Full Server not so full

[NaramSin.2693]

> @"lare.5129" said:

> so summary, we should more easy understand that, something like:

> if at Friday and weekend server have queue - the server is full.

 

Well this could be the real "secret algorithm" it make sense now :D

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

@"SeikeNz.3526" said:

> well the server is full on pve, wvw is boring so no one plays it

 

what is this thing with "only PvE"-players that hate on WvW, i really don't get this. had lately one of them crying on reddit around too, with zero argumentation... WvW got literally nothing since the warclaw dropped, and the warclaw did rather make the entry for newbies more difficult, bc they cannot walk with zergs efficiently often.

 

btw that is kinda the questionable part of links - they can pretty much render u unable to do anything. even if you can win 10 vs 30 battles with solid coulding by veterans, that isn't fun on longterm. but how to fix this is over my head. people dream of alliances, but wouldn't that be just this exactly^10?

 

@ slick notsure what u mean but if anough people transfer from guilds to a server it surely can fight standalone. some links are so weak / low populated that u barely notice them while other are pretty full and some others are bandwagoner-filled (ppl that joined the server bc they wanted to be on your team kinda).

some of EU t1 servers even have 'recruited' NA server guilds.

@ lare

you can see on character select screen on the server display if it is full or not. but with queues of 50-100 on weekends your servers seems pretty stacked, that's more than we have. ours go on WE from 30-70. there can be fake-queues as other said, when a zerg switches maps. that lasts for some minutes. you should just have random people tag up btw in the case of no commanders, people tend to do more if there's a tag around for reasons.

 

@ gebrechen

well i did not see piken around in t1 for quite a while here, on our server it's said that losing KISS did hurt them. not specially because KISS would be that good, but because numbers still win more often than not. i think also other guilds from them went to WSR for example. our matchups with kills were like "red blob inc hills!" ... "urgh its just kiss again, send 20 ppl to hills"

 

@ sovereign

can we leave "skill level" out of this discussion, that's likely just becoming biased. i know NA has some good players, EU surely has its veterans too though. if i look at gw2stats, the points in EU are overall higher. even that isn't transferable into "skill" but activity.

also people would maybe learn what they are doing rather if they'd be motivated to ascend tiers. atm some tank for fun, or claim to do so at least, bc they wanna dodge some other servers. idk why there is even "tiers" because at present it does not matter a tiny bit where exactly you are, you gain nothing from it.

 

about this GvG thing - it is privately organized, and i only randomly saw gvg fights in obisidan sanctums arena. u read no notifications about that in teamchat at all and it tends to be guilds that u NEVER see on the real WvW maps. even with tag'd up people that i never saw before from apparently our server.

[NaramSin.2693]

The real problem here is that until they reveal this "secret magical, dangerous algorithm" all we (and YOU) say are just our Hypothesis so thank You for your contribution, could be an idea but it's just your Hypothesis things could be completely different.

The real problem is that we on Piken now have to face things like no people playing,and our guild mates that would like to play WvW now are simply not playing at all in other dead servers , maybe the real algorithm it's "pay gems to go somewhere else or you can't play" but this is just my opinion like your.

 

> @"XenesisII.1540" said:

> Friday is reset and a lot of people will play from reset through the weekend, it's been like that since day one, it's not something to use to measure population as even the lowest servers can have full queues on reset.

>

> If both gandara and piken lose 60 players with the average of 2 hours raiding for 3 days on the week = 360 hours. From the example Gandara would fall down between full and very high, but Piken would still be full, just because an equal amount of people leave doesn't mean they would both fall under the threshold. Full status is the last line of measurement and servers can be way above it. Gandara has been riding that line in the last month, oct 28 full, nov 4 very high, nov 11 full, nov 19 full, nov 25 very high, dec 3 very high.

>

>

 

 

[LetoII.3782]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > >

> > > 

> > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > >

> >

> > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

>

> Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

 

Data that contradicts an unverified assertion must be discredited- truthiness 101

[Lottie.5370]

> @"kamikharzeeh.8016" said:

> > @"Lottie.5370" said:

> > > @"SeikeNz.3526" said:

> > > well the server is full on pve, wvw is boring so no one plays it

> >

> > Actually no, PvE population does not affect the server status.

>

> what is this thing with "only PvE"-players that hate on WvW, i really don't get this. had lately one of them crying on reddit around too, with zero argumentation... WvW got literally nothing since the warclaw dropped, and the warclaw did rather make the entry for newbies more difficult, bc they cannot walk with zergs efficiently often.

>

> btw that is kinda the questionable part of links - they can pretty much render u unable to do anything. even if you can win 10 vs 30 battles with solid coulding by veterans, that isn't fun on longterm. but how to fix this is over my head. people dream of alliances, but wouldn't that be just this exactly^10?

>

 

Literally no idea why you quoted me to complain about "only PvE" players. I play WvW.

[Len.1879]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> Data that contradicts an unverified assertion must be discredited- truthiness 101

Not sure if I am not understanding what you are trying to express, because what you wrote basically goes against the fundamentals of scientific paradigm shift, but okay. (Or is that even more sarcasm?) Someone said Piken is among the fullest servers. Someone else asked what data they are going off. I showed the only data that is to my knowledge available to players. Unless there is other data openly available or someone has insider information directly from one of the devs, everything beyond that is simple speculation, no matter how some players "feel" the charts must be wrong.

[LetoII.3782]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > Data that contradicts an unverified assertion must be discredited- truthiness 101

> Not sure if I am not understanding what you are trying to express, because what you wrote basically goes against the fundamentals of scientific paradigm shift, but okay. (Or is that even more sarcasm?) Someone said Piken is among the fullest servers. Someone else asked what data they are going off. I showed the only data that is to my knowledge available to players. Unless there is other data openly available or someone has insider information directly from one of the devs, everything beyond that is simple speculation, no matter how some players "feel" the charts must be wrong.

 

I was agreeing with you.

Truthiness is a Stephen Colbert joke, I suppose he doesn't make it over there as he mostly pokes fun at American politics.

[kamikharzeeh.8016]

@Lottie.5370 i was meant to adress the other guy lol, this came out wrong. i edited it, no offense! ( the citation behaved not how i thought it does)

[NaramSin.2693]

Just to add REAL data to the discussion today i played 4 h in SFR against GH and WSR, they range from High to VeryHigh (ok GH was medium just before kiss diaspora) and we had FULL queue in every map, tons of FULL Zerg clashing together all the time, at 2:30 AM i gave up and there still were zerg around with just SOME maps with queues, (today the same) well ANET .. good job :D

[Lazze.9870]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > >

> > > 

> > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > >

> >

> > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

>

> Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

 

That list shows no data. It shows server status and is obviously what lead OP to ask the question of WHY Piken is considered full.

 

People are being facetious because your answer is dumb.

[L A T I O N.8923]

> @"NaramSin.2693" said:

> Just to add REAL data to the discussion today i played 4 h in SFR against GH and WSR, they range from High to VeryHigh (ok GH was medium just before kiss diaspora) and we had FULL queue in every map, tons of FULL Zerg clashing together all the time, at 2:30 AM i gave up and there still were zerg around with just SOME maps with queues, (today the same) well ANET .. good job :D

 

If you qq harder to anet, players Will magicly appear q'ing all the maps

 

[Len.1879]

> @"Lazze.9870" said:

> > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > > >

> > > > 

> > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > > >

> > >

> > > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

> >

> > Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

>

> That list shows no data. It shows server status and is obviously what lead OP to ask the question of WHY Piken is considered full.

>

> People are being facetious because your answer is dumb.

 

Apparently, you have troubles understanding what "data" is and try to compensate it by being rude. I assume you're looking for the word "numbers". So let me repeat what I already said: the server status list is the only _data_ available to players to my knowledge, so I am pretty sure that's the _data_ they went off of. Which is what was being asked. Which is what I answered. Should you or anyone else have any other information as to actual numbers reflecting population or activity, either from official or unofficial sources, feel free to correct me. But please keep your bad upbringing to yourself.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"Lazze.9870" said:

> > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > > > >

> > > > > 

> > > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

> > >

> > > Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

> >

> > That list shows no data. It shows server status and is obviously what lead OP to ask the question of WHY Piken is considered full.

> >

> > People are being facetious because your answer is dumb.

>

> Apparently, you have troubles understanding what "data" is and try to compensate it by being rude.

 

>But please keep your bad upbringing to yourself.

 

So.., you call him out for being rude then become rude in return by insulting his parents?

 

Got it.

 

 

 

Back on topic: Anet will not share actual numbers to us. It would lead to further ‘gaming’ of the system. Which, with links is already prevalent enough.

[XECOR.2814]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"Lazze.9870" said:

> > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > > > >

> > > > > 

> > > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

> > >

> > > Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

> >

> > That list shows no data. It shows server status and is obviously what lead OP to ask the question of WHY Piken is considered full.

> >

> > People are being facetious because your answer is dumb.

>

> Apparently, you have troubles understanding what "data" is and try to compensate it by being rude. I assume you're looking for the word "numbers". So let me repeat what I already said: the server status list is the only _data_ available to players to my knowledge, so I am pretty sure that's the _data_ they went off of. Which is what was being asked. Which is what I answered. Should you or anyone else have any other information as to actual numbers reflecting population or activity, either from official or unofficial sources, feel free to correct me. But please keep your bad upbringing to yourself.

 

Meh, if you cant differentiate between data(unprocessed information) and results then you aren't worth my time. Kitten arguing about semantics. What a waste of everyone's time. Also this is internet so you might want to toughen up a bit lol. Bad upbringing, what a joke.

[NaramSin.2693]

As I said before i really enjoy to play on GH and SFR this week, full blobs everywhere at every hour of the day and night, great fights, a lot of toxic guilds btw we are a lot of people and (magic of ANet) no FULL servers :) o Joy I think There is no reason at the moment to increase time played on piken to increase the numbers of the so called "algorithm".

 

But now I have a PROPOSAL, Why the majority of Piken WvW players do not do the same? You just need to create a FTP account, in WSr, SFR (if you wanna to fight KISS) or GH maybe (if You want to fight with them), You just need level 60 (31 for full account, cheaper than pay gems for server transfer) and then we all can play together in a Guild named [PGY] (Piken Gap Year) until Piken will be again High or very High due to massive inactivity, we can enjoy the game, filling other servers (ehy in any case they are not full right?) and happily come back to Piken when it will be freed from the slavery of a useless algorithm :D

[KeyOrion.9506]

You have to understand, a server can be full, but that doesn't mean those players on that server have any slightest of interests in playing World vs. World vs. World. You could have thirty-thousand players on a server...and only 10 might play WvW. And I've been trying to teach that to all of you for the past 7 years....and you all still don't get it. There's server population. There is WvW population. The two don't even equate. Get it? If you don't....that's your problem.

[CrimsonNeonite.1048]

I don't get how blacktide is only a medium pop server too, when Deso keeps getting more and more pugs, but whatever, relink is quite soon anyway.

 

Clearly there is something wrong with their algorithm, which I think they've said they would potentially have a better grasp of, if Alliances ever happen.

[Camdal.6197]

> @"KeyOrion.9506" said:

> You have to understand, a server can be full, but that doesn't mean those players on that server have any slightest of interests in playing World vs. World vs. World. You could have thirty-thousand players on a server...and only 10 might play WvW. And I've been trying to teach that to all of you for the past 7 years....and you all still don't get it. There's server population. There is WvW population. The two don't even equate. Get it? If you don't....that's your problem.

 

That's still not how it works.

 

It only calculates WvW play hours.

[KeyOrion.9506]

Then why the HELL does it matter the size of a server population? It...does...not...matter between a medium server that sticks in a full 4 map que vs a high server population that can't even put a que on any single map during reset. It doesn't matter what size the server is. It doesn't matter how many players are on a Full Server. It doesn't matter. Algorithms be damned. Calculations be damned. Seriously. IF a player refuses to play WvW…..does it matter server size? NO, it doesn't. And that's what frustrates me with you players that believe there's a Calculation for a Player's want...or need...to play WvW. There isn't one. There never will be. I've been telling you all for seven LONG years this. I dont' give a damn what Calculation, or program, or math, Anet uses. I really could care less. If X number of players on a HIGH population server doesn't play WvW….??? What does it matter in calculations or math of any substance? The only calculation you need to figure out is "Player X, wanting Y amount of enjoyment being pulled from Z amount of Energy." If that player has no energy to play a certain aspect of Guildwars, the math falls apart. Then again...if your basing server size to player population in WvW…. High population server in year 1, Jade Quarry, had ques daily on all 4 maps, with population of players in que equaling between 150 to 250 players per que, with some of the ques lasting over 2 to 4 hours. And that was daily, on a weekly basis, for nearly a full year. Going on seven years, all the servers are now LINKED for North America, except maybe Blackgate…(which isn't going to last too much longer). Now after seven years, Jade Quarry is somewhere between medium and high population with a que that changes from either 0 ques at on reset, up to 3 possible ques that may pop in the first 30 minutes of said time. After that we just struggle to raise one que on any one map. Whatever math you want to use, whatever algorithm anet THINKS is going to show them what's actually going on...it's built on false premises. A WvW server does not exist as it used to. We're on a shared server system now. In fact the names of these "independent" servers no longer serve any real function...except for WvW. When a player joins Guildwars 2 for the first time and have to "choose" a server...unless they did their homework, don't know any more about that server beyond what other games use those servers for. Which is to keep a viable population playing without the system slowing down or coming to a crashing halt. You want to fill your "server" with a player that will play WvW….your going to have to recruit them from OUTSIDE WvW. If your recruiting WvW players inside WvW...well that's just useless, your not adding players to your server, they were ALREADY THERE. You want to add "population" to your "server"...you need to recruit from PvE or PvP. Your not increasing population from recruitment in WvW maps. Your just pushing your broccoli around the dinner plate, even though it's the same piece of broccoli. You want to add to your plate...your going to have to pull it off from another plate on the dinner table. <--- This is the easiest metaphor I have for you on "Building population in WvW".

[Hannelore.8153]

I think that one thing that's skewing the numbers is, people tend to forget that the game used to have different servers in PvE. Because of this, in the early years of the game alot of people also bought several boxed copies of GW2 to play with their friends on different servers without having to guest all of the time, which had a daily limit and tended to be unviable.

 

What this means is, there's alot of veterans who can access other servers that are long since full and without transfers.

[KeyOrion.9506]

And some players purposely purchased multiple accounts, because they were using those accounts as Spy's specifically for WvW. And that too also created a false body count on the other servers, since all they did was stand there, and watch the Leaders tag go from one location to another, basically give out our location.

[Len.1879]

> @"XECOR.2814" said:

> Meh, if you cant differentiate between data(unprocessed information) and results then you aren't worth my time. Kitten arguing about semantics. What a waste of everyone's time. Also this is internet so you might want to toughen up a bit lol. Bad upbringing, what a joke.

 

Yes, processed data is data in return. Sorry if the data doesn't show what you would like it to, but that's not really any of my business. Let me try to clarify one last time:

 

gebrechen.5643 stated:

> It is now, Piken still is one of the fullest servers EU

 

Duca di Ebonhawke.1045 asked:

> Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ?

 

To which I posted the server list. Now let me re-iterate one more time, because you seem to have trouble getting this into your head: this is the _only_ data (yes, still data, even if you don't like it) available to players. So the answer to "based on what data" has to be this particular table, unless there is other data that has yet to be shown to me. If you wanted to see raw numbers and an implementation of the algorithm or manual decision progress, then you are just out of luck, because the developers have not shown them after having been asked again and again. The implication of me posting that screenshot is that you will not get any other answer besides baseless speculations, unless some dev decides to disclose more information, which is unlikely at this point, so deal with it and kindly put your lame insults where the sun doesn't shine.

[Duca di Ebonhawke.1045]

You can put your comments in the place you suggest . Learn education before to answer.

[Lazze.9870]

> @"Len.1879" said:

> > @"Lazze.9870" said:

> > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > @"XECOR.2814" said:

> > > > > @"Len.1879" said:

> > > > > > @"Duca di Ebonhawke.1045" said:

> > > > > > Based on what data do you tell it is one of the fullest ? We have even no queue at the friday reset or just a small one in one border.

> > > > >

> > > > > 

> > > > > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World#Europe

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > You should get an award for this. Like 200iq. Man never seem someone so smart before. /s

> > >

> > > Not sure what you are being facetious about. That's exactly what was being asked.

> >

> > That list shows no data. It shows server status and is obviously what lead OP to ask the question of WHY Piken is considered full.

> >

> > People are being facetious because your answer is dumb.

>

> Apparently, you have troubles understanding what "data" is and try to compensate it by being rude. I assume you're looking for the word "numbers". So let me repeat what I already said: the server status list is the only _data_ available to players to my knowledge, so I am pretty sure that's the _data_ they went off of. Which is what was being asked. Which is what I answered. Should you or anyone else have any other information as to actual numbers reflecting population or activity, either from official or unofficial sources, feel free to correct me. But please keep your bad upbringing to yourself.

 

Right. If calling an answer dumb makes me rude, what do assuming my "understanding of data" (which I can assure you is perfectly fine and a necessity in my line of work) or speculating in my upbringing make you?

 

The server list provides no data. It's shows server status. The real answer to the question is that the data is hidden. What you're doing is re-posting the same server status that OP already refered to when starting this thread, thinking you're all so clever.

 

Are you even realizing that you're replying to multiple people?

[Len.1879]

> @"Lazze.9870" said:

> Right. If calling an answer dumb makes me rude, what do assuming my "understanding of data" (which I can assure you is perfectly fine and a necessity in my line of work) or speculating in my upbringing make you?

>

> The server list provides no data. It's shows server status. The real answer to the question is that the data is hidden. What you're doing is re-posting the same server status that OP already refered to when starting this thread, thinking you're all so clever.

>

> Are you even realizing that you're replying to multiple people?

 

Yes, I do realise multiple people were extremely unhappy with me providing the only piece of information that was available and reacted extremely upset because it was not the speculation they probably hoped they would receive? I do also see that after multiple clarifications on my part, neither of you guys is capable of accepting that there simply is no more data to be shown (again: feel free to correct me on this). So sure, keep your endless cycle of asking for data, not receiving it, and then going on a line of wild speculations as to "why is my server full? Whenever I take a peek my team chat is empty, so that can't be right!". Good day to you, guys!