Jump to content
  • Sign Up

With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW how about making EoTM into an Alt EBG


Knighthonor.4061

Recommended Posts

With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW we can expect more queues and stuff, which would lead to us having plenty of people for another map. Thats were EOTM come in. It was originally meant for this role, but I propose a new EOTM that mixes a bit of the current design with Boarderland map design and have it as a forth map, to also be some what of an alternative to EBG which would reward pip just like any other WvW map.

the old EoTM map can be used for something else in the future. But I believe this would be a great addition to Alliances going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Knighthonor.4061 said:With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW we can expect more queues and stuff, which would lead to us having plenty of people for another map. Thats were EOTM come in. It was originally meant for this role, but I propose a new EOTM that mixes a bit of the current design with Boarderland map design and have it as a forth map, to also be some what of an alternative to EBG which would reward pip just like any other WvW map.

the old EoTM map can be used for something else in the future. But I believe this would be a great addition to Alliances going forward.

i approve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been new information posted about alliances increasing the number of players per generated world and lowering the tier count? Cool. Where's the source?

Because otherwise this topic is bunk. Worlds can have the same average population as they have now, on exactly as many tiers, with the same queues. Or more. Or less. It would all depend on their target population numbers when generating the worlds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can play EOTM. Nothing is stopping people from playing it.

Go have at it.

The only reason people won’t play it is the rewards? Hmmm... that’s interesting as for the first few years, WvW cost more to play then you received. People played it because they enjoyed it.

EoTM is not an enjoyable map. If it takes rewards to draw you there, then it needs nothing more done to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point anything to mix it up would be good. Even using EOTM as an occasional EGB.

The game mode is stale and losing players. Alliances (2099?) will help but WvW needs more than that to survive. And new WvW maps take a ton of resources that ANET isn't willing to use. EOTM has already been created, make use of it. Keep doing the events, keep coming up with ways to change the game mode temporarily. DO SOMETHING.

I know a lot of veterans hate change. But look at what's happened with no change. Yeah that's right. It sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we just need server wipeouts as seasons instead of relinking. i.e. back to 0.

diablo 3 has a lot of seasons now. it should be an option for wvw players too.

want to join season? yey, server wipe in the sense that new tiers will be made and ppl can choose to stack each servers. and players who dont normally play anyway will not be clogging the population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:we just need server wipeouts as seasons instead of relinking. i.e. back to 0.

That is effectively what alliances will do. Please read up.

diablo 3 has a lot of seasons now. it should be an option for wvw players too.

There are lots of games that aren’t GW2. And??

want to join season? yey, server wipe in the sense that new tiers will be made and ppl can choose to stack each servers.

Alliances.... again, read what is there.

and players who dont normally play anyway will not be clogging the population.

They don’t now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:we just need server wipeouts as seasons instead of relinking. i.e. back to 0.

That is effectively what alliances will do. Please read up.

diablo 3 has a lot of seasons now. it should be an option for wvw players too.

There are lots of games that aren’t GW2. And??

want to join season? yey, server wipe in the sense that new tiers will be made and ppl can choose to stack each servers.

Alliances.... again, read what is there.

and players who dont normally play anyway will not be clogging the population.

They don’t now.

  1. speculation.

  2. and they work

  3. speculation

  4. still requires decloging

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Knighthonor.4061 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:@Knighthonor.4061 So tell me again why you don’t play EoTM?

@Sovereign.1093 And tell me what your thoughts are as to how population status is figured?

Because the progression system is not in EoTM. I play content for fun and progression. When it was rewarding to run EoTM was way more populated.

no pips. :/

yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course with ‘more rewards’ it’s more Populated.

It was a circular COORDINATED ktrain. There were guilds formed to run on multiple servers and all three colors to coordinate avoiding contact with each other.

It was a complete and utter bastardization of WvW.

Sure it was rewarding. Just like the Obsidean sanctum jump puzzle rewarded people with kill trading for UD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:@Knighthonor.4061 So tell me again why you don’t play EoTM?

@Sovereign.1093 And tell me what your thoughts are as to how population status is figured?

who says i dont? i play it with 2 or 3 ppl.

no of play hours per toon, the more you play, the more blocks you occupy, which i hope they put a limit.

It’s play hours... period. If you are playing 300 hours, good for you. That would allow 300 players to play one hour.

There is no clogging. Please stop spreading misinformation.

For further clarification this is a link to the forum archives where @"McKenna Berdrow.2759" posted the specifics.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Yaks-Bend/first#post6513382

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:@Knighthonor.4061 So tell me again why you don’t play EoTM?

@Sovereign.1093 And tell me what your thoughts are as to how population status is figured?

who says i dont? i play it with 2 or 3 ppl.

no of play hours per toon, the more you play, the more blocks you occupy, which i hope they put a limit.

It’s play hours... period. If you are playing 300 hours, good for you. That would allow 300 players to play one hour.

There is no clogging. Please stop spreading misinformation.

For further clarification this is a link to the forum archives where @"McKenna Berdrow.2759" posted the specifics.

and yet there's a lot of full servers :/ need to stop these clogging of servers and reset the wvw tiers. anet can do it and call it seasons. sure servers would stack again but that's how it is. i'd rather see players stack and play and fight than - be outnumbered all the the time.

also, is it me or the forum when you post a link - sends you to a page not found? i had to copy what you posted and paste instead of this clicking thing.


what you linked is similar to what i posted, whats the misinformation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW we can expect more queues and stuff, which would lead to us having plenty of people for another map. Thats were EOTM come in. It was originally meant for this role, but I propose a new EOTM that mixes a bit of the current design with Boarderland map design and have it as a forth map, to also be some what of an alternative to EBG which would reward pip just like any other WvW map.

the old EoTM map can be used for something else in the future. But I believe this would be a great addition to Alliances going forward.

There won’t be servers when alliances launches...

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW we can expect more queues and stuff, which would lead to us having plenty of people for another map. Thats were EOTM come in. It was originally meant for this role, but I propose a new EOTM that mixes a bit of the current design with Boarderland map design and have it as a forth map, to also be some what of an alternative to EBG which would reward pip just like any other WvW map.

the old EoTM map can be used for something else in the future. But I believe this would be a great addition to Alliances going forward.

Also...

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26877/world-restructuring-faq

"EotM will remain the same as it does now."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:@Knighthonor.4061 So tell me again why you don’t play EoTM?

@Sovereign.1093 And tell me what your thoughts are as to how population status is figured?

who says i dont? i play it with 2 or 3 ppl.

no of play hours per toon, the more you play, the more blocks you occupy, which i hope they put a limit.

It’s play hours... period. If you are playing 300 hours, good for you. That would allow 300 players to play one hour.

There is no clogging. Please stop spreading misinformation.

For further clarification this is a link to the forum archives where @"McKenna Berdrow.2759" posted the specifics.

and yet there's a lot of full servers :/ need to stop these clogging of servers and reset the wvw tiers. anet can do it and call it seasons. sure servers would stack again but that's how it is. i'd rather see players stack and play and fight than - be outnumbered all the the time.

also, is it me or the forum when you post a link - sends you to a page not found? i had to copy what you posted and paste instead of this clicking thing.

what you linked is similar to what i posted, whats the misinformation?

‘Full’ servers are a level that triggers the server to close. It has nothing to do queues or numbers of players.

It has everything to do with total play hours.

For example: BG, considered to be the most ‘full’ server in NA, never mind it’s link. Rarely is there a queue outside of reset. But, because of play hours, across all time zones it remains full (and should)

That isn’t ‘clogging’, it’s trying to keep things competitive.

The link system has some redeeming qualities, but like most things, players found a way to game it.

As it is written, (though I have no doubt it can be games) alliances offers some hope for more balanced matchups. But no system will be perfect.

And as far as the links in posts? I think for the most part it’s how your computer/device handles links. I’ve never had a problem clicking on links both on my phone, or my computer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Knighthonor.4061 said:With Alliances reducing the number servers overall in WvW we can expect more queues and stuff, which would lead to us having plenty of people for another map. Thats were EOTM come in. It was originally meant for this role, but I propose a new EOTM that mixes a bit of the current design with Boarderland map design and have it as a forth map, to also be some what of an alternative to EBG which would reward pip just like any other WvW map.

the old EoTM map can be used for something else in the future. But I believe this would be a great addition to Alliances going forward.

This is an interesting idea. If they do, I plan on making the tankiest build I can, and equipping every knockback/launch I can make room for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...