Bloodstealer.5978 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"morrolan.9608" said: > > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > > As i have said those same dominant servers will still try fo manipulate this as best they can each matchup. Those superguilds will stay thec same regardless of matchup it just means they will be controlling a whole matchup by virtue of the fact the guild will be fighting against itself... like a gvgvg arena. The rest will just be chasing footsteps around. > > The alliances are mooted to be only 20% of the population of a world, they won't be able to manipulate it. I wouldn;t mind betting an alliance will be closer to 500 members than 1000 so it may be smaller. > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > That attrition has already occurred in WvW and its in a worse state than PvP, it was happening before HOT, HOT accelerated it for a while but it continued to decline until legendary armor where it got a brief uptick but the grind turned people off and it declined again. This proposal is essentially a last resort. Last resort maybe .. but an ideal opportunity to create power vacuums in the gamemode and the one thing power vacuums do is to create fluidity, which in turn makes money out of a bad egg... xfers on a more regular basis is the kerching in this perfect storm.... We forget all this is not about our benefit.. pure genius :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodstealer.5978 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > > > > Except the new superguilds wont be community guilds.. they will want to do what they do best now and that is dominate.. the power vacuum this will create will only heighten the need for less open community format to rigid rule of dominance and all the drama and tensions that will likely come with it... it does not matter if every 8 weeks the decks get shuffled, those guilds will always look to manipulate the rules once those power guilds are established otherwise what is the point of creating the guild if not to dominate as a guild each matchup. > > You think having 500 randoms every month is what they are looking to lead.. it will just mean that guilds/alliances will simply use the system to create superguild matchups, likely between themselves once they have all their alliances placed, leaders established and communication channels opened.. the rest will just have to feed off the leftovers. > > When was the last time you saw a commander lead 500 people on EB or a border? Existing 500 man guilds arent exactly fighting for space, are they? > > 500 is *alot* of people and trust me, no guild leader will keep track of what everyone is doing 24/7. Will there be dedicated core? For sure. Just like there is now in such guilds. But thats more like 50 core with room for 450 randoms. > > It doesnt matter if "superguilds" *want* to dominate their world, they wont be able to. Its a game, not a bloody corporation with dedicated managers and paid employees. > > As I have mentioned many times before, the people that are playing WvW *now* are the same people that will play WvW *after* the change. Someone online 2 hours at 18-20 3 days a week isnt magically transforming into someone that has 24/7 coverage every day of the week in order to win. The change doesnt create players out of thin air to fill your "superguilds". What we have now is what you have after. Its not about leading 500 its about how that 500 can be manipulated to your advantage.. wvwvwv now becomes a gvgvg scenario once that 500 is split across matchups, its not rocket science to understand that the power guilds on each server will want to retain their dominance .. otherwise it will be just as you say a leader leading 500 randoms.. no thanks. Of course at the moment this is all individual thoughts and possibly emotive thinking but time will tell if this changes anything.. for me, I believe this change will hurt wvw even more than before, I think it will make it much worse for small guilds and solo players that don't wish to be part of that kind of structure and with severs now loosing what little identity they had completely those small guilds risk being pulled into that power vacuum and become subservient to elite guilds or worse broken up, along with the server community as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > Lets not forget those superguild leaders are likely only going to allow you entrance into the elite zergwar if your prepared to only play the meta class/build that they believe metabattle says is gold from one matchup to the next otherwise be prepared to play alone chasing in their footsteps. Why do you suggest that this is something related to the WvW restructuring - which is glorified server links? Doesn't this already happen now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Bloodstealer.5978" said: > wvwvwv now becomes a gvgvg scenario once that 500 is split across matchups, I'm not understanding how you get from Restructuring to GvG. Didn't GvG arise from server-based WvW and had its golden years already? What did Titan Alliance, et al, do in the first few months of the game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? --- Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” --- Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. You must research this well. " --- Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi https://archive.org/stream/MiyamotoMusashi-BookOfFiveRingsgoRinNoSho/Book_of_Five_Rings_djvu.txt --- Miyamoto Musashi Top 10 Quotes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Diku.2546" said: > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > --- > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > --- > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > You must research this well. " > > --- > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ What? The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diku.2546 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > @"Chaba.5410" said: > What? > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. --- I'd like to apologize for being cryptic, but I'm referencing a famous & well-know swordsman's teaching. Miyamoto Mushashi's Book of Five Rings....is a very literal documentation of his life's wisdom as a warrior. I hope I don't muddle up what Miyamoto Mushashi is saying below with my edits....but here goes: --- Know the small things & big things. How to win in large-scale applies to small-scale. Reverse can be said to be true. As Miyamoto Musashi tried to impart to his followers regarding "His Way" (Heiho). "You must research this well. " --- Strategy: "Heiho" is a word of Chinese derivation meaning military strategy. "Hei" means soldier and "Ho" means method or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. No. You'll be in their world for the remainder of the 8 week matchup. If you are in a guild, then getting kicked from a guild happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater of Peeps.9062 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 Some in here recently seem to be having a comprehension issue with my post. I did not say pugs won't be able to join or play in the green/blue/red worlds - if that is how you took, please let me clarify again. I mean pugs won't have a wvw experience that is a wvw experience - either similar to what they experience now in wvw or similar to what all other players in the new and improved system will experience. They will be kicked to the curb. THat is inherent in the design - anet is not kicking the guilds to the curb - they are giving them total control, with not only no input from the pugs, but no place for the pugs either. Think about it - you have say, for example - 1 guild each on 5 maps for a total of 5 guilds (50 people each guild - assume nice robust guilds/players)working together in an alliance. You have another 100 pugs per map. (This is an example - I don't know what the actual number will be). All of those guilds are fighting guilds, working hard to win, forming a super alliance. They are all closed squads - ie - must have right builds/class/gear/attitudes, etc. to win cuz we want to win always. Where do pugs play? Running alongside the zerg 24/7 (or roaming/gankers - which they have no real change) - dying more, no protections, hurting the alliances (or ignored), hurting their own personal ranking/score. No opportunities to get in squad (unless someone is benevolent - oh boy, I can't wait for that) ever. If you have a zerg build running solo, you are done forever. So why play? Many good dedicated solo silent iconoclasts are running zerg builds solo. They will be kicked to the curb. Also, this type of system will encourage soloers to die more/play crappy so they get can affiliated with the super alliances/guilds at least every 8 weeks - but even then, their game play will be hollow EOTM experience unless they capitulate and join a guild and all the rigidity/rules/banter, etc. that entails. I have suggested a random assignment free-for-all for everyone - you can meet up with your guildies once assigned. Open squads for everyone - everything random. It would definitely be more challenging/vibrant = it would be all inclusive and everyone working 24/7 to win. Isn't this the goal, to revitalize, rather than to impose an exclusionary punitive system that will result in more attrition and cliquishness. I have also seen more suggestions by others, including making bg a superpower that must fend off 2 v1s for control of smc etc. This seems a good approach as well. I am not here to suggest the perfect system - that is Anet's job, not mine. I would like my viewpoint, as a dedicated pug who plays not for rewards but for the love of the game (yes I play each night even after my diamond rewards have been met) who does not wish to be controlled or excluded by a dominating superalliance/guild composition system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > > > > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. > > No. You'll be in their world for the remainder of the 8 week matchup. > > If you are in a guild, then getting kicked from a guild happens. right and cast to the winds like I said, and all cohesion that you have left (your guild members) is lost and now its Eotm for you. compare that to now we have servers and a community, with this change, it will be the end of all community, and your sense of community will be dictated by the whims of a guild leader/officer, so like I said, they have too much power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > --- > > > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > > > --- > > > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > > > You must research this well. " > > > > --- > > > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ > > What? > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. This new change is no differnt from season 1 of pvp. If someone is a pug and they want to play with good alliances? WHats to stop an individual from tanking their rating for 8 weeks so the following 8 weeks they get to play with good alliances? Or in the sense of an alliance, whats to stop an alliance from deliberately tanking their rating in order to fight against weaker alliances they can then trounce. How is this even a solution? They already tried this and it failed spectacularly in spvp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > > > > > > > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. > > > > No. You'll be in their world for the remainder of the 8 week matchup. > > > > If you are in a guild, then getting kicked from a guild happens. > > right and cast to the winds like I said, and all cohesion that you have left (your guild members) is lost and now its Eotm for you. compare that to now we have servers and a community, with this change, it will be the end of all community, and your sense of community will be dictated by the whims of a guild leader/officer, so like I said, they have too much power. Again. Why would you NEED to go to EOTM? And if you were that close knit with your guild, why would you get kicked out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > > > > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > > > > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > > > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > > > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > > > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > > > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > > > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > > > > > You must research this well. " > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > > > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ > > > > What? > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > This new change is no differnt from season 1 of pvp. If someone is a pug and they want to play with good alliances? WHats to stop an individual from tanking their rating for 8 weeks so the following 8 weeks they get to play with good alliances? Or in the sense of an alliance, whats to stop an alliance from deliberately tanking their rating in order to fight against weaker alliances they can then trounce. How is this even a solution? They already tried this and it failed spectacularly in spvp. It's very different. There will be at most 2 alliances which will make up 40% of the 'world'. I.e. Based on your analogy: 2 out of 5 sPvP spots. The remainder will be made up of essentially HoT joins. The analogy doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > > > > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > > > > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > > > > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > > > > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. > > > > > > No. You'll be in their world for the remainder of the 8 week matchup. > > > > > > If you are in a guild, then getting kicked from a guild happens. > > > > right and cast to the winds like I said, and all cohesion that you have left (your guild members) is lost and now its Eotm for you. compare that to now we have servers and a community, with this change, it will be the end of all community, and your sense of community will be dictated by the whims of a guild leader/officer, so like I said, they have too much power. > > Again. Why would you NEED to go to EOTM? > > And if you were that close knit with your guild, why would you get kicked out? > > You don't understand wvw will become EoTM with the new system, if you have no guild it is essentially eotm, its identical almost to that game mode, it is no longer wvw because there are no servers. People can get kicked out for any reason, maybe the guild leader is having a bad day, and then, because you are kicked out your game play in wvw is now severely impacted in the sense that you lose cohesion and camaraderie as in the next 8 weeks you will be physically separated from your guild members, as they will go to a different wvw instance then you will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > > > > > > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > > > > > > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > > > > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > > > > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > > > > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > > > > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > > > > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > > > > > > > You must research this well. " > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > > > > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ > > > > > > What? > > > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > > > This new change is no differnt from season 1 of pvp. If someone is a pug and they want to play with good alliances? WHats to stop an individual from tanking their rating for 8 weeks so the following 8 weeks they get to play with good alliances? Or in the sense of an alliance, whats to stop an alliance from deliberately tanking their rating in order to fight against weaker alliances they can then trounce. How is this even a solution? They already tried this and it failed spectacularly in spvp. > > It's very different. There will be at most 2 alliances which will make up 40% of the 'world'. I.e. Based on your analogy: 2 out of 5 sPvP spots. The remainder will be made up of essentially HoT joins. > > The analogy doesn't work. It does work, If someone deliberately tanks their personal ranking, they will be placed on wvw maps in the next 8 weeks with the best alliances. Its theoretically possible that if you tank your personal wvw rating far enough, you might get to play with good alliances for the next 2-3 wvw matchup changes. This is what people did in spvp, to get an advantage, and it worked and anet was forced to change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auri.1365 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > It does work, If someone deliberately tanks their personal ranking, they will be placed on wvw maps in the next 8 weeks with the best alliances. Its theoretically possible that if you tank your personal wvw rating far enough, you might get to play with good alliances for the next 2-3 wvw matchup changes. This is what people did in spvp, to get an advantage, and it worked and anet was forced to change it. There is no personal ranking in wvw regarding skill, only play hours. If there are 9 worlds, each with a big alliance and there are several players that "tanked" their rating/play hours, these players will just be spread between the worlds. You would have no guarantee to end up with the "good alliances". Maybe big alliances find ways to game the system, e.g. a whole alliance tanking their play hours to get more additional players or even a second alliance and then they could dominate the match up. They would just have a boring match as no one would want to fight them. As we don't know the details of the system we don't know if this even would be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > > > > > > > > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > > > > > > > > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > > > > > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > > > > > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > > > > > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > > > > > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > > > > > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > > > > > > > > > You must research this well. " > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > > > > > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ > > > > > > > > What? > > > > > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > > > > > This new change is no differnt from season 1 of pvp. If someone is a pug and they want to play with good alliances? WHats to stop an individual from tanking their rating for 8 weeks so the following 8 weeks they get to play with good alliances? Or in the sense of an alliance, whats to stop an alliance from deliberately tanking their rating in order to fight against weaker alliances they can then trounce. How is this even a solution? They already tried this and it failed spectacularly in spvp. > > > > It's very different. There will be at most 2 alliances which will make up 40% of the 'world'. I.e. Based on your analogy: 2 out of 5 sPvP spots. The remainder will be made up of essentially HoT joins. > > > > The analogy doesn't work. > > It does work, If someone deliberately tanks their personal ranking, they will be placed on wvw maps in the next 8 weeks with the best alliances. Its theoretically possible that if you tank your personal wvw rating far enough, you might get to play with good alliances for the next 2-3 wvw matchup changes. This is what people did in spvp, to get an advantage, and it worked and anet was forced to change it. The post above this one from @"Auri.1365" explains that placement will be based on play hours per the FAQs. There is no personal ranking system other than WvW ranks, which, in either case, would move the experienced PUGs into worlds with less successful Alliances if what you atebstating is used for Matchups. You can't tank your WvW ranks. You could tank play hours, but most vets don't want that. And let's, for arguments sake, say people do, you would get 8 weeks of that, but then they would be bumped for the next 8 weeks. Or they would try to join a guild in the Alliance, There will be ways to game the alliances, if people want to, much like the way people games the current system and the links. But it won't be to the detriment of PUGs any more than if the guilds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Diku.2546" said: > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > What? > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > --- > > I'd like to apologize for being cryptic, but I'm referencing a famous & well-know swordsman's teaching. > > Miyamoto Mushashi's Book of Five Rings....is a very literal documentation of his life's wisdom as a warrior. > > I hope I don't muddle up what Miyamoto Mushashi is saying below with my edits....but here goes: > > --- > > Know the small things & big things. > > How to win in large-scale applies to small-scale. Reverse can be said to be true. > > As Miyamoto Musashi tried to impart to his followers regarding "His Way" (Heiho). > > "You must research this well. " > > --- > > Strategy: "Heiho" is a word of Chinese derivation meaning military strategy. "Hei" means soldier and "Ho" means > method or form. So are you agreeing that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? How is that possible when the stated design of Worlds under restructuring will not be the same as a full 5-man queuing sPvP team? Nor will it even be the same as a 3-man team queuing against a full 5-man pug team since all Worlds will be made up mixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Pj.2193 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > What? > > > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > > > --- > > > > I'd like to apologize for being cryptic, but I'm referencing a famous & well-know swordsman's teaching. > > > > Miyamoto Mushashi's Book of Five Rings....is a very literal documentation of his life's wisdom as a warrior. > > > > I hope I don't muddle up what Miyamoto Mushashi is saying below with my edits....but here goes: > > > > --- > > > > Know the small things & big things. > > > > How to win in large-scale applies to small-scale. Reverse can be said to be true. > > > > As Miyamoto Musashi tried to impart to his followers regarding "His Way" (Heiho). > > > > "You must research this well. " > > > > --- > > > > Strategy: "Heiho" is a word of Chinese derivation meaning military strategy. "Hei" means soldier and "Ho" means > > method or form. > > So are you agreeing that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? How is that possible when the stated design of Worlds under restructuring will not be the same as a full 5-man queuing sPvP team? Nor will it even be the same as a 3-man team queuing against a full 5-man pug team since all Worlds will be made up mixed. I expect he is advocating the idea he presented in the last forum iteration in which he was asked to stop posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > @"Diku.2546" said: > > > > @"Chaba.5410" said: > > > > > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > > > > > Have any of you considered that this proposed design will result in exactly the type of debacle and eventual diminution/attrition that occurred in spvp. > > > > > > > > > > In spvp, pro/league bound teams on TS bent on getting to the top of the leaderboards at any cost trounced solo "hot join" pugs and other loosely organized players. They trounced them and sped to the top. > > > > > > > > Why do you drawn an analogy between small sPvP teams where an entire team could enter a match together (not anymore) and essentially "force" out any hotjoins on that team with a World which will be composed of hotjoins plus allied players? > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Hope this helps to shed some light on this topic. I'd like to quote a famous swordsman. > > > > > > “Know the smallest things and the biggest things, the shallowest things and the deepest things. As if it were a straight road mapped out on the ground, the first book is called the Ground book.” > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Also, another good reference is "Crossing the Ford". > > > > > > "In strategy also it is important to "cross at a ford". Discern the enemy's capability > > > and, knowing your own strong points, "cross the ford" at the advantageous place, as a > > > good captain crosses a sea route. If you succeed in crossing at the best place, you may > > > take your ease. To cross at a ford means to attack the enemy's weak point, and to put > > > yourself in an advantageous position. This is how to win in large-scale strategy. The spirit > > > of crossing at a ford is necessary in both large — and small-scale strategy. > > > > > > You must research this well. " > > > > > > --- > > > > > > Book of Five Rings - Miyamoto Musashi > > > https://www.nateliason.com/lessons/book-five-rings-miyamoto-musashi/ > > > > What? > > > > The Restructuring information says all Worlds will be composed of hotjoin pugs, guilds, and alliances. Are you agreeing with Eater of Peeps that a few Worlds will be like a full 5-man sPvP team without hotjoins and other Worlds will be only composed of hotjoin pugs? If you have something to say, you should say it directly instead of trying to be cryptic about it. > > This new change is no differnt from season 1 of pvp. If someone is a pug and they want to play with good alliances? WHats to stop an individual from tanking their rating for 8 weeks so the following 8 weeks they get to play with good alliances? Or in the sense of an alliance, whats to stop an alliance from deliberately tanking their rating in order to fight against weaker alliances they can then trounce. How is this even a solution? They already tried this and it failed spectacularly in spvp. I played in Season 1 of sPvP. Where do you get information that Restructuring is going to be exactly like it? Why do you say that alliances are going to introduce tanking when that already occurs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said: > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > @"Sarrs.4831" said: > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said: > > > > > > > And if you can't get into a solid 500-player alliance? This seems soo risky, leaving the fate of players experience and sense of belonging in wvw, an open game mode, at the whim and sole discretion of guild leaders, who we all have to make nice with now or else. I just don't understand how anet could make such a decision and not factor this glaring variable in. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do you want to play with these people? > > > > > > > > > > I don't like socializing in a guild setting, I don't like people telling me what to do or how to play. I enjoy the familiarity that a server brings and playing with these players on the server but not socializing with them or having them tell me what to do or how to play. When you join a guild, they expect you to interact which I don't want to do, they also expect a ton of other rules, show up this time per week, make sure you rep our guild, respect our officers and guild members, don't say things we dont like ect. ect. ect. I don't want to adhere to this just to play a game mode and enjoy the comradere I have with players in the manner I have it, uninterrupted for the past 6 years in a game mode that should be open to everyone and not moderated or disrupted by the whims of a guild leader/officers or other individuals. I shouldn't have to adhere to these rules made up by a guild leader just to play with the few acquaintances I have made without being cast to the winds. I enjoy playing with other players, but not getting too close and certainly not socializing in a manner in which I am required to play nice and reign in my views on everything or else. > > > > > > > > > > An open game mode, and our capacity to enjoy a cohesive familiar environment that we have enjoyed for the last 6 years will now be dependent on our social skills and our desire to socialize, and I don't agree with this change. > > > > > > > > Again you are imposing *your* restriction on guilds and saying the change is bad because of it. Restrictions that the rest of us dont have, because we are already part of guilds in exactly the way you describe how you want them. This was was solved **years** ago with the update to the guild system. > > > > > > > > I am part of a community guild that I rarely rep (like once a week... maybe), that I rarely talk to and dont really interact with (I rarely join its guild raids as I am a roamer). And guess what - I am even an officer in the guild, lol. > > > > > > > > Its a community guild, its just there. Free guild missions. Chat if you want company, alert on things in WvW if you want to, whatever. The only rule is you get kicked after a couple months offline, because otherwise we hit the 500 cap. > > > > > > > > My main guild I run with every day and rep 99% of the time and is always on discord . Thats my choice. No self imposed restrictions. > > > > > > > > > > Yah and what if you day something they don't like, or bring a build they don't like, or don't adhere to everything they say? Now with the new system you'll be scattered to the winds. Seems like a pretty harsh punishment, and the guilds have too much power. > > > > No. You'll be in their world for the remainder of the 8 week matchup. > > > > If you are in a guild, then getting kicked from a guild happens. > > right and cast to the winds like I said, and all cohesion that you have left (your guild members) is lost and now its Eotm for you. compare that to now we have servers and a community, with this change, it will be the end of all community, and your sense of community will be dictated by the whims of a guild leader/officer, so like I said, they have too much power. Well yeah if the approach to community is that the community you refuse to be part of must support you because you consider it a right to be part of it despite refusing to be part of it, there's gonna be a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaba.5410 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 > @"Eater of Peeps.9062" said: > I mean pugs won't have a wvw experience that is a wvw experience - either similar to what they experience now in wvw or similar to what all other players in the new and improved system will experience. They will be kicked to the curb. THat is inherent in the design - anet is not kicking the guilds to the curb - they are giving them total control, with not only no input from the pugs, but no place for the pugs either. How will it not be similar to now? Like my earlier example I joined a pug tag on my server on Saturday during the double XP weekend and I really didn't know many people in the squad. The only people who got kicked from the squad was players who went offline or were sitting in a PvE map. Squad was always practically full, commander was chat-manding - not on voice comms, map was always queued, took a defended T3 keep even, and everyone had fun. I'm pretty confident those players would do the same thing after restructuring. > Think about it - you have say, for example - 1 guild each on 5 maps for a total of 5 guilds (50 people each guild - assume nice robust guilds/players)working together in an alliance. You have another 100 pugs per map. (This is an example - I don't know what the actual number will be). > > All of those guilds are fighting guilds, working hard to win, forming a super alliance. They are all closed squads - ie - must have right builds/class/gear/attitudes, etc. to win cuz we want to win always. Why do you say all those guilds in your example are fighting guilds? What if one of those guilds is a havoc group that just goes around trying to hit objectives while a main blob is tied up with fighting? What is it about restructuring that you suggest will prevent anything other than fighting guilds? Your example sounds way too hypothetical. > I have suggested a random assignment free-for-all for everyone - you can meet up with your guildies once assigned. Open squads for everyone - everything random. It would definitely be more challenging/vibrant = it would be all inclusive and everyone working 24/7 to win. Isn't this the goal, to revitalize, rather than to impose an exclusionary punitive system that will result in more attrition and cliquishness. We don't know how Anet plans to form teams other than through consideration of participation levels, play hours, etc. Why do you think that randomness would lead to inclusiveness and teamwork? Can you give an example where randomness leads to kumbaya? I doubt very much that all players would suddenly change their behaviors and attitudes and become team players just because they were randomly assigned. This sounds like the topic of many a fiction story, like strangers on an airplane that crashes on an island that holds mysterious secrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caliburn.1845 Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 I think a lot of people don't fully understand that WvW right now is very stratified and exclusive because for most of us winning does not matter, if anything many of us try to avoid winning. So we run closed, try to shake pugs, and look for the fights we consider quality. If alliances succeed in making people care about winning, it will become much more inclusive. You're going to be grouped with a random assortment of other alliances, guilds and solo players, and if you want to win you're going to have to at least marginally be able to work with them. All these fears about guilds being super exclusive, and toxic, and kicking people to the curb are sort of silly when we see that numerous guilds and some entire servers are ALREADY LIKE THIS. Some alliances will no doubt take the exclusive route. And they will lose. The alliances that are more inclusive will win. And the option of whom to join will rest in the hands of the individual player, as it should. 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