World Restructuring

[TheQuickFox.3826]

Disclaimer: I'm sorry if this has been answered already, but I don't feel like reading through 37 pages of this topic to find out.

What about guildless players or players who are still in an inactive guild?

My guild is mostly inactive and I mostly play with random commanders and some fellow players of my Ruins of Surmia (EU) server. I might just as well leave my guild. What does the change mean to me? Will WvW still be as accessible to random players (not in a guild or ally). Will there be as many open commanders who accept players regardless of alliance? Is there a way to continue to play with the players of my Ruins of Surmia server who i frequently come across?

[Dravenultimate.6983]

I only just started playing three months ago and honestly I never did WvW or even PvP so what's lost I can't ever miss what I never experienced.

[Swamurabi.7890]

@TheQuickFox.3826 said:Disclaimer: I'm sorry if this has been answered already, but I don't feel like reading through 37 pages of this topic to find out.

What about guildless players or players who are still in an inactive guild?

My guild is mostly inactive and I mostly play with random commanders and some fellow players of my Ruins of Surmia (EU) server. I might just as well leave my guild. What does the change mean to me? Will WvW still be as accessible to random players (not in a guild or ally). Will there be as many open commanders who accept players regardless of alliance? Is there a way to continue to play with the players of my Ruins of Surmia server who i frequently come across?

If you are guildless then you will be assigned a world when you enter WvW.If you are in an inactive WvW guild and you select that as your WvW guild, when you enter WvW, you will be assigned a world and anyone else in the guild that also selects that inactive WvW guild as their WvW guild will join you in the same world.

If you wish to play with other Ruins of Surmia players then in the next few months you should join a guild that you like so you can continue to play with them when the restructuring is rolled out. Otherwise you could be placed on any world every 8 weeks and you'd have to look for a guild to run with, assuming that they want you around. My guess is that some guilds will stop accepting players once they can have 50 players on every raid. Some will continue to accept players. I even expect some to act as a holding guild and give specific roles to players that are from separate guilds but want to play together on the same world/alliance.

[Sesbog.8705]

If you look at the update without euphoria, then we'll get the same maps, the same gameplay, maybe the same colors and

new "server" names

If you are already tired of the current www, after the update you will get it the same.

They will just make a new skeleton, on which this boring mode will hang out.

[Rod.6581]

@Shiera.3152 said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

[Euryon.9248]

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

[Euryon.9248]

@"Sesbog.8705" said:If you look at the update without euphoria, then we'll get the same maps, the same gameplay, maybe the same colors and

new "server" names

If you are already tired of the current www, after the update you will get it the same.

They will just make a new skeleton, on which this boring mode will hang out.

If you mean the low-level experience of running around solo, with a havoc guild, or in a zerg -- you're mostly right, this proposal isn't about changing the specifics of on-the-ground gameplay. It will drastically change the framework, but it's not going to "ruin" or even significantly change havoc groups or solo roaming other than for T4 and maybe T3 players used to roaming around off hours with zero opposition. Those players will probably find more people on the map than they are currently accustomed to. But in a general sense, this isn't about updating maps/objectives/etc.

[Rod.6581]

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

It is an answer to the question. And with the amount of information and stage of this feature, only one we can be sure of.

[Draygo.9473]

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

I think you have a misunderstanding, its the players that choose which guild is their 'wvw' guild. You can be a member of 5 different guilds that do wvw, but you can only have one flagged as your wvw guild which will determine your matchup.

So I don't quite get your question here. The only thing that matters on the guild entity level is what alliance they are a part of, and that members that have flagged that guild as their 'wvw' guild go with that alliance from matchup to matchup. Each individual player will have to make their own choice as to what guild they flag to. So I really don't get why there should be any cost or repercussion.

[Euryon.9248]

@Draygo.9473 said:

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

I think you have a misunderstanding, its the players that choose which guild is their 'wvw' guild. You can be a member of 5 different guilds that do wvw, but you can only have one flagged as your wvw guild which will determine your matchup.

So I don't quite get your question here. The only thing that matters on the guild entity level is what alliance they are a part of, and that members that have flagged that guild as their 'wvw' guild go with that alliance from matchup to matchup. Each individual player will have to make their own choice as to what guild they flag to. So I really don't get why there should be any cost or repercussion.

That wasn't the original question that was being asked. The poster wanted to know why a given guild would not choose to set itself as a "wvw guild". Obviously there is not much point to doing so if the guild is nothing but a personal bank guild, but for any given guild that may be PvX and not necessarily wvw-focused, is there any drawback/cost/penalty/repercussion for setting your guild as a wvw guild so that the members of your guild can be grouped and join an alliance? That is the information being sought, and which, afaik, we haven't gotten a direct answer to yet. There may not be an answer until the implementation is further down the road.

The question wasn't about individuals choosing which guild to set as their one wvw guild.

[Eramonster.2718]

@"Sesbog.8705" said:If you look at the update without euphoria, then we'll get the same maps, the same gameplay, maybe the same colors and

new "server" names

If you are already tired of the current www, after the update you will get it the same.

They will just make a new skeleton, on which this boring mode will hang out.

Pretty much. After all the system designed purpose (mentioned 4 in the FAQ) is mainly about coverage for competative play. No mention on changing anything else I believed?

[Norbe.7630]

@blackgamma.1809 said:

1. can we get exclusive titles to represent what world we used to represent when the new wvw system goes live?

i was hoping for an exclusive account bound server WvW finisher for each servers name motif

[Egg.6198]

I think is will breath fresh air into WvW and its always nice to see major attention given to the game mode.

My only concern is for players who play WvW regularly or as their only game mode but can not commit to guilds due to real life commitments or can not play at primetime (which most WvW guilds require) or are on the night cap team or roamers. A lot players are hardcore and only play WvW but are solo guild (bank) players or small groups/guilds that join tag/TS/Discord and would like to stick with the community they are with at present because it suits their needs. The alliance system looks like this would solve the problem and keep communities together as long as its not too strict and its flexible for the amount of guilds that can alliance.

An example would be guild A 50 players, guild B 30 players, guild C 20 players, guild D 15 players, guild E 5 players, guild F 2 players, guild G-Z 1 player. If the example is possible, flexibility with guild amounts in the alliance system to allow many guilds of lower number or solo hardcore WvW players to alliance with each other, I can see the system could work. The example above will keep communities together and players that regularly play together but not necessarily in one of the main WvW server guilds, if you see my point. If not then a lot of hardcore WvW solo guild players, small groups/guilds and roamers who join the community TS/Discord and join tag will be screwed and we will end up forced into communities we don't know, are not friendly with, not committed to and may eventually stop playing with for 8 weeks because we will end up stuck in a rut.

You could maybe argue the point to transfer to the alliance/community with the players you want to play with for 8 weeks but again there is limitations on that with population being fulls etc and paying to transfer will be forced onto players in this situation that has already been forced into the previous situation mentioned above. Players who get screwed will be double screwed with a pay wall every 8 weeks ££££$$$$$.

[Strider Pj.2193]

@Norbe.7630 said:

@blackgamma.1809 said:

1. can we get exclusive titles to represent what world we used to represent when the new wvw system goes live?

i was hoping for an exclusive account bound server WvW finisher for each servers name motif

That would be cool as kitten. Only it would mean making about 54 finishers..... Not sure almost doubling the current number of finishers would be workable...

But I'd sure as hell pay some Gems for it..,,

[Norbe.7630]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Norbe.7630 said:

@"blackgamma.1809" said:

1. can we get exclusive titles to represent what world we used to represent when the new wvw system goes live?

i was hoping for an exclusive account bound server WvW finisher for each servers name motif

That would be cool as kitten. Only it would mean making about 54 finishers..... Not sure almost doubling the current number of finishers would be workable...

But I'd sure as hell pay some Gems for it..,,

the design can be made by players and approved by anet so less work for anetthink of it as an art contest in memories of everyones' servers to commemorate your devotion to a server... (i can't remember the word in english about building a statue about it)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FxjMdxTwag

[Strider Pj.2193]

@Norbe.7630 said:

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Norbe.7630 said:

@"blackgamma.1809" said:

1. can we get exclusive titles to represent what world we used to represent when the new wvw system goes live?

i was hoping for an exclusive account bound server WvW finisher for each servers name motif

That would be cool as kitten. Only it would mean making about 54 finishers..... Not sure almost doubling the current number of finishers would be workable...

But I'd sure as hell pay some Gems for it..,,

the design can be made by players and approved by anet so less work for anetthink of it as an art contest in memories of everyones' servers to commemorate your devotion to a server... (i can't remember the word in english about building a statue about it)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FxjMdxTwag

Monument would be one.

That's a really good idea. I would love to see them do it.

[Jonesy.9728]

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

Why should it have costs?

[Eroder.7698]

I guess this will be the end of WvW \ GW2 for a few folks.

[Riba.3271]

@"Eroder.7698" said:I guess this will be the end of WvW \ GW2 for a few folks.

Every patch has its drama queens that will pull out the "I will quit the game now" card because they dont like the patch. In the end they dont quit.

[Euryon.9248]

@diamondgirl.6315 said:

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

Why should it have costs?

Not suggesting that it should. I'd be fine if every guild could mark itself as a wvw guild. And if there are no other ramifications to doing so, why wouldn't they?

[Jonesy.9728]

@Euryon.9248 said:

@diamondgirl.6315 said:

@Euryon.9248 said:

@Rod.6581 said:

@"Shiera.3152" said:I have a couple of questions I really need answered before I decide which side of the fence I sit on with this issue:

1. Why would any guild ever NOT set themselves as a WvW guild?

Personal bank guilds, guilds made by people in same country/region to stay in touch while playing in their main guild etc.

You're missing the point. The question isn't "when would it be a moot point to set the wvw flag" (e.g., personal bank guild), but when would it have costs or negative repercussions to set the flag to wvw.

So far I haven't seen any dev supply any such reason.

Why should it have costs?

Not suggesting that it should. I'd be fine if

every

guild could mark itself as a wvw guild. And if there are no other ramifications to doing so, why wouldn't they?

Honestly, the easiest reason that comes to mind is that a lot of the PVE people I know never ever even think of WVW and it simply wouldn't occur to them to do it. That's not really a reason NOT to, per se, but I bet it won't occur to plenty of people.

[HitmanHaydon.1053]

Please, please, please just get on with it ASAP.Game is awful atm.There will be no one left to play at this rate.

[Xelonir.5921]

Some thoughts on the new system:

Server prideBelieve it or not, but there are people in the game who are strongly connected to their server. People who brought guilds on the server together to form a community, who provided web pages, forums, etc. People who are still playing WvW on the same server since day one.The new system will destroy this connection to a server, will make all that work useless.Yes, maybe it will be replaced with something like alliance pride. But what is an alliance compared to a server? Something far smaller.Players who don’t care about which server they are on, on the other hand, will simply exchange “server hopping” for “alliance hopping”.I think you are punishing the wrong people.

Player toxicityOne benefit of having servers as a reference is that guilds who do not get along with each other had a simple way to avoid all that drama. One guild simply moved to another server, problem solved. World linking was already a step back in this regard, and the alliance system will make things even worse.

Voice communicationNowadays, every server (as far as I can tell) has a dedicated TS, often set up by those “server pride” people who care about their server and its community. They put in a lot of effort to provide all that fancy stuff a good WvW TS needs (multiple channels per map with map-wide whisper lists as well as cross-map whispers, etc.) and that separates modern day WvW from the stone age situation at the game’s release.World linking added a little extra work for the TS admins on those days when links change, because many server TS only provide access to people of that server and the linked one(s). But still, even on link change resets, every WvW player has a TS server that he can join for reset.With the alliance system, basically every alliance will need to set up its own TS server, and hopefully on every world there will be at least one alliance that is willing to open up its TS to all players on the world. Otherwise, that world will be put back into stone age WvW for at least 8 weeks. Unless ArenaNet decides to add in-game voice communications (which I don’t believe they’ll do) this will turn the start of every season into an organization nightmare.

Pressure on casual WvW playersA lot of guilds have some players who are hard core WvW players, while other players in that guild are more on the casual side but still like to join their guildmates every now and then for some WvW action. Imagine multiple of these guilds forming an alliance, and the alliance reaching its capacity limit. What will you do if other players want to join one of those guilds and play WvW with their guildmates? Or if players returning after some months of absence and want to get back into WvW with their guild? Tell them they cannot do that and send them away? Ask the more casual players in the guild to deselect their main guild and choose another guild for WvW? Ask the guild with the lowest member count or the highest number of casuals to leave the alliance?

Night cappingThe new system will not improve time zone coverage globally. With the current system, servers can try to find guilds for their server who are more active during the night. With the alliance system, it will be almost impossible to make sure every world has an equal coverage over different daytimes, especially when your pool is limited like in the language specific European servers. If one world has an alliance with a night crew, and the others don’t, guess who’ll win. And the automatic upgrade system just works in favor of the server who already has an advantage.ArenaNet should first continue improving the scoring system before messing up servers.

ConclusionYou claim

@"Gaile Gray.6029" said:[...] Simply "blowing up" worlds or removing people from the worlds on which they currently play is high risk [...]yet blowing up worlds is exactly what this system will do. You only make the chunks a little larger, but you also repeat it every eight weeks.IMHO the numbers discussed here (500-1000 players per alliance) are far too low to keep communities intact if you consider bonds between guilds as well as inside guilds, while larger alliance sizes would contradict the baseic idea of more granularity for linking people together.Instead of working on fundamental problems like better scoring and WvW specific balance, you prefer to spend months of work time on a system that will destroy communities (and the massive amount of work some dedicated individuals have invested to build and support those communities) and increase toxicity between players.

What a waste of resources :(

[Raymond Lukes.6305]

@Klypto.1703 said:

@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:

@hmsgoddess.3869 said:I'd like to make a suggestion in regards to alliances and number cap. As a guild leader I am in charge of making alliances that benefits my guild, that said this means I need to know how many of my guild members are choosing my guild as their WvW guild, as you can imagine one larger guilds this is a guild leader nightmare. I need to know how many are choosing my guild as their WvW guild. When the time comes, I do hope that ANET places some sort of UI that guild leaders can see as to whom is selecting their guild as the WvW guild choice. A simple 50/100 have selected this guild for WvW is fine it would at least give guild leaders a base number to foster alliances with. Just my 2 cents.

There will be UI to help manage the guild aspects of this change so you'll defiantly be able to see guild members that have picked your guild as their WvW guild.

One issue regarding guilds and this may or may not happen with restructuring but a certain server I am on they basically are toxic to anything except afking inside smc waiting for someone to attack it. That problem being said some of us smaller guilds had to make alt guilds just to have enough claims if this issue persists in the restructuring will we be able to claim objectives outside of the wvw guild we choose? thx

yes, there is currently no plan to change the way claiming works.

[kafka.1657]

PROBLEM: Our server's WvW community guild is already full (500 members), and yet I know of some members who are still planning to declare a different guild as their WvW guild. Ideally, such members would leave the community guild to make room for players who will actually commit to that guild for WvW, but I suspect that large numbers will remain.

SOLUTION A: I suggest that ArenaNet create a means for guild leaders to designate that their guild is flagged for WvW. Then, after that flag has been set, all uncommitted members would be given ~7 days to designate that guild for WvW, or they would automatically be kicked out.

SOLUTION B: If solution A seems too ruthless then perhaps a new WvW-guild marker could be introduced next to each member's name in the guild roster, showing whether or not they've designated that guild for WvW. It could then be left up to the Guild leaders to cull uncommitted members as they see fit.

Edit: Doh!! I've just read a post by Raymond Lukes on the previous page stating that they will be introducing new Guild UI elements along the lines of Solution B above.