Artaz.3819 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 [source](https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/69872/update-from-the-guild-wars-2-team "Source") https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/69872/update-from-the-guild-wars-2-team "Our long-term plans for the game like World Restructuring and large-scale improvements to quality of life are still in the works." Alliances have not been hacked (yet) but are still "long- term". ..."some updates are going to see delays, like the recent Warclaw, as we regain our focus." [Related big announcement](https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/tame-the-warclaw/ "Related big announcement") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steki.1478 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 We already knew that though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subversiontwo.7501 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 What's more interesting about Mike Z's post is this ... _The Guild Wars 2 team is still committed to bringing content and feature updates to the game. The next episodes of Living World are already in development, Swiss tournament support is coming to PvP, we’re looking at more WvW events coming soon_ If what's in the pipline for the next year or so- and what their commitment to WvW after this mount debacle amounts to is "looking at more events" then things remain dire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blocki.4931 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 Pretty sure that's just referring to the delay by a week. It should be done by now and was just delayed because studio was closed a couple days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldrick.8967 Posted February 27, 2019 Share Posted February 27, 2019 Sounds like instead of doing any content they will rehash old events. Alliance looks more likely to be 2021 with every passing announcement...(if ever). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neural.1824 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 > @"Baldrick.8967" said: > Sounds like instead of doing any content they will rehash old events. Alliance looks more likely to be 2021 with every passing announcement...(if ever). Honestly, as GW2 goes as a whole, considering the changes that have been made I'd be happy if any focus on content (outside of completing what they said they are working on) included a bit of polishing what we already have. There are bugs that have been around a while, some QoL things, etc. that could use some work. That or creation/introduction of QoL items that would help the players but also take some of the workload off the devs (my #1 suggestion there would be the universal gobbler that allows Anet to choose very few weeks which item it consumes in large quantity, to enable trash value items on the MP to be consumed in exchange for other useful things). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coro.3176 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 > @"coro.3176" said: > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... ... You do realize there are 10,000+ WvW players in a region with hundreds of larger guilds and thousands of smaller guilds, right? And Anet would have to wait for mail to come in from every one of them? And match them together so that they are all in agreement? Less than a day. Seriously. This idea is about as sensible as suggesting that Outlook mails should be sent via carrier pigeon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swagger.1459 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 > @"coro.3176" said: > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... Yeah! So easy!... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
displayname.8315 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 Open BG please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coro.3176 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"coro.3176" said: > > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... > ... You do realize there are 10,000+ WvW players in a region with hundreds of larger guilds and thousands of smaller guilds, right? And Anet would have to wait for mail to come in from every one of them? And match them together so that they are all in agreement? Less than a day. Seriously. > > This idea is about as sensible as suggesting that Outlook mails should be sent via carrier pigeon. * 10k+ players, not guilds. Far fewer guilds than that.. probably even fewer guilds that would care to make alliances. I'd bet it's in the low hundreds. * Anet wouldn't have to wait or care. If the guild leaders don't get their requests in, they don't get allied. simple as that. * less than a day is reasonable, I think. Seriously. Spreadsheets + scripts can automate away most of the tedious bits, eg. the "being in agreement thing" could be checked with a script. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swamurabi.7890 Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 PVE: major content updates frequently PvP: minor content updates periodically WvW: major content perpetually in the future, minor content once PvE team and PvP team are done, extremely minor "events" billed as "extremely awesome" done periodically to show that Anet still supports WvW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanAlcedo.3281 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 > @"coro.3176" said: > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... A plan, so amazingly kitten, it could actually work. Ok. Simple question. Would YOU want to do this job? Not the „programming“ but sitting there each day and changing things per hand? But seriously, good lord that would be painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawdler.8521 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 > @"coro.3176" said: > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > @"coro.3176" said: > > > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > > > > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > > > > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > > > > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > > > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > > > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > > > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > > > > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > > > > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > > > > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > > > > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > > > > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... > > ... You do realize there are 10,000+ WvW players in a region with hundreds of larger guilds and thousands of smaller guilds, right? And Anet would have to wait for mail to come in from every one of them? And match them together so that they are all in agreement? Less than a day. Seriously. > > > > This idea is about as sensible as suggesting that Outlook mails should be sent via carrier pigeon. > > * 10k+ players, not guilds. Far fewer guilds than that.. probably even fewer guilds that would care to make alliances. I'd bet it's in the low hundreds. > * Anet wouldn't have to wait or care. If the guild leaders don't get their requests in, they don't get allied. simple as that. > * less than a day is reasonable, I think. Seriously. Spreadsheets + scripts can automate away most of the tedious bits, eg. the "being in agreement thing" could be checked with a script. This still means that your "spreadsheet" have to contain *every single player* and they still need to manually form *all the worlds* based on the stats and guilds of those players. You cant do alliances for the 3 guilds that responded on Blackgate and 2 guilds on Tarnished Coast and then proclaim **alliances have now been implemented, WvW is saved!**. Ugh, this hurts my head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kylden Ar.3724 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"coro.3176" said: > > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... > ... You do realize there are 10,000+ WvW players in a region with hundreds of larger guilds and thousands of smaller guilds, right? And Anet would have to wait for mail to come in from every one of them? And match them together so that they are all in agreement? Less than a day. Seriously. > > This idea is about as sensible as suggesting that Outlook mails should be sent via carrier pigeon. Outlook Mails by carrier pigeon would make more sense than his idea. At least message by bird is an established and functional past method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zinkz.7045 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Alliances are a pointless exercise anyway, as usual Anet are far too slow. Three plus years ago alliances would have worked better, but In a game with a dwindling population alliances are completely flawed, because the game mode is becoming more and more 2-3 hours of primetime only and unplayable out of that which only hastens the death spiral. Alliances will not solve that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirin.7306 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 alliance changes is like the FF7 remake for playstation. It will never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coro.3176 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > @"coro.3176" said: > > > @"Dawdler.8521" said: > > > > @"coro.3176" said: > > > > I don't understand what is so complicated about alliances that it takes years to finish :( > > > > > > > > A very basic hack of an alliance system could probably(maybe?) be done manually by one person every few months with no added interfaces or backend coding work needed. > > > > > > > > 1. WvW guild leaders send in-game mail to Anet person requesting an alliance with other guilds. > > > > > > > > 2. Anet person puts list of alliance requests in a spreadsheet or text file or whatever and checks that they are valid: > > > > * alliances requests must be reciprocal . If A requests B, then B must request A or the request is void > > > > * alliances requests must be under the player limit. If they are not, the entire alliance request is void > > > > The responsibility is on the guild leaders to make sure their alliance requests are valid > > > > > > > > 3. Anet person shuffles valid alliances + other remaining guilds into servers with equal populations > > > > > > > > .. done? That'd probably take less than a day each time. Steps 2 + 3 could probably be scripted > > > > > > > > This could be balanced a bit by taking into account average WvW play hours for each guild, but I assume Anet could get this information from their metrics. > > > > > > > > Obviously, I don't have the slightest clue what other complications could be involved, since I don't work there. I am in no way saying this would definitely work.. just that I think it could work, and it might be easy, and I'd prefer it to the status quo. > > > > > > > > Perfect is the enemy of good + all that... > > > ... You do realize there are 10,000+ WvW players in a region with hundreds of larger guilds and thousands of smaller guilds, right? And Anet would have to wait for mail to come in from every one of them? And match them together so that they are all in agreement? Less than a day. Seriously. > > > > > > This idea is about as sensible as suggesting that Outlook mails should be sent via carrier pigeon. > > > > * 10k+ players, not guilds. Far fewer guilds than that.. probably even fewer guilds that would care to make alliances. I'd bet it's in the low hundreds. > > * Anet wouldn't have to wait or care. If the guild leaders don't get their requests in, they don't get allied. simple as that. > > * less than a day is reasonable, I think. Seriously. Spreadsheets + scripts can automate away most of the tedious bits, eg. the "being in agreement thing" could be checked with a script. > This still means that your "spreadsheet" have to contain *every single player* and they still need to manually form *all the worlds* based on the stats and guilds of those players. You cant do alliances for the 3 guilds that responded on Blackgate and 2 guilds on Tarnished Coast and then proclaim **alliances have now been implemented, WvW is saved!**. > > Ugh, this hurts my head. Nope. You only need to look at guilds with alliance requests, and know the number of people in those guilds. Once those alliances have been made, the rest of the alliance can be populated with random guilds - again, you just need to know the number of players in them. As a bonus, if you knew other info like active WvW hours, WvW time per week, etc, you could do it with some semblance of balance. 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