Re-linking

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"Liston.9708" said:

> Not sure what all the mithril diamond talk has to do with re-links..... the issue is mass movement right after re-links that seems to happen every time making the link logic useless for the next 7 weeks

 

The mass movements usually involve the vets, not the newbies therefore the servers will eventually and surely be isolated into two main types which are either stacked with vets or bunch of untrained newbies. So, if the trend continues on that every relink there will be bandwagoning, such is what will come to be. Relinking cannot fix this skill unbalance, even if it manage to make a population balanced matchup, it will just be one sided.

[Bigpapasmurf.5623]

Meh...mithril/platinum drop the same way bronze/silver does. Rank means nothing.

 

As for relinking, thanks to bandwagoning, whats left is exactly what it is. I have high hopes for alliances, however I have a suspicion we will be in a very similar boat.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> > @"Liston.9708" said:

> > Not sure what all the mithril diamond talk has to do with re-links..... the issue is mass movement right after re-links that seems to happen every time making the link logic useless for the next 7 weeks

>

> we all wanted shorter re links than 2 months but devs ignored. monthly or hell even weekly would be way better

No we didnt. I dont know the results in my head, but with a little googling: 38% was in favor of monthly and the other 62% wanted 2 months or more (various options). A large portion of that (29%) was in fact 4 months. Your definition of "all" is strange.

 

Anet made a compromise with the community in making it 2 months and for that I do recall pretty much everyone was ok with it. It was a good compromise between the two camps. Not too short, not too long.

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> > > @"Liston.9708" said:

> > > Not sure what all the mithril diamond talk has to do with re-links..... the issue is mass movement right after re-links that seems to happen every time making the link logic useless for the next 7 weeks

> >

> > we all wanted shorter re links than 2 months but devs ignored. monthly or hell even weekly would be way better

> No we didnt. I dont know the results in my head, but with a little googling: 38% was in favor of monthly and the other 62% wanted 2 months or more (various options). A large portion of that (29%) was in fact 4 months. Your definition of "all" is strange.

>

> Anet made a compromise with the community in making it 2 months and for that I do recall pretty much everyone was ok with it. It was a good compromise between the two camps. Not too short, not too long.

 

There was a unofficial poll after that, after the bandwagoning/stacking worsen, which show more people voting 1 month.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"hunkamania.7561" said:

> we all wanted shorter re links than 2 months but devs ignored. monthly or hell even weekly would be way better

 

That's inaccurate The actual survey showed a split of opinions.

> [McKenna Berdrow wrote in June 2016](https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Poll-6-June-World-Linking-Schedule-CLOSED/6196507)

 

> The poll has ended! After removing all votes for “Don’t Count My Vote” the final results are:

>

> * 38.1% Reevaluate match-ups monthly.

> * 15.9% Reevaluate match-ups every other month.

> * 28.9% Reevaluate match-ups quarterly.

> * 5.5% Reevaluate match-ups every 4 months.

> * 11.6% Reevaluate match-ups every 6 months.

 

> After analyzing the results we have decided to go with a 2 month world linking evaluation schedule because the majority of players voted for evaluations to be more frequent than quarterly but less frequent than monthly. Since we have decided to reevaluate every 2 months we will be reevaluating the current world links and making adjustments on the very last Friday of every even month starting this month on the 24th. Thank you to everyone who voted!

>

_I've re-ordered to list the choices in amount of time; the original post ordered by the number of votes._

 

There are a couple of ways to group the data:

* Over 60% wanted longer than every four weeks.

* The top vote was 38%, less than a majority.

* The _weighted_ average (number of votes times duration) is just under 2.5 months.

* A 2-month cycle means that nearly 16% got exactly what they want, 38% think it's too long, and 46% think it's too quick.

 

In other words, "we all" wanted different things and ANet offered the least bad compromise.

PS ANet tested the hypothesis that people who played little WvW might have skewed the numbers, which turned out to be untrue: removing relatively inactive players wouldn't have changed the outcome, just the specific number of votes.

[RisenHowl.2419]

Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

 

[Avengedeath.4671]

yep I am also enjoying our new link/host server. took a little getting used to having enough ppl to respond to defend. love the big fights when we have numbers on our side and not just getting mowed down over and over by the blobs. thank you anet.

[Lord Trejgon.2809]

I may be risking getting in trouble with this post (matchup disucss is not allowed after all) but I really enjoyed reset night after this relink. Haven't got that much of interesting action in a while, so it felt nice to be linked up to t1 server again \o/

[Dayra.7405]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> _I've re-ordered to list the choices in amount of time; the original post ordered by the number of votes._

>

> There are a couple of ways to group the data:

> * Over 60% wanted longer than every four weeks.

> * The top vote was 38%, less than a majority.

> * The _weighted_ average (number of votes times duration) is just under 2.5 months.

> * A 2-month cycle means that nearly 16% got exactly what they want, 38% think it's too long, and 46% think it's too quick.

>

> In other words, "we all" wanted different things and ANet offered the least bad compromise.

> PS ANet tested the hypothesis that people who played little WvW might have skewed the numbers, which turned out to be untrue: removing relatively inactive players wouldn't have changed the outcome, just the specific number of votes.

 

I agree that was how it happend.

Unfortunately what isn't respected in this simple average math is the reasons for short and long periods.

- voters for 1 month or less (like me) mainly though: fine, this makes WTJ so expensive (as you have to move at least every month) that WTJ will finally stop.

- voter for 3 month or more (I did not voted that, but I can agree to the reason) mainly thought: That's a period at least needed for some identification with the link.

 

But with the average of two month we got:

- Long enough for WTJ

- To short for identification.

 

The Negation of all people’s reasons.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Dayra.7405" said:

> But with the average of two month we got:

...

> The Negation of all people’s reasons.

 

No one can speak for anyone else's reasoning, only for one's own. For example, some people voted for the longest because they didn't want linking at all, and that was the closest they could get. Some people wanted more dynamic match ups and voted for 1 month, because (under Glicko-determined match ups), that was the only way to fight different worlds in some tiers. (Not saying that either idea was correct or that anyone else should agree; just pointing out that not everyone was focused on WTJ nor identification, even though both were important considerations for lots of people.)

 

But more to the point, I was responding to the earlier post that stated:

> we all wanted shorter re links than 2 months but devs ignored.

And that simply wasn't true: 3/5 voted for links lasting 2 months or more.

[hunkamania.7561]

Ok that poll is stupid and all over the place. It is clear 2 months is way too damn long since everyone just transfers right after re links so it is pretty useless in general. i would rather it be weekly but i guess Anet might make money off all these transfers so that might be more important than actual balance in wvw.

[HazyDaisy.4107]

It was originally going to be 3 months, think back on some of the links both host/links and competion and try to imagine what that would've been like.

 

As far as the decided schedule, I think 2 months was OK in the beginning, maybe even through the first year to year and a half, but now, it's just feels too long.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> No one can speak for anyone else's reasoning, only for one's own.

 

To keep things in perspective 21% of the same people (ie "we all") wanted to willfully kill WvW on a quartely basis by voting in favor of only having DBL on all borders. The only reason we are still here is because 3% more voted over the 75%+ qualified majority that was required not to do quarterly.

 

TL;DR dont trust people on anything.

[Justine.6351]

> @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

>

>

 

> @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

>

>

 

Must be amazing running 2 50 man zergs together everywhere. Maybe anet should increase squad size for you guys so you can fit all 100 under single tag.

[RisenHowl.2419]

> @"Justine.6351" said:

> > @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> > Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

> >

> >

>

> > @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> > Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

> >

> >

>

> Must be amazing running 2 50 man zergs together everywhere. Maybe anet should increase squad size for you guys so you can fit all 100 under single tag.

 

You seem upset! If it makes you feel better you can see me dropping 10 DB every time I push in, so I don't think it's a matter of numbers

 

Edit: ty again for carrying us for two months, we really appreciated it

[dynomite.5834]

As I recall, the Dev's were wanting a longer (4+ months) between re-links. People howled and thus the poll. Then the Dev's came back and said to do it monthly was just too difficult on their side but they kinda split the difference and went for 2 months and that's where we landed

[HazyDaisy.4107]

Though I oftentimes scratch my head the last Friday of every other month, I must admit, parts of this one have left me bald.

 

At least old, familiar comfy shoes will keep me and my people away from the storm that is occurring up north :)

[RisenHowl.2419]

> @"HazyDaisy.4107" said:

> Though I oftentimes scratch my head the last Friday of every other month, I must admit, parts of this one have left me bald.

>

> At least old, familiar comfy shoes will keep me and my people away from the storm that is occurring up north :)

 

All hail the lizard king

[Justine.6351]

> @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> > @"Justine.6351" said:

> > > @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> > > Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

> > >

> > >

> >

> > > @"RisenHowl.2419" said:

> > > Love the new relinks! SBI vs CD vs HoD/DB was a great time last night!

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Must be amazing running 2 50 man zergs together everywhere. Maybe anet should increase squad size for you guys so you can fit all 100 under single tag.

>

> You seem upset! If it makes you feel better you can see me dropping 10 DB every time I push in, so I don't think it's a matter of numbers

>

> Edit: ty again for carrying us for two months, we really appreciated it

 

I'm not db.

[Djamonja.6453]

The problem is that so many servers try to game the system by tanking for 3-4 weeks (you know who you are). So Anet has no choice but to run their moving average activity over an 8 week period. I think 2 month period for relinks is the only option right now.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Djamonja.6453" said:

> The problem is that so many servers try to game the system by tanking for 3-4 weeks (you know who you are). So Anet has no choice but to run their moving average activity over an 8 week period. I think 2 month period for relinks is the only option right now.

Its not, but yes a shorter relink period would have made it much easier to try to game the system by organized tanking. luckily people are like puppies, you can only keep them focused for so long.