Open t6 on EU — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home WvW

Open t6 on EU

lodjur.1284lodjur.1284 Member ✭✭✭

See title.

Ögonen omges av vita och svarta penseldrag som gör att de ser större ut än vad de egentligen är. Baksidan av lodjurets öron kantas av svart päls som slutar i den karaktäristiska tofsen högst upp på örat. Lodjurets svans är kortare än de flesta andra kattdjurs.

Comments

  • Answer : No.

  • Sovereign.1093Sovereign.1093 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Merge na and eu :3

    Not Even Coverage is the Only broken thing in WVW.

  • Faenar.8036Faenar.8036 Member ✭✭✭

    Do I understand you correctly, that you mean this as an option for ballancing the "Full" server markings by spreading the population to new servers, thus these atm "Full"-marked servers will became only "high", so ppl will be able to transfer into any server they want to transfer to?

    If yes, that is actually a nice idea, but I dont think it would actually work well, because I highly doubt any WvW-player will risk transfering to a new server because he will be affraid that server will stay empty. Maybe this can still be an option for WvW guilds, which are sometimes transfering between servers.

    Not sure if this would happen or would work well, but an interesting option to solve WvW population disballance anyway. Imho, alliances would still be the best option to solve that.

  • lodjur.1284lodjur.1284 Member ✭✭✭

    @Faenar.8036 said:
    Do I understand you correctly, that you mean this as an option for ballancing the "Full" server markings by spreading the population to new servers, thus these atm "Full"-marked servers will became only "high", so ppl will be able to transfer into any server they want to transfer to?

    Mostly to fix how there's no currently no tier that is actually not very stacked and that doesn't have almost permanent queues.

    If it would mean that people are able to move more freely that would indeed be a nice bonus.

    If yes, that is actually a nice idea, but I dont think it would actually work well, because I highly doubt any WvW-player will risk transfering to a new server because he will be affraid that server will stay empty. Maybe this can still be an option for WvW guilds, which are sometimes transfering between servers.

    I wish my server was more empty, as does my personal circle of friends, a bit anecdotal but at least there are some people who would

    Not sure if this would happen or would work well, but an interesting option to solve WvW population disballance anyway. Imho, alliances would still be the best option to solve that.

    Tbh tiers are too "balanced" atm. T4 currently feels as bad as t1/t2 used to feel (in regards to frequency of zergs, how long they chase, how many camps have multiple omega golems etc). Last linkings had much more diverse matchups where the people who like t1 awfulness could go there and those who don't could go t4/5 to find fights

    Ögonen omges av vita och svarta penseldrag som gör att de ser större ut än vad de egentligen är. Baksidan av lodjurets öron kantas av svart päls som slutar i den karaktäristiska tofsen högst upp på örat. Lodjurets svans är kortare än de flesta andra kattdjurs.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Meh just reset wvw, drop links, drop alliances, drop 1u1d back to glicko, have all servers open, no more population level monitors, all transfers set to 1800 gems.

    Go ahead go where you want, play where you want, and don't kitten come back here complaining about population or coverage ever again.

    ^ Another derailing post - Anet
    Perma stealth is needed to outrun zergs. - Thieves
    A skill overpowered? just nerf their dodge, balanced. - Anet
    No expansion money as long as Mesmers are broken. - Me

  • lodjur.1284lodjur.1284 Member ✭✭✭

    @XenesisII.1540 said:
    Meh just reset wvw, drop links, drop alliances, drop 1u1d back to glicko, have all servers open, no more population level monitors, all transfers set to 1800 gems.

    I was with you until glicko and and 1800 transfers tbh.

    Go ahead go where you want, play where you want, and don't kitten come back here complaining about population or coverage ever again.

    Ögonen omges av vita och svarta penseldrag som gör att de ser större ut än vad de egentligen är. Baksidan av lodjurets öron kantas av svart päls som slutar i den karaktäristiska tofsen högst upp på örat. Lodjurets svans är kortare än de flesta andra kattdjurs.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Well if you want blob servers and roamer sized servers it's only fair to have glicko walls too to keep those servers in their own tiers, or do a full separation of tiers, because obviously low pop servers will not be able to compete.

    And if you want those type of servers and no population locks, then obviously also shouldn't offer 500 gem transfer to low servers so bandwagons running from skill lag will happen and force those server into tiers they don't want to be, continuing the same cycle we have had for years now.

    Heck they should take it a step further and designate servers as zerg or roamer servers, and the roamer servers have all their map caps reduced to 20, so if you move your blob there you get stuck with queues. Transfer fees should even be 2-3k gems to move, think twice before you do it.

    ^ Another derailing post - Anet
    Perma stealth is needed to outrun zergs. - Thieves
    A skill overpowered? just nerf their dodge, balanced. - Anet
    No expansion money as long as Mesmers are broken. - Me

  • joneirikb.7506joneirikb.7506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Said it before, but designating entire tiers (read: servers) as a specific play style, is a bad idea. And is only going to frustrate and annoy other players that get in "the wrong place" as it annoys you now. The best way to solve it would be to give players for any server a way to do the play-style they want/enjoy.

    And this is where I'm going to give a TLDR of my usual rant about them using maps to solve this:

    • Make specific roamer maps for each tier/server. Set lower total population, small objectives you don't need to zerg, but instant swords on anything more than 5 players in the same spot (everyone hears you etc), possibly even add some mechanics that gives disadvantages to large groups etc.

    That way everyone, no matter what server, can still roam, without having to transfer down to whichever server is "T6" this week.

  • Faenar.8036Faenar.8036 Member ✭✭✭

    @XenesisII.1540 said:
    Meh just reset wvw, drop links, drop alliances, drop 1u1d back to glicko, have all servers open, no more population level monitors, all transfers set to 1800 gems.

    Go ahead go where you want, play where you want, and don't kitten come back here complaining about population or coverage ever again.

    This would probably be also a good solution , of course minus the "1800 gems transfer" part. The first transfer after this change should be totally free, because if reset, then TRUE reset should happen, which would basically mean choosing the new "home server", like all of us did when creating first character on account, and that is, as far as I know, for the logical reasons free of charge. After the first free transfer, then, I will not argue against any transfer price anyway, be it only 10 or even 5000 gems. But the first one, after so much important change, should be kept free.