Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring


Gaile Gray.6029

Recommended Posts

We've been Borlis Pass since Beta and planned to be loyal to our server for all time, won't be happy to be shoved onto a new world for sure... Also how about making it easier to earn Favor? How will this affect earning of Favor. What about bringing back the aspect of the old influence system where if guildies party up in PvE and do events etc together they also earn Favor? Awesome that WvW is getting some love but I forsee some pretty major issues if our guild doesn't declare itself as a WvW guild regardless of whether we are or are not WvWcentric?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you want creat new maps? I left this game long time ago, because there is no reality update for WvW, its really boring.you just cut some hills, and change skills timer , that all :)
its too late for thinking about WvW, but its better than nothing,bad work for wvw Arenanet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Phlogistn.7893" said:I realize that many servers no longer feel they have an "identity". That is not, I feel, the case for Tarnished Coast and some other servers I know of. Some people have been on their server since day one, have friends across guilds and have a history. Although "something" needed to be done with WvW I am sad to think that all the people we play with here will be dispersed to the winds. Even stating they can be in an "alliance" with alliances changing from season to season, makes the continuity of community null. Baby, bathwater.....

I feel the same way. I feel quite sad and demotivated by the thought of our world’s population being dispersed. I feel our world has quite a good community that I’ve come to know over a long period of time, and one of the things I find the most compelling about WvW is jumping in with familiar commanders on the field that I know and recognize.

I get where this is coming from and that other world have balance and population issues, but this is a sad day for me as a WvW player.

What this concept does is eliminate the pride we feel in our world, which for many of us, is literally the chief motivation to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@McKenna Berdrow.2759 Instead of WvW it can soon either be called GvG, AvA or PvP. Although I like AvA, it has a nice ring to it. I'm excited, as recently I find myself more likely to SPvP because I get more consistent fights and rewards like gold/ascended gear etc. But my first preference of fighting is just small scale roaming with my guild mates in WvW.

Goodluck, I will say if your going ahead with this it would be best to bring out new maps at the sametime for wow factor to lure back more players eager and keen to retry a fresh Guild Wars 2 WvW like experience.

Also the participation mechanic needs a rework such as a cashout system etc. So large ques don't happen on the release of this new world restructuring creation or the new plan. People hate waiting for afkers to leave a map.

Finally if reward chests are match based or seasonal, not sure how that will wor yet, is it possible to get a monetary reward like the SPvP chests? I ask because for me I can make vastly greater sums of gold from SPvP than WvW currently. It seems odd to me that a WvW player should be forced into SPvP to get gold so they can afford a new suit or gear for WvW faster. All this to feel like they can be competitive. Don't get me wrong though I like SPvP, but others might get salty about that and it could ruin SPvP players fun or ratings in ranked matches.

People who play SPvP should be those wanting to be there, not just for gold, rewards or daily achieve achievements!

Just as those who want to WvW should be those players wanting to participate and do well for their world that they take pride in or feel like they have a sense of belonging to over a long period of time. On that note I will miss Sanctum of Rall, but there isn't many of us left. So this change needs to happen and as soon as possible. Sometimes at the times I play NA nights maps are like ghost towns :(

Marks are essentially the problem as they are so costly to craft. Harvesting nodes don't provide enough sustained revenue to even buy good food or utilities these days. Perhaps because the wood, cloth, ores etc are so cheap to buy and sell now. Anyways that is enough from me grumbling about the lack of gold or rewards for WvW.

Just a thought... WvW players shouldn't feel like they are the forgotten ones, but your plans already are a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ArenaNet Staff

@"Karnasis.6892" said:My concern is honestly in transferring. It would have to be a harsher restriction than it currently is, simply for the fact that server transfers/world linking is what got us into this mess of imbalance in the first place. I get that there will be people impacted in the sense that their friend is on "Server A" and they are currently on "Server E", but give them a chance before the system goes live to decide if they want to play with that friend or guilds. I just feel that the overall impact of having no transfers will overall outweigh the cons of not being able to have one or two friends come play with you. But that's just my initial thoughts.

We are planning to give the community some lead time before this goes live. Organizing yourselves will take time and we want to allow that to happen. Transfers are something we can monitor better with this system and respond to more quickly. Since worlds should be relatively even the amount of transferring to the higher population worlds before they become full will be less. This should prevent guilds and alliances trying to use transferring to stack servers more difficult. We're open to discussion about this though and the "fullness %s" are things be looking at and adjusting if needed until we find a good spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this new system will kill diversity within the server. It's gonna be 1 or 2 guilds dominates whole server and the rest tries to get in those guilds to get easy loot. big guilds sell transfer spots for gold. it's like wvw during the game release when everything was fresh, but where are you gonna find those fresh people now? 5.5 years game, sieges too strong, damage strong. new players even can't realise how they died in 1 secs from stealth. even this system has no sign of how to introduce new players to wvw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who has played mainly WvW since starting GW2 a year after launch, I honestly think that this a great and refreshing idea to bring into WvW and the game! I'm very excited to see some of the proposed changes and hope that they will go through. My main server is Crystal Desert and I've seen it go from thriving all day to having peak and non-peak times, which really hurt the server as a whole and made certain times of day almost unplayable. Restructuring how worlds are made/matched and giving us the option to choose/form alliances is a great, interactive, and fun idea. I understand that people have server pride, and there is nothing wrong with that as I love CD, but my first and foremost alliance is to my friends and guild, which I think will greatly benefit from this. Overall, I think these are great changes and am excited to see where this goes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@McKenna Berdrow.2759 said:

@Symmol.8639 said:Is the setting to be a WvW guild independant from the Guild Mission settings? I want to play WvW with my guild mates but still being able to do PvE missions with my other guild mates that don't play WvW.

It is independent. It will be a new setting launching with the system.

Nice thanks, that's a relief :D I'm so happy to see this change coming then!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here's my two cents on this.

First off I believe that the numbers for alliances should be tuned to accept a large number of guilds, but a low number of players. IE, only two large guilds can be in one alliance because they hit the player cap, but say, 10 small guilds can form an alliance. The intended effect for this is to allow smaller guilds to be able to join these guild alliances without "wasting a guild slot." Also, overall i would say 500-1000 players in an alliance is too high of a number for current populations. While i dont have the concrete data, I would wager that 500-1000 is basically a medium population server's entire active playerbase(gut feeling). In order to produce that granularity you guys mention in the original post, those numbers should be lower.

Here's some counter arguments to the naysayers:

Looking to play casually with a friend but not interested in joining a wvw guild? Make a personal guild with you and your friend and set it as your wvw guild. Now you'll always be able to play with your friend whenever.Afraid that your community is being torn apart? Create a community guild, guilds have 500 slots for a reason.

In closing, deleting the current servers is in my opinion the only way to set populations back on the right track. They will never fix themselves via linking or discounted transfers. Its like you broke your arm and it was set wrong, yeah it sucks, but you're going to have to get your arm re-broken so that it can be set properly. It'll be painful in the short term, but in the long run we only stand to benefit from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I guess this is going to be the final nail in the coffin for me. As a working adult, I am unable to keep up with long play hours and so, I predict I will be lumped with others who play very little or simply log into wvw only for the dailies. Even though I do not play long hours, I also do not play wvw solely for the dailies and I am exclusively a wvw player. I guess players with such demographics can consider looking for another game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extremely disappointed with this change. Overhaul was needed but not like this.

1) Basically turning into EoTM style maps where playing for your server means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING since worlds are gonna change anyway, which also means no room for community growth.

2) The PuGs (by far the larger population than "guilds") are indirectly shown the way out. No allegiance to any particular server means, unfortunately, no real rewards for actually working towards your community (which won't exist anymore).

  1. Might as well rename the mode as GvG or AvA and be done with WvW as a whole. This disrespect towards the wvw community (that took years to build) started with wvw linking which had ZERO benefit and has only caused problems. This reconstruction change will be the final nail in the coffin for majority of the users.

It was nice while WvW lasted (just prior to world linking) and good luck to Anet in future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:

@"Karnasis.6892" said:My concern is honestly in transferring. It would have to be a harsher restriction than it currently is, simply for the fact that server transfers/world linking is what got us into this mess of imbalance in the first place. I get that there will be people impacted in the sense that their friend is on "Server A" and they are currently on "Server E", but give them a chance before the system goes live to decide if they want to play with that friend or guilds. I just feel that the overall impact of having no transfers will overall outweigh the cons of not being able to have one or two friends come play with you. But that's just my initial thoughts.

We are planning to give the community some lead time before this goes live. Organizing yourselves will take time and we want to allow that to happen. Transfers are something we can monitor better with this system and respond to more quickly. Since worlds should be relatively even the amount of transferring to the higher population worlds before they become full will be less. This should prevent guilds and alliances trying to use transferring to stack servers more difficult. We're open to discussion about this though and the "fullness %s" are things be looking at and adjusting if needed until we find a good spot.

Can you just unlock all the servers until this new system goes in then? It would be nice for people on JQ and BG to get friends over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds good and fresh in so many ways and I'm looking forward to it, my only concerns are with how the community may use alliances to over stack especially if its anything like 500 - 1000 ppl. 200 - 400 would be more then enough.

I also understand why some ppl are upset at losing their community but really a shake up is long over due.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rest in peace, Fort Aspenwood. I will always have fond memories of rolling over people with Shrouded Warband and The Legion of Charr under your banner.
Getting onto the actual changes that will be in place someday, these are interesting and while I can't say I know how this will actually play out given that none of this is actually set in stone yet: I am skeptical but also interested in seeing how it all goes down in the long run since this might be the jump start that the game mode needs to actually breathe some life back into it.

Edited by SadiraVolantes.2563
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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