World Restructuring

[Gwaihir.1745]

Yeah the whole bait n switch is old now. This isn't the first 'massive overhaul' to be first delayed a year and then quietly forgotten.

[Dawdler.8521]

It would be nice to hear from Anet if this is still on the table or if they gave up on it, yes.

[XenesisII.1540]

> @"devious.4605" said:

> To be honest, it wouldn't be the first time Arena net said they would do a major overhaul to WvW only to back peddle.

> If you've been playing WvW since or close to launch you will remember Devon Carver "Major WvW Revamp"

> When it was quietly announced he was no longer with Anet, Devon disclosed on Reddit he hadn't worked on WvW for the prior 8 months.

>

 

You mean this? https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/devon-carver-on-the-future-of-world-vs-world/

Some of it came through, some of it wasn't exactly spelled out what it was like the roles which could have just been what something the ruins or wvw abilities provided.

Let's not forget that wvw team has had a few different devs come and go, two of which we know was pulled off the wvw team for other things, and really that's on the uppers for the delays or stuff not happening, speaking of which we haven't heard from McKenna since like feb, although I don't know if she's been on any of the wvw streams since...

 

The alliance system was apparently in the works before and wasn't announced, but due to conflicting internal feedback they decided that wasn't the route to go at the time, and moved on to links instead which was a quick and easy fix to the dying wvw population after HoT. This time it was announced, so I fully expect they will work on it till finish, however long that is. It's been like 5 months now and they told us upfront it was expected to take a long time, cut them some slack for a couple more months.

[HazyDaisy.4107]

The ND event was supposed to happen at the beginning of May and that was just a week long event. This is a pretty major and a pretty permanent one, 5 months thus far with possibly more months wait isn't a big deal.

[aspirine.5839]

All that alliance talk. They need to fix the goddamn blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

 

[SlippyCheeze.5483]

> @"aspirine.5839" said:

> All that alliance talk. They need to fix the kitten blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

 

It is literally impossible to fix this without imposing some sort of mechanic limitation like "y'all die if you get too close" or something. People will do whatever is most effective, and big groups win easier than small groups.

[aspirine.5839]

> @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > @"aspirine.5839" said:

> > All that alliance talk. They need to fix the kitten blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

>

> It is literally impossible to fix this without imposing some sort of mechanic limitation like "y'all die if you get too close" or something. People will do whatever is most effective, and big groups win easier than small groups.

 

Well they could give it a try in a weekend like the no downstate. Simple as creating a debuff if you are more than 20 in 600 range or something, take 25 % more damage. If more than 20 in 300 range take 30% more damage. Something like that. Just a thought and the mumblings of someone really tired of the mapblob....

[Kovu.7560]

Social Awkwardness week.

Make it happen, Anet.

 

~ Kovu

[dailyroom.3024]

So Anet is going to announce shortly in a blog post that the Alliance update is not gonna happen to mid to late 2019 at the earliest.

Heard here it first guys.

Sh*t not happening folks

[XenesisII.1540]

Reporting live from a closet at anet studios?

[Diku.2546]

While we're waiting...

 

Can we have a "WvW Server Guesting Event"?

 

During the Event...Players are allowed to use the Server Guesting mechanic to visit & Fight on other World Servers?

 

**The game mechanic is already built & working...why not just re-purpose it for a couple of weeks?**

 

ANet could set a Weekly Limit on Which servers & How many servers that we can Guest Fight on.

 

---

 

Also, Players wanting to stack for the win is common knowledge.

 

Let the max map capacity naturally queue up.

 

**Popular World Servers will become like restaurants where folks just have to wait to find a seat to dine there.**

 

Let players decide if they want to "wait" for an open seat at their favorite restaurant...or choose to go somewhere else to dine.

 

---

 

Please...

 

Give players the option to pick their own match-ups using Server Guesting for a couple of weeks.

 

---

 

Guild Wars 2: How To Use Guesting

 

Respectfully,

Diku

[Substance E.4852]

> @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > @"aspirine.5839" said:

> > All that alliance talk. They need to fix the kitten blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

>

> It is literally impossible to fix this without imposing some sort of mechanic limitation like "y'all die if you get too close" or something. People will do whatever is most effective, and big groups win easier than small groups.

 

They could spend the time and resources to code a system that has a dynamic player limit that's based on the total player pop of your enemies.

 

IE, you can't have more than 10 people per map over the lowest server.

 

If server A has 20 people on a map, servers B and C can't get in more than 30. Anyone joining over the limit is put in queue like normal.

 

Make it adjust automatically as server A gets in more. Obviously kicking wouldn't happen. Just don't try and swap toons etc.

 

It's not a perfect system but it would help counter full squads K training on servers that can barely scrape together 12 pugs following a no-coms commander.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > > @"aspirine.5839" said:

> > > All that alliance talk. They need to fix the kitten blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

> >

> > It is literally impossible to fix this without imposing some sort of mechanic limitation like "y'all die if you get too close" or something. People will do whatever is most effective, and big groups win easier than small groups.

>

> They could spend the time and resources to code a system that has a dynamic player limit that's based on the total player pop of your enemies.

>

> IE, you can't have more than 10 people per map over the lowest server.

>

> If server A has 20 people on a map, servers B and C can't get in more than 30. Anyone joining over the limit is put in queue like normal.

>

> Make it adjust automatically as server A gets in more. Obviously kicking wouldn't happen. Just don't try and swap toons etc.

>

> It's not a perfect system but it would help counter full squads K training on servers that can barely scrape together 12 pugs following a no-coms commander.

 

Its definetly not a perfect system as you set the bar on the lowest activity.

 

The problem here become very simple and to make a common example - what if server A only has 5 people because its a Spanish server (1h+ later primetime than the rest) but server B has 80 people wanting to play and server C also have 80 players wanting to get in and they both want to fight each other with a vengance? You're gonna say no sorry only 10 is the max, 70 gets dumped into queue?

 

That is a bad method of "balancing". It becomes *very* bad when you consider how WvW is played in practice. A zerg moving border would become impossible, as would moving a zerg there to respond to the enemy zerg. WvW would grind to a halt as people would get bored being stuck in the same place all the time. Zergs wouldnt start to form, gameplay would fall apart.

[joneirikb.7506]

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

 

I'd generally prefer to scale after the middle server.

 

* A 80

* B 40

* C 10

 

Thus set the scaling after server B, and allow n+10, so server A could have 50 players, against B's 40. To a minimum of 20 or so.

 

This allows for more even battles all over, while only restricting the largest server so it doesn't over-run both the others.

 

As Dawdler pointed out though, it does hurt zerg map hopping.

[Menzo.2185]

I will give some suggestions for when alliance came out...

(sorry my bad english)

 

1- Rebuild all borderlines with new stuffs, such as placing shrines on alpine borderline OR introduce mounts on WvW.

2- Remove Vistas, POI's and HP's from the WvW maps. Is useless.

3- Change the functionality or remove the Centaurs, Quaggans, Skritts... sites. It is currently useless.

4- Limit the amount of siege weapons built inside each location not only by proximity (Keep, Tower and Camp).

5- Battle of Kyhlo treb changes must be introduced at WvW for trebuchets, Arrow Carts, Mortars and, maybe, Cannons.

6- Develop a siege tower that cost a lot of supply to be build, be runnable by only one person (like charr car) and can carry up to 20 ppl at the top. But this siege can only be built at respawn, camp, tower or keep that you own And like omega/alpha golems, if destroyed, kill all who are inside. This will bring a lot of emotions to ppl.

7- WvW glider should have 5 skills. 1: Damage, 2: AOE Damage, 3: AOE Healing, 4: Clear 1 Condition, 5: Evade... similar to Bloodstone Fen.

 

8- New Map

- Alpine Borderline to Green (1st)

- Desert Bordeline to Red (3rd)

- New Map to Blue BL (2nd): Maybe Edge of the Mist Borderline. Will this map still be needed in the future with the alliance changes?

 

9- Introduce to WvW when Alliance comes out:

- WvW League Tab (Previous- Current)

- Guild Skill Rating / Divisions (Bronze - Legendary): Based on the guild contribuition to War Score (Skirmish/Total) and Kill/Death (Skirmish/Total).

This can be done by one single roamer representing their guild per tik or the whole guild.

- Leaderboard (All / Top / Rewards): Rewards like a crown above my head "Gods of WvW": This will bring WvW to a new better level.

- Badges (Bronze - Legendary): To show off how good your guild was in the last season

 

 

* Please!!!!!! Don't launch the Alliance Changes only when a new expansion comes out.

[XenesisII.1540]

Alliance mode is about redistributing the population, not remaking wvw.

 

1. Shrines should stay in desert. Mounts will probably come at the end of this expansion.

2. No point putting work into removing Vista's, POI's, HP's from the maps, it's there, go see them, or not.

3. Again why waste development time on removing stuff on maps unless it's to turn into a useful revamp like adding another tower up there or something.

4. Already discussed at length in the siege thread.

5. Most have already said no to the spvp treb changes for wvw as it changes things unique to wvw, the kyhlo map is small and the change suits it there.

6. How big are these towers? Is pangloss going to have to build a bigger ceiling? What's really the point if you're next to a structure already? I do think they could maybe add player built barricades like they had on desert, but I imagine a lot of things could go wrong with this. Side note you don't get killed in golems if you have the mastery.

7. Barely use gliders other than get from point a to point b, why do we need all these extra skills for it?

8. New map takes a lot of time, there's no current plans for one, certainly not while they're building alliance mode.

9. Additions that can come after alliance mode. Once populations are more evened out I'm sure they could more seriously look at more competitive things to add to wvw.

 

 

[ZNICK.8537]

> @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> 2020. they prob got 1 dev working on it.

 

In fact, this is accurate from what I've been told...

Z

[XenesisII.1540]

> @"ZNICK.8537" said:

> > @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> > 2020. they prob got 1 dev working on it.

>

> In fact, this is accurate from what I've been told...

> Z

 

Reporting live from the drone in the broom closet at anet studios.

[dailyroom.3024]

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> Reporting live from a closet at anet studios?

Well, when you put your ear to the ground you hear stuff.

BTW

[XenesisII.1540]

So you have your ear on the ground in the closet? XD

 

It would be a mistake for them to release information "soon" if the system isn't going to be ready for another year. I originally predicted 6-12 months for them to work on this, if it's going to take the same time it takes to develop a regular expansion, they really announced it way too early, and really do only have 1 dev on it, lol.

 

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"dailyroom.3024" said:

> > @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> > Reporting live from a closet at anet studios?

> Well, when you put your ear to the ground you hear stuff.

>

> BTW

 

There was a discord post from ray himself a month ago too, iirc, so I believe that was talking about a month old comment.

[fewfield.7802]

> @"Menzo.2185" said:

> I will give some suggestions for when alliance came out...

> (sorry my bad english)

>

> 1- Rebuild all borderlines with new stuffs, such as placing shrines on alpine borderline OR introduce mounts on WvW.

 

> 5- Battle of Kyhlo treb changes must be introduced at WvW for trebuchets, Arrow Carts, Mortars and, maybe, Cannons.

> 6- Develop a siege tower that cost a lot of supply to be build, be runnable by only one person (like charr car) and can carry up to 20 ppl at the top. But this siege can only be built at respawn, camp, tower or keep that you own And like omega/alpha golems, if destroyed, kill all who are inside. This will bring a lot of emotions to ppl.

> 7- WvW glider should have 5 skills. 1: Damage, 2: AOE Damage, 3: AOE Healing, 4: Clear 1 Condition, 5: Evade... similar to Bloodstone Fen.

 

> 8- New Map

> - Alpine Borderline to Green (1st)

> - Desert Bordeline to Red (3rd)

> - New Map to Blue BL (2nd): Maybe Edge of the Mist Borderline. Will this map still be needed in the future with the alliance changes?

 

Do you really think that most of main wvw player play wvw because of these fancy machanics ?

You can see a result as the population in the red border. No one wants to go there.

 

The fun part of wvw is massive scale pvp. I can play wvw for 5-6 hrs if i have some decent fights like Blob vs Blob. But i cant even play more than 20 mins against sieges and players hugging tower/keep.

 

 

 

[Redponey.8352]

I dont really think those changes will make great again WvW as it was previously.

 

Actually there is no MMO that provide such dynamic gameplay and combat system with a massive amount of people with a minimum of latency.

Why regular WvW player leave the gamemode? because it has became poor in gameplay/build, less variability in build.

I dont mean that other alternative build are not viable. i mean that one or maybe two build outperform totally all other alternative. This push people to play this "meta build" instead of try several alternative.

 

I have talk with many of friends that have already left the game because of this...

 

**The Major point of this gamemode is** F U N but actually with this non possibility to play with my friend several alternative without totally outperfom by others .

 

We went in a vicious cycle, that regular player doesnt want to get involve to help new player in WvW and left the game, and then started the decrease of population in WvW.

 

One major point that will bring a lot of people back in WvW , is to make a great and huge balance that allow us to play different way (not in number of people) but in Build composition. this change wont bring new content but will use all the content already developed.

 

For example, i loved play core guardian build in WvW but without firebrand specialization in WvW , you're completly behind in DPS/ Support (heal buff) and even in selfsustain.

Same issue with necro, most of all necro , you will check in WvW are scourge (except people who doesnt own PoF) and are in celestial or condi/tank. is it a healthly gamemode? no, we need **VARIABILITY in MetaBuild** . Just look at the past, GW1 was the greatest PvP game ever made because it has completly separate skill (pve/PvP)

it have a lot of skills and possibility to counterplay an other build (it means variability).

 

I think just using the recipe that made GW1 great may help to recover the issue of population in WvW.

 

 

[Substance E.4852]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > > @"SlippyCheeze.5483" said:

> > > > @"aspirine.5839" said:

> > > > All that alliance talk. They need to fix the kitten blobbing that ruins this gamemode once and for all. All I see is one boring mapblob going from object to object.

> > >

> > > It is literally impossible to fix this without imposing some sort of mechanic limitation like "y'all die if you get too close" or something. People will do whatever is most effective, and big groups win easier than small groups.

> >

> > They could spend the time and resources to code a system that has a dynamic player limit that's based on the total player pop of your enemies.

> >

> > IE, you can't have more than 10 people per map over the lowest server.

> >

> > If server A has 20 people on a map, servers B and C can't get in more than 30. Anyone joining over the limit is put in queue like normal.

> >

> > Make it adjust automatically as server A gets in more. Obviously kicking wouldn't happen. Just don't try and swap toons etc.

> >

> > It's not a perfect system but it would help counter full squads K training on servers that can barely scrape together 12 pugs following a no-coms commander.

>

> Its definetly not a perfect system as you set the bar on the lowest activity.

>

> The problem here become very simple and to make a common example - what if server A only has 5 people because its a Spanish server (1h+ later primetime than the rest) but server B has 80 people wanting to play and server C also have 80 players wanting to get in and they both want to fight each other with a vengance? You're gonna say no sorry only 10 is the max, 70 gets dumped into queue?

>

> That is a bad method of "balancing". It becomes *very* bad when you consider how WvW is played in practice. A zerg moving border would become impossible, as would moving a zerg there to respond to the enemy zerg. WvW would grind to a halt as people would get bored being stuck in the same place all the time. Zergs wouldnt start to form, gameplay would fall apart.

 

I really don't care about EU problems. Expecting a match making system to work across half a dozen languages and timezones was a mistake from the start.

 

NA tier 1 is already enough of a cluster fuck because of JQ's massive EU pop playing on an NA server.

[Slanderman.9532]

Imo capping Tower/keep should award points according to how many Enemy players are on map. Make it have some timegate how long player counts as a point. Also you would get something like half of the third teams numbers towards the capped objective.

Hide how points are given or calculated. I think it would be better if you get to know your worlds score after the week.

Reward players/commanders/guilds with something like MVP title with small benefits for next week. Just something small to show off and make servers/alliances/Guild compete each other. Title for most kills, cool Guild banner for most objectives defended, statue in middle of SM to one with most solokills. Keep The reward rotating, every week.