World Restructuring Update 2 - Page 3 — Guild Wars 2 Forums

World Restructuring Update 2

13

Comments

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Rangerdeity.5847 said:

    @Blocki.4931 said:

    @Rangerdeity.5847 said:
    The most concerning thing about this post is how many times he says "I" as if he is the only one working on it. That was always a joke that they have exactly one dev working on it I am kinda stressed to see that might be literally what is happening.

    He's just talking out of his perspective because he is the one making the post

    He mentions multiple times "i am done with or I am almost done with or I am working on" those "i"'s should be "we"'s shouldnt they?

    Maybe he's just taking credit for everything the team does, who knows. It really doesnt matter. People have been asking for an update, they got an update.

  • Kilo.2539Kilo.2539 Member ✭✭✭

    @Lord Of The Tree.5249 said:
    As one of the members that been on the game since the beginning have seen some good changes and some bad but from what I can see WvW is in it's death wiggle. Doubt if the changes are really going to make a difference. There are many areas broken but we at least have roller beetle racing and a frigging dog whistle.

    I still haven’t unlocked the beetle...

  • I've read all the comments and I think 500 limit is fine, since its the elected wvwers of your guild, for the alliance. Hopefully wvwers can be approved by officers... before being let into the guild's wvw section. If guild members WvW Levels would display in theguild's wvw tab & "alliance panel" it would also be useful. Oh and who has commander tags... Also when someone applies for the wvw section of a guild, can they tick for small scale fights or large scale fights? So that you'd know in a more convenient manner if its roamer types or zergers... and so that an Alliance Marshal can view the stats of an allied Guild, to know if they need more blobbies or roamers, etc.

    I'm really curious as to the New Guild UIs & Alliance UI...

    Also since wvw is sort of messy at the moment, would Anent consider making transfers free, at the present moment, in order for Guilds to start pulling their members to their servers? If they're full they can move their guild to a smaller server until they have all their members with them... to start "helping" form alliances, recruit... if you're a new wvw guild, since people you find open world has a hard time joining you unless they have a free transfer. Especially for those who want to get into wvw now and breath new life into it. (While we wait for the wvw aliance update.)

    Maybe a Free transfer every 8 weeks, until the new system?

  • Dayra.7405Dayra.7405 Member ✭✭✭

    @Heartpains.7312 said:
    Basically if we have 3 teams, team A,B and C all of them have 100 player in the team.
    Team A 100 player logs for 2hours
    Team B 100 player logs for 4hours
    Team C 100 player logs for 8hours

    it should neither happen now, nor in an alliance-future that these 3 teams are in one match.

    Teams are NOT balance by equal number of players, but by equal number of player-hour.
    In your example Team A has 200 player-hours, Team B has 400 player-hour, Team C has 8oo player-hours.

    And the reason is obvious if you distribute this over (nearly) a full day of 8to simplify math) 20 hours:

    Team A has in mean 10 player on the map (10 times 20h = 200 player-hours)
    Team B has in mean 20 player on map (20 times 20h = 400 player-hours)
    Team C has in mean 40 players on map (40 times 20h = 800 player-hours)

    Admittedly no Team has ever it's mean (but not it's total either) number of players on the map, but I hope you see the general point:

    The amount of player per team together on a map at any point of time, is determined by it's total number of player-hours, not by it's total number of players.

  • kmfart.7480kmfart.7480 Member ✭✭
    edited December 18, 2018

    About balancing teams & players:

    1. The "newbie / low kdr" players should have pririoty to be balanced out across all teams, so no team has a massive bad player population, because its impossible to balance a bad majority team by putting a few really good players into them (this does not actually balance a team at all with this many players).
      Teams have to be bulk balanced around the average player level to avoid really good or really bad player populations from converging into major team disrupting balance issues. (I hope what i'm saying are things already been looked at).
      Dont just balance out the good players, it is equally important that the bad players get spread out around all teams!

    2. Good players with lots of playtime (cough), with the current info, it seems they will always be punished for playing wvw if they dont join a wvw alliance (will they get default balanced onto the worst possible team Tyria can create...?).

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

    @The Path Finder.3197 said:
    I've read all the comments and I think 500 limit is fine, since its the elected wvwers of your guild, for the alliance. Hopefully wvwers can be approved by officers... before being let into the guild's wvw section. If guild members WvW Levels would display in theguild's wvw tab & "alliance panel" it would also be useful. Oh and who has commander tags... Also when someone applies for the wvw section of a guild, can they tick for small scale fights or large scale fights? So that you'd know in a more convenient manner if its roamer types or zergers... and so that an Alliance Marshal can view the stats of an allied Guild, to know if they need more blobbies or roamers, etc.

    I'm really curious as to the New Guild UIs & Alliance UI...

    Also since wvw is sort of messy at the moment, would Anent consider making transfers free, at the present moment, in order for Guilds to start pulling their members to their servers? If they're full they can move their guild to a smaller server until they have all their members with them... to start "helping" form alliances, recruit... if you're a new wvw guild, since people you find open world has a hard time joining you unless they have a free transfer. Especially for those who want to get into wvw now and breath new life into it. (While we wait for the wvw aliance update.)

    Maybe a Free transfer every 8 weeks, until the new system?

    Not likely as many guilds are ‘practicing’ by spending their gems to bandwag... errr transfer to linked servers to steamro... er practice.

  • Talindra.4958Talindra.4958 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 18, 2018

    I thought people would write to say thank you for spending time to update us progress in wvw development. I can not wait to see or have a glimpse of this update. Thank you for this update post.

    Death is Energy [DIE] in EU
    Envoy's Herald, CoZ, VitV, DD, SS, The Eternal, LNHB, Champion Magus, Champion Phantom, Wondrous Achiever etc.

  • Talindra.4958Talindra.4958 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @duillyn.2697 said:
    Negative comment, no need. Thank you for the update, gl with it.

    Totally agree. ppl thats so unappreciative.. I hope they leave the game.. :)

    Death is Energy [DIE] in EU
    Envoy's Herald, CoZ, VitV, DD, SS, The Eternal, LNHB, Champion Magus, Champion Phantom, Wondrous Achiever etc.

  • Tomahawk.7361Tomahawk.7361 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dragun.4509 said:
    Hi, where to even start lol...

    So, Lets say Alliances hit over night and it just "works as intended"

    So, what are we to believe that means? and "why" is it going to be benefiting.

    As stated by Anet, its NOT going to solve coverage issues or even take them into account right away.

    So what is it going to do? "its going to quote divide the populations into even smaller portions to work with"

    So that the Anet Gods can do what? finally BALANCE populations right?

    But How? are you going to FORCE oxc/sea guilds into alliances they may not want to be in?

    and how "thin" do you think, you can spread populations before WvW isn't WvW anymore?

    as is right now, how many alliances do you think "can" be formed that would in reality give the "feel" of "coverage" and what REAL WvWing is?

    and what is the best way to arrive at this answer? - to look at what we have right now correct?

    I mean sure, we can hope that once the alliance system is announced PLAYERS WILL RETURN IN MASS!!!!

    but what will they return to? and do you REALLY think it will be such a new and enriching experience that it'll keep them here for long?
    when even a 15 minute downtime in coverage can mean your entire map, and everything your team has protected throughout the day is annihilated cus you got NOBODY and siege is nearly worthless?

    And i'm sure, the magics of coverage fixing isn't exactly going to happen over night either right?

    I mean look at how long we have basically been being told the same thing BIG ANNOUNCEMENT GUYS! "oh we're making progress things are happening!coming soon™"

    How long do you think it'll take to get "coverage solved" and actually see any kind of benefit out of the "new system"
    i mean wasn't the alliance system originally brought up to solve coverage issues? and now its not even going to be doing that "right away"
    so alliance system 1-2 years likely to implement(total i'm hoping who really knows tho right? not even Anet apparently...), another 1-2 years to "fix" coverage? lol...

    How many people do you think are going to flock away from this game, once you destroy the communities?
    or are bluntly so overwhelming dissapointed by a system thats going to be in the works for over a year now likely, and not really fix anything, just more of the same....

    BIGGER question, when it is a complete disaster, as many people who have played this game for 6 years KNOWS how big of a untested, unreliable, complete mess new releases and content from anet are/is INNATELY.
    how long is it going to be to fix that stuff? its not even a paid expansion like HOT, and any WvWer knows exactly how bad, and how "tested" that TRULY was... AND HOW LONG IT TOOK TO CHANGE ANYTHING...

    And now its going to be "Harder" to transfer to where you want to go? and make it harder for the average person/pug to find an active alliance?

    and How are they going to "join" those few "good" alliances? - "NO EXPANSION PACK REQUIRED" LOL how many pugs are going to RNG into dead alliances or bluntly be refused from the "few" good alliances that will ultimately be "possible"...
    THIS SOUNDS LIKE A TRULY PLAYER ENRICHING EXPERIENCE TO ME!

    • i think thats been a huge part of the problem for a long time now, servers going full status for no real reason and being kept on full status for far to long causing guilds to stack links or dead servers to get their entire team in and its only going to get worse? lol...
      1 pug who plays 48 hours is still only 1 guy taking up who knows how many population slots along the way and potentially stopping their server from getting any meaningful population...

    But Anet believes right now thats the best "metric" is "time played" without any consideration to coverage or actual "worth" of the people idling or capping camps or just going out an getting destroyed solo...

    Yaks Bend for example has been "full status" since PVE-Halloween Event (somehow 5-6+weeks now) and we've lost guilds some large(60+members), yet still "full" and the only thing it has done is encourage me to NOT play even with a near 12 hour DEADZONE in the hopes we get off full status for long enough to get any kind of meaningful transfers.

    Is it going to better our quality of life? or do absolutely ANYTHING FUN OR MEANINGFUL or enriching? - i really doubt it -ultimately its going to be "MORE OF THE SAME" - best case scenario - I'd love for example to be-able to use more then my 1 skill in a SMC 3 way que fight particularly on reset night.... Maybe work on your packet compression, or engine, or core machines you run the game on, instead of giving out free cars from pve-events ect with the gem store money you get... or maybe when a siege print is 100% built, it ACTUALLY BE 100% built... and maybe i dunno, promote world vs world alot better? by giving people a reason to enter the gamemode and spend a little time there, like map completion used to do... and maybe a SERVER WIDE Chat - where we can ask our community's pve population for help kinda like what people did in lions arch back in the day to get people into WvW when stuff is going on...

    anyways have fun responding and picking out 1 or 2 things you can make an argument about out of my statements and ignoring the rest which is equally as important o7

    Wishing you the Best Anet GOODLUCK, you need it...

    Man I can't speak for sea, but all the ocx has moved to FA and kaineng. These players utterly depress and bore me. And I've had to do the same just because ocx is virtually dead in all other places. Our ocx community used to spread out and have fun on the other servers but bandwagoning has killed it. No one in ocx wants challenges. I honestly don't think alliances could make ocx any worse than it already is.

  • I just hope that this restructuring is not as wrong as the relink of this week

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭
    edited December 23, 2018

    @Talindra.4958 said:

    @duillyn.2697 said:
    Negative comment, no need. Thank you for the update, gl with it.

    Totally agree. ppl thats so unappreciative.. I hope they leave the game.. :)

    If Living Story had not had an update for years (or only seen two rather poor arcs in six years), there had been no story what so ever with Path of Fire and there had only been two posts about how it is still nowhere near completion in a full year… How do you think the PvE Community would have responded?

    If some daft WvW meow smirkly came into their forums and told them to be more appreciative or that they should just quit the game. How would that have been received? That's kind of how we feel about you now.

  • Instead of all this convoluted alliance malarkey, why not introduce some Red vs Blue faction war instead? You choose a colour/faction and are locked to it. To prevent over pop of one faction, lock it, like you already do with servers, until it balances itself out.

    GM of Havoc and Zergbusting guild Vegans Ate My Pony [PONY]
    Words are Cheap; Blood is Costly

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @necromancin.2396 said:
    Instead of all this convoluted alliance malarkey, why not introduce some Red vs Blue faction war instead? You choose a colour/faction and are locked to it. To prevent over pop of one faction, lock it, like you already do with servers, until it balances itself out.

    If you are locked to a faction and people leave - which they will either naturally or because they find it boring - how is it supposed to balance itself? You cant have both locked factions and balancing. Its an impossibility. Its like saying go left and right at the same time.

  • Only allow people to leave once every quarter via a gem store purchase; if the faction you're wanting to transfer to is full, then you're out of luck. You could also make the selection permanent. Factions work in other games, I don't see why it couldn't here, especially since it isn't lore related.

    GM of Havoc and Zergbusting guild Vegans Ate My Pony [PONY]
    Words are Cheap; Blood is Costly

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 24, 2018

    @necromancin.2396 said:
    Only allow people to leave once every quarter via a gem store purchase; if the faction you're wanting to transfer to is full, then you're out of luck. You could also make the selection permanent. Factions work in other games, I don't see why it couldn't here, especially since it isn't lore related.

    That's not how reality work. People will leave regardless of being "allowed" to or not. They can simply stop playing. Balance will never happen if you only allow some arbitrary player move every quarter - they just wont move. Why should they join a dying faction? You can see the result of a transfer system no one use for "balancing" in the current worlds. People use it only when they get an advantage, ie stacking worlds to win. Your idea of locked factions would work the exact same way. Well, except it would be 10x worse than now since instead of 15+ worlds where half are dying we'd have 3 worlds where all are dying.

    Free transfers or heavily penalized transfer, neither leads to balance.

  • Knighthonor.4061Knighthonor.4061 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Should do Factions like EoTM did

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

    @Knighthonor.4061 said:
    Should do Factions like EoTM did

    Which.... was based on servers winning matchups. The servers in the previous matchups that won were green, blue for second, red for third.

    So, random assignment?

    How do you meet up with your guild?

    And let’s say you divide people into red green and blue and lock them in: people will leave once one becomes better at it than others thus throwing off balance.

  • Diku.2546Diku.2546 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 11, 2019

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Knighthonor.4061 said:
    Should do Factions like EoTM did

    Which.... was based on servers winning matchups. The servers in the previous matchups that won were green, blue for second, red for third.

    So, random assignment?

    How do you meet up with your guild?

    And let’s say you divide people into red green and blue and lock them in: people will leave once one becomes better at it than others thus throwing off balance.


    It was Christmas 2018...

    The above quote really details what WvW players want...Healthy Competitive Weekly Match-Ups...imho

    Naturally Reward players by allowing World Ranks to have a deeper meaning based on Healthy Competitive Match-Ups.

    It's a nice thought that we're getting something that In-directly Fixes our Match-Ups, but doesn't really do a good job...because it avoids/ignores the main problem...which is a Bad Match-Up model that typically encourages an un-healthy 800 pound Gorilla in the Room scenario where the other 2 Alliances in the room are stuck in a Tier they'd rather not be.

    (Alliance Linking = Team Creation v2.0)
    or
    (World Linking = Team Creation v1.0)

    We're repeating the same fix & expecting a different result.


    So maybe for Christmas 2019?

    Can we...Change or Replace our current Match-Up design model (Fixed 3 way fight using a Tiered Pyramid) with something else that can Directly Fix things...so we Can Have Healthy Competitive Weekly Match-Ups instead?

    Nobody wants to be stuck Weekly or Month after Month in a Fixed 3 Way Fight with a 800 pound Gorilla in the Room...unless you're on the Team that's the Gorilla.


    No specific dates or pressure to hit a deadline...just a simple "timeline" where there is a reasonable assumption that we might be able to expect delivery?
    https://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/grub/2017/11/29/29-dominos-pizza-tracker.w1200.h630.jpg

    Above Dominos Pizza tracker link credited to Capitol.3815

    Yours truly,
    Diku

    Credibility requires critical insight & time.


    p.s.

    Any solution for WvW needs to allow for Healthy Competitive Weekly Match-Ups that:

    1) Reduce the direct impact of Server stacking to Match-Ups
    2) Allow friends & family to play together from many different Worlds
    3) Allow Off-peak capping, but let players to work out a solution themselves

    See some of my past posts...please vote Helpful or Thumbs up if you agree.

  • @Raymond Lukes.6305 said:

    What is next? What comes after World Restructuring?
    Whoa now! We should not get ahead of ourselves. World Restructuring is only one of the irons we have in the fire so we are talking about things post World Restructuring. These are things we are not ready or able to discuss yet but we’ll update you when we have more things to relay.

    When you say "only one of the Irons we have in the fire", do you mean the WvW fire? As in there will be some love given to WvW in the next year or so?

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    @Tomahawk.7361 said:

    Man I can't speak for sea, but all the ocx has moved to FA and kaineng.

    Large OCX is also still on SOS.

  • Redponey.8352Redponey.8352 Member ✭✭✭
    edited January 5, 2019

    This topic is like the current state of WvW. laying in dust and dying, mainly due to the fact that WvW became less and less fun with exp and balance patch... to not fun at all at the moment. (and no more Objectives only bus for rewards ).

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kolisch.4691 said:
    WvW is ANET's best gem grab to date. The rampant bandwagoning means that a majority of those who don't spend gems will login to wvw having forced to face hundreds of players with just a couple of guys chased around the whole map just to take a camp for the whole week.

    For now gw2 is not a game I can recommend to families and friends to purchase for its wvw game mode. It's kind of degrading to play something like this. It's still a great game for the pve content.

    It's a playermade problem really. The bandwagoning makes it impossible to enjoy the game on both sides, while the servers they transfer from will suffer even more on the long term, causing more people to transfer and be miserable.

    /shrug

    Very passive aggressively chuckling, because I'm totally not mad on the Internet.

  • morrolan.9608morrolan.9608 Member ✭✭✭

    Whilst I'm in favour of the change one thing is of concern. BG being given a link this period and subsequently dominating T1 shows how badly Anet assesses populations and just ends up screwing the matches. If this continues with alliances it will be a disaster.

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭

    Updates on this are always nice, but I'd still be much more excited to see an update/clarity on what Anet wants WvW to be.

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

    @Sviel.7493 said:
    Updates on this are always nice, but I'd still be much more excited to see an update/clarity on what Anet wants WvW to be.

    Honestly, I don’t really care what they want it to be. I prefer they do what they can to allow us to make it what we want...

    There are numbers balance issues, there are OP mechanics, but as a whole, let it be what we want it to be. Which is different for most of us.

  • Blocki.4931Blocki.4931 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I just hope it does give us some different reward structure alongside it. Whether that is something similar to seasons or not I don't care, but taking a break from it and seeing many people quit or change servers the last couple of weeks really showed me that winning should mean something. Restructuring alone will fix many of the issues people try to escape from, but long term there needs to be some form of reward for actually working your kitten off.

    Very passive aggressively chuckling, because I'm totally not mad on the Internet.

  • phys.7689phys.7689 Member ✭✭

    @Blocki.4931 said:
    I just hope it does give us some different reward structure alongside it. Whether that is something similar to seasons or not I don't care, but taking a break from it and seeing many people quit or change servers the last couple of weeks really showed me that winning should mean something. Restructuring alone will fix many of the issues people try to escape from, but long term there needs to be some form of reward for actually working your kitten off.

    i am not a WVW heavy player, but i think one of the issues is it feels rather pointless. A reward system might help, but probably not, as WvW primarily rewards time spent, and that generally will only appeal to people who can spend tons of time. for example, the skirmish track awards spending more hours per week in wvw, but its a pretty poor motivator for people who only are going to play an hour or so a day.

    to be honest the biggest motivator for me in GW wvw, was the old trashtalk heavy forums and the early tournaments. There needs to be a motivation for going to war. If its rewards just based on winning, that will mostly just lead to stacking. I think it would need to be about team pride/props revenge/domination/ competition. But honestly wvw probably requires too many resources and changes to get better, and there is no guarantee these iterations will lead to a better product, so its basically a tough cookie to crack.

  • I am a new player , less than a month of playtime , wvw is the funnest part of the game for me. Thank you for the work you do , it may not be at a pace the vets here like but I appreciate the work anet does. Buff engineer please :)

  • @phys.7689 said:

    to be honest the biggest motivator for me in GW wvw, was the old trashtalk heavy forums..

    Whatever happened to GW2WvW.net? I loved those salty forums.

    Xterra/Marqeese[Ark]

  • @aspirine.6852 said:

    @Shagaliscious.6281 said:
    Sounds like I made the right choice of buying ESO when it was on sale.

    Hmm so how is it?

    eso has its own issues as well, worst servers ive ever played on but its a great game, as is this one, the devs focus on that game as much as they do this game, id say its more balanced in the pvp tho.

  • Marcel.1857Marcel.1857 Member ✭✭
    edited January 11, 2019

    @Nebilim.5127 said:
    What about the roleplaying servers? Will anything be done about keeping the already shambled community together now that there won't be any official RP server?

    Well in the open world is the mega server system and this will only affect wvw since you can play in the open world with players from nearly every world, so as long you don´t RP in wvw it should still be the same and tbh. wvw is like pvp a competitive mode so there should be no rp (my opinion).

  • Rod.6581Rod.6581 Member ✭✭

    Just siting here, waiting for Update 3...

  • Redponey.8352Redponey.8352 Member ✭✭✭

    @Rod.6581 said:
    Just siting here, waiting for Update 3...

    u can take a long nap see u in 6months :)

  • Chasind.3128Chasind.3128 Member ✭✭✭

    Just merge EU with NA- so we will always have the numbers. Many of us are looking for fights, not tower camping.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Chasind.3128 said:
    Just merge EU with NA- so we will always have the numbers. Many of us are looking for fights, not tower camping.

    And we would also always have unplayable lag. Is that better?

  • Redponey.8352Redponey.8352 Member ✭✭✭

    Day 30, still no content. How we could survivre more?! People are starving of content, the death toll rise again, only 2 guild member survived.

  • @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Chasind.3128 said:
    Just merge EU with NA- so we will always have the numbers. Many of us are looking for fights, not tower camping.

    And we would also always have unplayable lag. Is that better?

    Create a map where roaming is more rewarding, Jade quarry was really popular in GW1 maybe make a map where you go in with a team to keep control over a given area to earn more bonus pips in WvW kinda like Spvp, they have done things like that before :) "Heros Ascent in GW1 with UW/FoW"

  • Chasind.3128Chasind.3128 Member ✭✭✭

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Chasind.3128 said:
    Just merge EU with NA- so we will always have the numbers. Many of us are looking for fights, not tower camping.

    And we would also always have unplayable lag. Is that better?

    There are better ways to liven up maps, mine was just a suggestion, never said it was a good one. Maybe WvW servers shouldnt be on amazon servers

  • keenedge.9675keenedge.9675 Member ✭✭✭

    This thread is dead and should be closed. Start a fresh one when new information is given.

    Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.

  • Dawdler.8521Dawdler.8521 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sinsrock.1702 said:

    @Dawdler.8521 said:

    @Chasind.3128 said:
    Just merge EU with NA- so we will always have the numbers. Many of us are looking for fights, not tower camping.

    And we would also always have unplayable lag. Is that better?

    Create a map where roaming is more rewarding, Jade quarry was really popular in GW1 maybe make a map where you go in with a team to keep control over a given area to earn more bonus pips in WvW kinda like Spvp, they have done things like that before :) "Heros Ascent in GW1 with UW/FoW"

    I'd rather actually play WvW, sorry.

  • Sviel.7493Sviel.7493 Member ✭✭✭

    @Strider Pj.2193 said:

    @Sviel.7493 said:
    Updates on this are always nice, but I'd still be much more excited to see an update/clarity on what Anet wants WvW to be.

    Honestly, I don’t really care what they want it to be. I prefer they do what they can to allow us to make it what we want...

    There are numbers balance issues, there are OP mechanics, but as a whole, let it be what we want it to be. Which is different for most of us.

    Therein lies the problem.

    As a fairly sandbox mode, there's plenty of room for it to be whatever we want it to be. However, there are mechanics in place that don't change based on our individual preferences. If Anet made Golem Week permanent and then let the players decide how they wanted to play, it would be very different from if they made No-Downed week permanent instead. Their decisions on what they want to happen determine the bounds of the sandbox. When things like Shield Generators show up and at first appear to be a defensive boon but instead work out to make offense invincible, it'd be nice to know what the intent was. That helps me determine if it's a sandbox I want to play in or one I'd rather avoid.

  • Etria.3642Etria.3642 Member ✭✭✭✭

    So after being involved in a bandwagon, alliances has me a little concerned.

    Will hours played be divided somewhat evenly across the new makeup or will those who play more heavily be grouped together? If the latter won't it result in the horrible situation sor became briefly? Huge queues for na then little else otherwise?

    The way I read it a 'server' will be a couple alliances of 500 and then enough smaller groups and singles to even the population out. WHEN the hours played won't matter, just how many there are.

    So unless an alliance deliberately portions out timezones itself(which is harder to do than I previously thought) you could end up with players playtimes being all the same.

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

    @Etria.3642 said:
    So after being involved in a bandwagon, alliances has me a little concerned.

    Will hours played be divided somewhat evenly across the new makeup or will those who play more heavily be grouped together? If the latter won't it result in the horrible situation sor became briefly? Huge queues for na then little else otherwise?

    The way I read it a 'server' will be a couple alliances of 500 and then enough smaller groups and singles to even the population out. WHEN the hours played won't matter, just how many there are.

    So unless an alliance deliberately portions out timezones itself(which is harder to do than I previously thought) you could end up with players playtimes being all the same.

    You can see the potential flaws in the system. That being said, it does provide smaller chunks for Anet to portion out into worlds.

    As I’ve said before, my worry is an alliance made up of just SEA and OCX guilds. That would make them very instrumental in determining wins based in coverage. As there are comparably few players in those time zones, they would likely be paired with a NA heavy alliance.

    If the rewards stay the same, and don’t get buffed significantly (which would incentivize the behavior potentially) we should be fine as ‘winning’ won’t mean anything other than bragging rights. (And meme creation of course).

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭
    edited February 10, 2019
  • And we are left in the dark again.

    Is it really that much trouble to give us an update once per month? I guess it is for an abandoned game mode.

  • @Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
    Hey everyone,
    I would like to give you all a quick update about world restructuring. It has been a few months since our last update, and we are happy to let you know that progress has been good. We have overcome a few major snags and bugs and this has put a few of our big goals in sight.

    What am I working on?

    I am primarily working on World Restructuring with some of my time supporting the live game. These additional tasks include improvements for some live systems, addressing bugs and a bit of internal support for the team. I have worked on some QoL tasks such as removing participation decay outside of WvW. I hope that we soon will be able to announce some of the other things we have been working on. As I have discussed before, we are working on a live game, and so there are always a lot of moving parts.

    What has been happening with World Restructuring?

    We spent some time since the July update working on breaking down the remaining backend tasks. I have been focusing on getting those things done. Presently, many of the pieces are working on their own, though some things are still outstanding. Once I have all the parts I will begin the work of stitching it all together. I want to stress that while there has been a lot of work done, and we have made some really good and exciting progress, we are still a ways out from the launch of World Restructuring and Alliances.

    One of the elements that currently is functional on the backend is the concept of WvW guilds and players being able to select a WvW guild. We test this using debug commands because none of the UI is in place, but the communication layers are there as well as the storage aspects of that data. This provides us with some of the data necessary for grouping people onto teams in the matchmaker.

    Speaking of the matchmaker, I have completed a very basic implementation of a matchmaker that will churn through a huge list of players grouped by WvW guild and then place them on teams while keeping team sizes even. There is still a lot to do with this to get it to something that handles all the cases we want, but the early work and numbers look very promising.

    We are taking a pragmatic approach to building and testing various parts of World Restructuring. We are already testing some of these systems in isolation using live data and the live environment. Using this method, we have already identified bugs and race conditions that would have been difficult to track down and fix with the whole system in place.

    There has not been a ton of work on the player front end. We continue to focus on getting the core architecture solid so we can build the frontend on a working foundation. Once work is underway and we have something more tangible on the frontend, we can start discussing how we want to show off the new shinies to everyone.

    F.A.Q.

    What World Restructuring update would be complete without an FAQ section?

    Is there an update on the Alliance (World Restructuring) system?
    Yes, here it is! ;)

    Can NA and EU players join the same Alliance and play WvW together?
    No. The NA and EU still will be split and have their own teams. While it technically will be possible for a guild or alliance to have members in both NA and EU, the system places those players on teams in their own datacenter.

    Will I need to buy an Expansion to get into an alliance?
    No.

    What about non-WvW groups that use their shard to influence map instance selection outside of WvW?
    These players will be unaffected by this change. The system that chooses map instances does not consider shard.

    How does the alliance system fix anything if people still will be able to transfer?
    Currently, the plan is to change where we allow people to transfer, and to be more responsive to transfer restrictions for teams that are overpopulated. Some of the details of how this will work are in the original post about World Restructuring.

    Will time zone imbalance still be an issue
    It is true that in the initial release of World Restructuring we are not planning to consider time zone distribution when creating worlds. Part of that is so we can get the primary aspects of the system in and gather data about how the system works given the metrics we are using for balance. We want to compare apples to apples to give us the clearest information. This also will allow us to have a new baseline to compare against modifications to the metrics used for balancing the teams. We also are discussing some other ways to address “off hours” play, so stay tuned for more info as we can share it.

    Are only WvW play hours, not all play hours, considered in the population calculation?
    Yes, we only use play hours in WvW when doing the population calculations.

    How Many Alliances can be on a team?
    There is not a clear answer here other than “however many there need to be.” The focus is on getting the population balanced and not specifically on limiting the number of alliances per team.

    Are you planning to update the API?
    Yes. There will need to be some updates to the API to support the new system. Beyond that, I do not have details.

    Is repping a guild the same as selecting it as my WvW guild?
    No, repping is independent from selecting your WvW guild. You still will be able to rep whatever guild you like in WvW without changing the world the system places you on.

    What is next? What comes after World Restructuring?
    Whoa now! We should not get ahead of ourselves. World Restructuring is only one of the irons we have in the fire so we are talking about things post World Restructuring. These are things we are not ready or able to discuss yet but we’ll update you when we have more things to relay.

    BUT! We have more PVE content coming to WvW! Mounts! GAG

  • Redponey.8352Redponey.8352 Member ✭✭✭

    @Zolazie Grengche.3051 said:

    @Raymond Lukes.6305 said:
    Hey everyone,
    I would like to give you all a quick update about world restructuring. It has been a few months since our last update, and we are happy to let you know that progress has been good. We have overcome a few major snags and bugs and this has put a few of our big goals in sight.

    What am I working on?

    I am primarily working on World Restructuring with some of my time supporting the live game. These additional tasks include improvements for some live systems, addressing bugs and a bit of internal support for the team. I have worked on some QoL tasks such as removing participation decay outside of WvW. I hope that we soon will be able to announce some of the other things we have been working on. As I have discussed before, we are working on a live game, and so there are always a lot of moving parts.

    What has been happening with World Restructuring?

    We spent some time since the July update working on breaking down the remaining backend tasks. I have been focusing on getting those things done. Presently, many of the pieces are working on their own, though some things are still outstanding. Once I have all the parts I will begin the work of stitching it all together. I want to stress that while there has been a lot of work done, and we have made some really good and exciting progress, we are still a ways out from the launch of World Restructuring and Alliances.

    One of the elements that currently is functional on the backend is the concept of WvW guilds and players being able to select a WvW guild. We test this using debug commands because none of the UI is in place, but the communication layers are there as well as the storage aspects of that data. This provides us with some of the data necessary for grouping people onto teams in the matchmaker.

    Speaking of the matchmaker, I have completed a very basic implementation of a matchmaker that will churn through a huge list of players grouped by WvW guild and then place them on teams while keeping team sizes even. There is still a lot to do with this to get it to something that handles all the cases we want, but the early work and numbers look very promising.

    We are taking a pragmatic approach to building and testing various parts of World Restructuring. We are already testing some of these systems in isolation using live data and the live environment. Using this method, we have already identified bugs and race conditions that would have been difficult to track down and fix with the whole system in place.

    There has not been a ton of work on the player front end. We continue to focus on getting the core architecture solid so we can build the frontend on a working foundation. Once work is underway and we have something more tangible on the frontend, we can start discussing how we want to show off the new shinies to everyone.

    F.A.Q.

    What World Restructuring update would be complete without an FAQ section?

    Is there an update on the Alliance (World Restructuring) system?
    Yes, here it is! ;)

    Can NA and EU players join the same Alliance and play WvW together?
    No. The NA and EU still will be split and have their own teams. While it technically will be possible for a guild or alliance to have members in both NA and EU, the system places those players on teams in their own datacenter.

    Will I need to buy an Expansion to get into an alliance?
    No.

    What about non-WvW groups that use their shard to influence map instance selection outside of WvW?
    These players will be unaffected by this change. The system that chooses map instances does not consider shard.

    How does the alliance system fix anything if people still will be able to transfer?
    Currently, the plan is to change where we allow people to transfer, and to be more responsive to transfer restrictions for teams that are overpopulated. Some of the details of how this will work are in the original post about World Restructuring.

    Will time zone imbalance still be an issue
    It is true that in the initial release of World Restructuring we are not planning to consider time zone distribution when creating worlds. Part of that is so we can get the primary aspects of the system in and gather data about how the system works given the metrics we are using for balance. We want to compare apples to apples to give us the clearest information. This also will allow us to have a new baseline to compare against modifications to the metrics used for balancing the teams. We also are discussing some other ways to address “off hours” play, so stay tuned for more info as we can share it.

    Are only WvW play hours, not all play hours, considered in the population calculation?
    Yes, we only use play hours in WvW when doing the population calculations.

    How Many Alliances can be on a team?
    There is not a clear answer here other than “however many there need to be.” The focus is on getting the population balanced and not specifically on limiting the number of alliances per team.

    Are you planning to update the API?
    Yes. There will need to be some updates to the API to support the new system. Beyond that, I do not have details.

    Is repping a guild the same as selecting it as my WvW guild?
    No, repping is independent from selecting your WvW guild. You still will be able to rep whatever guild you like in WvW without changing the world the system places you on.

    What is next? What comes after World Restructuring?
    Whoa now! We should not get ahead of ourselves. World Restructuring is only one of the irons we have in the fire so we are talking about things post World Restructuring. These are things we are not ready or able to discuss yet but we’ll update you when we have more things to relay.

    BUT! We have more PVE content coming to WvW! Mounts! GAG

    Do not forget Mount skin that will come with this new mount xD

©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.