Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring


Gaile Gray.6029

Recommended Posts

a competitive mode within Wvw would be great, yeah. no wonder players get demotivated, fights are nearly never on even ground, apart from those that should rather be held in spvp. links are often unfair, the system gets crazily cheated, artificially open servers exist, map number differences of 20-30 people seem to be normal (be it bots, algorithm errors or whatever, i don't know), rewards à play time are not adequate, having desert border as hbl is a handicap, ppt calculation isn't great either. EWP despawnings are a pain since forever etc.

all this is why we need chang/es. it's really hard if not impossible to make the mode worse. we're on the lower edge of it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I am playing Shadowlands more than GW2, and PvP feels completely different.

WvW is instant figth; waypoint, join the commander and action. Or go to an enemy camp, flip it and keep looking for players. The game mode has no queu or make you wait for more players to start playing.

I think that is what WvW unique and amazing, the feeling that always, even during late evening, the game is running.

Arenanet has a great opportunity with this game mode... And I have the feeling that players have seen it but not the developers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@lare.5129 said:

@"Kylden Ar.3724" said:Please tell us who you develop for so we can
never
use you as a vendor then.I don't say it on this account, but funniest thing that I sure that you already use that product. It so funny, that I laugh 3 minutes. And one of fun that in these "free of monopoly :facepalm " you can't discard this product and not hurt proof of life. But back to that thread product process .. You still think that any task or case should be solved per half year??? Order it just by time creation order without other priorities and not check risks??? NOOO.This is normal, that some process eat more time that half year. Is this nice? no. But this is normal common state form many many other projects..This is not small startup. So you can be ready that many things that already implemented in text inside task we will see may be after 5 years, or 10, or 30.

Sure buddy, sure you do. Just like the kids back in my school days that "totally have an uncle that works at Nintendo, and I know all the stuff!"

You can take forever to deliver on a project. But not communicating at ALL about progress gets you fired. You sir are full of kittens.

On reddit you would already be added to everyone's ignore list.

@"primatos.5413" said:Alliances WHEN ?!

Um, good sir, you mean,

"Alliances WHEN!?"

yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gz Lare on 2.1k posts.

It feels as if Lare has taken it upon himself to defend Anet and attack anyone who dares to ask when/if alliances will ever happen. Maybe you should ask Anet for a job:-)

Personally I would feel better if Anet just tell us the current state of wvw development, whether anyone is actually working on it at all and if they are then what's the current road map and estimate for alliances. If they said '5-7 years' then they would make it to ten years from announcement to implementation, which would probably be some sort of record for developing something within an already published game!

I wonder what will come first, Lare giving up on defending Anet or alliances. I should start a book on it. Although really it's a one horse race...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Baldrick.8967 said:Gz Lare on 2.1k posts.thanks

Personally I would feel better if Anet just tell us the current state of wvw development, whether anyone is actually working on it at all and if they are then what's the current road map and estimate for alliances.what we point see roadmap and see different result ? real roadmap only for production and can be nothing tie whit real result.

I wonder what will come first, Lare giving up on defending Anet or alliances. I should start a book on it. Although really it's a one horse race...Personal I don't like concept of alianses who some people image it. And think that then aliances come they will look differently as some persons predict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alliances are terrible idea. Counting commander hours and timezone activity will never work with the commitment the player/commander base has and how often guilds are disbanding. It is already obvious that players do not want to play with equal numbers and it is just better to split higher and lower tiers. Just go back to the old system. 1-2 servers full in tier 1 and rest open with tier 2 and tier 3 1000 or 1800 gems transfers. Do not forget the language issues also.

Pugs will also be split equally between every alliance so you won't get rid of them and they won't be used to your playstyle as they reset every 2 months. So things won't be any better for your "guild/alliance", it will be worse for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Threather.9354" said:

Pugs will also be split equally between every alliance so you won't get rid of them and they won't be used to your playstyle as they reset every 2 months. So things won't be any better for your "guild/alliance", it will be worse for everyone.

Do you really think Alliances is wanted because people think they won’t have to play with PUGs? Really?

Do you understand that with linking, people can’t recruit effectively?

Guilds can’t continue to grow and develop within WvW with how links are. It’s why many left their established servers. Not all, but many.

With alliances, if new players are there and want to join the guild, they can then designate that guild as their WvW guild and move with them during the next matching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

merry christmas!andAlliances when?

btw pugs are only metabuild players that aren't joining a tag/voice or? the people @Threather.9354 u talk of are our countless pepega builds, thieves, bear rangers, PvE sets finally or just random sets. (speed runes hello)real pugs should know the mechanics even, most of those people do not.

i sorta agree with the issue guilds have @ recruting that @"Strider Pj.2193" mentions. like my guild that basically taught me 90% of my whole skills had to search for a new server mainly bc effective recruitment wasn't possible here.

the constant link change also messes thing up all the time, so yes, i would indeed appreciate just unlinks for everyone over the current system.the problems with links is, that either:

  • unlinked: server basically dead, many will transfer, every play day a struggle, u will barely every have ground and go t5 very likely, unless ur BB. often leads to quality-loss bc nobody wants to have this. transfers not rarely get filled with newbies who think "high population sounds good, idk what the term means tho" [this was also my own decision thought process when first booting up Gw2]

  • very small link + seemingly rather dead but nearly full host = still no numbers for most, but can work bc ppl may transfer into the link, host players may just be partially inactive. population count doesn't always update that fast.

  • big host + small link = bandwagon target. small link gets full by nomad guilds anyways who just pay the gems to hop. provides overall random quality. some get fighting guilds, others just avoid fighting mostly if they don't have guilds to carry their battles.

  • also, due to the changing combinations, u often lose servers and/or guilds u just adapted to. we had the situation yet that it'd been nice to keep at least that one guild, but impossible due to population issues. the guild would also want to stay at us initially, but when a server pretty much never opens, this ain't possible.

... in the end, i feel that currently the strongest guilds and groups rarely get to fight each other. now and then yes, mostly not. simply bc they're spread out all over the matchups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well... those who still have hope swear we will see them with the x pac this year.

I’m not one of those. I don’t even fully trust there will be an x pac this year. It’s one of those “fool me once, fool me twice” scenarios. By all means though, plz prove me wrong anet!

allianceswhen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Diku.2546" said:Can we have Healthy Competitive Tournaments with Alliances?

Example of How to Host Healthy Competitive Tournaments:https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/comment/1064956/#Comment_1064956

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

We can if they ever delivered on the 8-year old request of a GvG arena that actually works.

A tournament does not have to be server-tournament. Alliances, a guild-based system, could drive further incentive towards more guild-based content, like tournaments. In this game there have been plenty of good, player-run guild-based tournaments. In other games there are such tournaments, some even run by the developers, that capture the eyes of the entire game. Anet/NCsoft are even outdone by their chinese-market partner.

GW2 China GvG Tournament 2020 run by the partnered publisher

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...