Indefinite "Alliance" will hurt WvW【Steam Gw2 WvW Unable to succeed】

Arenanet. It's time to come out and explain.

If you dont tell Steam users Alliances was supposed to happen, they wont expect or know about it.

Will? More like has.

@Flee.5602 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:If you dont tell Steam users Alliances was supposed to happen, they wont expect or know about it.

triggered

@Flee.5602 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:If you dont tell Steam users Alliances was supposed to happen, they wont expect or know about it.

you are wrong, Dawdler does know about WvW

“It was wrong not to be curious, it was wrong not to wonder.”

@Burnfall.9573 said:

@Flee.5602 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:If you dont tell Steam users Alliances was supposed to happen, they wont expect or know about it.

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@Burnfall.9573 said:

@Flee.5602 said:

@Dawdler.8521 said:If you dont tell Steam users Alliances was supposed to happen, they wont expect or know about it.

:mindblownemoji:

Wasn't Steam release delayed/cancelled indefinitely?

@Clownmug.8357 said:Wasn't Steam release delayed/cancelled indefinitely?

It's ok. My title shows a lot of information.

guys they are working on it, just lets them work, we can have it in gw4

We are coming up on THREE YEARS since alliances were announced. You read that right 3...3 whole years. Other than some backend stuff they said was done for pvp like 2 years ago, no work has been done on it. At this point, especially with how abandoned wvw has been with regards to Anet, it is unlikely a Cantha expansion will even have 3 way wvw battles in it. They have no plan to stop links, no desire to stop players buying gems to stack on servers to fight smaller groups and doors. What that leaves us with is an empty promise to eventually give us "alliances" that even Anet said wouldn't address the issues wvw is facing, the disparity in time zone coverages and players choosing to stack to "fight" doors.

This leaves us with only one real possibility, unless you accept that they will never do anything for wvw. We will get "alliance battles" with the Cantha expansion, and with it, 3 way realm vs realm will be gone forever. It will be a redo of the Kurzick vs Luxon battles from GW: Factions. We will get our "alliances", we may even get the ability where guilds can "own" the towns like before. We will be stuck with a 2 sided fight, where the bandwagon players will do exactly what they did in Factions (and have been doing here)...all stack on one side so they can "win" every fight.

The future does not look bright. I guess I can hope that the open world PvE stuff is fun, so I might have something to do.

Nothing can hurt something that is already dead

@blazefm.1693 said:Nothing can hurt something that is already deadZombies have feelings too.

@Strige.9382 said:guys they are working on it, just lets them work, we can have it in gw4

@"Flee.5602" said:Arenanet. It's time to come out and explain.

What I mean by this sentence includes.Arenanet. It should be stated whether the "alliance" is feasible. Instead of being exiled indefinitely

Alliances are here already, go pick one. They are called servers and if its full just join the link easy. remember to use the code [unbanperish] when your buying gems

I think WvW just needs a complete overhaul. Honestly, the story reason for WvW makes no sense. I don't think people in any of the alternate Tyrias call their world stuff like "Blackgate" and "Dragonbrand" in-world. The WvW map should still be used, but the rationale for using it should change. It should be guilds fighting over resources or something that actually makes sense. Also, it would probably make sense to make Tyria maps useable too. How it should work is guilds decide to be enemies. The battles are NOT arranged all like "let's fight because we all know wars in real life are like a friendly football game," rather you can drop in and drop out any time once your guild decides to be enemies and the battle ends once your guilds stop deciding to be enemies (maybe the battles will need to be terminated, but I doubt it, because the only reason Dragonbrand, Blackgate, Maguuma, and Tarnished Coast aren't perpetual enemies is that servers have to be shuffled automatically.) You can link up a ton of guilds in the alliance so your tiny guild with 10 people can join a large guild, kind of like server linking now. You can also be ganked in open world maps, but only if you're repping the guild that's fighting in that map, so if you're trying to do something and you don't want to be ganked, rep a different guild. Some guilds will probably just be neutral like Switzerland or something so people will always have a gank-free option (probably mostly raiding guilds and sPvP guilds.) Your guild can end up allying with the centaurs, Sons of Svanir or the Nightmare Court if you're on a map where you're fighting those enemies... you can already ally with Palawa Joko and Mad King Thorn, so allying with a bad guy expediently in GW2 is not weird. I think this is a way better open-world PvP option than the lore-unfriendly WvW option, though as long a we have WvW and not this I'm going to play it, because open-world PvP is fun.

Denmark and Canada still fight for territory despite both being part of NATO. We might as well hint that there are groups of players fighting for each other and not just evil dragons vs. good players. Not everyone who fights is exemplary good vs. exemplary evil even where good vs. evil exists. It's supposed to be "Guild Wars," not "Dragon Wars" anyways even though I love fighting the Elder Dragons and harvesting their magic and that's very cool.

I think the main issue with this probably is that it'd lead to a huge overhaul to the "feel" of the game even if it involves virtually no new mechanics or removing anything that already exists. The game has been too implicitly United Federation of Planets kumbaya between all the playable races' strongest forces, even though this isn't actually Star Trek and there's no good explanation for that. However, if there were open-world guild alliance wars in designated territories that are NOT SCHEDULED but still chosen by declaring war on different guilds and agreeing to be enemies (not to fight specific battles, that's stupid and lame) and to dispute territories for resources, services, spreading freedom and democracy, the true faith, or whatever ideals (this should probably be a mechanic, but it wouldn't be a hard mechanic to implement and I know this from developing small games myself) absolutely nothing about the lore would change. There are already rogue bands running around and fighting each other. You even fight your long-term friends and allies in dungeons when they simply get mad at you. End the kumbaya and give us open-world PvP alliance wars! All the WvW maps should still be used as territories you can choose to dispute and they should be the Mists territories which have valuable synthesizer nodes that can make rare materials as well as the Obsidian Sanctum jumping puzzle. You shouldn't even have to have all of them packaged together, but if you choose the borderlands, you can get Borderlands Bloodlust and then use the buff to fight for territory, resources, people, services, etc. in Tyria and not only the Mists so people might always want to choose to have their guilds dispute those anyways.

@"Coeruleum.9164" said:I think WvW just needs a complete overhaul. Honestly, the story reason for WvW makes no sense. I don't think people in any of the alternate Tyrias call their world stuff like "Blackgate" and "Dragonbrand" in-world. The WvW map should still be used, but the rationale for using it should change. It should be guilds fighting over resources or something that actually makes sense. Also, it would probably make sense to make Tyria maps useable too. How it should work is guilds decide to be enemies. The battles are NOT arranged all like "let's fight because we all know wars in real life are like a friendly football game," rather you can drop in and drop out any time once your guild decides to be enemies and the battle ends once your guilds stop deciding to be enemies (maybe the battles will need to be terminated, but I doubt it, because the only reason Dragonbrand, Blackgate, Maguuma, and Tarnished Coast aren't perpetual enemies is that servers have to be shuffled automatically.) You can link up a ton of guilds in the alliance so your tiny guild with 10 people can join a large guild, kind of like server linking now. You can also be ganked in open world maps, but only if you're repping the guild that's fighting in that map, so if you're trying to do something and you don't want to be ganked, rep a different guild. Some guilds will probably just be neutral like Switzerland or something so people will always have a gank-free option (probably mostly raiding guilds and sPvP guilds.) Your guild can end up allying with the centaurs, Sons of Svanir or the Nightmare Court if you're on a map where you're fighting those enemies... you can already ally with Palawa Joko and Mad King Thorn, so allying with a bad guy expediently in GW2 is not weird. I think this is a way better open-world PvP option than the lore-unfriendly WvW option, though as long a we have WvW and not this I'm going to play it, because open-world PvP is fun.

Denmark and Canada still fight for territory despite both being part of NATO. We might as well hint that there are groups of players fighting for each other and not just evil dragons vs. good players. Not everyone who fights is exemplary good vs. exemplary evil even where good vs. evil exists. It's supposed to be "Guild Wars," not "Dragon Wars" anyways even though I love fighting the Elder Dragons and harvesting their magic and that's very cool.

I think the main issue with this probably is that it'd lead to a huge overhaul to the "feel" of the game even if it involves virtually no new mechanics or removing anything that already exists. The game has been too implicitly United Federation of Planets kumbaya between all the playable races' strongest forces, even though this isn't actually Star Trek and there's no good explanation for that. However, if there were open-world guild alliance wars in designated territories that are NOT SCHEDULED but still chosen by declaring war on different guilds and agreeing to be enemies (not to fight specific battles, that's stupid and lame) and to dispute territories for resources, services, spreading freedom and democracy, the true faith, or whatever ideals (this should probably be a mechanic, but it wouldn't be a hard mechanic to implement and I know this from developing small games myself) absolutely nothing about the lore would change. There are already rogue bands running around and fighting each other. You even fight your long-term friends and allies in dungeons when they simply get mad at you. End the kumbaya and give us open-world PvP alliance wars! All the WvW maps should still be used as territories you can choose to dispute and they should be the Mists territories which have valuable synthesizer nodes that can make rare materials as well as the Obsidian Sanctum jumping puzzle. You shouldn't even have to have all of them packaged together, but if you choose the borderlands, you can get Borderlands Bloodlust and then use the buff to fight for territory, resources, people, services, etc. in Tyria and not only the Mists so people might always want to choose to have their guilds dispute those anyways.

So you basically want open world pvp like in tera. Sounds dumb. Wvw maps are alright as they are now.

Most people would be disappointed with alliances anyway. Because as far as I understand it would be all about guild alliances then which means you better have a good active guild that can enter a strong alliance. There are still strong server communities here on EU and even if you don't have a strong WvW guild, you can participate in a strong community.

@Clownmug.8357 said:Wasn't Steam release delayed/cancelled indefinitely?

Is it taking the alliances route? That's going to be a long wait

Think the idea is what Anet is gonna do with "Pug" players that will not be part of any major Guild Alliance. What do you do with all the solo players. "Oh well they can just join up with one of the Guild's in that alliance....." Seriously? I seen some of the big Guilds and their little backroom alliances...i don't like where that was headed to begin with. And i don't think it would have created a "positive" atmosphere or dialogue concerning WvW's future in general. All I seen was just a lot of politics, half kept promises of how the alliances were going to form in the first place. Many of the major guilds in all the Servers...after Alliances was announced, went full out testing each other in Obsidian Sanctum. Measuring each others ability, so they could "Choose" which guilds they were gonna ally with for Alliances. Pugs, solo players, and small guilds....were pretty much left fending for themselves. I saw the whole alliance thing from the bottom rung of the WvW food chain. It was not a pretty sight. The so called big guilds were at the banquet table...and the small guilds were what? Given combat scraps? No participation? And all you people could do was say "well they can just disband and join the larger guild. I don't LIKE large guilds. Too much noise. Too much ego. Too many problems.

@"KeyOrion.9506" said:Think the idea is what Anet is gonna do with "Pug" players that will not be part of any major Guild Alliance. What do you do with all the solo players. "Oh well they can just join up with one of the Guild's in that alliance....." Seriously? I seen some of the big Guilds and their little backroom alliances...i don't like where that was headed to begin with. And i don't think it would have created a "positive" atmosphere or dialogue concerning WvW's future in general. All I seen was just a lot of politics, half kept promises of how the alliances were going to form in the first place. Many of the major guilds in all the Servers...after Alliances was announced, went full out testing each other in Obsidian Sanctum. Measuring each others ability, so they could "Choose" which guilds they were gonna ally with for Alliances. Pugs, solo players, and small guilds....were pretty much left fending for themselves. I saw the whole alliance thing from the bottom rung of the WvW food chain. It was not a pretty sight. The so called big guilds were at the banquet table...and the small guilds were what? Given combat scraps? No participation? And all you people could do was say "well they can just disband and join the larger guild. I don't LIKE large guilds. Too much noise. Too much ego. Too many problems.

pugs will be randomly placed to these alliance worlds, if they dont care enough to join a guild i dont see the problem. Same with smaller guilds. You have to be able to offer something to the guilds you want to be in alliance with.Or make smaller guild alliance with similiar minded ppl who dont like large guilds.

Considering most of the commanders don't care for the Capture the Flag of WvW, and their always roaming for a fight...or heading to the "Swords" or "OJ's", well why even HAVE alliances then? You might as just as well go full on Guild vs. Guild, and forget the WvW. When you no longer give a damn about capture the flag mechanids....then you don't have WvW.

@"KeyOrion.9506" said:Considering most of the commanders don't care for the Capture the Flag of WvW, and their always roaming for a fight...or heading to the "Swords" or "OJ's", well why even HAVE alliances then? You might as just as well go full on Guild vs. Guild, and forget the WvW. When you no longer give a kitten about capture the flag mechanids....then you don't have WvW.

gvg is something ppl have been asking for years. Anet is just too proud to admit mistakes so they rather do something else than what players want.

@"KeyOrion.9506" said:Considering most of the commanders don't care for the Capture the Flag of WvW, and their always roaming for a fight...or heading to the "Swords" or "OJ's", well why even HAVE alliances then? You might as just as well go full on Guild vs. Guild, and forget the WvW. When you no longer give a kitten about capture the flag mechanids....then you don't have WvW.

I think you are wrong about that. I don't know anyone who only plays WvW for one thing. If all you do is GvG or BvB all the time it quickly gets boring. It's the variety in WvW that makes it fun.

The issue with PPT is rather that PPT is much more sensitive to the scoring being broken than PPK is. If scoring is fixed and matchups get good so players will build and play to win again, then PPT and PPK will be more merged and PPT stands to benefit from that.

As things stand with scoring being broken, so no one cares about winning or losing, PPT suffers more. If a predominant PPT server matches up against a predominant PPK server then the PPT will quickly gain some stuff from captures and then they will just tick score and get nothing else. The PPK will at least farm the other server for bags and get WXP that way. That is more of the reason why most commanders care more about PPK than PPT.

I think I've mentioned this before, but a few weeks back I was part of a matchup where the outcome mattered. That week really showed what the mode is capable of (both the good and the ugly), how much activity still is left and the entire week was fought all the way up to the buzzer. The placings wasn't fully decided until 15 mins before reset. That's more of how things should be, it is obviously still possible, however that example is an extreme rarity given the population balance and scoring problems. I've not seen a single weekly matchup as close and gritty as that for years and years. It also wasn't even a T1 fight. It was a T4 fight deciding who would get thrown down to T5 and get a completely dead week against two then dead servers. None of the servers wanted that so they fought tooth and nail - and the matchup ended up with two servers being even on PPT so it was decided by PPK. If the scoring system worked every matchup, in every tier, every week would be more like that and less like dead by sunday.

They shoul do what }Among Us} do , wher if you die you come bac as ghost , trying to sabotage the keep.tower/offer assistance to others .The fewer remaining aliv person remains (or guilds members occassionally are revived in order to be 30v30v30_ , objectives are diactivated and are funned to capturing the middle round casle in the huge map -not the normals maps . or capturing stractures revives 3-4 guildes people and cannot be recaptured for 30 minOr capture it urself , it you have reached the cap...but dont allow the others to rez from the other server

Or they ghosts can keep attacking on the own ....not the main gate ,but a ghoslty one right next toi it