Jump to content
  • Sign Up

4 week server links until Alliance system implemented


Blodeuyn.2751

Recommended Posts

Ill be brief - 8 weeks feels too long for server links with the current state of the game. We currently have these major issues:

  1. Bandwagoning
  2. Gaming of system
  3. Tanking/match manipulation
  4. Toxic links
  5. Staleness of matches when locked into links for 8 weeks

I'd like to see server links last 4 weeks until the Alliance system is implemented. Maybe shorter links will fix these issues, maybe not. All I know is that I am sick of waiting 8 weeks to get rid of a toxic link, or hoping certain servers are placed in their appropriate tier. I know I am not the only one tired of the other problems as well. Just my thoughts, maybe I'm wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:they wont make as much money thru gems if we do this.

They are completely getting rid of the ability to transfer I doubt gem income is significant at all.

actually you can still transfer worlds =)

I thought so too but I couldn't find the original thread about. You can transfer during the 8 week match for gems still.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Loosmaster.8263 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:they wont make as much money thru gems if we do this.

They are completely getting rid of the ability to transfer I doubt gem income is significant at all.

actually you can still transfer worlds =)

I thought so too but I couldn't find the original thread about. You can transfer during the 8 week match for gems still.

links in this sense will be the alliances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:they wont make as much money thru gems if we do this.

They are completely getting rid of the ability to transfer I doubt gem income is significant at all.

actually you can still transfer worlds =)

In the alliance system? How?

Even then the system should result in less movies therefore ostensibly less gem income.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@morrolan.9608 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:they wont make as much money thru gems if we do this.

They are completely getting rid of the ability to transfer I doubt gem income is significant at all.

actually you can still transfer worlds =)

In the alliance system? How?

Even then the system should result in less movies therefore ostensibly less gem income.

(world(guild alliances(other guilds not in alliance(individual players))))

so those who are always together are the guild alliance, who get to move every 2 months, so the rest can go where they are if the place is not full.

=)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I remembered reading in one of those threads that no one (guild or otherwise) could transfer the first or last week of the alliance system linking, but in 6 weeks in between (assuming they go with 8 week pairings) you could pay to transfer with the restrictions currently in place (ie no pips until a full week on new world).

I can understand some safe guard restrictions, but it's unreasonabke to say no one can transfer at all during these linkings, especially if they're long, it doesn't do Anet or players any good to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 weeks isn't enough time to even out the ladder on +1-1. I really wonder what makes you think it's an improvement.

Bandwagoning doesn't require links or server relinks. Also anet has created many "stacked" links by themselves without anyone asking for it.Tanking and match manipulation aren't related to the length of the season; but matchmaking stability is. A server which gets put in T4 might belong in a T2 matchup; but never reach its ideal mu in a 4 week span of time.

Toxic links isn't a problem with links; but a problem with players and how the game doesn't incentivise working together.

Staleness of matches is the state of the game.

Your proposal doesn't fix any of the issues you're trying to fix. Please review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a solution isn't found, then wvw may not make it to alliances. The abuse of this transfer system has only increased as time has gone on. I'm glad there are some at least willing to help try to find a solution.

Perhaps all servers should be locked for the first 1/2 of a linking. Or even up to 2 weeks before the next linking. Allow people to shift and join friends, etc just before the new linking so that their numbers are properly factored in before the new linking and thus it is balanced for the next few weeks.

The current system is just breaking the game more and more each matchup. If Anet does nothing, as certain new games come out, they are going to loose more of the wvw player base. Ktrains will be all those here who stay will have left. Be nice to find some solution to this mess that links created.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"hunkamania.7561" said:Didn't we vote for 1 month server relinks and they made it 2 months anyways? Not 100% positive on this but anet does what anet wants even if it's wrong and relinks should be done every week.

It was not a "majority" vote, most of the players voted for 1 month and 3 months, so they went with 2 months.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Poll-6-June-World-Linking-Schedule-CLOSED/page/3#post6196507

38.1% Reevaluate match-ups monthly.15.9% Reevaluate match-ups every other month.28.9% Reevaluate match-ups quarterly.

Also constant relinking gives servers less time to settle, which means more chaotic matches, and more time for devs working on data than wvw, as the system is not automated but it will be with the alliance system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...