World Restructuring FAQ - Page 4 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home WvW

World Restructuring FAQ

124>

Comments

  • Erze.7253Erze.7253 Member ✭✭

    RPers worry here isn't about RPing in WvW (I imagine that happens very rarely).

    Does happen, though.

  • kafka.1657kafka.1657 Member ✭✭

    @medivh.4725 said:
    Will I keep recieving my WVW interval ticks on reward tracks if...
    A) If I change a toon, and went to another map/meta event?
    B ) I change a toon, and come right back at WVW?
    C) If I get disconnected?
    D) Get kick out of WVW due to inactivity?

    Are you're asking this about my pips-into-pops post above? I'm not suggesting that the current pips and participation system be changed. With that said, the extra pips we get for playing on an outnumbered borderland probably should not affect a server's population threshold.

  • medivh.4725medivh.4725 Member ✭✭

    @kafka.1657 said:

    @medivh.4725 said:
    Will I keep recieving my WVW interval ticks on reward tracks if...
    A) If I change a toon, and went to another map/meta event?
    B ) I change a toon, and come right back at WVW?
    C) If I get disconnected?
    D) Get kick out of WVW due to inactivity?

    Are you're asking this about my pips-into-pops post above? I'm not suggesting that the current pips and participation system be changed. With that said, the extra pips we get for playing on an outnumbered borderland probably should not affect a server's population threshold.

    @kafka.1657 I meant it as a general QNA question. Can someone answer the 4 questions pls

  • Diku.2546Diku.2546 Member ✭✭✭
    edited March 22, 2021

    Will there be a published WvW Road Map that helps to detail the future of this game mode?

    Example Road Map for WvW that leads to hosting competitive tournaments that are healthy & encourages good sportsmanship:
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/89449/wvg-world-vs-globes/p1

    Credibility requires critical insight & time.

    Yours truly,
    Diku

    Credibility requires critical insight & time.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/89449/wvg-world-vs-globes/p1

  • Leaa.2943Leaa.2943 Member ✭✭✭

    @kafka.1657 said:
    Question: Instead of play-hours, why not determine server populations using pips?

    Surely a significant number of PvE players contribute to a server's WvW play-hours by merely completing WvW dailies. What has such a player contributed to a server's WvW strength when all they've done is wait 10 minutes to kill a veteran warg? By counting pips intead of play-hours such PvE players would add much less to the population tally.

    Furthermore, player experience would finally matter because veteran players gain pips faster than novices. A server full of novices would therefore have a higher population threshold than a server full of vets. Wasn't this one of the goals that ArenaNet hoped to achieve with alliances?

    Similarly, commanders also earn pips faster, so a server with fewer commanders would naturally have a higher population threshold.

    Bottom line: Who needs alliances when a mechanism already exists that could achieve many of the same benefits? ArenaNet merely needs to set server population thresholds using pips instead of play-hours.

    Consider how bad the system is today, giving a false way of showing server as active when veterans on the server knowing very well that it isn't makes me wonder how big of a impact the players only visit WvW doing dailys really have.

    My server was closed for 270 days before it opened up, and being on the server during that time playing for many hours every day i can say that the last 2 link periods before they finally open us up, really felt like a waste land, and many of us was wondering where the hell all those players that is making us full where. If time was counted they should be visible to us but they never was. This experience during this period built a lot of disbeliefe towards the system we have. Watching other servers going through roughly the same thing all though none was never closed as long as our server was, i often see them asking the same thing, were the hell are this players?

    The idea of using pips as a messurment have come up from us players in the past as well as now, and tbh i don't really understand why this is not used yet. It is already a system in place that check every players progress on pips which update every 5 min, so using that system to check the server populations activity and how it is spread out and how long a player dedicate their time in wvw should be the way to go instead of the way that is used now that don't feel very accurat at all. I mean if we actually count the players only there to do dailys by killing a warg, putting supplies in to a wall, and buy 3 cattas and then leave after 10 min, how much did they really contribute, compated to the players who join the server and spendign hours in the game mode playing it actively. The pips system should be a much better way to count the population and ballance it out in a better way then the system we have today, who seem very flawed at points, and especially in EU where the population is moving servers every relink leaving some servers without link and closed.

  • bigo.9037bigo.9037 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Leaa.2943 said:

    @kafka.1657 said:
    Question: Instead of play-hours, why not determine server populations using pips?

    Surely a significant number of PvE players contribute to a server's WvW play-hours by merely completing WvW dailies. What has such a player contributed to a server's WvW strength when all they've done is wait 10 minutes to kill a veteran warg? By counting pips intead of play-hours such PvE players would add much less to the population tally.

    Furthermore, player experience would finally matter because veteran players gain pips faster than novices. A server full of novices would therefore have a higher population threshold than a server full of vets. Wasn't this one of the goals that ArenaNet hoped to achieve with alliances?

    Similarly, commanders also earn pips faster, so a server with fewer commanders would naturally have a higher population threshold.

    Bottom line: Who needs alliances when a mechanism already exists that could achieve many of the same benefits? ArenaNet merely needs to set server population thresholds using pips instead of play-hours.

    Consider how bad the system is today, giving a false way of showing server as active when veterans on the server knowing very well that it isn't makes me wonder how big of a impact the players only visit WvW doing dailys really have.

    My server was closed for 270 days before it opened up, and being on the server during that time playing for many hours every day i can say that the last 2 link periods before they finally open us up, really felt like a waste land, and many of us was wondering where the hell all those players that is making us full where. If time was counted they should be visible to us but they never was. This experience during this period built a lot of disbeliefe towards the system we have. Watching other servers going through roughly the same thing all though none was never closed as long as our server was, i often see them asking the same thing, were the hell are this players?

    The idea of using pips as a messurment have come up from us players in the past as well as now, and tbh i don't really understand why this is not used yet. It is already a system in place that check every players progress on pips which update every 5 min, so using that system to check the server populations activity and how it is spread out and how long a player dedicate their time in wvw should be the way to go instead of the way that is used now that don't feel very accurat at all. I mean if we actually count the players only there to do dailys by killing a warg, putting supplies in to a wall, and buy 3 cattas and then leave after 10 min, how much did they really contribute, compated to the players who join the server and spendign hours in the game mode playing it actively. The pips system should be a much better way to count the population and ballance it out in a better way then the system we have today, who seem very flawed at points, and especially in EU where the population is moving servers every relink leaving some servers without link and closed.

    only one problem.. this would just encourage vets to make alt accounts and bypass the pip measurement system and now you have higher population than other server full of vets who don’t use this bypass strategy.

    but if it can somehow prevent that, yea it would be a good idea.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 22, 2021

    @Leaa.2943 pips is kinda useless indicator, u can just keep your participation up by killing a guard or dolly now and then and afking for most of the time, running into walls at some point. but yes, that'd be still probably more effective than the current model, that apparently counts played hours only. (or sth alike, who really knows). and these camp flippers, repairbots, treb-bots and afkers are not really having impact on anything that happens otherwise, that'd u would want or see as content (neither fighting nor ppting actively) tbh.

    on some servers, which skirmish around in eternal stalemate brawls, u can even just add in, fight a bit, get some kills or damage done at least, and then afk for 5+minutes again.

  • bigo.9037bigo.9037 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    @Leaa.2943 pips is kinda useless indicator, u can just keep your participation up by killing a guard or dolly now and then and afking for most of the time, running into walls at some point. but yes, that'd be still probably more effective than the current model, that apparently counts played hours only. (or sth alike, who really knows). and these camp flippers, repairbots, treb-bots and afkers are not really having impact on anything that happens otherwise, that'd u would want or see as content (neither fighting nor ppting actively) tbh.

    on some servers, which skirmish around in eternal stalemate brawls, u can even just add in, fight a bit, get some kills or damage done at least, and then afk for 5+minutes again.

    as a roamer i will say it can kinda be both good and bad. camp defenders usually sit in towers or wait in t3 upgraded and sieged camps and get pips participation or whatever meanwhile i run around entire maps capping multiple camps t3 if they aren’t heavily contested. i do think this has an impact though. if i can kill 80 or 90% of the dollies going from 1 camp to 2 towers and 1 keep for however long i decide to do that for, well, enemy towers will stay t1.

    it also genuinely provides content for both myself and enemy. if not toxic, it can be quite a lot of fun trying to capture defended camps without calling for an entire zerg in map chat for help.

  • kafka.1657kafka.1657 Member ✭✭
    edited March 23, 2021

    @bigo.9037 said:

    only one problem.. this would just encourage vets to make alt accounts and bypass the pip measurement system and now you have higher population than other server full of vets who don’t use this bypass strategy.

    but if it can somehow prevent that, yea it would be a good idea.

    Sadly, this sort of thing is already happening. Players make alt or ftp accounts on rival servers to boost their populations in the week prior to when links are reassessed. This can leave those rival servers with a weaker link or, in Europe, no link at all. Even though, using pips instead of play-hours to set population thresholds would be a step in the right direction, it would not keep many players from gaming the system. ...Of course, neither would alliances.

  • Leaa.2943Leaa.2943 Member ✭✭✭

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    @Leaa.2943 pips is kinda useless indicator, u can just keep your participation up by killing a guard or dolly now and then and afking for most of the time, running into walls at some point. but yes, that'd be still probably more effective than the current model, that apparently counts played hours only. (or sth alike, who really knows). and these camp flippers, repairbots, treb-bots and afkers are not really having impact on anything that happens otherwise, that'd u would want or see as content (neither fighting nor ppting actively) tbh.

    on some servers, which skirmish around in eternal stalemate brawls, u can even just add in, fight a bit, get some kills or damage done at least, and then afk for 5+minutes again.

    The point is that you will see how many active hours each person actually contributing to WvW rather then just counting accounts logging in to WvW. Stopping afk players is a whole other matter and is already a issue in all game modes. Lazy play is rewarded and this is something Arena Net need to have a bigger look at over all before they take over the game entierly. But in this case you can litterally see that people spending hours in WvW actually playing the game mode is what should be rewarded, not 15 min dailys were you kill a worm, buy 3 cattas and add supplies to a wall being trebbed and then they are done. That is not contributing to anything at all what so ever. But it still count as an active wvw player which is flat out ridiculous.

  • Leaa.2943Leaa.2943 Member ✭✭✭

    @bigo.9037 said:

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    @Leaa.2943 pips is kinda useless indicator, u can just keep your participation up by killing a guard or dolly now and then and afking for most of the time, running into walls at some point. but yes, that'd be still probably more effective than the current model, that apparently counts played hours only. (or sth alike, who really knows). and these camp flippers, repairbots, treb-bots and afkers are not really having impact on anything that happens otherwise, that'd u would want or see as content (neither fighting nor ppting actively) tbh.

    on some servers, which skirmish around in eternal stalemate brawls, u can even just add in, fight a bit, get some kills or damage done at least, and then afk for 5+minutes again.

    as a roamer i will say it can kinda be both good and bad. camp defenders usually sit in towers or wait in t3 upgraded and sieged camps and get pips participation or whatever meanwhile i run around entire maps capping multiple camps t3 if they aren’t heavily contested. i do think this has an impact though. if i can kill 80 or 90% of the dollies going from 1 camp to 2 towers and 1 keep for however long i decide to do that for, well, enemy towers will stay t1.

    it also genuinely provides content for both myself and enemy. if not toxic, it can be quite a lot of fun trying to capture defended camps without calling for an entire zerg in map chat for help.

    But you are describing something else. If you are contributing to game play in WvW like what you described then you are contributing to the game mode. Most roamers do not only roam around looking for fights, they also cap or cap back camps, sentries, killing enemy dollies well all that stuff you run in to along the way to a fight. That is game play. Killing a worm, buying 3 cattas and adding supples to a wall being trebbed have nothing to do with WvW. It is daily for 10 min and they log out, but they are registered as a active player. Since on my server we have had a lot of time to watch whats going on when we were closed for 270 days becaue we were full, even though all of us playing during that time for sure knew we were not full.

    Somewere something is going wrong in how thye count for active players and what they use now for sure is broken some how or changes have happen that we are not aware of. Pips can be more accurtat then the way they do it now imo.

  • Leaa.2943Leaa.2943 Member ✭✭✭

    @bigo.9037 said:

    @Leaa.2943 said:

    @kafka.1657 said:
    Question: Instead of play-hours, why not determine server populations using pips?

    Surely a significant number of PvE players contribute to a server's WvW play-hours by merely completing WvW dailies. What has such a player contributed to a server's WvW strength when all they've done is wait 10 minutes to kill a veteran warg? By counting pips intead of play-hours such PvE players would add much less to the population tally.

    Furthermore, player experience would finally matter because veteran players gain pips faster than novices. A server full of novices would therefore have a higher population threshold than a server full of vets. Wasn't this one of the goals that ArenaNet hoped to achieve with alliances?

    Similarly, commanders also earn pips faster, so a server with fewer commanders would naturally have a higher population threshold.

    Bottom line: Who needs alliances when a mechanism already exists that could achieve many of the same benefits? ArenaNet merely needs to set server population thresholds using pips instead of play-hours.

    Consider how bad the system is today, giving a false way of showing server as active when veterans on the server knowing very well that it isn't makes me wonder how big of a impact the players only visit WvW doing dailys really have.

    My server was closed for 270 days before it opened up, and being on the server during that time playing for many hours every day i can say that the last 2 link periods before they finally open us up, really felt like a waste land, and many of us was wondering where the hell all those players that is making us full where. If time was counted they should be visible to us but they never was. This experience during this period built a lot of disbeliefe towards the system we have. Watching other servers going through roughly the same thing all though none was never closed as long as our server was, i often see them asking the same thing, were the hell are this players?

    The idea of using pips as a messurment have come up from us players in the past as well as now, and tbh i don't really understand why this is not used yet. It is already a system in place that check every players progress on pips which update every 5 min, so using that system to check the server populations activity and how it is spread out and how long a player dedicate their time in wvw should be the way to go instead of the way that is used now that don't feel very accurat at all. I mean if we actually count the players only there to do dailys by killing a warg, putting supplies in to a wall, and buy 3 cattas and then leave after 10 min, how much did they really contribute, compated to the players who join the server and spendign hours in the game mode playing it actively. The pips system should be a much better way to count the population and ballance it out in a better way then the system we have today, who seem very flawed at points, and especially in EU where the population is moving servers every relink leaving some servers without link and closed.

    only one problem.. this would just encourage vets to make alt accounts and bypass the pip measurement system and now you have higher population than other server full of vets who don’t use this bypass strategy.

    but if it can somehow prevent that, yea it would be a good idea.

    Alt account is already a thing. Most veterans including my self have alt accounts. I don't think it will change anything if you count pips for activity rather then log ins. Pips show that you been in WvW and done things for a longer period of time and Arena Net can see the difference in ballance between server among those who just log in for daily or hide some were in the jp (just kidding that was just one of our questions marks because we never found those players that made our server full for so long :D) and those who actively play it.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @kafka.1657 said:

    @bigo.9037 said:

    only one problem.. this would just encourage vets to make alt accounts and bypass the pip measurement system and now you have higher population than other server full of vets who don’t use this bypass strategy.

    but if it can somehow prevent that, yea it would be a good idea.

    Sadly, this sort of thing is already happening. Players make alt or ftp accounts on rival servers to boost their populations in the week prior to when links are reassessed. This can leave those rival servers with a weaker link or, in Europe, no link at all. Even though, using pips instead of play-hours to set population thresholds would be a step in the right direction, it would not keep many players from gaming the system. ...Of course, neither would alliances.

    i'm nearly sure that population is sorta counted not by number of accounts, but by played hours per matchup, ergo this does not work alike.

    @Leaa.2943 the thing is, pips or how effective u get them aren't the bigger issue simply. the stuff u get for pips isn't that good either way. i don't care that much about this stuff. on a content filled weekend, i have done the participation stuff before monday. and even if i only play few hours each day i'd have it at wednesday. reward tracks run through themselves also.

  • kafka.1657kafka.1657 Member ✭✭

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    i'm nearly sure that population is sorta counted not by number of accounts, but by played hours per matchup, ergo this does not work alike.

    You are correct about play-hours raising a server's active WvW population. So, if a player puts in play-hours on an alt/ftp account on a rival server then they've raised that rival server's active WvW population, thereby reducing that rival server's chances of getting a strong link.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭

    i mean, probably there are weird people that try to do sth like this... but that sounds pretty much effort for basically nothing outside of... beeing annoying? like if somone would do this intentionally. which surely might be... competitive ppt would kinda create such ways of behaviour, i suppose.

    most players i know have their alts mostly then in usage, if their main is having boring matchups (or the other one simply a more interesting/challenging one), yeah idk.

  • kafka.1657kafka.1657 Member ✭✭
    edited March 24, 2021

    @kamikharzeeh.8016 said:
    i mean, probably there are weird people that try to do sth like this... but that sounds pretty much effort for basically nothing outside of... beeing annoying? like if somone would do this intentionally. which surely might be... competitive ppt would kinda create such ways of behaviour, i suppose.

    Your server might not be full, in which case there would be little reason for players from rival servers to boost your population ahead of the relinking. My server is nearly always full and often finds itself without a link.

    Last week was when play-hours would be measured for the upcoming relink. Sure enough, there were plenty of strangers showing up with low achievement points and some even repping guilds from other servers. That week in which play-hours were measured ended Sunday, so I looked to see if our server's WvW performance would drop as all those visitors left. Well, that's exactly what happened. We went from being a dozen points ahead to a dozen behind in just 2 days. Only 1 of the 8 skirmishes in which our kdr was over 2.2 occurred after Sunday. I very much expect that we will be without a link again after this Friday.

    Consider yourself lucky if this is not happening on your server.

  • kamikharzeeh.8016kamikharzeeh.8016 Member ✭✭✭✭

    that's just showing the toxicity of the link system; i was on a permafull server most of my playtime. the ppl who turned the server full were either afking for most of the times, or just ppting for days and pretty much unwilling do engage in pvp. or if they did, rather a help for the enemies. what u additionally have to keep in mind is, that due to the lesser activity in NA, the EU servers get extra population in terms of migrated NA guilds, who do then their "guildraids" during our nighttime. bit weird, but that stuff counts into the calculation as well.

    cannot say a lot about my new one, i swapped 3 weeks ago and cannot play atm. the full servers usually are having unhealthy amounts of non-fighter population. the vicious cycle repeats time and again, sadly.

    i still don't see the reason to manipulate a link. fighting groups want others to be able to fight as well, so they have sth to fight, therefore it makes no sense still that they'd do this.