One way to revive Etom — Guild Wars 2 Forums

One way to revive Etom

Lord of Rings.5371Lord of Rings.5371 Member ✭✭
edited January 30, 2018 in WvW

Might be

Just make Etom completely separate from WvW

calling it Faction vs Faction or alliances vs alliances or something else

with

color assignement independent from current server matches and

with its own pips, armors and rewards,

And its own forum subtopics

Like PvP, fractals, Raid, etc

and

As an equal but separate activity to WvW.

Comments

  • GDchiaScrub.3241GDchiaScrub.3241 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Make a better map that isn't just another PvE theme park style of design...but I can't say it'll pay off in 2018.

    Holy Warriors of [Kazo] following Kazo doctrine guided by, Our Lord and Commander, Zudo in the holy Trinity of Him and his two firm glutes.

  • Arlette.9684Arlette.9684 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Eotm was introduced to minimize player downtime while waiting in queue, since queuing all 4 maps now is a rare occasion reserved for reset night and BG. EotM has no purpose. If it serves no purpose, it’s time to scrap it and move on.

    Vae Victus!
    [Hcm] Promotraitor

  • Loosmaster.8263Loosmaster.8263 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2018

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Why does EotM need to be revived? Presuming ANet has limited resources to work on realm-vs-realm, I'd far prefer they focus on traditional WvW.

    I would lay odds they would do something like this before tampering with traditional WvW. EotM was also developed as a testing grounds for future content, lol.

    Fàther - Create a mount then kill it until it's more useless than PvE. "Smart"
    Tactical Killers
    Server(DR)

  • @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Why does EotM need to be revived? Presuming ANet has limited resources to work on realm-vs-realm, I'd far prefer they focus on traditional WvW.

    I would lay odds they would do something like this before tampering with traditional WvW. EotM was also developed as a testing grounds for future content, lol.

    And yet ... when's the last time they used it for testing something for traditional WvW?
    And... even if they did, that would still mean that their focus is on traditional WvW; the changes to EotM would be incidental and not for the express purpose of reviving EotM, as the OP suggests.

    So I'll double down: I hope that ANet focuses on traditional WvW and ignores EotM (unless its in service of improving traditional WvW). Your mileage might vary.

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • Klipso.8653Klipso.8653 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Why would you want people in eotm? Let it die, we need those people on the real maps

    -Balwarc [ICoa]

  • Loosmaster.8263Loosmaster.8263 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2018

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:
    Why does EotM need to be revived? Presuming ANet has limited resources to work on realm-vs-realm, I'd far prefer they focus on traditional WvW.

    I would lay odds they would do something like this before tampering with traditional WvW. EotM was also developed as a testing grounds for future content, lol.

    And yet ... when's the last time they used it for testing something for traditional WvW?
    And... even if they did, that would still mean that their focus is on traditional WvW; the changes to EotM would be incidental and not for the express purpose of reviving EotM, as the OP suggests.

    So I'll double down: I hope that ANet focuses on traditional WvW and ignores EotM (unless its in service of improving traditional WvW). Your mileage might vary.

    True but the changes would happen there and not in WvW where everyone would start screaming. And the 2nd requirement would be communication and tweaking/discarding changes.

    I'm still waiting for their proposed announcement on population issues (soon)™.

    Edit: At this point I don't really care anymore as long as we see consistent communication and actual development.

    Fàther - Create a mount then kill it until it's more useless than PvE. "Smart"
    Tactical Killers
    Server(DR)

  • Chaba.5410Chaba.5410 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2018

    @Lord of Rings.5371 said:
    Some miss it,

    Let's be honest. There was a locust swarm of players who originally left WvW and went to EOTM due to the giant karma train, which was easier to do there than in WvW proper. What is being said by those that want to revive it, even if you mean this unintentionally, is that there should be a giant loot train again because that's all EOTM was - something that was removed when Anet added pips to WvW. People miss the three-way ktrain. Anet discourages easy loot trains of rewards also in PvE maps.

    Making EOTM multi-server instead of the originally designed per-tier instances was the main cause IMHO of turning it into a loot train because it removed any incentive to play there for your team while waiting on your WvW queue. There was and still is no incentive to play the multi-server EOTM map outside of the loot and it will remain that way until Anet finds a way to either tie EOTM into a WVW match (the extra supply is no incentive) or rotate the map into WvW somehow. Making it "separate but equal" means making two competing RvR modes in one game, which would also be bad for both WvW and EOTM. Resources should be focused on a single RvR game mode.

  • Alehin.3746Alehin.3746 Member ✭✭✭

    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

  • Loosmaster.8263Loosmaster.8263 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

    Most of you have no idea what you want.

    Should I link you the thread about afk'ers and pip farming?

    You cry in one hand and whine with the other...

    Fàther - Create a mount then kill it until it's more useless than PvE. "Smart"
    Tactical Killers
    Server(DR)

  • Kaiser.9873Kaiser.9873 Member ✭✭✭

    @Klipso.8653 said:
    Why would you want people in eotm? Let it die, we need those people on the real maps

    This times a million. EotM should have been shuttered two years ago.

  • X T D.6458X T D.6458 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Op you said ONE way, you listed several...I feel lied to :cry:

    Also NO kthx.

    BG

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

    Most of you have no idea what you want.

    Should I link you the thread about afk'ers and pip farming?

    You cry in one hand and whine with the other...

    Please link it and quote me please. It would be enlightening.

  • Loosmaster.8263Loosmaster.8263 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited January 30, 2018

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

    Most of you have no idea what you want.

    Should I link you the thread about afk'ers and pip farming?

    You cry in one hand and whine with the other...

    Please link it and quote me please. It would be enlightening.

    I did not specify about you, players in general.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/19963/my-issue-with-faq-why-is-there-world-linking-instead-of-some-other-solution#latest

    Here's another that wants to drive players out.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/25047/we-need-to-eliminate-supply-wasting-trolling-please#latest

    Fàther - Create a mount then kill it until it's more useless than PvE. "Smart"
    Tactical Killers
    Server(DR)

  • X T D.6458X T D.6458 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

    Most of you have no idea what you want.

    Should I link you the thread about afk'ers and pip farming?

    You cry in one hand and whine with the other...

    Its almost as if different people have different opinions oOoOo

    BG

  • Strider Pj.2193Strider Pj.2193 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    Absolutely agree.

    Most of you have no idea what you want.

    Should I link you the thread about afk'ers and pip farming?

    You cry in one hand and whine with the other...

    Please link it and quote me please. It would be enlightening.

    I did not specify about you, players in general.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/19963/my-issue-with-faq-why-is-there-world-linking-instead-of-some-other-solution#latest

    Here's another that wants to drive players out.
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/25047/we-need-to-eliminate-supply-wasting-trolling-please#latest

    Agreed.. but when you quote me...

    And I agree people don't know what they want

  • shagwell.1349shagwell.1349 Member ✭✭✭

    I'd say get rid of it. We have four wvw maps and we don't need a karma train one for people that want wvw, but are afraid to die or work for their stuff.

  • Voltekka.2375Voltekka.2375 Member ✭✭✭✭

    EotM server no purpose other than karmatrain and easier WXP gain, for faster rank gain. Lets face it. Bringing it back will remove players from actual WvW. And we need more of those as it is.

  • @Alehin.3746 said:
    or we could just delete it to keep players in EBG and BLs

    It'll probably take too much effort, expect to see it in 2020 if they start removing now at the cost of no other new contents

    Power > Condition

  • Loosmaster.8263Loosmaster.8263 Member ✭✭✭✭

    From the wiki:
    Edge of the Mists serves as a testing ground for the new features that may be introduced to core WvW, and already provides a new style of gameplay on the floating islands

    I'm not advocating for the revitalization of EotM but for one of it's intended purpose. The rewards suggested by OP is definitely a No Go. Maybe some AP's for participating.

    After what, 3 years I don't think we will see any new maps. They can take it down when not active and put it back up when they want to test something.

    There have been a lot of suggestions that would fall into the use of the map. Inaction and the silence is the worst part of this mode.

    Fàther - Create a mount then kill it until it's more useless than PvE. "Smart"
    Tactical Killers
    Server(DR)

  • Sarrs.4831Sarrs.4831 Member ✭✭✭

    Why not just turn EOTM into a real WvW map, let it contribute towards the scoring and get rid of some of the sillier stuff

  • Swamurabi.7890Swamurabi.7890 Member ✭✭✭

    @Loosmaster.8263 said:
    From the wiki:
    Edge of the Mists serves as a testing ground for the new features that may be introduced to core WvW, and already provides a new style of gameplay on the floating islands

    I'm not advocating for the revitalization of EotM but for one of it's intended purpose. The rewards suggested by OP is definitely a No Go. Maybe some AP's for participating.

    After what, 3 years I don't think we will see any new maps. They can take it down when not active and put it back up when they want to test something.

    There have been a lot of suggestions that would fall into the use of the map. Inaction and the silence is the worst part of this mode.

    OP is not likely to get much sympathy for EotM because of it's lack of attention from Anet. Some here are still waiting for Anet to treat WvW like it's core to GW2.

    FreeHabib2018

  • zinkz.7045zinkz.7045 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 31, 2018

    @Sarrs.4831 said:
    Why not just turn EOTM into a real WvW map, let it contribute towards the scoring and get rid of some of the sillier stuff

    In a game mode that is competitively a complete joke and is so poorly designed that much of PPTing is contrary to a mass PvP mode (and terrible, dull "gameplay" at that), that it renders "winning" as meaningless, the scoring is the 'sillier stuff'.

  • Lord of Rings.5371Lord of Rings.5371 Member ✭✭
    edited February 1, 2018

    Since changes are coming to WvW,

    for all who care about WvW, a separation of WvW from Etom would

    preserve WvW while exploring new alliances ideas elsewhere.

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

    Details from the restructuring notes demonstrated seriousness and willingness for the changes to be committed.

    Let's hope that everyone can have fun after the changes implemented.

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I don't see any reason with the changes proposed that EoTM isn't just made a 5th map in the current weekly matches. Honestly if the balancing can work as hoped for then we don't need an overflow anymore since we shouldn't be over queued. Bring it in line and stop making excuses, it should never have been setup outside of the existing play, fix that oversight with these other changes.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

  • @TheGrimm.5624 said:
    it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

    Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @TheGrimm.5624 said:
    it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

    Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

    I included write ups on the past in the old forums. It boiled down to having scoring from EoTM to add into the weekly scoring for the given worlds but would have involved more balancing when assigning colors in EoTM. Aka by making it it own entity is how we got into a situation where its hard to classify EoTM as WvW. That was a mistake. I don't use ultimates much but based on where we are now, it was. Overflow was fine but since only part of the equation was factored (send people there but don't let them add contribution to the weekly fight) in it was a band-aid and band-aids can quite often cause more harm than aid. And again, why did we have queues? Because players didn't self-balance and would prefer to come complain versus move to a server that needed more people and had open queues. Point is now, if the balancing is to prevent queues since people should be balanced, then let us use the map and remove the question of its WvW while also creating more land to fight over, again reducing queue times since there is more land to queue for. There were high expectations for more maps by this late in the life cycle, not having new maps was at least a factor in previous game burnouts.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

  • Honestly, depending on how things play out, EOTM could see a resurgence due to map que's. If we end up with more balanced populations and fuller timezone coverage you may end up with longer que's that extend well into off times for a lot of us. If people want to hop into a WVW environment yet all maps are que'd then EOTM will be there at least to ride out the que.

  • @TheGrimm.5624 said:

    @Illconceived Was Na.9781 said:

    @TheGrimm.5624 said:
    it should never have been setup outside of the existing play,

    Oh? How would you have given people something to do in WvW while queued for the other maps?

    I included write ups on the past in the old forums. It boiled down to having scoring from EoTM to add into the weekly scoring for the given worlds but would have involved more balancing when assigning colors in EoTM. Aka by making it it own entity is how we got into a situation where its hard to classify EoTM as WvW. That was a mistake. I don't use ultimates much but based on where we are now, it was. Overflow was fine but since only part of the equation was factored (send people there but don't let them add contribution to the weekly fight) in it was a band-aid and band-aids can quite often cause more harm than aid. And again, why did we have queues? Because players didn't self-balance and would prefer to come complain versus move to a server that needed more people and had open queues. Point is now, if the balancing is to prevent queues since people should be balanced, then let us use the map and remove the question of its WvW while also creating more land to fight over, again reducing queue times since there is more land to queue for. There were high expectations for more maps by this late in the life cycle, not having new maps was at least a factor in previous game burnouts.

    There were two reasons for EotM: to provide something WvWish to do while waiting in queue, without being part of the match up directly, and as an opportunity for ANet to test stuff out. Your idea would have changed it into a fifth map, undermining its primary purpose.

    Also, it's a misunderstanding to think we only had queues because players didn't self-balance. Originally, there were queues in all tiers, especially when the tiers were less stable (as they were for a while). The main reason for queues is that the vast majority likes to play WvW (a) at similar times and (b) when lots of people are fighting (for the increased number of encounters).

    I agree with you that people burned out in part because the game mode didn't evolve very quickly and perhaps ANet should have figured out a way to add more maps or more something else rather than EotM. But we said we wanted to play rather than wait, so we got EotM, which was a sensible & scalable solution to making room without changing the nature of match-ups.

    For a lot of reasons, it turned into k-train city and never recovered from that reputation.

    Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2, 2018

    Having it as a fifth map now simply stops it from being quasimodo of WvW. ANet never capitalized on using EoTM as a test bed, so leaving it to be one now, doesn't make sense. So yes, lets re-purpose it as a fifth map. Will we still need overflows, maybe but considering they might be launching a variable number of worlds divisible by 3 to try and create these balanced matches then odds should be lower we need it. Again re-purpose it. If it was to stay as is aka able to spawn multiple copies, then figure out an algorithm and add in for each skirmish period points from matches where sides were balanced and disregard Warscore for copies that weren't and have the existing WvW options available to it. Its not embraced as WvW because it was associated to a server, well we are moving away from that anyway, take the opportunity and bring it into the fold.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.