No Real Discussion

[subversiontwo.7501]

@Swagger.1459 said:The problem that Diku doesn’t understand is that we can’t even fill up the current 8 match ups (let alone find a state of closer-to-equal numbers of players at most times) that have a total of 32 maps... yet still desires 51 individual match ups with 204 maps...Is that a problem though, if you can see the population of each map and choose where to go?

Edit, I'll make a new thread with the other stuff as it is kind of off-topic here.

[Diku.2546]

@"Swagger.1459" said:

The problem that Diku doesn’t understand is that we can’t even fill up the current 8 match ups (let alone find a state of closer-to-equal numbers of players at most times) that have a total of 32 maps... yet still desires 51 individual match ups with 204 maps...

Edit- So to recap... The idea aims to save each server from going bye bye through adding in 172 maps to play on... Using the football references made in this thread, and in the past, it’s like each football team, and individual players, being able to go play football at any other football team’s stadium... Much like if we made the NFL a free-for-all basically...

---

You're incorrectly explaining things btw...

NA only needs 24 stand alone Borderland Maps.EU only needs 27 stand alone Borderland Maps.

There would be a total of 51 stand alone Borderland Maps.

---

Players would be able to visit any of these 51 stand alone Borderland maps using the concept of

.

We get rid of the Fixed 3 Way Match-Up between servers that's separated into Bronze, Silver, and Gold Tiers mechanic. (Also, Get rid of Server Linking).

We replace it with this concept for Server Guesting re-purposed for WvW that:

Would allow players to pick up to 3 servers that they want to visit & fight against.Would allow players to change their 3 choices weekly & not have to wait several months to pick a new Match-Up...them self.

Changing a player's Home Server choice, however, would be every 3 months by gem payments.

---

With this Change in Match-Up mechanic...

Players enter any stand alone Borderland map through a Red / Green / Blue WayPoint.

Players always enter their stand alone Home Borderland map through Red.Green and Blue WayPoints are to be used by enemy players to enter.

The eSport SuperBowl event would be hosted by ANet once a year between Only Top Ranked Servers vying for the Title of WvW Champions...between specific EU & NA servers...not everybody gets invited...much like the real NFL SuperBowl...you have to earn that right to enter.

Players are encouraged to create verbal alliances in-game to help them cover their off-peak times.

Players are only rewarded by attacking any higher ranked server in relation to their Home Server's rank to encourage a healthy competitive game mode.

It's really not that hard...except for folks making things up when they don't fully understand the concepts being presented.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[style.6173]

They have one person on the wvw team. Maybe after the re-org another one or two will be added.

[Swagger.1459]

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Swagger.1459" said:

The problem that Diku doesn’t understand is that we can’t even fill up the current 8 match ups (let alone find a state of closer-to-equal numbers of players at most times) that have a total of 32 maps... yet still desires 51 individual match ups with 204 maps...

Edit- So to recap... The idea aims to save each server from going bye bye through adding in 172 maps to play on... Using the football references made in this thread, and in the past, it’s like each football team, and individual players, being able to go play football at any other football team’s stadium... Much like if we made the NFL a free-for-all basically...

---

You're incorrectly explaining things btw...

NA only needs 24 stand alone Borderland Maps.EU only needs 27 stand alone Borderland Maps.

There would be a total of 51 stand alone Borderland Maps.

---

Players would be able to visit any of these 51 stand alone Borderland maps using the concept of

.

We get rid of the Fixed 3 Way Match-Up between servers that's separated into Bronze, Silver, and Gold Tiers mechanic. (Also, Get rid of Server Linking).

We replace it with this concept for Server Guesting re-purposed for WvW that:

Would allow players

to pick up to 3 servers that they want to visit & fight against.

Would allow players

to change their 3 choices weekly & not have to wait several months to pick a new Match-Up...

them self.

Changing a player's Home Server choice, however, would be every 3 months by gem payments.

---

With this Change in Match-Up mechanic...

Players enter any stand alone Borderland map through a Red / Green / Blue WayPoint.

Players always enter their stand alone

Home

Borderland map through Red.Green and Blue WayPoints are to be used by enemy players to enter.

The eSport SuperBowl event would be hosted by ANet once a year between

Only Top Ranked Servers

vying for the Title of WvW Champions...between specific EU & NA servers...not everybody gets invited...much like the real NFL SuperBowl...you have to earn that right to enter.

Players are encouraged to create verbal alliances in-game to help them cover their off-peak times.

Players are only rewarded by attacking any higher ranked server in relation to their Home Server's rank to encourage a healthy competitive game mode.

It's really not that hard...except for folks making things up when they don't fully understand the concepts being presented.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

It’s really not that hard to understand that it’s not going to happen.

[Diku.2546]

---

@Swagger.1459 said:

@"Diku.2546" said:

You're incorrectly explaining things btw...

It’s really not that hard to understand that it’s not going to happen.

---

Based on personal observation & past history...coupled with the current development direction...I'll concede...you're probably right.

Sadly...it's a disservice to the WvW game mode community, but ironically...it's more critical to the financial health of ANet. The developers are myopically destroying their Long Term earning potential...listening to the wrong group of players on where to take WvW...imho

Developers should be focused on creating a Long Term view that builds community to encourage players to return & spend large amounts of time in the WvW game mode.

The Short Term view to create a constant 24/7 zerg fest tends to attract players that quickly lose interest & leave when they're not part of the winning team, or the opposite happens as players leave the game because PvD gets boring when winning without a competitive challenge becomes a thing.

---

I strongly believe that the Long Term population growth of WvW is declining & stagnating.

I also strongly believe that the Long Term population decline of a game mode that naturally happens over time can be better managed & reversed if the right decisions are made by the developers to implement changes that:

1) Encourages players to visit & play based on a stable Long Term community that's not directly controlled by players themselves2) Attract players by letting them pick their own Match-Ups3) Allow players to create "Teams" that includes friends & family from different servers

The solution that I've supported...correctly explained...does all of this in a simple way...using the natural behavior of players in a positive way.

ANet has a vested interest in the WvW game mode's Long Term health...

Foot traffic generated by WvW helps to supply players that may visit their gem store to make a real dollar purchase which is tied to their overall sales revenue.

You can't sell stuff in the gem store if nobody comes to your shopping mall.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

why do you randomly capitalize and hyphenate words?

[Diku.2546]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:why do you randomly capitalize and hyphenate words?

---

Trying to emphasize the word.

[XenesisII.1540]

"No Real Discussion"

It's been like that for quite a while now, there's no point in having any constructive discussion anymore because nothing will be changing. We all know there's a lack of staff working on this part of the game. Alliances already taken over a year and probably will take two, and this from the people who don't like announcing anything until a few weeks before.

And holy cripes Diku really took that server guesting suggestion and bloated it up. It was just a simple suggestion to add it as a mercenary feature back in the day.

[Diku.2546]

@"XenesisII.1540" said:"No Real Discussion"

It's been like that for quite a while now, there's no point in having any constructive discussion anymore because nothing will be changing. We all know there's a lack of staff working on this part of the game. Alliances already taken over a year and probably will take two, and this from the people who don't like announcing anything until a few weeks before.

And holy cripes Diku really took that server guesting suggestion and bloated it up. It was just a simple suggestion to add it as a mercenary feature back in the day.

---

chuckles

Nowadays...I try not to post too often...for similar reasons that you gave.

As of this current posting I only have 2 discussions & 91 postings.

Of these...1 discussion & 3 postings have been removed for reasons that I respectfully understand & actively try to Give Good Feedback.

Hope new forum members here take a moment to read some of my old posts, but I doubt that would happen.

---

Yeah...the original idea that was posted over 4 years ago...was simple & it came as an epiphany.

Regardless of the state of things...I still want to humbly ask that WvW should:

1) ENCOURAGE players to visit & play based on a stable Long Term community that's not directly controlled by players themselves2) ATTRACT players by letting them pick their own Match-Ups3) ALLOW players to create "Teams" that includes friends & family from different servers

Long Term vision should be on encouraging players to spend long hours within a community shielded & insulated against player politics.

---

Natural population decline happens.

Our current accelerated population decline was something I predicted over 2 years ago based on an insight that Server Linking in my opinion was going to systematically suppress the WvW ecosystem.

Currently...my opinion is that Alliance Linking will horribly repeat this same mistake & introduce a toxic sub-culture aspect.

Alliance Linking in my opinion will allow players to create a toxic sub-culture based on the fundamental human behavior related to power & politics...when we give them direct control over our Long Term communities through their Guild ownership powers.

---

ANet should easily be Financially supported by the Foot traffic that naturally gets generated by the WvW game mode.

Decisions to "improve" WvW have consistently become a disservice to the WvW game mode community.

Server & Alliance Linking is bad for growing the Long Term Foot traffic of the WvW game mode.

You can't sell stuff in the gem store if nobody comes to your shopping mall.

It's really going to be ironic when we reach the point when the WvW ecosystem collapses due to mismanagement...imho

Only comfort that I'll have is...Told you so.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[CETheLucid.3964]

@gebrechen.5643 said:And: What do you think changes with Alliances? Your behaviour of overstacking?

I mean to be fair, yes. That's exactly what it will stem. Can't stack servers if servers don't exist. Assuming it matches guilds together and against each other based on performance, it'll be a much healthier system.

Maybe there can be an EoTM style sign-up division where guilds can agree to play with/against each other, where the main WvW is a completely automated system managed by a megaserver algorithm that no guild can influence beyond merely pretending to be retarded.

Players get GvG on the side, EoTM has a reason to exist, WvW remains an objectively even playing field.

[Dawdler.8521]

@CETheLucid.3964 said:I mean to be fair, yes. That's exactly what it will stem. Can't stack servers if servers don't exist. Assuming it matches guilds together and against each other based on performance, it'll be a much healthier system.It doesnt match by performance from what Anet said. Thats what tiers are supposed to do naturally. Though I suppose they could take into account the alliance tier when reshuffling.

[derd.6413]

WvW was never intended to be an esport or even a serious competition

[oOStaticOo.9467]

@derd.6413 said:WvW was never intended to be an esport or even a serious competition

There sure are a lot of people on here that try to make it that way though.

[derd.6413]

@oOStaticOo.9467 said:

@derd.6413 said:WvW was never intended to be an esport or even a serious competition

There sure are a lot of people on here that try to make it that way though.

they can try, just don't QQ when it doesn't take off or doesn't get supported

[Straegen.2938]

Most WvW issues boil down to coverage. Few like going to bed with all T3 then waking up to paper. The lack of permanence in structures encourages players to either stop focusing on structure and go where the best fights are or flip the easiest structures for the rewards.

A "server" is an arbitrary pick players make early on. They are an intentional design flaw to manage server side resources. A guild is actually where a players alliance should be and servers simply should not exist from a game design standpoint. Linked servers are a mechanism to prevent server merges. Linking and merges both have their fundamental flaws and I see one no better than the other particularly since "servers" is a basic design flaw.

What I would like to have seen was a Battlefront Assault mode style of guild combat. Multiple relatively evenly matched guilds on a single map with specific objectives necessary to win. Each guild would be paired with some number of slots for unaligned players. Matches would be relatively short thus eliminating the entire coverage issue and WvW would be focused around fights all the time rather than hours of dead zones.

[Kaiser.9873]

The only eSport they could pull out of WvW would be GvG's, and contrary to some's belief; that ship has sailed. Is it possible to attract that crowd back? No one knows for sure, but ANet would need to perform many mea culpas before they got that scene back and active.

As to your other points. There is no way ANet is going to backtrack and make a WvW universe that people can sail all willy nilly through. Links don't work, because PEOPLE. People move around looking for the main chance, thereby rendering all possible matchmaking moot. At least with alliances there should be some kind of method that keeps players/guilds in place longer than the current system.

Long term viability? I think that this far in the game there is a level of inertia that will keep the game going at least a bit longer. I believe that you have a great deal of investment and passion in your idea for WvW. Your idea, however, is not ANet's "vision"(if there is one) for WvW.

[Diku.2546]

Based on personal observation & past history...coupled with the current development direction.

I'll concede...WvW will never be able to evolve into the next eSport without a Major Reboot.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[Vayne.8563]

The game is going on 6.5 years old now. This constant OMG if the game mode doesn't have X it won't work. It works and has always worked for some people. It doesn't work for other people. The problem is you change it to work the way one group wants it and another group becomes disenfranchised.

I get the impression the OP wants a harder core WvW game. Something for people who live and breathe it and that would suit them. And probably drive me from WvW never to return, which is a shame, because I actually enjoy some of it now, and I probably wouldn't if it became "too" competitive. This is a casual game, with a largely casual playerbase and a very vocal harder core population. I don't believe for a second the hard core population, anywhere in this game, is some kind of majority. But they are very loud and often very knowledgable. I think a lot of what hard core people say make sense for hard core players.

But then the bring out works like viable, or sustainable, or in some cases dying as in the mode/game will die if X isn't done.

Heart of Thorns was a response to those hard core players and Anet almost had to apologize for it, because it was too hard, too grindy too everything when it came out, until they compromised and made it better for casuals.

What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

[L A T I O N.8923]

@"Vayne.8563" said:The game is going on 6.5 years old now. This constant OMG if the game mode doesn't have X it won't work. It works and has always worked for some people. It doesn't work for other people. The problem is you change it to work the way one group wants it and another group becomes disenfranchised.

I get the impression the OP wants a harder core WvW game. Something for people who live and breathe it and that would suit them. And probably drive me from WvW never to return, which is a shame, because I actually enjoy some of it now, and I probably wouldn't if it became "too" competitive. This is a casual game, with a largely casual playerbase and a very vocal harder core population. I don't believe for a second the hard core population, anywhere in this game, is some kind of majority. But they are very loud and often very knowledgable. I think a lot of what hard core people say make sense for hard core players.

But then the bring out works like viable, or sustainable, or in some cases dying as in the mode/game will die if X isn't done.

Heart of Thorns was a response to those hard core players and Anet almost had to apologize for it, because it was too hard, too grindy too everything when it came out, until they compromised and made it better for casuals.

What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

Yes casuals are the lifeboat of this game and therefor there's casual mechanics like passive gameplay to compete with hardcore play

Unfortunatly for selfindulging reasons alot of hardcore roamers run these mechanics and get salty if they loose

[Diku.2546]

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

[Knighthonor.4061]

@"Diku.2546" said:It's hillarious & depressing now...

There was a time when topics in the WvW forum had real substance.

This is how I feel as I observe & continue to encourage a long term vision for the WvW game mode..

---

Server Linking is a prime example of Team Creation mechanics failing to create healthy competition while destroying the "ecosystems" of our WvW communities in the Long-Term...IF we continue to use the same mechanics in Match-Up design.

Alliances is a second attempt at using this same approach. A huge investment of development resources on an In-Direct solution through Team Creation & not Directly attacking the Real Flaw in our Match-Up mechanics that only encourages un-healthy match-ups that stifles competition & systematically favor a few heavily stacked teams. Alliances will in my opinion have similar results that Server Linking had in the Long-Term.

Game mechanics needs to be re-designed to allow players vested in their team to have healthy competitive match-ups where a highly sought after & published team ranking is earned...all the while taking into account that players will naturally want to stack onto the currently "winning" team.

---

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

I dont quite understand how this can be solved. Regardless of what Anet does, unless WvW becomes a instanced battleground like Old AV was, it will NEVER be balanced population wise. I really want to know what people solution here are for this. Because I haven't seen any reasonable solutions. The Alliance system will fail as well, I agree. But nobody is addressing the real problem here which is WvW was trying to emulate open world faction pvp but with a limited space and population cap with no real faction pride. The WvW doesnt reward other methods of combat other than the zerg train and PvD. There are no meaningful faction smaller scale objectives that help the team greatly.EoTM although dead early exposed the flawed design of WvW in a more in your face way, yet that was ignored. Most people on this forum really dont want this game mode improved in a new way. I dont see solutions and all I see is bug fix request (ie this lag is terrible plz fix)and complaining about population unbalance.

[Kylden Ar.3724]

@Knighthonor.4061 said:EoTM although dead early exposed the flawed design of WvW in a more in your face way, yet that was ignored.

Could you expand on what you mean by this?

[Knighthonor.4061]

@Kylden Ar.3724 said:

@Knighthonor.4061 said:EoTM although dead early exposed the flawed design of WvW in a more in your face way, yet that was ignored.

Could you expand on what you mean by this?

EoTM although had a much better concept of population balance since it was more like instanced pvp with players from different servers,

The gameplay still revolved around PvD being more rewarding, defense not being as important for player progress or faction progress, and zerg avoidance was a thing unless random encounters.

Everything that WvW was hyped up for in pre release, it never lived up to. EoTM only had a better way of handling population but most people would not be okay with dedicated WvW factions instead of server vs server and this terribly handled server link system which has same problem.

[Vayne.8563]

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

This is all great...in theory. My experience of the practice is probably quite different from yours.

Hard core players are often looking for real competition. That's what gets them going. The more important you make the competition the harder it is to find a niche for the casual players. There's plenty for me to do as a casual right now, everything from escorting dolyaks to capping camps, to veteren creatures, that keep my participation up (and that's all a lot of casuals are interested in btw). When I want to, I can follow a commander around and there are some fights, some tower/keep captures, camp captures, etc. For a casual player I get around just fine in WvW. That is casual in attitude, rather than time spent anyway.

The point is, the more competitive you make WvW, the less interested others are in in having me there at all, and that's where the real issue lays. It happens with raids now. People want to get raids done as fast as possible and if you're looking to pug raids, you really do have to be at least somewhat competitive. Sure there are raid training guilds, but at the end of the day, raiding requires a commitment that turns off a lot of casuals. WvW has a place for casuals now. I'm not convinced that changing it to make it better for hard core players won't interfere with the casual player base, because hard core players often can't abide casual players.

Just my own personal experience.

[Swagger.1459]

@Diku.2546 said:Based on personal observation & past history...coupled with the current development direction.

I'll concede...WvW will never be able to evolve into the next eSport without a Major Reboot.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

@Diku.2546 said:

@"Vayne.8563" said:Snip 8<What I'm saying is that casuals are the lifeblood of this particular game and any solution that will work long term, has to be made with the casual population in mind. If you can find a way to ""fix" WvW without disenfranchising the bulk of the population, go for it. But I not sure how easy that is to do.

---

I agree with you & there is a fix.

ANet needs to create a WvW ecosystem that allows for niches. Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together.

What I really want is...

WvW game mode that's implemented with a diverse ecosystem that allows for many different play styles...FROM Casuals TO Hard Core.

---

It's been over 2 years since warning this community that we were taking the wrong path with Server Linking, because it would destroy many of the servers that had casual population niches.

This prediction came true.

Now I'm predicting that Alliance Linking will next encourage a toxic sub-culture when players are given the power over who stays & who goes when creating their "Winners" Community.

We're once again...going down the wrong path again.

---

WvW population levels are dropping without a solid ecosystem that naturally replenishes the Top Tier Worlds…imho

We've focused on solutions that's attempted to balance server population through Team Creation mechanics that's failed.

We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win.

We need a different solution.

Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to.

Instead…We need a solution that leverages & makes use of these huge population differences between servers as “bait & target”.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Is-there-no-close-matchups-anymore/page/1#post6566831

I'd like to see a WvW game mode that systematically allows & encourages diversity by it's very design.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

Well, wvw isn't an "esport". It will never be an "esport". You are wasting time trying to make wvw into an "esport". WvW was inspired by DAoC RvR gameplay, and that's what players want... A 3 way REALM vs REALM vs REALM war, not an "esports superbowl free-for-all" wars.

You say "Casuals & Hard Core players should be allowed to co-exist together."... and they already do... Not sure how you haven't recognized this fact?

I'm not sure you are really paying attention to the issues while typing these...

First you say... "We need to recognize that population can't effectively be balanced because players want to Stack for the Win."

Then you say... "We need a different solution. Don’t balance population. Let players stack on any server as much as they want to."

Are you not aware that stacking, which has caused match-up issues due to unbalanced numbers, has always been one of the main problems?

Honestly, it doesn't seem that you bothered to read the links about Alliances that I pmed you, so you should probably start there before pushing the same "wvw into esports" ideas... That will cause even worse "stacking to win" issues... All while wasting developer time, resources, money and server space to host 204 wvw maps that open and close based off of players on the maps, and that will not address any issues, nor make this mode more attractive to the RvR minded player.