World Restructuring - Page 7 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

World Restructuring

145791047

Comments

  • @asha.4159 said:

    @SnowPumpkin.1809 said:

    The problem is those guilds will only recruit players that can dedicate all their time to WVW, or can train as you said, or raid with them etc. If you can't or don't you will be in a map for 8 weeks with people you don't know and huge guilds that run around saying get lost pug. I play a lot of WVW I can see this happening easily, as it already does in some cases with Guild raids. I think it's a bad idea to give guilds the reins in WVW, it's already a problem.

    Definition of Guild - an association of people for mutual aid or the pursuit of a common goal.

    Yes there will be elite guilds - raids/ trainings/ expectations - but casual ones with less restrictions are already around and dont have a culture to git gud or gkick.

    Exactly! It's already a problem, I only see it becoming worse with this solution. So casual groups will they be broken up in to players that play a lot of play a little and moved to different servers? If not I see casual guilds being stuck up against elites so Idk how this fixes anything.

  • DeceiverX.8361DeceiverX.8361 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Glad to see data is being properly utilized for matchmaking. I hope this bodes well. I'm just a little afraid 8 weeks is too long in the event that a lot of stacking is performed.

    You sure that Sniper idea is as good as you thought it was gonna be?
    Because I think my original idea is better.
    Quit/Inactive. No, you can't have my stuff.

  • Chaba.5410Chaba.5410 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Zephyr.8015 said:
    Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

    This is a hard fact that will be ignored by the ignorant

    It is also a hard fact that battlegroups was an idea first hinted at before server links and before T1 was as it is today, meaning that this announcement has nothing to do with today's BG.

  • ugrakarma.9416ugrakarma.9416 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Endelon.1042 said:
    If they make the Alliance cap size around 1,000....that's probably already pretty close to the really active population numbers for a lot of servers. I think a lot of people are really overreacting. I suspect most of the Alliances are going to settle around the existing server communities anyway and if you can't be bothered to join one of the WvW guilds (a lot of which have no actual requirements) then I'm not sure why you're concerned about being randomly placed.

    Yeah just this, theres no reason for ppl going to panic.

    If someone has a group of "inseperable friends", create a guild and put them in, set them as a WvW.

    For those who are crying about the "important pugs", I advise you to create a generic guild to group your pugs, very simple.

    The price for "hanging out with your friends" will simply be the guild organization, so finally this game will have a reason to have the nome of Guild Wars.

    "It's a testament to the folly of the humans and their gods. They say Arah was sacred, but all I see is one big dragon nest."(Rytlock Brimstone)

  • ReaverKane.7598ReaverKane.7598 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @McKenna Berdrow.2759 said:

    @Endelon.1042 said:
    Who will be in charge of Alliances (a single player? will there be an Alliance UI panel like the Guild panel?) and how will kicking guilds out of an Alliance be handled?

    The current design is that there will be a new tab in the guild panel where guilds can create and manage Alliances. The guild that created the Alliance can kick guilds from the alliance. We have also discussed that no one can kick guilds from an Alliance. Instead anyone can leave an Alliance and form a new one.

    I'd rather a vote system, seems too complicated to manage all that movement just to oust a single entity.

    Also, will guilds be able to be in more than one alliance.
    For example, can i join an alliance of old SFR guilds, plus make one alliance with other guilds that i do WvW and other PvE content with (which incidentally are also all SFR players), or would i have to join one or the other?

  • SnowPumpkin.1809SnowPumpkin.1809 Member ✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    # Question: ****So I am officially NA playing on EU, when we get regrouped or resorted will I be staying on EU or automatically on NA? The reason I ask is I play with my SO on EU so that would be awful :'( .**

  • Klipso.8653Klipso.8653 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Zephyr.8015 said:
    Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

    This is a hard fact that will be ignored by the ignorant

    It is also a hard fact that battlegroups was an idea first hinted at before server links and before T1 was as it is today, meaning that this announcement has nothing to do with today's BG.

    Yet anet felt the need to point us out by name, even though we aren't the problem? They're just feeding into the propaganda built on pillars of salt

    -Balwarc [ICoa]

  • Chaba.5410Chaba.5410 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Zephyr.8015 said:
    Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

    This is a hard fact that will be ignored by the ignorant

    It is also a hard fact that battlegroups was an idea first hinted at before server links and before T1 was as it is today, meaning that this announcement has nothing to do with today's BG.

    Yet anet felt the need to point us out by name, even though we aren't the problem? They're just feeding into the propaganda built on pillars of salt

    And they also mentioned Crystal Desert!

  • Blaeys.3102Blaeys.3102 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @KalasDelRio.8921 said:
    I'm not sure why I'm seeing so many complaints about "Elitism".

    Will this system promote WvW-focused Guilds to recruit more hardcore members? Yes, of course it will. Will those WvW-focused Guilds end up walking all over more casual Guilds? Unlikely, seeing that both players and Guilds are going to be monitored for how much time and effort you put into the game-mode.

    Simply put: If you and your Guild play nothing but WvW, expect to be placed alongside like-minded players against other worlds full of like-minded players. This should result in a higher level of WvW play for players/Guilds who enjoy playing at that level.

    If you enjoy a more casual approach, expect a more casual level of play with other casual players against other casual worlds. It's not that hard to figure out.

    And if you're a solo player that enjoys playing on a certain server, there'll no doubt be Server Guilds/Alliances that pop up to keep people together. Yes, you might technically have to join a Guild, but that doesn't mean you have to run as a Guild.

    If you look at guilds as solid single entities, your points work.

    But that isn't the case. There are players out there that enjoy playing with different groups of friends throughout the week. Many bounce between harder-core full time wvw groups and their smaller groups based around friendships or spillovers from PVE activities. This will be impossible to do under the new system, unless those guilds are all in the same alliance (which is highly unlikely if any of them are more casual than the others - or if the alliance cap is restrictive). So, the system will force guilds to ally not based on friendships, but rather on perceived skill levels - which is definitely worth labeling as elitism.

    And getting away from elitism is why many shifted from other MMOs to GW2 in the first place. It baffles that Anet wants to mess around with that.

    The proposed system only works if everyone is either in a full time wvw guild or in a casual wvw guild. When you have crossover between the two (and you definitely have a lot of that), then the system falls apart - and makes the decisions you make about who to wvw with affect real tangible friendships.

  • Donari.5237Donari.5237 Member ✭✭✭✭

    This isn't really a WvW question, but given the bit about World Selection being eliminated, will our original chosen server no longer factor into megaserver placement? Will it be less likely for the RPers of Tarnished Coast to happen to be in the same maps as each other?

  • asha.4159asha.4159 Member ✭✭

    @SnowPumpkin.1809 said:
    Exactly! It's already a problem, I only see it becoming worse with this solution. So casual groups will they be broken up in to players that play a lot of play a little and moved to different servers? If not I see casual guilds being stuck up against elites so Idk how this fixes anything.

    I dont know your WvW gameplay - roaming, joining a zerg with open commander, PPTing....

    But its already been mentioned there is some gameplay and 'skill' of the players being matched up in the new restructuring. I already mentioned people would lean towards joining a guild/ alliance attracted to their skill and gameplay and possibly time anyway, therefore, you have more chance being matched with a casual guild vs another casual guild take for an example one that like to follow commander and do a bit of ppt and a bit of ppk - which is a good thing right?

    Compare to the current system - Vabbi, a fighting server mainly where people can bandwagon with IRL money Vs casual players/ low/ less skill like the current match up UW and JS (sorry Streaming commanders on UW and GH :P oh the banter) where Vabbi are farming lootbags.

    Khan Ur Asha - EU server Vabbi - Achievement hunter spending too much time in WvW PPK farming lootbags
    Member of WvW guild Burn Vabbi [vB] also The Spud Club [SPUD], Guardians of the Dutch [GOTD] &
    New PvP Guild - My Build is from MetaBattle [Mb]

  • SnowPumpkin.1809SnowPumpkin.1809 Member ✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @Donari.5237 said:
    This isn't really a WvW question, but given the bit about World Selection being eliminated, will our original chosen server no longer factor into megaserver placement? Will it be less likely for the RPers of Tarnished Coast to happen to be in the same maps as each other?

    Yes I'm really curious about this as well and no one has answered as of yet. I'm in Canada my SO is Estonian, he plays EU and I play EU with an NA account. So what happens to me when servers get reset? I hope this doesn't effect PVE as well by me being set back to NA.

  • Djamonja.6453Djamonja.6453 Member ✭✭✭

    @Muzical.1396 said:
    So what's anet going to do about people who have JUST spent gems to transfer servers? Seems like y'all would owe people a refund, since that costs RL money.

    This won't be going live for many months, so you should be able to enjoy your new server for a long time.

  • Chaz.1857Chaz.1857 Member ✭✭

    Chipping in as well to ask about how this is going to affect roleplayers and folks who started in Tarnished Coast!

  • Regardless of if this will work or not (though I will say that I do really like what I've read so far), I'm glad something's being done. Better to try something and it not work then just continue sitting in this stagnation and watch WvW die off more and more.

  • Jazz.2643Jazz.2643 Member ✭✭

    Will this even affect people who are doing PvE?

    Also, this gives me a big worry on how people who Roleplay will find Roleplay. Given that the Tarnish Coast and Piken Square are being used as RP servers for most of the RP community, sharding us to different worlds will make meeting people even harder than it already is!

    So my question is, how will this affect the RP community?

  • Djamonja.6453Djamonja.6453 Member ✭✭✭

    @Chaz.1857 said:
    Chipping in as well to ask about how this is going to affect roleplayers and folks who started in Tarnished Coast!

    Would a RP alliance work?

  • Muzical.1396Muzical.1396 Member
    edited February 1, 2018

    @Djamonja.6453 said:

    @Muzical.1396 said:
    So what's anet going to do about people who have JUST spent gems to transfer servers? Seems like y'all would owe people a refund, since that costs RL money.

    This won't be going live for many months, so you should be able to enjoy your new server for a long time.

    Not me: guildmates. One of them just moved to FA specifically FOR WvW.

  • SnowPumpkin.1809SnowPumpkin.1809 Member ✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @asha.4159 said:

    @SnowPumpkin.1809 said:
    Exactly! It's already a problem, I only see it becoming worse with this solution. So casual groups will they be broken up in to players that play a lot of play a little and moved to different servers? If not I see casual guilds being stuck up against elites so Idk how this fixes anything.

    I dont know your WvW gameplay - roaming, joining a zerg with open commander, PPTing....

    But its already been mentioned there is some gameplay and 'skill' of the players being matched up in the new restructuring. I already mentioned people would lean towards joining a guild/ alliance attracted to their skill and gameplay and possibly time anyway, therefore, you have more chance being matched with a casual guild vs another casual guild take for an example one that like to follow commander and do a bit of ppt and a bit of ppk - which is a good thing right?

    Compare to the current system - Vabbi, a fighting server mainly where people can bandwagon with IRL money Vs casual players/ low/ less skill like the current match up UW and JS (sorry Streaming commanders on UW and GH :P oh the banter) where Vabbi are farming lootbags.

    Ok so question. I WVW a lot and my BF works and does when he can. Even if we are in the same guild will we be split because of play hrs etc? If not can't you see how elite guilds that only pick the best of the best that have 100% dedication and alliance with like guilds will be OP in WVW? Also the same guilds that may take me may refuse him so....I could make my own guild but then do we get put in a map with a lot of hardcore players because of me, or with casual because of him or do we get split up? You see the problem?

  • Yes, burn down all the servers. I always thought WvW would turn into something like this. Make guilds matter more.

  • Hitman.5829Hitman.5829 Member ✭✭✭✭

    So, now that you are at it, will we be seeing new maps or are we stuck with the old ones?

    Charr Warrior Master Race!
    Black Gate Beast Roamer chicken chaser!

  • CedarDog.9723CedarDog.9723 Member ✭✭✭

    Will we get extra guild slots since the changes sound like they'll divide up PvX and WvW orientated guilds? We'll probably have to join a separate WvW guild with the new system. We should get extra slots to reflect that.

  • Well, sometimes you dont know what to say.
    There are moaning of the "mercenary"-servers (the lesser linking servers) of the loss of server identity
    Your proposal of developing a lot of mini-"merc"-servers was blown into little bits by the comm, among other things, because of missing server identity.
    And what idea do you get?
    You repeal the worlds entirely...
    Certainly this will increase server-identification....

    It would have been better, if there had been no support for wvw at all, than this botch.
    The opposite of "well done" is not "bad done", but "well meant".

    I`m from aba.
    I like my server for the kind of play it offers to me: not deadly serious and not only success and/or fight oriented.
    And that I will not be able to find in the new system - best I can hope for will be two fractions argueing about that all the time.
    For me, if the new system really is coming, it will be the farewell for wvw.
    And, cause wvw is the one thing keeping me to gw2, it will be the farewell for the game.
    What a pity.

  • Just want to say, this is fantastic. Everything about it sounds like exactly what we need and what proper guilds have been hoping for throughout the last 5 years. Nice and bold, just hope you have the stones to pull through on it (ignore the moaning, ppl afraid of change and/or putting in any effort).

    Questions though,

    • How will guilds 'lock-in' the concept they are in an alliance together? Will both guilds have to press some sort of commit button? If so, I take it that would be handled by the GLs?
    • Also, what happens if one guild doesn't want to be in an alliance with another any longer? Would one guild have to break free from an alliance to escape a guild they no longer wanted to be associated with? Or Would there be a single guild at the core of an alliance and should they deselect the link with another, that guild would be removed from the alliance?
    • How will the system algorithms planned tackle guild coverage? will everything be split into prime-time and non-prime? Will there be another split for Nightcrew? I'm asking because for sure there will be PPT alliances and PPK alliances and I'd recommend you try ensuring there is some kind of balance/harmony between the two (please don't be naive to think we'll get along, we never have and never will). I am hoping there will be some of the rumored guild k/d API stats coming to help sort balance in that regard?
  • HazyDaisy.4107HazyDaisy.4107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    How is the loyalty pip going to work if there are no worlds to be loyal to? Apologies if this has already been asked.

    [HaHa] Hazardous Hallucination - Sorrows Furnace

  • Red Haired Savage.5430Red Haired Savage.5430 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @HazyDaisy.4107 said:
    How is the loyalty pip going to work if there are no worlds to be loyal to? Apologies if this has already been asked.

    It's not a loyalty pip anymore(they changed it shortly after starting it), its now the commitment pip, you get it for getting wood last week.

    #nornmodeisbestmode

  • Seems good

  • asha.4159asha.4159 Member ✭✭

    @SnowPumpkin.1809 said:
    Ok so question. I WVW a lot and my BF works and does when he can. Even if we are in the same guild will we be split because of play hrs etc? If not can't you see how elite guilds that only pick the best of the best that have 100% dedication and alliance with like guilds will be OP in WVW? Also the same guilds that may take me may refuse him so....I could make my own guild but then do we get put in a map with a lot of hardcore players because of me, or with casual because of him or do we get split up? You see the problem?

    I would have every confidence that as youre on a lot the very least, you will find a guild that is less restrictive, friendly and take both of you on probably before this would go live - we would have months and Anet seems to be planting this seed for change. This restructuring would turn a lot on its head. Your current guild(s) your in now may actually change there focus/ vision too which both you or your bf may or may not want to be part of before any of this goes live.

    I dont know any more details than you, but say you're both on different 'world' on day 1 after restructuring, you will be in 2 different worlds to scout out the guilds/ alliances that form. I hope Anet will provide free transfers in the first season so either you or your BF can join that preferred guild and server.

    Khan Ur Asha - EU server Vabbi - Achievement hunter spending too much time in WvW PPK farming lootbags
    Member of WvW guild Burn Vabbi [vB] also The Spud Club [SPUD], Guardians of the Dutch [GOTD] &
    New PvP Guild - My Build is from MetaBattle [Mb]

  • Overall I Also think this is a great idea. All players will get in WvW, but its better if you are in an alliance or a guild then as an individual. One suggestion though, perhaps Average out the numbers of players in the Off hours and and perhaps make those guild count for 3x or 5x their numbers in alliances. this way, it will guarantee they spread out among the new worlds.

  • SkyShroud.2865SkyShroud.2865 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    Basically, the idea was the same as the "leaked" I heard from someone almost a year ago....
    So, took almost an year to actually decide to get into it and check the public reactions of it.

    @Concordia Discors.7592 said:
    How does this fit in with PvX guilds? Will calling ourselves a WvW guild affect anything else we do as a guild? Are our missions going to change (we go mixed)? Can people be in our guild still if they're playing on a different world?

    From my understanding we basically can't join an alliance unless we put all WvW'ers in a second guild for our WvW purposes, and then we have to build that up too. Otherwise an alliance headcount is going to suffer with non-WvW'ers in our guild....? It'd be a waste of time and resources.

    Unless our WvW headcount is completely separate from all that and doesn't go by total number of guild members, but active playtime on our world... That sounds less concerning.

    For the record, I'm looking forward to changes. WvW needs an overhaul and it's way past due. The attention and effort being put into it is fantastic. I don't support all of the changes proposed, especially after seeing the comments, but with modifications it could be made a lot fairer.

    Ermm....

    As far as they described, the system will only recognize the players that specifically chose WvW guild as WvWers. So, choosing WvW guild is optional. However, what if people choose WvW guild for the sake of choosing it? Would it consider them as active players just like that or base on historical activities?

    Founder & Leader of Equinox Solstice [TIME], a Singapore-Based International PvX Guild
    Henge of Denravi Server
    www.gw2time.com

    --

    Explanations of WvW Structures & Populations Issues

  • @KalasDelRio.8921 said: > Simply put: If you and your Guild play nothing but WvW, expect to be placed alongside like-minded players against other worlds full of like-minded players. This should result in a higher level of WvW play for players/Guilds who enjoy playing at that level.

    I hope you are right. However, I remain skeptical because of my experience. My guild and server have played WvW in the top tier for years and I have enjoyed myself immensely playing against only the best servers. But for one season we dropped down only a single tier, and the WvW lost all its fun.. We steamrolled over our opponents. It was so easy that it was no fun. I know it had to be even less fun for our opponents.

    At best, this new system can only duplicate my experience at having great and appropriate opponents. At worst, NO one will have any fun for the season. So why change? Perhaps the other tiers will start having more fun, I don't know. All I do know is that it will be a trainwreck for those of us in the top tier. Perhaps the politics of envy will rejoice at this. But will the other tiers fare any better? There is no guarantee. Will "time played" be as sure a measure of skill as our current system's measure?

  • Vrita.7846Vrita.7846 Member ✭✭✭

    Is it possible that I could get my 1800 gems refunded for a world transfer I did? I've only been part of the world for about a couple months, and had I known ahead of time that this change was coming, I would've spent the gems on something else entirely. Certainly doesn't feel worth the cost to be part of a different world for a few months only to have it scrapped entirely.

  • Baldrick.8967Baldrick.8967 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    I'm interested to know how they will measure k/d api stats, 'participation', etc. I sometimes do a lot of scouting. Will that push me down the list? Just because I feel like scouting doesn't mean I don't like huge 3 way zerg fests- I love them. Just not all the time. Variety is the spice of life. I'm also not the type to rush around desperately trying to maximise my points/kills, etc, preferring to take my time and enjoy my leisure time.

    I don't want to join a big guild because they are usually very political. I also have a tendency to end up sooner or later as guild leader, and I no longer want that sort of involvement in a game- I have a RL.

    I can't join any voice comm for personal reasons- which most commanders on my server know and understand. I don't want to have to explain this to people all over again.

    This new system forces players like me to join a larger guild. I don't want to join a pug guild with players below my skill level, but I don't want to join some crazed 'do it our way or else' mad keen must raid 4 times a week or kick type guild- even if I run with them, sometimes several times a week (yes, despite no voice comms, and not using a 'meta' build).

    I like being a 'casual' player without the commitments belonging to a full wvw guild entails. I like following our current commanders .

    But the current system needs to change- there are large swathes of time when no one is on any map.

    Just wondering where in the plan players like me fit in. Or should we just quit now? (ex- top 30 gvg guild, Guild Wars player- back when 10,000 guilds played it and getting in the top 100 was bloody hard!).

    I've played another game with guild alliances- the politics is something I don't miss. Also, most of the so-called 'elite guilds' are pretty easy to take down or play with so they get frustrated:-)

    If there are no checks and balances then people and guilds will be pigeon holed, and one alliance will totally dominate every match up they have, several alliances will have all the fun and be impossible to enter and then the rest will have little to no organisation leading to bad match ups and people quitting the game/mode and a huge barrier to entry for new players. Might lead to a very small wvw population. This problem needs to be addressed before it happens.

  • X T D.6458X T D.6458 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ubi.4136 said:

    @X T D.6458 said:

    @Kerall.7390 said:
    Well, not optimistic about the effects this will have on WvW. I'd love to be proven wrong. But this looks like it will destroy communities.

    Thats going to ruin wvw for a lot of people, this essentially makes it meaningless as there is no reason to play for your server. No reason to defend, upgrade, scout, or do anything. It will basically turn into an eotm style ktrain.

    I guess they want everyone to do nothing but trade towers for karma.
    Prepare for the greatest exploitation of this game (and game format) to date.
    The T1 guilds are just going to ally with themselves or create 1-5 mega guilds so that they can stack on the same world.
    Pretty much all the militia folks, regardless of skill and play time, will end up in no man's land. I should not have to join a mega (forced 100% rep) wvw guild to play...but it's gonna happen. Guess us militia folks will play in the basement tier and ktrain too.

    How long do you think it will be before the so called 'fights guild and players' start complaining that wvw is boring and nothing but pvd...?

    BG

  • @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Zephyr.8015 said:
    Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

    This is a hard fact that will be ignored by the ignorant

    It is also a hard fact that battlegroups was an idea first hinted at before server links and before T1 was as it is today, meaning that this announcement has nothing to do with today's BG.

    Yet anet felt the need to point us out by name, even though we aren't the problem? They're just feeding into the propaganda built on pillars of salt

    Your server alone is winning against four other servers. Any other server matched up against you without a link would lose, most likely without winning a skirmish. How is that not stacked?

  • asha.4159asha.4159 Member ✭✭

    Just thinking - Why 8 weeks? thats such a longtime! why not 4 weeks??

    Khan Ur Asha - EU server Vabbi - Achievement hunter spending too much time in WvW PPK farming lootbags
    Member of WvW guild Burn Vabbi [vB] also The Spud Club [SPUD], Guardians of the Dutch [GOTD] &
    New PvP Guild - My Build is from MetaBattle [Mb]

  • HazyDaisy.4107HazyDaisy.4107 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    @Red Haired Savage.5430 said:

    @HazyDaisy.4107 said:
    How is the loyalty pip going to work if there are no worlds to be loyal to? Apologies if this has already been asked.

    It's not a loyalty pip anymore(they changed it shortly after starting it), its now the commitment pip, you get it for getting wood last week.

    And if you did not transfer, which still makes server loyalty come into play for this pip currently whatever it's called. So, I ask again, how can we hold to the loyalty stipulation assosiated with this pip if none of us have a server? Is the transfer penalty going to be removed or is the whole pip going away?

    [HaHa] Hazardous Hallucination - Sorrows Furnace

  • Klipso.8653Klipso.8653 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mr Green.4157 said:

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Chaba.5410 said:

    @Klipso.8653 said:

    @Zephyr.8015 said:
    Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

    This is a hard fact that will be ignored by the ignorant

    It is also a hard fact that battlegroups was an idea first hinted at before server links and before T1 was as it is today, meaning that this announcement has nothing to do with today's BG.

    Yet anet felt the need to point us out by name, even though we aren't the problem? They're just feeding into the propaganda built on pillars of salt

    Your server alone is winning against four other servers. Any other server matched up against you without a link would lose, most likely without winning a skirmish. How is that not stacked?

    Open the link, we are not even close to the top population. All we have are dedicated players that stay logged in for extended periods of time.

    -Balwarc [ICoa]

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.