns be alleviated? I believe answering some of these questions objectively could go a long way in furthering constructive discussion about those most affected by these changes. From my personal perspective, I believe communication and organization options will become incredibly important for these WvW changes to succeed. My personal suggestion for approaching in game communication would be the addition of map markers for use by squad leaders and commanders. Markers as simple as a "My squad is moving here", "Enemy group spotted here", "Please help defend this objective" would go a very long way in helping entire shards coordinate strategy without voice chat. I believe alliances and guilds will likely utilize their own Teamspeak or Discord servers as well as web pages as servers have done in the past, but extra communication will be needed for strategic planning between guilds and alliances. It will be even more important for pugs and roamers that choose to operate independently. I mentioned in my previous post about roles for squads and commanders as well. I think allowing commanders and squads to declare their desired goals/role on the map would be very helpful to non guilded/allied players to coordinate with existing organized groups. Roles like "Roaming", "Fighting", "Objectives", "Scouting" could really help bolster shard organization in the absence of centralized voice communication. With the server identities being relegated to alliances (or seemingly dissolved for players not inclined to join a community alliance), I believe that it's important to engage those players in other ways. Finding a way to allow them to contribute in **visible** and **meaningful** ways to their assigned shard, while also being rewarded for that contribution will be very important. Guilds and alliances will be fighting for prestige and reputation, and hopefully there will be stats added to the API to allow that glory to be broadcast to the masses, but it's imperative that solo players aren't left in the shadow of guilds. There are many scouts and roamers that do great work that's appreciated by large and small guilds alike, and that work needs a way to be recognized season to season. Allowing those players to gain a **visible** and **perpetuating** reputation among players outside their current shard is necessary. It is my belief that these changes to WvW will help foster a more healthy game mode, and the developer interaction with World Vs World players is very welcome. I'd like to urge the WvW community to work hard to not only voice their concerns, but explain them as well. The more information the developers have at their disposal, the better the result we can hope to receive. Thank you to everyone who has spent time in this thread to correct misunderstandings and project their concerns and constructive feedback for the betterment of a game mode that we're all passionate about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50? > > > > > > > > > They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. > > > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. You're confusing opinion with fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PookieDaWombat.6209 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Swamurabi.7890" said: > There's a reason it's called WORLD vs WORLD and not squad vs. squad Were you trying to be ironic here? Honest question. Because you DO realize that this whole idea is literally taking away the concept of "Worlds" and instituting the concept of "Squads". I mean...you DO get that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CETheLucid.3964 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > Or they'll see who in a tagless squad is throwing siege. I guess? Possibly? Though I personally doubt that would be something you could use to reliably determine such a niche thing. That's game politics/trolls and something a metric can't solve in of itself. > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > Yes such a metric is difficult to measure which is my entire point. Aye. With regards to tagless commanders, even if my proposed metric is not strictly true for an individual, for the sake of a metric it is better than nothing. Said player would at least (hopefully) have competency in the game mode that they could be a passable commander if they absolutely needed to be if nothing else? I can't really imagine any other way they could judge the metric of tagless commanders when the metric they could use, the tag, isn't being used. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"CETheLucid.3964" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > Or they'll see who in a tagless squad is throwing siege. > > I guess? Possibly? Though I personally doubt that would be something you could use to reliably determine such a niche thing. That's game politics/trolls and something a metric can't solve in of itself. > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > Yes such a metric is difficult to measure which is my entire point. > > Aye. With regards to tagless commanders, even if my proposed metric is not strictly true for an individual, for the sake of a metric it is better than nothing. > > Said player would at least (hopefully) have competency in the game mode that they could be a passable commander if they absolutely needed to be if nothing else? I can't really imagine any other way they could judge the metric of tagless commanders when the metric they could use, the tag, isn't being used. lol I just wouldn't use commander hood as a metric. I think their are other metrics they could use. Or they could perhaps use the commander metric but not directly in relation to player hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > > What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50? > > > > > > > > > > > > They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. > > > > > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > You're confusing opinion with fact. If you have a guild of 50 people, and they all average 100 hours a week (just using nice round numbers here to make math easy), and you have larger squads so they double your commanders wvw time so you magically have 200 hours. That extra 100 hours on your 50 person guild with 5000 total hours for the week is pretty small. Just a little food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > > > What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. > > > > > > > > thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. > > > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > > > You're confusing opinion with fact. > > If you have a guild of 50 people, and they all average 100 hours a week (just using nice round numbers here to make math easy), and you have larger squads so they double your commanders wvw time so you magically have 200 hours. That extra 100 hours on your 50 person guild with 5000 total hours for the week is pretty small. Just a little food for thought. their numbers in calculation are estimations and examples.. Yet still 50 adds up considering the number of commanders on a server That small number could mean the difference of size capacity, world capacity amonst other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"CETheLucid.3964" said: > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > Or they'll see who in a tagless squad is throwing siege. > > > > I guess? Possibly? Though I personally doubt that would be something you could use to reliably determine such a niche thing. That's game politics/trolls and something a metric can't solve in of itself. > > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > Yes such a metric is difficult to measure which is my entire point. > > > > Aye. With regards to tagless commanders, even if my proposed metric is not strictly true for an individual, for the sake of a metric it is better than nothing. > > > > Said player would at least (hopefully) have competency in the game mode that they could be a passable commander if they absolutely needed to be if nothing else? I can't really imagine any other way they could judge the metric of tagless commanders when the metric they could use, the tag, isn't being used. lol > > I just wouldn't use commander hood as a metric. I think their are other metrics they could use. Or they could perhaps use the commander metric but not directly in relation to player hours. I see why they are wanting to use it though so preconceived notions that wvw is dead because there aren't any tags running around is something Anet is probably wanting to avoid. Is it the way they should be doing their calculations probably not. They should probably try to divide it up so that server A has X ammount of hours of people being tagged, and Server B has a similar ammount of hours with people tagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben K.6238 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Ben K.6238" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. > > I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. > > This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > @"Ben K.6238" said: > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > > > I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. > > > > I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. > > > > This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. > > Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CETheLucid.3964 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > I just wouldn't use commander hood as a metric. I think their are other metrics they could use. Or they could perhaps use the commander metric but not directly in relation to player hours. That's fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstealer.5978 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"Zephyr.8015" said: > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > @"Zephyr.8015" said: > > > > > > > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > > > @"Zephyr.8015" said: > > > > > > > @"Raymond Lukes.6305" said: > > > > > > > There has been some talk about using Blackgate as an example in the post. Blackgate has been at the top of player activity hours in WvW for a very long time in NA. BG's numbers are twice as big as the average world on NA (without world linking) and 30% larger then the average NA host world. I'm not saying Blackgate hasn't suffered losses of players and coverage but BG is still on top for activity. IT'S NOT JUST BLACKGATE though. > > > > > > > Here are all the worlds in NA and EU ordered by size names have been omitted to protect the innocent: > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you're are saying that BG has the most WvW hours played, you are not saying that BG has the most players. Played hours does NOT equal population. It is unfair to say that in general. Like tonight we have scouts, commanders, and players in general that spend hours or most of their day in WvW. BG players have stated numerous times that we have dedicated players and guilds who care about our standing in WvW. > > > > > > > > > > Server status and WvW population takes into account play time hours. This is showing playtime hours. which depicts your WvW population. Its perfectly fair to make this assessment and its accurate. This is why in Tier 1 to compete you need a link and the server trapped below BG have enough to be locked but not enough to compete. It literally explains everything we've been experiencing and the reasons as to why Tier 1 is avoided. Because giving servers a link to compete against something that's taken the last 5 years to organize in a 2 month time frame is damaging to those around it. The linked pairs are servers that can equal or even out pace BG in terms of player activity but not the ability to organize and coordinate given the time frame. There is never an even playing field and thus the sense of competitiveness breaks down completely. > > > > > > > > > > BG should not take this as an attack and Arena Net does not intend it to be that. BG is the product of a system design that's no longer present and a system that was indeed flawed. Servers like BG are the last of its kind when the game has broken down and many have left. > > > > > > > > Alright, so 5 BG players play for 2hrs each totaling 10hrs of play time, while on another server lets say for example's sake JQ has 10 players play for 1hr each. Its the same amount of play time just spread differently. While another server has twice the amount of players in the same playtime. This is why I said playtime does not equal players aka population. You can have extremes on both sides, players going into WvW for 10mins to do a daily vet slayer, to Commanders doing a 4hr raid. What I am saying is very plausible that BG has players playing longer hours than other servers. There is also a plausible thing to say that other servers may have players that care less about WvW. This is why I am stating, played hours does not equal players on a server. The chart linked shows total played hours in WvW, Anet saying BG has the most WvW played hours. If you have servers that don't care about WvW as a game type then yes they will have low hours. This chart depending on the players and how much they play is easily skew-able, and is not a good representation of the amount of players. Also a good example is Maguuma, I've watched their population changes from Tier 2, to T1. They go from high positions in all timeslots, to complete opposite when they come up to Tier 1. There is no system anet can put in place to force a server or an alliance to play a game type; that desire has to come from the players want and striving to do better. I am stating that there is a lot more information that goes into a chart like that, and it is not objective or accurate to think that just because BG has the most played hours in WvW that it must equal that we have the most players. > > > > > > Read carefully. Not only did arena net said BGs NUMBERS doubles that of an average server but they're 30% bigger in active population. Not only does BG outnumber everyone drastically but they also are 30% more active by player hours. > > > > To directly copy what the GM said: There has been some talk about using Blackgate as an example in the post. Blackgate has been at the top of player activity hours in WvW for a very long time in NA. BG's numbers are twice as big as the average world on NA (without world linking) and 30% larger then the average NA host world. I'm not saying Blackgate hasn't suffered losses of players and coverage but BG is still on top for activity. IT'S NOT JUST BLACKGATE though. > > Here are all the worlds in NA and EU ordered by size names have been omitted to protect the innocent: his/her entire post is about WvW ACTIVITY. Blackgate has been at the top of of PLAYER ACTIVITY HOURS. Those numbers aka hours are twice as big as the average NA world, and 30% larger than a NA+Link. So that's what I am reading. So I stand by my point that activity hours in a game type does not equal player population on a server. > > Player activity is the only thing that determines population status. Do you understand. And BG had everyone beat by double. Counting physical accounts is largely pointless because if we were to do that then each server has about 100k+ accounts able to enter wvw. Your points dont make sense. BG is stacked to death. Arena Net pointed it out. This.. 100% When this kind of stack up gets transferred into the new algorithm.. it's is obvious to see that the same stacking effect will exist every 8 weeks, but rather than having a server dominating two others you will get a complete matchups dominated by 1 alliance broken down across each world effectively making it a fight amongst yourself gamemode.... likely to satisfy the GvG crowd. What is left will make for lop sided matchups , dead rubbers.. ooh just like just like we have now. The missing info that I believe lays behind this light bulb moment.. the gamble on an increase in players willingness to xfer around to find some fun rather than festering on dead or dominated matchups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > @"Ben K.6238" said: > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > > > > > I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. > > > > > > I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. > > > > > > This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. > > > > Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. > > a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though.. Super effective just the same as a 5-8 man group? If your 25 person group is just as effective as a 5-8 person group you're doing something wrong. If you're just as effective as a 25+ person group then why are you afraid to tag, you're adding only a fraction of total wvw time to your guild's total wvw hours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PookieDaWombat.6209 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Arlette.9684" said: > @"McKenna Berdrow.2759" > > Would the new system allow you to implement a simple command, similar to /age to show KDR, and other relevant stats, showing individual players how they stack up, in the grand scheme of all? No. just no. This would just be yet another bit of data some will either want to mine or "require" from people. Just no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArenaNet Staff Raymond Lukes.6305 Posted February 2, 2018 ArenaNet Staff Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Mr Green.4157" said: > From what I understand and I could be wrong I don't think they will weigh all alliances equally. Your alliances active hours are what matters so joining an alliance should be more centered around ensuring you get to play with the guilds you want to play with. Which means that if they are a guild you like there is a point to joining the alliance even if they are like your guild. This is correct. By declaring a WvW guild, you are simply saying, “add me to the same world as these folks.” That is the base level of what is happening. Rather than putting players in that guild into a world separately, the system will put them all into the same world. The world’s population will increase based on the adjusted play hours of each of those players. This is the same idea for alliances. Alliances at the base level are just treating a group of guilds as if they were one large guild and assigning those players to the same world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaLeVoLenT.8129 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > @"Ben K.6238" said: > > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > > > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > > > > > > > I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. > > > > > > > > I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. > > > > > > > > This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. > > > > > > Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. > > > > a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though.. > > Super effective just the same as a 5-8 man group? If your 25 person group is just as effective as a 5-8 person group you're doing something wrong. If you're just as effective as a 25+ person group then why are you afraid to tag, you're adding only a fraction of total wvw time to your guild's total wvw hours? No read again. I said a 25 man can be Super effective just the same as a 5- 8 man can be super effective. I did not say they will put in the same amount of work or do the samethings. I said they can both be super effective within their given play styles. Those play styles may differ, but who are you to say what is and isnt effective based off my play style? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Haired Savage.5430 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > @"Ben K.6238" said: > > > > > > @"Red Haired Savage.5430" said: > > > > > > > > > > > > That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. > > > > > > > > > > I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. > > > > > > > > > > I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. > > > > > > > > > > This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. > > > > > > > > Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. > > > > > > a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though.. > > > > Super effective just the same as a 5-8 man group? If your 25 person group is just as effective as a 5-8 person group you're doing something wrong. If you're just as effective as a 25+ person group then why are you afraid to tag, you're adding only a fraction of total wvw time to your guild's total wvw hours? > > No read again. I said a 25 man can be Super effective just the same as a 5- 8 man can be super effective. I did not say they will put in the same amount of work or do the samethings. I said they can both be super effective within their given play styles. Those play styles may differ, but who are you to say what is and isnt effective based off my play style? You're worried about a minuscule amount of hours added to your guild's total wvw play time (that doesn't fill up your server btw, its still raw accounts). Anet will just be shuffling accounts around so that your world's total combined play hours are similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobee.1567 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 is nice and good work about the new change , but i dont know anet for Eotm have any idea to change the map to test new maps or modify ? most of ppl dont like the Eotm map reason : 1. too big ( same with red borderland ) 2. falling to sky and DIE 3. have alot stupid auto attack siege i dont know anet have possible to make gw2 wvw style near this with_# **_ tyria world version_**_ B)  have alot different maps let players or guild to start to wars in which one types map  anyway good to see anet start to work on wvw , if wanna make wvw become to long term and fresh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard.8207 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"MaLeVoLenT.8129" said: > What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50? > Of course this is a flawed example but you get the point. Pins are used for strategy and coordination. They should not be used to determine server status or or they shouldn't increase someones play time for wearing one. Of course people will game the system. If pins get valued, trolls will run pins just to tank whoever gets stuck with them in the next matchup. If you count kill-death ratios, people will tank one account while playing another. The only way to avoid gaming the system is aligning rewards properly to make gaming the system cost more than it gains, and the more complicated the system is, the harder it is to align rewards properly. There’s a reason so many games use little beyond ELO for matchmaking, and give better rewards for higher ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SugarCayne.3098 Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 > @"CETheLucid.3964" said: > > @"SugarCayne.3098" said: > > ... as a pug you don’t care. > > Okay? Enjoy your random placement? You choose that. If you want it to be not so random, take active steps to be where you want to be with friends, family, guildies, people you want to play with. You have some months, maybe a year to get it figured out. Get on that buddy. Out of context that's a great response. Try pairing it with the rest of the comment. 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