Jump to content
  • Sign Up

World Restructuring Update 2


Raymond Lukes.6305

Recommended Posts

@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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have almost six years of gw2 and I really like wvw but with this news of monaria I was unmotivated to continue playing.They promised a more balanced wvw with a new system and instead send us a mount that from the point of view of many old ones will end wvw.I'll talk to some friends who are playing and others who are starting, it will be difficult for you to keep the game active with this decision!I installed the APEX Legend and I'm slowly playing it, my lives that were previously focused on gw2 will be focused on other games, I do not have the guts to indicate gw2 for a person who wants to make massive pvp, no more!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Raymond Lukes.6305 is there any chance that in tomorrow stream (which i assume you guys will talk more about the mount) can give us a bit more info about this topic too? because us, WvW players, the real players who still keep this gamemode alive, the ones who still hold here, waiting with hope for this system to come SOMEDAY. You could have a chance to calm down the people a bit.

Let us know, communicate with us please, that you still have in mind the correct priorities in order to keep the players in the game, because being realistic, your pve-like mount will only influx a bit of pve players for a while, once they get the mount they gone to pve land again.

Server balance is top priority, you started all this project having Blackgate as example of how stacked it was, and yet you gave them a server link, it gives me the impression that you guys just dont know how WvW is being played.

I can totally help, and i know a lot of people will be able to help too, contact us, give us a chance to give you proper feedback, and even play with us, learn how we do, because your weekly streams, just following a random pugmander, and getting sniped by Deadeyes when you respawn its all that i see of your gameplay in those streams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Mechanix.9315" said:Server balance is top priority, you started all this project having Blackgate as example of how stacked it was, and yet you gave them a server link, it gives me the impression that you guys just dont know how WvW is being played.

Just want to emphasise this point. Its so true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@morrolan.9608 said:

@"Mechanix.9315" said:Server balance is top priority, you started all this project having Blackgate as example of how stacked it was, and yet you gave them a server link, it gives me the impression that you guys just dont know how WvW is being played.

Just want to emphasise this point. Its so true.

May the bg link make maguuma stand up towards it's once great glory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

@Exciton.8942 said:I hope you guys are still fully committed to this project.I think this is the only thing that can balance WvW better. The linking is getting worse and worse these days and all you see is ppl bandwagon to create completely lopsided matchups.

at least, they could have stoped linking with this wvw mount update. too much people on Q.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Raymond Lukes.6305"I run a havoc guild, that has a few members, thanks largely do to server linking every time we manage to run across someone who wants to join WvW and learn the ropes 2 weeks later we have to part ways because a new link. My Server has an alright community when it comes to WvW, except when only a select few of them go to the Red Borderland map at all, this is the case for a number of other servers. I say this because I have always enjoyed my time in WvW, and I would others to learn to enjoy it as well.

So please continue to work and get this update out. when it does it will invigorate the rest of the player base, after a transition period, because if the "tiered system" as we have it now can be done away with it would help all match ups.

And just to reiterate:

@"Mechanix.9315" said:

Let us know, communicate with us please, that you still have in mind the correct priorities in order to keep the players in the game, because being realistic, your pve-like mount will only influx a bit of pve players for a while, once they get the mount they gone to pve land again.

I can totally help, and i know a lot of people will be able to help too, contact us, give us a chance to give you proper feedback, and even play with us, learn how we do, because your weekly streams, just following a random pugmander, and getting sniped by Deadeyes when you respawn its all that i see of your gameplay in those streams.

Don't hesitate to reach out to some people, you would be surprised the insight that you can gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Raymond Lukes.6305"

I think that the huge "change" in Arenanet in the past month may have been delay World restructuring update.What do you think as alternative or tempory option :1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)2) Make a WvW as before but instead of having each part of the day equal, just weight off-peak hour by less pts (like 3-2-1) and (4-3-2) for the rest of the day.

WvW community player need to have an identity (through guild,server) and fight for it (mean win ) so we need some tournament.

We need some answer Raymond at least negative, positive or even on something different it's fine but we need you to communicate with us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@nxsage.6578 said:

@"Redponey.8352" said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Redponey.8352" said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:

  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:
  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

that why before during tournamement transfers was locked and as most valuable servers were in top tier (mean "nearly full or full) a large coordinated group couldnt migrate.

However with link systeme, allow them to migrate between servers (including top server which are full, by using linked server)That why i hope that they will stop linking server system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:
  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

that why before during tournamement transfers was locked and as most valuable servers were in top tier (mean "nearly full or full) a large coordinated group couldnt migrate.

Yes... DURING tournaments it was locked. That’s not the issue. Unless they surprise us with a tournament that no one expects, and lock transfers prior to them announcing it, what I described is the expected outcome.

However with link systeme, allow them to migrate between servers (including top server which are full, by using linked server)That why i hope that they will stop linking server system.

So... with alliances, the link system will go away. Until then, they have stated they will not just delete servers. And they aren’t going to spend time and resources reorganizing before Alliances.

And if you mean just splitting off the links and leaving people in those essentially dead servers to fend for themselves, then... it is a failure already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:
  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

that why before during tournamement transfers was locked and as most valuable servers were in top tier (mean "nearly full or full) a large coordinated group couldnt migrate.

Yes...
DURING
tournaments it was locked. That’s not the issue. Unless they surprise us with a tournament that no one expects, and lock transfers prior to them announcing it, what I described is the expected outcome.

However with link systeme, allow them to migrate between servers (including top server which are full, by using linked server)That why i hope that they will stop linking server system.

So... with alliances, the link system will go away. Until then, they have stated they will not just delete servers. And they aren’t going to spend time and resources reorganizing before Alliances.

And if you mean just splitting off the links and leaving people in those essentially dead servers to fend for themselves, then... it is a failure already.I think that Alliance system will not be good as a server system because a server system is more open (it doesnt belong to anyone) as alliance belong to GM that form the alliance. so new player wont get in easier than a server system.I mean that alliance system will use it own vocal , so lonely guild also. and than you split the whole community in different box instead to reunite.Server vocal system is really nice it gather people on a single vocal from guilds, non-guild , casual to regular player, beginner can easily ask question to commander. but with alliance i think it wont work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:
  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

that why before during tournamement transfers was locked and as most valuable servers were in top tier (mean "nearly full or full) a large coordinated group couldnt migrate.

Yes...
DURING
tournaments it was locked. That’s not the issue. Unless they surprise us with a tournament that no one expects, and lock transfers prior to them announcing it, what I described is the expected outcome.

However with link systeme, allow them to migrate between servers (including top server which are full, by using linked server)That why i hope that they will stop linking server system.

So... with alliances, the link system will go away. Until then, they have stated they will not just delete servers. And they aren’t going to spend time and resources reorganizing before Alliances.

And if you mean just splitting off the links and leaving people in those essentially dead servers to fend for themselves, then... it is a failure already.I think that Alliance system will not be good as a server system because a server system is more open (it doesnt belong to anyone) as alliance belong to GM that form the alliance. so new player wont get in easier than a server system.I mean that alliance system will use it own vocal , so lonely guild also. and than you split the whole community in different box instead to reunite.Server vocal system is really nice it gather people on a single vocal from guilds, non-guild , casual to regular player, beginner can easily ask question to commander. but with alliance i think it wont work.

It remains to be seen.

Honestly though, most people will find an alliance that suits them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@nxsage.6578 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

And anyone that doesn't think Alliances won't need gems to re-link after the initial alliances are set, see me.

I got a bridge on the moon I want to sell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Redponey.8352 said:

@Redponey.8352 said:1) make a refresh start of all WvW server (it has an effect only in WvW because in PvE there is megaserver) and stop linking system (which is a issue because of bandwagonning.)

This won't ever happen since this is a huge gem sink. They can't replace an existing system without good reason because of revenue projections and NCSOFT.

inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

@Redponey.8352 said:inter-tournament period was also a huge gem sink. so it kind the same, however bandwaggoning has been tremendously increase with server linkage while before with a "full" server, it may have been less impactful than nowaday.

Moreover people need to have a reason to fight and win in WvW however without any tournament and no more "server identity" it's became like a PvEvP. I mean that now many players come for loots (pips , reward track , legendary stuff, warclaw) sometimes fight other player and that all. they doesnt play the gamemode which has been design to be a World vs World (Server vs Server).

I totally agree, a good motivation to take fights and win would definitely help kill the karma trains.They would still need a better way to sink gems into wvw to replace the relinking system. Hopefully mount skins do the trick.

What a tournament would do, is further encourage transfers.

A large coordinated group would transfer to a link that was linked with a server that has their weak points covered.

Then they would proceed to win each matchup to ‘win’ the tournament. For reference, see previous tournaments.

The other servers who stayed for server pride would be complaining on the forums, and multiple players would leave the mode because of:
  • burnout
  • Frustration
  • Anger.

It has happened with each and every tournament.

that why before during tournamement transfers was locked and as most valuable servers were in top tier (mean "nearly full or full) a large coordinated group couldnt migrate.

Yes...
DURING
tournaments it was locked. That’s not the issue. Unless they surprise us with a tournament that no one expects, and lock transfers prior to them announcing it, what I described is the expected outcome.

However with link systeme, allow them to migrate between servers (including top server which are full, by using linked server)That why i hope that they will stop linking server system.

So... with alliances, the link system will go away. Until then, they have stated they will not just delete servers. And they aren’t going to spend time and resources reorganizing before Alliances.

And if you mean just splitting off the links and leaving people in those essentially dead servers to fend for themselves, then... it is a failure already.I think that Alliance system will not be good as a server system because a server system is more open (it doesnt belong to anyone) as alliance belong to GM that form the alliance. so new player wont get in easier than a server system.I mean that alliance system will use it own vocal , so lonely guild also. and than you split the whole community in different box instead to reunite.Server vocal system is really nice it gather people on a single vocal from guilds, non-guild , casual to regular player, beginner can easily ask question to commander. but with alliance i think it wont work.Thats not how alliances are supposed to work at all.

We still have worlds.

These contain contain alliances (groups of guilds), guilds (groups of players) or loose players.

Alliances just adds a layer of player self-management above guild level, but below the worlds that Anet will create anew every world reset. From a top level, WvW as it is now would look identical to WvW under the alliance system.

Its exactly as "open" as todays worlds. In fact you could totally remove alliances from the alliance system and it would still work as intended - reshuffling all guilds and players to newly created and population balanced worlds at certain intervals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Exciton.8942 said:I hope you guys are still fully committed to this project.I think this is the only thing that can balance WvW better.

But... but.... there has been a faster fix to assure WvW does not die: the Warclaw! :s ;)

I, too, hope that we will get a final result soon, but - even before the layoffs - the dev's initial post makes it sound like this will take much, much longer. :/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ashantara.8731 said:

@"Exciton.8942" said:I hope you guys are still fully committed to this project.I think this is the only thing that can balance WvW better.

But... but.... there has been a faster fix to assure WvW does not die: the Warclaw! :s ;)

I, too, hope that we will get a final result soon, but - even before the layoffs - the dev's initial post makes it sound like this will take much, much longer. :/

The initial post was over 12 months ago. This is the second UPDATE. Ie: there have been three iterations of this.

These are the previous 2.

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/26547/world-restructuring/p1

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/45856/world-restructuring-update-1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...