NSP Full?

How is that? The only time there is anything like real numbers running on NSP is the first two hours after weekly reset. It's been in T4 for months.

The idea that it is full is simply ludicrous.

CD is now Medium. Thanks, ANET! The best guild in the game, VR, abandoned us. Along with the worst guild in the game, VOID.

@Ni In.6578 said:CD is now Medium. Thanks, ANET! The best guild in the game, VR, abandoned us. Along with the worst guild in the game, VOID.

Do you even grub?

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World

Nsp is “very high”

@Ni In.6578 said:CD is now Medium. Thanks, ANET! The best guild in the game, VR, abandoned us. Along with the worst guild in the game, VOID.See, isnt that the definition of balance?

@"Calisanna.8732" said:https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World

Nsp is “very high”

Oh good it dropped a bit finally.

Still, based on what it actually has for population it should be High at the most.

Full, repeatedly linked with SF (which is virtually vacant), and stuck in this broken T4 where there's basically only 2 servers competing.

Good matchups are about the only thing going for what is a totally stale game mode and they can't even get that right.

I've just stopped logging in. Either they'll finally do something or another game will catch my interest.

Half the problem isn't how many people play on each server, it's the skill level of the players who do play. Anet trying to balance the link servers to have equal numbers isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when after each relink players/guilds can switch to a new server. Bandwagoning and already having superior skilled players just lead to bad match up after bad match up. Even if they were equal numbers when relinked, after the mass bandwagon after each relink it's all screwed up again. Blackgate was the original bandwagon server and the average player skill wise there is much more skillful then on other servers. With equal number fights they dominated for years after they stacked their population with skilled players. Even if BG has lower numbers now, their better skilled players still are good enough to get to t1 even with lower numbers. Now that they have a link server to get equal numbers (or even more from bandwagon players) these past few weeks have just been sad match up wise.

I hope the alliance system spreads out the skill more evenly, and doesn't let 500 person alliances stack match ups (like they already are) and let 'equal' numbers be the determining factor for good match ups. It's like having a pro sports team versus a high school team. They both have the same amount of players on the court, but the skill is not the same.

@DAN.7314 said:Half the problem isn't how many people play on each server, it's the skill level of the players who do play. Anet trying to balance the link servers to have equal numbers isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when after each relink players/guilds can switch to a new server. Bandwagoning and already having superior skilled players just lead to bad match up after bad match up. Even if they were equal numbers when relinked, after the mass bandwagon after each relink it's all screwed up again. Blackgate was the original bandwagon server and the average player skill wise there is much more skillful then on other servers. With equal number fights they dominated for years after they stacked their population with skilled players. Even if BG has lower numbers now, their better skilled players still are good enough to get to t1 even with lower numbers. Now that they have a link server to get equal numbers (or even more from bandwagon players) these past few weeks have just been sad match up wise.

I hope the alliance system spreads out the skill more evenly, and doesn't let 500 person alliances stack match ups (like they already are) and let 'equal' numbers be the determining factor for good match ups. It's like having a pro sports team versus a high school team. They both have the same amount of players on the court, but the skill is not the same.

You can't force skilled players to play against each other, often they are skilled because they play with other skilled players , somebody has to win and somebody has to lose and those that don't take the time to get better are going to lose inevitably

@Trajan.4953 said:

@DAN.7314 said:Half the problem isn't how many people play on each server, it's the skill level of the players who do play. Anet trying to balance the link servers to have equal numbers isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when after each relink players/guilds can switch to a new server. Bandwagoning and already having superior skilled players just lead to bad match up after bad match up. Even if they were equal numbers when relinked, after the mass bandwagon after each relink it's all screwed up again. Blackgate was the original bandwagon server and the average player skill wise there is much more skillful then on other servers. With equal number fights they dominated for years after they stacked their population with skilled players. Even if BG has lower numbers now, their better skilled players still are good enough to get to t1 even with lower numbers. Now that they have a link server to get equal numbers (or even more from bandwagon players) these past few weeks have just been sad match up wise.

I hope the alliance system spreads out the skill more evenly, and doesn't let 500 person alliances stack match ups (like they already are) and let 'equal' numbers be the determining factor for good match ups. It's like having a pro sports team versus a high school team. They both have the same amount of players on the court, but the skill is not the same.

I agree with this. Usually learning from other skilled players make that process move faster.

The drawback is this same people get bored because wiping unskilled players gets old fast.

And I know ‘training others’ is both tedious and often fruitless, (well it was explained better by @Israel.7056 ) playing alongside skilled players can help those unskilled ones get better leading to a slightly larger skilled base.

Honestly, in some ways it seems kind of futile.

@Trajan.4953 said:

@DAN.7314 said:Half the problem isn't how many people play on each server, it's the skill level of the players who do play. Anet trying to balance the link servers to have equal numbers isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when after each relink players/guilds can switch to a new server. Bandwagoning and already having superior skilled players just lead to bad match up after bad match up. Even if they were equal numbers when relinked, after the mass bandwagon after each relink it's all screwed up again. Blackgate was the original bandwagon server and the average player skill wise there is much more skillful then on other servers. With equal number fights they dominated for years after they stacked their population with skilled players. Even if BG has lower numbers now, their better skilled players still are good enough to get to t1 even with lower numbers. Now that they have a link server to get equal numbers (or even more from bandwagon players) these past few weeks have just been sad match up wise.

I hope the alliance system spreads out the skill more evenly, and doesn't let 500 person alliances stack match ups (like they already are) and let 'equal' numbers be the determining factor for good match ups. It's like having a pro sports team versus a high school team. They both have the same amount of players on the court, but the skill is not the same.

Then why all the bandwagoning? Get better amirite?

@"Glass Hand.7306" said:How is that? The only time there is anything like real numbers running on NSP is the first two hours after weekly reset. It's been in T4 for months.

The idea that it is full is simply ludicrous.

The problem is servers "FULL" status is NOT purely based on how many players are on that server it based on how many hours each account plays in wvw per week on avg. This failed logic is one of the biggest reasons the game mode is dying and balance is never going to happen in wvw. Anet doesn't like to admit when they're wrong and certainly not quick to fix MASSIVE issues even if it's killing the game mode and losing them thousands of players cutting into their profits. People don't play the exact same amount of hours each week so a servers "full" status should never have been based on last weeks/months/years play hours. My server, for example, has on/off been locked for over a year only open few a few hours in that time. Anet publically admitted BG lacks people however play hours of our players is higher than other which is why they don't allow more to join the server. So we have dead maps on reset and outnumbered buff during the week (before the ET link). Instead of anet finally admitting this system is adding to the servers balancing issues not helping it they have already stated they will carry this system over to the "new worlds". So yet again we will see "full" worlds that have 500 people and full worlds that only have 250 people (but on avg play longer). And because of this the "NEW" coming system has already failed and will be the end of this game mode for many vets.