Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring


Gaile Gray.6029

Recommended Posts

So we have to join a WVW guild to play with friends? I joined GW2 with someone and a lot of couples play that either run guildless or do not want to be in a WVW guild. We love WVW however and if we can't play together I can't see myself continuing to play GW, we will end up having to play something else. A lot of guilds have expectations, they expect you to raid with them at certain times etc... not everyone can do that and I'm not about to go begging WVW guilds to add me to their guild. I'm upset about all the money spent transferring to new worlds trying to find a balance in population times considering he's in EU and I'm NA. What will be done for customers who have poured money into transfers and couples who want to play together and not be in a guild? How will TeamSpeak work when it has to be changed every couple months? This also breaks up long term servers that have worked very hard to get where they are, trained constantly and are used to the players they play with? I'm hoping this fixes some issues but I have a bad feeling. This solution may create more issues than it fixes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sold on this idea.This can go one of two ways for me. Either it will allow me to play on Piken Square with my newer guildies who never could join it because they started playing long after Piken got tagged as full.Or because i rarely play wvw BECAUSE i can't play with those guildies and thus end up doing solo roam, Me and my guild will lose our Piken Square connection because of this bull.I am a loyal Piken Square resident, have been since launch. And this looks like its going to make me jump through numerous hoops to keep that. for no other reason that because some shrubs complained their lower tier wvw server was always losing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to reiterate the previous questions posed, and not yet answered, about how this will affect Roleplayers.

Even though I'm not a roleplayer myself, I always found their play style something that made the game world feel a little bit more active. Instead of a silent chat with a bunch of people AFKing in town, folks are pretending to do... well, whatever it is roleplayers do. It's nice to see, and it's a long lived tradition of MMOs (in the 20 years I've been playing, I've been seeing RPers do their thing).

I took a hiatus from this game a while back, before the megaserver, and before leaving I was on Tarnished Coast. It felt alive; always something going on. Upon arriving back to the megaserver, it's hit or miss. Some instances feel active, with the roleplayers doing their thing, and others are dead silent.

It sounds to me like this is going to further that disparity between instances. Almost every MMO I've played at least had some remote head nod to RPers, but it feels almost as if this game is slowly adding more and more things to scatter and deter them, like trying to break up kids loitering outside of storefronts.

If RP really is something that is discouraged by Arenanet, it would be nice if y'all would take the time just to go ahead and say that so everyone can have an understanding of their situation. But otherwise, if that isn't the case, a little encouragement and explanation as to what the future of these players will be (and maybe even a carrot, now and then) might help a lot.

As much as RPers probably spend on the gem store looking pretty, I think they've at least earned a small acknowledgment of their existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feedback:

1.) 500-1000 player alliances is waaaaay too big. Consider large guilds who have 10% hardcore players (a lot of participation towards their alliance/guild, yet low actual coverage). Limit the Alliance size to maximum 200 (100 ideally). This will force people who actually play (by timezones) together to build smaller alliances, and guilds like (ex) CERN wont clutter a server/timezone with "casuals". This will prevent the bandwagoning of alliances as well.

2.) Make Alliance or Guild leaderboards (ppt contributed, k/d ratios, etc.). This whole "server identity" crying will be mitigated if you give people something to fight for. Since you're working on an Alliance system, I would suggest we stick to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ArenaNet Staff

@Vova.2640 said:WORLD = (an alliance[or a few] +guilds[a few smaller ones?] + individuals[those who didn't declare a wvw guild??])In a world, is it random alliances that are matched together? And random guilds put in? and random individuals?

Yes, except worlds will also consider language. So random alliances, guilds, and individuals that all have the same language preference.

Also if alliance size is large enough, would it be possible that...WORLD = (an alliance + individuals) or even just an alliance?Like, can an alliance be large enough to be its own small world? Then a few small worlds (that are primarily 1 alliance + individuals) can fight each other in a matchup?

An alliance can not be large enough to be it's own world since alliances have population caps. It will be possible to have a world with 1 alliance and many individuals though, or even a world with no alliances and instead several guilds.

How much population is every world expected to have?For example, when compared what Blackgate has right now? I imagine (and really hope) it would be much lower.

It will most likely be similar sizes to the current more populated worlds or the size of linked worlds now.

What about inactive players?A player comes back and wants to join his guild that is already part of an alliance/world. Can he just join them with ease?

Possibly. That inactive player should set their guild as their WvW guild so next season they are guaranteed to be able to play with their guild. They might be able to play with their guild during the current season if the guild is on a world that is not full. Then the new system would recommend that world to the player when they enter WvW.

What about scores? or rankings?Ideally, alliances or even just guilds within the alliance should have some sort of score or ranking system within them.

We do not have any plans to have a leaderboard based off of this system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm gonna need to give this a proper look over tomorrow but my initial thoughts are hopeful for this system. WvW does need something to happen.

The big drawback seems to be doing away with the current worlds, which a lot of people have clung on to for the longest time and have built their communities around. Look at GSCH on Sanctum of Rall, for instance. But with the Alliance system, this drawback can mostly be alleviated I feel. I don't think I've ever actually seen a 500-man pure WvW Guild before, so I doubt there'll actually be an issue of not having enough space in an Alliance.

I like idea of tracking Participation more thoroughly in order to gauge a player's WvW rating, but would it be possible to add more things that actually count as Participation i.e. Reviving, Healing, Boonsharing for people who play more supportive roles?

Also, how will different types of Participation affect a player's WvW skill rating? For instance, Maguuma is known for its' fight mentality so naturally its' players would attain more Participation from killing enemies than some other servers that prefer PPTing. Will killing enemies grant you a higher skill rating than someone who mostly caps keeps?

You also mention that Guilds will have to mark themselves as WvW Guilds. Does marking your Guild automatically secure your entire Guild a spot in a World during World Creation? How will inactive members of these Guilds affect population slots within the World the Guild is allocated to? Some Guilds have been known not to play in WvW for the week during unfavourable matchups, what will the repercussions be for intentional tanking like this?

That's all I can think of at the moment. Looking forward to seeing the outcome of this dialog :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite honestly I am upset, especially because you name Blackgate as a problem server when its not. It is not BG's problem that servers don't want to participate in WvW, it is also not our problem that other servers aren't putting in time and effort into WvW in comparison to others. Looking at this site: https://wvwstats.com/timezones BG does not have the WvW population people think it does. I am so kitten glad to hear that anet has listened to the massive amount of haters of BG that carry around giant amounts of salt from Season 1 and 2. Because its BG's fault they don't put in effort, its BG's fault they get rolled over, its BG's fault that they don't play the game type as well. Anyone on SoS can tell you they have been doing well these past two weeks against us, by putting in effort and playing the game type. All this alliance thing will do is require more guild politics/map politics and cause drama. I am sure BG isn't alone in the fact that we have members of guilds who are in multiple WvW guilds, forcing them to choose 1 guild for an 8 week period or just in general to WvW with isn't cool. But I guess that's an exclusive issue on closed servers having to recruit from a limited pool of players, while other servers can recruit a lot more. This boils down to effort, the fact that you'd rather break apart servers who do WvW well to make it fair to those who don't want to put in effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this idea is a pretty damn good one. The idea of guild alliances has been thrown around a lot and for good reason: it now gives you the opportunity to get closer with your guilds, encourages pugs to join one or even just form their own community guild, improving overall gameplay, and balances out population more.

@DeadlySynz.3471 said:Even though this thread is long, it looks like many of the people failed to read through it, as the questions were already answered:

One thing I've noticed reading through this thread, just how little support there is behind the current system. I knew there were some people for the existence of servers, but didn't realize just how few people there are. There is literally a handful of naysayers in this thread only, which when multiplied over the big picture in comparison to the support of the new idea, we basically have a very very small fraction of the population that's behind servers. This prove this new alliance system is fully warranted.

That's the typical forumgoer though lol, they don't read posts, they just skim the OP and then come down whining or raging in the thread.

@McKenna Berdrow.2759 Do you have any considerations for asking guilds to label their 'timezone' as well? There're strong distinctions between most NA, OCXSEA and EU guilds, but a lot of players play both timezones and so may skew the algorithms.

Additionally, will you consider calculating the mixing of OCX/SEA separately from NA? Overall, the scale of numbers is smaller in those timezones and if NA's numbers are used to match up alliances there would be too few different matchups for OCX/SEA and too much blobbiness that a lot of them dislike./

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I foresee this to create a lot of issues very quickly in the WvW world. While yes, there are some unbalances, this whole new system opens up a possibility for an even worse environment to something many players already shy away from to begin with. First, If you have one guild that would be your WvW guild, yet you are part of others that may be part of another WvW world and you run different guilds at different times during the week, this becomes an impossible move unless by chance ALL of the guilds are in an alliance. The only groups that this will be probably effecting is the more militant type servers, whose guilds will probably just form alliances week in and week out to keep it very similar.

Second, this system is promoting severe elitism from the beginning. In order to get to the upper tier, you have to already have high rank, commander time, etc..., meaning to get into the highest ranked worlds, they are going to pick and choose who come, whereas many servers and groups open the door for all to come and enjoy WvW. There already is some form of elitism, however this will make things run seemingly rampant and ruin what is a fun environment, in my opinion.

Third, Many guilds share a server world identity already in various ways not seen within the game. My server (HoD) support a high volume TeamSpeak and Discord channels, along with several guilds that collaborate on various items during the week, not just WvW. Creating a system like this will destroy what little server pride is left, and put the focus on to the guilds and commanders to be the "best of the best" to have some kind of remotely good time in WvW.

Fourth, not all players consistently play at the same exact times each week. Vacations happen, sick days come in to play with work, schedules change, and if a player, in one guild/alliance, has some kind of permanent change to their schedule, immediately may lose the peak time to play WvW. This penalizes players for having lives and jobs that sometimes have to adjust, and mind you many of these players have invested years and thousands of dollars into GW2.

In my guild's weekly WvW session tonight, we had approximately 15 people through the night running, and every single one of them was not in favor of this system (my guild leader posted earlier already on this thread). At the same time as that discussion, another guild that I am a part of (one more WvW focused) had approximately 40 people commenting in their chat at their disapproval of this setup.

Please listen: change for the sake of change is not good. It forces a lot of good people away. Is there a perfect system for millions of players? No. But there should be some other alternative. I would strongly suggest that before a new system is implemented or even proposed, that representatives from each server and most guilds be polled on what they think may be a better alternative to having a server such as Blackgate with coverage at all times.

Another point to consider, Blackgate's players are extremely dedicated to WvW. No doubts there. Is it fair that one server should sit atop the rest week in and week out? No. Perhaps the solution may lie with the server linking being done based off of WvW participation data, not tier score each cycle. I know that for HoD (my server), there are bigger groups that run during EU, NA, and OCX times, some more focused (EU having AIR guild, for example). Maybe the solution lies with finding a way to make a few guilds move to help the coverage times with incentivized moves across servers instead of nuking and replacing the entire system. Maybe the solution lies with bringing the players in WvW most to get together with devs to discuss possible adjustments with the current system to make it more balanced. This is just a few ideas that come to mind just being a player who likes to PvX, and not just WvW all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SnowPumpkin.1809 said:So we have to join a WVW guild to play with friends? I joined GW2 with someone and a lot of couples play that either run guildless or do not want to be in a WVW guild. We love WVW however and if we can't play together I can't see myself continuing to play GW, we will end up having to play something else. A lot of guilds have expectations, they expect you to raid with them at certain times etc... not everyone can do that and I'm not about to go begging WVW guilds to add me to their guild. I'm upset about all the money spent transferring to new worlds trying to find a balance in population times considering he's in EU and I'm NA. What will be done for customers who have poured money into transfers and couples who want to play together and not be in a guild? How will TeamSpeak work when it has to be changed every couple months? This also breaks up long term servers that have worked very hard to get where they are, trained constantly and are used to the players they play with? I'm hoping this fixes some issues but I have a bad feeling. This solution may create more issues than it fixes.

Everyone spent gems to play with friends with this new model u will never have to again, if you wanna play with your friends create a guild play together or just join a guild, you can additionally just play as a PUG join some group using LFG or whatever, all that is important is that this model allow the game to potentially scale up and down in size so you can find people to play with easier then ever, since you can play potentially with 100% of any player that enjoys playing WvW the way you do, not only the players on your current server.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does anet keep ignoring whats under their nose? Why server linking in the first place? The solution was and still is SIMPLE, DELETE half the lower pop servers and open up the others.

By doing what you have suggested you basically render all wvw server sites useless, kill communication because there will be no voice comms anymore. Or allies will run their own and one world could end up with zero voice comms or 5+ (which is nearly just as useless). each ally having their own voice comms...You also kill any server pride.Are us max ranks all gonna end up on the same servers while low ranks end up together also. And then u force big guilds to join each others ally? And this will give wvw more balance??

on the up side it may help with server spying because everyone will be kicked from their current servers.

As someone else said this sounds like it will be a complete mess with regard to communication and could be the final nail in the wvw coffin. If you wanted wvw to end up all like eotm ktrain then this is what you do by killing server pride and communities.

As i've said for YEARS we need to simply lose half the servers and keep the rest to help solve the balance issues. There is a simple idea like thats being ignored and a more complex solution that offers nothing better (like deleting them all) being planned? why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's talk about the EU servers. There are currently national (DE, ES, FR, EN) servers there. Will the guilds of the servers be merged so that DE and FR fight for the same world?

Personally, I think it would be great, because this way the cover can probably be better balanced. But it is no secret that it can also lead to problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jacobian.6173 said:The only real problem I foresee with this is that all of the top guilds will make an alliance together to dominate the rest of the worlds. and because of how you make it sound it would just be another BG type of deal over the rest of the world.

Actually that is already how WVW is run, guilds all transfer together (move servers) to stay together and servers like BG have the top WVW guilds. So it sounds like those same guilds will still be playing together stomping on the little guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sounds too much like PVP, which I loathe, and if I liked it, I'd play that. We don't need another EOTM bag train for 8 weeks at a time.

There are still those of us that try and use intelligence and tactics to defeat the enemy instead of just a bag train. Anet, you have made it increasingly difficult to do this. I long for the days of server loyalty, which was destroyed by the mega-servers, and the lack of a "server chat", which we asked for repeatedly.

I play with several friends who are all in small guilds, we build siege, or run havoc, taking small things while a main commander does the big fights. If we are no longer able to play wvw together, there will be little reason to play this game. None of our guilds are solely wvw, most are PVE. We play together because we like eachother's company, but, our guilds do not run together. Most of us have been on the same server together for years, and still have server loyalty.

I believe this will be the nail in the coffin for small guilds, from small servers, and those of us who like being in them. Personally, I do not want to be paired with people who have left our server on bad terms, and I will not play with people I am not friendly with. I'll look for another game instead...even though I've been here since GW1.

This would be a better additional feature of PVP, not wvw. I hope you will reconsider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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