Jump to content
  • Sign Up

EOTM needs love


Recommended Posts

@Kaiser.9873 said:

@DeathPanel.8362 said:The biggest misconception people have is that somehow EotM and wvw shared the same player base. They don’t. One set is a mostly pve group after karma train. The other set is after wvw Zerg/roaming pvp. Nerfing EotM didn’t make the farmers join wvw. It just made them move on to a pve farm zone. Ie Silverwastes. Improving EotM in the way I talked about isn’t going to detract from wvw. It would just encourage part of the pve population to go there the same way a new LS zone attracts them.

Then go talk about this on the PvE forums. You're on the WvW forums, because indeed it was WvW players that played EotM.

PvE players have their farm zones. No need for EotM to become another for the massive numbers of PvE players that want to EotM.

Now, if ANet would alternate EotM map with EBG map I could perhaps get behind that.

I'm not the one that started the topic in this forum. You should take it up with the OP if you don't think it should be in WvW. I just responded with my feedback on what can be done to encourage EOTM and not impact WvW. Your idea would directly impact WvW because it would literally replace EBG on alternates. That's a idea that many people wouldn't like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@Voltekka.2375 said:I am sorry, you wrote on a previous post/comment that you want eotm to become a pve map, and it to have reward tracks. Since my cognitive dissonance is apparent, pray tell me which PVE map has reward tracks as a feature. If you want eotm to remain a wvw map, and for it to have a reward track, you should really make better arguments to the devs mainly WHY they should spend their time to change eotm rewards. Ad hominems hardly make your case stronger.I am a patient man, I will wait for your apology

Wrong. I never said I want EOTM to become a pve map. I said it could use currency/skin unlock mechanics similar to LS maps and its own reward track and only that reward track to keep it separate from WvW and not impact it. That's different from saying I want it converted into a PVE map.Either way your statement still contradicted itself.

You: Plenty of pve maps to farm, no need for more.Also You: I would rather Anet spend resources on the Alliance system, new ls maps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:yes, yes it does. some servers are so small that there's no one there. some servers are so big that you can't even play.

The issue is wvw population difference. Two servers with similar overall population levels may have vastly different population numbers that play wvw. The issue is Anet takes metrics and link worlds based on that overall population and not the wvw population.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeathPanel.8362 said:

@Sovereign.1093 said:yes, yes it does. some servers are so small that there's no one there. some servers are so big that you can't even play.

The issue is wvw population difference. Two servers with similar overall population levels may have vastly different population numbers that play wvw. The issue is Anet takes metrics and link worlds based on that overall population and not the wvw population.

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

The reason wvw got stacked in the first place is allowing people to transfer which allowed wvw players to stack certain servers. This is why world linking doesn’t work because it’s based on overall population and not wvw population. Two worlds with the same population can have drastically different wvw populations. If there’s a reset no transfers should be allowed or people will just stack again and you’ll be back where you started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeathPanel.8362 said:

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

The reason wvw got stacked in the first place is allowing people to transfer which allowed wvw players to stack certain servers. This is why world linking doesn’t work because it’s based on overall population and not wvw population. Two worlds with the same population can have drastically different wvw populations. If there’s a reset no transfers should be allowed or people will just stack again and you’ll be back where you started.

not really, if my idea was followed since worlds would be for wvw only. because pve is universal.worlds dont matter in pve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

The reason wvw got stacked in the first place is allowing people to transfer which allowed wvw players to stack certain servers. This is why world linking doesn’t work because it’s based on overall population and not wvw population. Two worlds with the same population can have drastically different wvw populations. If there’s a reset no transfers should be allowed or people will just stack again and you’ll be back where you started.

not really, if my idea was followed since worlds would be for wvw only. because pve is universal.worlds dont matter in pve.

Your statement doesn’t make sense. It’s like you’re responding to something I never even said. People don’t transfer because of pve. They usually transfer to stack the winning wvw world the same way there are always people trying to swap to the winning team in FPS games. Allowing for transfers is what caused the worlds to be so stacked in the first place for wvw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeathPanel.8362 said:

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

The reason wvw got stacked in the first place is allowing people to transfer which allowed wvw players to stack certain servers. This is why world linking doesn’t work because it’s based on overall population and not wvw population. Two worlds with the same population can have drastically different wvw populations. If there’s a reset no transfers should be allowed or people will just stack again and you’ll be back where you started.

not really, if my idea was followed since worlds would be for wvw only. because pve is universal.worlds dont matter in pve.

Your statement doesn’t make sense. It’s like you’re responding to something I never even said. People don’t transfer because of pve. They usually transfer to stack the winning wvw world the same way there are always people trying to swap to the winning team in FPS games. Allowing for transfers is what caused the worlds to be so stacked in the first place for wvw.

transfering isnt a bad thing, having a full world with afk account is. so, if there is a world reset, those who are active can get together and play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DeathPanel.8362 said:

@"SWI.4127" said:You are wrong, they use WvW play hours as their metric.

Wrong. They use that for the upcoming alliance system. Right now it’s only based on
overall world population
.

Wrong.

A “Full” server is a server with a number of Active WvW Players (as defined by the algorithm) above a certain threshold. It has nothing to do with hardware limitations, or PvE players.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/World-Population-Changes-Are-Coming/page/5#post5326517

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sovereign.1093 said:

i thought the issue here is eotm :3

on the issue of wvw, the solution i can think of is simple server reset every 3 months; so ppl can stack on a new server and those not active will simply have to choose eventually or atleast be removed from the worlds. that should unify players provided they are informed ahead of time like in a calendar. :)

The reason wvw got stacked in the first place is allowing people to transfer which allowed wvw players to stack certain servers. This is why world linking doesn’t work because it’s based on overall population and not wvw population. Two worlds with the same population can have drastically different wvw populations. If there’s a reset no transfers should be allowed or people will just stack again and you’ll be back where you started.

not really, if my idea was followed since worlds would be for wvw only. because pve is universal.worlds dont matter in pve.

Your statement doesn’t make sense. It’s like you’re responding to something I never even said. People don’t transfer because of pve. They usually transfer to stack the winning wvw world the same way there are always people trying to swap to the winning team in FPS games. Allowing for transfers is what caused the worlds to be so stacked in the first place for wvw.

transfering isnt a bad thing, having a full world with afk account is. so, if there is a world reset, those who are active can get together and play.

Then you’re just going to be back where you started when a bunch of guilds and wvw players stack onto a few select worlds.

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...