Do you think the transfers every relink is bad or good?

[SkyShroud.2865]

We need to do a reality check on how many actually believe those transfers are good or bad.

Good as in good for WvW overall

Bad as in bad for WvW overall

 

It is very important reality check, it is very important for everyone to clearly understand the public opinions.

[Ni In.6578]

It enables bandwagoning. That will happen regardless, but it would be nice if there were a period of freeze for transfers, or a cap on transfers from any given server to another (this would potentially discourage large guilds from transferring).

 

Or another thought might be to open up transfers to a select list of servers every relink. For example, if you're on FC, you can transfer on the first week of relinks, YB second week of relinks, etc.

 

This will not solve the server stacking issues, of course.

[LetoII.3782]

I'd rather pay a sub but I'm in the minority.

 

No such thing as a free lunch Bois

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> We need to do a reality check on how many actually believe those transfers are good or bad.

> Good as in good for WvW overall

> Bad as in bad for WvW overall

>

> It is very important reality check, it is very important for everyone to clearly understand the public opinions.

 

I agree it would be useful to have the public's opinion. But a poll in the forums isn't going to reach more than 5-10% of WvWarriors.

****

More importantly, the question is moot. The WvW transformation is using up all of the ANet people who work on matchup theory & design. Even if ANet agreed right this minute that mass transfers were bad for the game, they'd have to essential indefinitely delay the long term project to address it. If they reinvent worlds halfway close to their goal, then "mass transfers" aren't going to happen for ages (after the initial shake up). It will take months before people figure out what alliances get placed where.

 

The game might be better or worse for it, but it's going to be a long time before we can tell.

[Grim West.3194]

Lol, ANET linked BG.

 

That alone explains everything about ANET's garbage mode called WvW.

[Hitman.5829]

I think its really bad, we got linked with a lower tier and I see lots of wall hugers and low skill players.

[Caliburn.1845]

Lets game out this idea a bit. If we had no transfers for relinks, or minimal transfers, servers basically keep their Anet projected numbers. Because no significant numbers change, when relinks hit they also do not change.

 

So now the question becomes more interesting. Would WvW be better without anyone moving around, if population were locked where it is at. Lets game it a bit further, would WvW be in a better place today, if transfers had been disallowed for the past couple years?

 

I don't think so, relinks and population flux prevent staleness, and keeps things interesting and dynamic.

[Caliburn.1845]

Oh, and as a further point, if the population was forced to stay where it was, you'd see many, many more of the few WvW guilds remaining the game being forced to quit out of boredom or attrition. So would WvW be better with fewer guilds? Definitely not.

[ArchonWing.9480]

Transfers are a necessary evil because sometimes the server is just not good for you or vice versa.

 

No point in forcing people to play somewhere they don't like. No other content does that either for good reasons. Besides it makes money for Anet anyways so they don't take WvW to the back and....

 

I've never transferred, btw.

[Israel.7056]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> I'd rather pay a sub but I'm in the minority.

>

> No such thing as a free lunch Bois

 

I'm down to pay a sub.

[dbill.7483]

I think server transfers are healthy for guilds, since it allows them to continue to recruit.

 

However, I believe it would be better if they would restrict the transfers to the last two weeks of a matchup. That way ANET could see the server population before creating the new links. That may reduce some of the dramatic population swings we are seeing now.

 

[Lady Sapphirah.6234]

Transferring should not have been allowed in the first place. It should be like GW1.... R v R... Kurzicks v Luxons. Everybody was happy.

[Israel.7056]

Transferring is essential for most guilds to sustain themselves and pick up new talent but the lack of stability probably drives away some number of pugs who just want to k train and build siege on the server they treat like their favorite sports team. So when the guilds move they have to move if they want to keep living the good pug life and it looks like a mess

[CrimsonNeonite.1048]

They are way too slow to adjust transfer costs, but they will either lock or make a host server more expensive, than most link servers, even if those link servers ends up becoming a new host server.

[EremiteAngel.9765]

Having the ability to transfer isn't a bad thing.

A tool can very well be used for good, or it can be used for bad.

It depends on the person using the tool.

 

It's the mentality of guilds/players that needs to change.

Bandwagoning for easy fights and bag farming?

Pfft.

Come on.

You guys are better than that.

[Rampage.7145]

Transferirng is not the problem, the problem is arenanet not monitorig activity in WvW properly alongside with the linking system, there should be no links it should just be 3 tiers 9 servers all open, RERIOD. No guilds currently wanna be stuck in T3/T4 because the quality of the fights is just complete terrible, so there is no fun for my guild for example to be farming NSP PPTers for weeks, that just makes no sense because the way we rank up tiers within WvW is not based on skill but offhours PPT. The whole system is just bad so the guilds must constantly transfer to get challenging content within the higher tiers. WvW rankings should be based on ability to acomplish active objectives and players skill instead of offhours coverage, whenver arenanet can make that happen, transfers will just stop naturally because guilds will find stability within tiers fighting equaly skilled/unskilled players. This goes both ways, it is not fun for a server like TC to be fighting the top tier servers and just getting rekt over and over just because they have a lot of coverage, this makes a bad gaming experience for both the skilled and the casual players. If rankings were based on skill the game would be enjoyable for everyone and the constant transfers would stop.

[SkyShroud.2865]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> > @"SkyShroud.2865" said:

> > We need to do a reality check on how many actually believe those transfers are good or bad.

> > Good as in good for WvW overall

> > Bad as in bad for WvW overall

> >

> > It is very important reality check, it is very important for everyone to clearly understand the public opinions.

>

> I agree it would be useful to have the public's opinion. But a poll in the forums isn't going to reach more than 5-10% of WvWarriors.

> ****

> More importantly, the question is moot. The WvW transformation is using up all of the ANet people who work on matchup theory & design. Even if ANet agreed right this minute that mass transfers were bad for the game, they'd have to essential indefinitely delay the long term project to address it. If they reinvent worlds halfway close to their goal, then "mass transfers" aren't going to happen for ages (after the initial shake up). It will take months before people figure out what alliances get placed where.

>

> The game might be better or worse for it, but it's going to be a long time before we can tell.

 

You can always help by spreading the words by asking your server mates to vote too. This will help improve the data sample.

 

****

 

It is a reality check because some people actually believe certain mindset is part of the "majority".

[Israel.7056]

Essentially bloodie is right the matchups need to be weighted more heavily on kdr/kills not ppt. Ppt essentially tells you nothing useful about a servers overall skill on its own because it's too easy to get ppt by playing offhours and upgrading in dead zones instead of taking things from people when they're actually awake to defend them.

 

Too many people expect the guilds left playing to shoulder some extra burden and place themselves on servers that are complete disasters in order to try to balance the matchups. Guilds are expected to carry the ppt in offhours by playing overtime forever. No one wants to do that.

[Israel.7056]

As an addendum: If the term "skill" makes you squeamish feel free to replace it with "knowledgeable, competent, organized, well lead." Superior leadership, organization and teamwork trump individual skill any day particularly where large scale endeavors are involved.

[meri.9187]

I think it's pretty obviously bad overall, but this isn't due to the transfers themselves, it's due to the stubbornness of the linking system and the unwillingness to go down to 3 tiers for NA, which I think is direly needed. Most anyone wants to play in T1 or T2 to avoid playing Running Simulator 2019.

 

I'm not too happy about it as my home server FC is the most recent one to be bandwagoned, but at the same time I can't really blame players for wanting to leave places like SoR. It's just staring down the barrel of this happening to us as well and leaving native FC players in 12th place in a dead T4 a few months from now that will be really frustrating, as much as I would like to represent my own server.

 

So, bad overall, but not the players' fault as easy as they are to blame.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> Essentially bloodie is right the matchups need to be weighted more heavily on kdr/kills not ppt. Ppt essentially tells you nothing useful about a servers overall skill on its own because it's too easy to get ppt by playing offhours and upgrading in dead zones instead of taking things from people when they're actually awake to defend them.

>

> Too many people expect the guilds left playing to shoulder some extra burden and place themselves on servers that are complete disasters in order to try to balance the matchups. Guilds are expected to carry the ppt in offhours by playing overtime forever. No one wants to do that.

 

The KIlls aspect only worries me as I think you would see even more turtling.

 

Otherwise, if there were a way to minimize that, and incentivize fights, I agree

[Israel.7056]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> The KIlls aspect only worries me as I think you would see even more turtling.

>

> Otherwise, if there were a way to minimize that, and incentivize fights, I agree

 

Yeah some people will do that. But if they want to actually win and move up or not get pushed down they're gonna have to go out and try to kill people. The structures won't be able to carry them anymore.

 

The meta strat for years has been upgrade and paper offprime and hold prime. You upgrade your things in offhours when there's no pressure, maybe paper your enemy's stuff if there's no real defense and then defend your upgraded structures during primetime. This is the tried and true method of winning at WvW. You don't even need to hold SMC, just your sides and maybe one side of an enemy map. If you can do that you win.

 

So how do NA guilds play into this? Spoilers: They don't. The only guilds that have mattered for putting the big points on the board and gettings things upgraded and keeping a server in their tier have been OCX/SEA/EU. NA is just the holding force.

 

Ah but the further along we go in this game the fewer and fewer offprime guilds still play. Most servers don't have enough offprime to get out of t3. So if an NA guild wants to fight something in t1/t2 they have to go where the offprime still exists or alternatively try to cover multiple timezones. But let me tell you that's not fun.

 

So this all means NA guilds have to stack servers with some sort of offprime coverage to be able to get out of t3/t4. This means that every relink the NA guilds have to reorient themselves to be able to stay in a tier they want to stay in. This means transfers. Endless waves of transfers.

 

The whole thing starts with the way the points are tallied and what the game mode prioritizes. So yeah maybe some people will turtle and play it safe, but they'll get punted down to the lower tiers eventually because that won't be a winning strategy anymore.

[SkyShroud.2865]

"Skill" base matchup basically is translated to elo which is basically "fair" matchup, similar that of a dota, cs, spvp etc. In other words, population must be absolutely comparable, be it 5v5 or 10v10 or 25v25 or 50v50, it must be absolutely comparable. Even in games that support large scale matchup via ondemand basis with little to zero players' freedom will not allow more than 1 number difference, for example zero-k and fortnite.

 

Problem with large scale gameplay is that it is near to impossible to get absolute comparable number without a strong and firm control and in this case, gw2 favor freedom over control. This freedom is then made worse with 24 hours design. With this combining factors, you usually end up with lopsided matchup due to players' on a whim decisions. Therefore, instead of aiming for "fair" matchup, it is much more realistic to aim for "most" fair matchup. Which in turn, accordance to the basic of "fair" matchup which is "comparable" population, gw2 should be aiming for "minimum" population disparity. Again, as of now, is not possible for gw2 as it usually messed up due to players' on a whim decisions

 

The transfers do have "butterfly effects" such that it end up making matchup lopsided which include bolstering some servers while weakening some servers. This in general shake up the matchup balance **throughout** all tiers and it is painfully obvious it can be unenjoyable for many. As transfers accumulate ~~throughout every relink~~, this effect will no longer stop at just shaking up the balance but also displace the residing population which act as the last and final foundation for population balance. The moment the population is displaced, it can no longer be used as a building block for matchup balance, just count how many servers have fall to ruins. With that, you will end up with a very large groups of nomads which you have no control of and the matchup will continue to be lopsided while more servers slowly turn to ruins.

 

Overall, to me, transfers are just bad. I can understand why people do it but it is still bad for WvW overall. Frequent transfers simply the worst evil and cause the most damage.

 

PS: Fortunately, in real world, majority chose sendatry over nomadic life.

[Jeknar.6184]

> @"Israel.7056" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > The KIlls aspect only worries me as I think you would see even more turtling.

> >

> > Otherwise, if there were a way to minimize that, and incentivize fights, I agree

>

> Yeah some people will do that. But if they want to actually win and move up or not get pushed down they're gonna have to go out and try to kill people. The structures won't be able to carry them anymore.

>

> The meta strat for years has been upgrade and paper offprime and hold prime. You upgrade your things in offhours when there's no pressure, maybe paper your enemy's stuff if there's no real defense and then defend your upgraded structures during primetime. This is the tried and true method of winning at WvW. You don't even need to hold SMC, just your sides and maybe one side of an enemy map. If you can do that you win.

>

> So how do NA guilds play into this? Spoilers: They don't. The only guilds that have mattered for putting the big points on the board and gettings things upgraded and keeping a server in their tier have been OCX/SEA/EU. NA is just the holding force.

>

> Ah but the further along we go in this game the fewer and fewer offprime guilds still play. Most servers don't have enough offprime to get out of t3. So if an NA guild wants to fight something in t1/t2 they have to go where the offprime still exists or alternatively try to cover multiple timezones. But let me tell you that's not fun.

>

> So this all means NA guilds have to stack servers with some sort of offprime coverage to be able to get out of t3/t4. This means that every relink the NA guilds have to reorient themselves to be able to stay in a tier they want to stay in. This means transfers. Endless waves of transfers.

>

> The whole thing starts with the way the points are tallied and what the game mode prioritizes. So yeah maybe some people will turtle and play it safe, but they'll get punted down to the lower tiers eventually because that won't be a winning strategy anymore.

 

I think the issue about reducing the importance of PPT in the final score is that it affect the structure of the game mode... Theorically you are suposed to take objectives and hold them, and people are suposed to be fighting for the objectives... Right now we have turtling objectives and people PPT'ing empty structures on off-times because cracking a T3 structure that is being defended is actually terrible...

 

But if you remove the importance of objectives, most likely people will simply just avoid any fight that isn't a sure win in order to preserve score and won't even try to defend objectives because "why bother?" if they aren't important anymore.

[ArchonWing.9480]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"Israel.7056" said:

> > Essentially bloodie is right the matchups need to be weighted more heavily on kdr/kills not ppt. Ppt essentially tells you nothing useful about a servers overall skill on its own because it's too easy to get ppt by playing offhours and upgrading in dead zones instead of taking things from people when they're actually awake to defend them.

> >

> > Too many people expect the guilds left playing to shoulder some extra burden and place themselves on servers that are complete disasters in order to try to balance the matchups. Guilds are expected to carry the ppt in offhours by playing overtime forever. No one wants to do that.

>

> The KIlls aspect only worries me as I think you would see even more turtling.

>

> Otherwise, if there were a way to minimize that, and incentivize fights, I agree

 

You can't minimize it.

 

There is literally no penalty for dying now and PPT has been a joke for years. It's even less than before yet people still do the same things. It's not because of score. It's because they don't want to lose. I suppose we shouldn't let them hold back the game mode.

 

Can't incentivize fights to people who don't want to fight. There are numerous ;posts on this very forum by the same people about being one pushed every fight _for years._. These aren't people that want to learn and get better. They'd rather just complain to anet about reducing damage and sustain yet still get one pushed in 10s every fight regardless of meta. They play WvW for other reasons I guess, and they're the ones staying around. So then again it makes sense they still have their say.... If you balance the game around them-- and the game is balanced around them-- it's going to be nothing but a disaster. And look at where we are now.

 

And we all know that forums only represent a vocal minority. What of the more casual players?