WvW changes. Some of my inspiration (part) — Guild Wars 2 Forums

WvW changes. Some of my inspiration (part)

Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

[First of all. Please tolerate my poor English level]

WvW change concept: Each player will not belong to any server, and the server name will be stored in WvW like a landmark building in the future. Players entering WvW are like PVE shunts, and the number of players is fair (just like FPS games, entering the game). This system will optimize the 3 party camp Lag war

Comments

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Uh, no thanks.
    I dont rly want to play with randoms everytime. I still like having some sort of community.

    Oh, this will reduce the cost of the conversion server. Consider Arenanet will not give up this benefit.

  • RedShark.9548RedShark.9548 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Uh, no thanks.
    I dont rly want to play with randoms everytime. I still like having some sort of community.

    Oh, this will reduce the cost of the conversion server. Consider Arenanet will not give up this benefit.

    Hu? Sorry, i dont get what exactly you mean with that, if i get onto a random group everytime i log into wvw, i wont be able to play with the same ppl again and again

  • Fish.2769Fish.2769 Member ✭✭✭

    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @RedShark.9548 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Uh, no thanks.
    I dont rly want to play with randoms everytime. I still like having some sort of community.

    Oh, this will reduce the cost of the conversion server. Consider Arenanet will not give up this benefit.

    Hu? Sorry, i dont get what exactly you mean with that, if i get onto a random group everytime i log into wvw, i wont be able to play with the same ppl again and again

    (English is not my first language. I sometimes use translation software.)
    This is only part of my inspiration: Of course this is based on the alliance. It will enter WvW with the guild as a unit. You can still play with your guild friends.

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    But... this is just EoTM.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Fish.2769Fish.2769 Member ✭✭✭

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

    It's not a doubt, it's another way of saying - it simply wouldn't work and would create more imbalance with populations.

  • Sleepwalker.1398Sleepwalker.1398 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:
    But... this is just EoTM.

    Would prefer EoTM to be just a vanilla map...no HoT/PoF specs, mounts, glides etc.

  • Virdo.1540Virdo.1540 Member ✭✭✭

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Uh, no thanks.
    I dont rly want to play with randoms everytime. I still like having some sort of community.

    Oh, this will reduce the cost of the conversion server. Consider Arenanet will not give up this benefit.

    idk if u noticed, but anet doesnt really care about their benefits or profit

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭

    I just want WvW to swap links more regularly.

    I hate being stuck with the same team chat troll or incompetent server for an entire month.

    They could also make EotM count to warscore, removing Keeps from EotM and making more Towers and Camps so it becomes THE Roamer map, and has additional combat penalties like no Downstate and special terrain interacts like Bouncing Mushrooms and stuff instead of Gliding and Mounting.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    I just want WvW to swap links more regularly.

    Wont happen. The current 2 month link time is already a compromise - Anet wanted longer, the community wanted shorter.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    I just want WvW to swap links more regularly.

    Wont happen. The current 2 month link time is already a compromise - Anet wanted longer, the community wanted shorter.

    Ik man... but since this thread seems perfect to throw out unlikely suggestions, I just wanna lay it out anyway.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The community wanted one month - 38.1%, more than one month - 61.9%
    Since most of the community wanted 1-3 months they went with 2 as middle ground.

    https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/WvW-Poll-6-June-World-Linking-Schedule-CLOSED/6196507

    The poll has ended! After removing all votes for “Don’t Count My Vote” the final results are:

    38.1% Reevaluate match-ups monthly.
    15.9% Reevaluate match-ups every other month.
    28.9% Reevaluate match-ups quarterly.
    5.5% Reevaluate match-ups every 4 months.
    11.6% Reevaluate match-ups every 6 months.

    After analyzing the results we have decided to go with a 2 month world linking evaluation schedule because the majority of players voted for evaluations to be more frequent than quarterly but less frequent than monthly. Since we have decided to reevaluate every 2 months we will be reevaluating the current world links and making adjustments on the very last Friday of every even month starting this month on the 24th. Thank you to everyone who voted!

    ^ Another derailing post ^ - Anet
    "Perma stealth is needed to outrun zergs." - Thieves
    "There's no power creep, you just don't recognize more people hitting you." - Flat Earther

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭
    edited January 23, 2020

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

    It's not a doubt, it's another way of saying - it simply wouldn't work and would create more imbalance with populations.

    Arenanet The "alliance system" mentioned has a huge influence on the guild
    Now known WvW guilds, no guild can achieve 50 guild members to enter WvW at the same time, the rest of the fill by some free agents or another guild to piece together a complete 50 complete team.

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @Yasai.3549 said:
    I just want WvW to swap links more regularly.

    I hate being stuck with the same team chat troll or incompetent server for an entire month.

    They could also make EotM count to warscore, removing Keeps from EotM and making more Towers and Camps so it becomes THE Roamer map, and has additional combat penalties like no Downstate and special terrain interacts like Bouncing Mushrooms and stuff instead of Gliding and Mounting.

    I don't think this is the core issue, it cannot solve your problems. Because player switching server costs are not high. Take me as an example, I will replace one server every month on average (OK, I will pay 500gem for the satellite server xD)

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @Virdo.1540 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @RedShark.9548 said:
    Uh, no thanks.
    I dont rly want to play with randoms everytime. I still like having some sort of community.

    Oh, this will reduce the cost of the conversion server. Consider Arenanet will not give up this benefit.

    idk if u noticed, but anet doesnt really care about their benefits or profit

    lol. I will replace a server on average every month. Over time, this is a lot of wealth (I may have lost several legendary weapons) lol

  • Fish.2769Fish.2769 Member ✭✭✭

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

    It's not a doubt, it's another way of saying - it simply wouldn't work and would create more imbalance with populations.

    Arenanet The "alliance system" mentioned has a huge influence on the guild
    Now known WvW guilds, no guild can achieve 50 guild members to enter WvW at the same time, the rest of the fill by some free agents or another guild to piece together a complete 50 complete team.

    I know you said your English isn't great but what you've written originally is a completely different concept and idea to what you're now saying. I'm not picking at your lack of knowledge for the language, just not sure you made the point you were trying to with your opening post.

  • Flee.5602Flee.5602 Member ✭✭

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

    It's not a doubt, it's another way of saying - it simply wouldn't work and would create more imbalance with populations.

    Arenanet The "alliance system" mentioned has a huge influence on the guild
    Now known WvW guilds, no guild can achieve 50 guild members to enter WvW at the same time, the rest of the fill by some free agents or another guild to piece together a complete 50 complete team.

    I know you said your English isn't great but what you've written originally is a completely different concept and idea to what you're now saying. I'm not picking at your lack of knowledge for the language, just not sure you made the point you were trying to with your opening post.

    Don't restrict yourself, just say what you think, the alliance system needs everyone's attention, no matter what, look forward to WvW changes.

  • Fish.2769Fish.2769 Member ✭✭✭

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:

    @Flee.5602 said:

    @Fish.2769 said:
    The problem would be that whenever someone disconnects, they wouldn't be immediately replaced or more a large number leave would have a bigger effect on said 'team' - also FPS games are designed in that way and that's what sPvP is for...

    I understand your doubts. When this system enters WvW with guild as a unit, it will be much better.

    It's not a doubt, it's another way of saying - it simply wouldn't work and would create more imbalance with populations.

    Arenanet The "alliance system" mentioned has a huge influence on the guild
    Now known WvW guilds, no guild can achieve 50 guild members to enter WvW at the same time, the rest of the fill by some free agents or another guild to piece together a complete 50 complete team.

    I know you said your English isn't great but what you've written originally is a completely different concept and idea to what you're now saying. I'm not picking at your lack of knowledge for the language, just not sure you made the point you were trying to with your opening post.

    Don't restrict yourself, just say what you think, the alliance system needs everyone's attention, no matter what, look forward to WvW changes.

    Yep. You've lost me completely now... Alliances coming to a Gemstore near you! (soon ™)