Any word on alliances? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Any word on alliances?

xikira.3264xikira.3264 Member ✭✭
edited June 2, 2019 in WvW

Hello I have been gone for about a year give or take a few months. I have only recently returned. I was wondering has there been anymore info on when the world alliances are going to happen?

<1

Comments

  • LetoII.3782LetoII.3782 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Right after HoT is stable

    [HUNT] the predatory instinct

  • GDchiaScrub.3241GDchiaScrub.3241 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Bird is the word. That is about as accurate as any player can be in this thread.

    D:

    Holy Warriors of [Kazo] following Kazo doctrine guided by, Our Lord and Commander, Zudo in the holy Trinity of Him and his two firm glutes.

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

    If you go here: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/73411/guild-wars-2-forum-the-library-wvw#latest

    You will see several posts about world restructuring. There have been two ‘updates’ since the initial post, including a small blurb on it in the ‘where do we go from here’ post after the layoffs.

    But honestly, there really isn’t anything new other than they ‘still have it as a priority’.

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • enkidu.5937enkidu.5937 Member ✭✭✭

    Obviously, I'm too dumb to understand what they are working on and why it takes years.

    Instead of 27 servers (EU), that are currently linked with each other to a total of 15 worlds, they want smaller compounds to handle world population more precisely, fine.

    So, what exactly is the problem? Just keep the current 27 servers and add the opportunity for guilds to create additional mini-servers aka alliances, where the more competitive players can organize themselves.

    Then create match-ups as it is now.

    Done.

    I would prefer, that the current servers and the newly created alliances get separate match makings. Then add a leaderboard, where every server / alliance gets its victory points or whatever score (since the current positions in tier 1-5 actually dont say much, because of server linking and bandwaggoning). I also would prefer a shuffle every 4 weeks, with the possibility to transfer from one server / alliance to another only in the last days before the next shuffle. If alliances and non-alliance players are put in the same world, it will be too hard for the latter ones to find ppl to play with.

  • xikira.3264xikira.3264 Member ✭✭

    Thanks for all the answers hopefully we get some news soon :)

  • knite.1542knite.1542 Member ✭✭✭

    @xikira.3264 said:
    Thanks for all the answers hopefully we get some news soon :)

    I am sure we will. I can't wait!! Alliances are going to be awesome!

    so you are still salty about that.

  • Strages.2950Strages.2950 Member ✭✭✭

    The last actual "update" was 7 months ago...if you can call that an update. Naively bumping for Dev answer.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @enkidu.5937 said:
    Obviously, I'm too dumb to understand what they are working on and why it takes years.

    Instead of 27 servers (EU), that are currently linked with each other to a total of 15 worlds, they want smaller compounds to handle world population more precisely, fine.

    So, what exactly is the problem? Just keep the current 27 servers and add the opportunity for guilds to create additional mini-servers aka alliances, where the more competitive players can organize themselves.

    Then create match-ups as it is now.

    Done.

    I would prefer, that the current servers and the newly created alliances get separate match makings. Then add a leaderboard, where every server / alliance gets its victory points or whatever score (since the current positions in tier 1-5 actually dont say much, because of server linking and bandwaggoning). I also would prefer a shuffle every 4 weeks, with the possibility to transfer from one server / alliance to another only in the last days before the next shuffle. If alliances and non-alliance players are put in the same world, it will be too hard for the latter ones to find ppl to play with.

    We've seen like 5 different multi guild alliances in NA the past 2 years that have formed and basically failed because they become bored, meanwhile screwing up populations after relinks and leaving vacuums in servers when they leave. Can't leave anything to players cause they'll just screw it up even more, plenty of history to support that.

    Alliances will populate servers to fill in the numbers to make all worlds as close in player numbers activity time. The system will be fully automated (it isn't right now), and can do this on a more individual level, rather than having to use a big chunk of players (current servers) to put together for a world, like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle instead of the kiddy 27 piece giant sized ones.

    Once the automation is in place and worlds can be refreshed every two months (even that can easily change when it's automated) more evenly than now, I believe they be able to do tournaments/seasons.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

  • Mil.3562Mil.3562 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 4, 2019

    Who can say what happened to the World Server system will not happened in Alliances?

    We are still the same players from the World servers except that now we are broken into smaller Worlds named Alliances and forced to join Alliance guilds which will inevitably encourge more toxic, elistic guild leaders enlisting only meta clasess into their guilds.

    For the first few months, there may be more players due to the new system they wnt to try out but give a few months or maybe just weeks, after the dust settled, players will see that we are still having the same core problems. Only meta classes needed.

    We totally lost server identity but retaining the same sets of problems and encourages more elistic commanders and their minions to take over the population.

    How is this better? It will be better only if ANet stop the powercreeps, reinstate or strenghten defence or support mechanics, including better tower defence. Give us a choice and a fair chance to play defence and not always running around in numbers. For once, give us a real balance update and not nerfs. Of course, many will say " why not just quit WvW? " But, is this what ANet wants with Alliances? To make more players give up WvW?

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Anet stated that the purpose of removing the language restrictions on EU links was to prepare for the alliance system, so at the very least we do know it is still on their radar. That's about all we know though. I don't think I could honestly say whether I'd be more surprised if it showed up next month or didn't show up for another two years . . .

  • DeadlySynz.3471DeadlySynz.3471 Member ✭✭✭✭

    In the mean time they could just eliminate the bottom 6 servers and disperse the players into the upper 6. At the bare minimum at least the players/activity will be somewhat in line, and it is a step to see how players react to somewhat even numbers or do they still persist on trying to stack.

  • Ubi.4136Ubi.4136 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Getting an answer is like shaking one of those Magic 8 balls: and it just keeps coming up on uncertain or try again later. Pretty sure this all got put on a back burner (in an overseas warehouse somewhere) when the layoffs happened. Honestly, it looks like the earliest we could even hope for is a year or 2 from now

    Lost in the Maguuma (TC)
    For the geographically challenged, yes, Tarnished Coast is located IN the Maguuma Jungle.

  • Justine.6351Justine.6351 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Ubi.4136 said:
    Getting an answer is like shaking one of those Magic 8 balls: and it just keeps coming up on uncertain or try again later. Pretty sure this all got put on a back burner (in an overseas warehouse somewhere) when the layoffs happened. Honestly, it looks like the earliest we could even hope for is a year or 2 from now

    And that will still be before CU rofl.

    Anet buff me :-(
    Make me good at game!

  • hunkamania.7561hunkamania.7561 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Aint happening anytime soon

    Ferguson's Crossing Server Leader

    WVW LEADER

    VR

  • enkidu.5937enkidu.5937 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 4, 2019

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:
    In the mean time they could just eliminate the bottom 6 servers and disperse the players into the upper 6.

    Pretty sure, Anet will not reduce the number of linking puzzle pieces from 27 to 21 (EU), when their ultimate goal is to increase the number of puzzle pieces.

  • Ubi.4136Ubi.4136 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Justine.6351 said:

    @Ubi.4136 said:
    Getting an answer is like shaking one of those Magic 8 balls: and it just keeps coming up on uncertain or try again later. Pretty sure this all got put on a back burner (in an overseas warehouse somewhere) when the layoffs happened. Honestly, it looks like the earliest we could even hope for is a year or 2 from now

    And that will still be before CU rofl.

    Ain't that the truth. My wife and I got our money back last year when we realized that game is never going to release. If by some miracle it does, the graphics will look just as bad as the first DAoC looks now.

    Lost in the Maguuma (TC)
    For the geographically challenged, yes, Tarnished Coast is located IN the Maguuma Jungle.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Mil.3562 said:
    Who can say what happened to the World Server system will not happened in Alliances?

    We are still the same players from the World servers except that now we are broken into smaller Worlds named Alliances and forced to join Alliance guilds which will inevitably encourge more toxic, elistic guild leaders enlisting only meta clasess into their guilds.

    For the first few months, there may be more players due to the new system they wnt to try out but give a few months or maybe just weeks, after the dust settled, players will see that we are still having the same core problems. Only meta classes needed.

    We totally lost server identity but retaining the same sets of problems and encourages more elistic commanders and their minions to take over the population.

    How is this better? It will be better only if ANet stop the powercreeps, reinstate or strenghten defence or support mechanics, including better tower defence. Give us a choice and a fair chance to play defence and not always running around in numbers. For once, give us a real balance update and not nerfs. Of course, many will say " why not just quit WvW? " But, is this what ANet wants with Alliances? To make more players give up WvW?

    You only join guilds in the alliance to make sure you get into the same worlds as those guilds, if you don't want to play with elitist guilds or commanders then don't join their guilds. Mind you, you still might end up in the same worlds are those guilds, there's no real way to get away from them, so just ignore them like you currently would?

    The difference from current world? the worlds will always be refilled, unlike now when a bunch of players leave a server, that server itself is screwed it becomes low population and then has to hope to be linked with a high population server so they don't become dead. We've seen servers get dumped and then rebuild over a period of months to even years, the alliance system will repopulate the servers every two months, if they keep it at two months.

    Server identity was lost a long time ago, a lot of people stopped caring about defending the homeland since 2015, certain servers were known for certain things and even that has been erased over time. We can blame anet for that all we want, but frankly players got tired of it too. What I hope they would do for the new worlds is some sort of branding, like a sports team, building a theme around it, give something to rally around, give them unique names like the gods and elder dragons, titles, flags, icons the whole shabang, but I know that's a pipe dream.

    As for balance, that's a separate team, and they don't care about wvw balance.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

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

    @DeadlySynz.3471 said:
    In the mean time they could just eliminate the bottom 6 servers and disperse the players into the upper 6. At the bare minimum at least the players/activity will be somewhat in line, and it is a step to see how players react to somewhat even numbers or do they still persist on trying to stack.

    People complain loudly when just one server goes without a link so that some guilds get split, how do you think six entire servers would react?

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

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

    @XenesisII.1540 said:

    @Mil.3562 said:
    Who can say what happened to the World Server system will not happened in Alliances?

    We are still the same players from the World servers except that now we are broken into smaller Worlds named Alliances and forced to join Alliance guilds which will inevitably encourge more toxic, elistic guild leaders enlisting only meta clasess into their guilds.

    For the first few months, there may be more players due to the new system they wnt to try out but give a few months or maybe just weeks, after the dust settled, players will see that we are still having the same core problems. Only meta classes needed.

    We totally lost server identity but retaining the same sets of problems and encourages more elistic commanders and their minions to take over the population.

    How is this better? It will be better only if ANet stop the powercreeps, reinstate or strenghten defence or support mechanics, including better tower defence. Give us a choice and a fair chance to play defence and not always running around in numbers. For once, give us a real balance update and not nerfs. Of course, many will say " why not just quit WvW? " But, is this what ANet wants with Alliances? To make more players give up WvW?

    You only join guilds in the alliance to make sure you get into the same worlds as those guilds, if you don't want to play with elitist guilds or commanders then don't join their guilds. Mind you, you still might end up in the same worlds are those guilds, there's no real way to get away from them, so just ignore them like you currently would?

    The difference from current world? the worlds will always be refilled, unlike now when a bunch of players leave a server, that server itself is screwed it becomes low population and then has to hope to be linked with a high population server so they don't become dead. We've seen servers get dumped and then rebuild over a period of months to even years, the alliance system will repopulate the servers every two months, if they keep it at two months.

    Server identity was lost a long time ago, a lot of people stopped caring about defending the homeland since 2015, certain servers were known for certain things and even that has been erased over time. We can blame anet for that all we want, but frankly players got tired of it too. What I hope they would do for the new worlds is some sort of branding, like a sports team, building a theme around it, give something to rally around, give them unique names like the gods and elder dragons, titles, flags, icons the whole shabang, but I know that's a pipe dream.

    As for balance, that's a separate team, and they don't care about wvw balance.

    This^

    Probably one of the more accurate and unbiased descriptions of where we are at and going.

    Well said

    Thank You for the {MEME}

  • Servers would be more active if incentives for going higher were worth it. We need another WvW Seasonal Tournament.

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Bristingr.5034 said:
    Servers would be more active if incentives for going higher were worth it. We need another WvW Seasonal Tournament.

    Servers would suffer even more population imbalance if there were any reward for winning at all. If alliances provide anet with the tools necessary to create balanced matchups -- and that's a huge if -- then it would be possible to increase the rewards for winning . . .

    With so many players willing to bandwagon for free, paying them to do so seems counterintuitive . . .

  • Diku.2546Diku.2546 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 5, 2019

    @XenesisII.1540 said:
    Snip 8<

    What I hope they would do for the new worlds is some sort of branding, like a sports team, building a theme around it, give something to rally around, give them unique names like the gods and elder dragons, titles, flags, icons the whole shabang, but I know that's a pipe dream.

    Snip 8<


    Hmm...

    Pipe dreams do come true...sometimes.

    1) NFC & AFC leading to an annual NFL Super Bowl event.
    2) AL & NL leading to an annual MLB World Series event.
    3) EU & NA & ASIA leading to an annual WvWvW World Tournament event

    Can you see any pattern here?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANet_World_Tournament


    Ok...ok...2 out of 3 pipe dreams coming true is pretty good in my book.

    ANet World Tournament event still needs work.

    It would be easier & more straight forward if we did 5 simple things to change WvW into creating an ANet World Tournament:

    1) Remove the current match-up system, but keep a system for World Ranking.
    2) Assign each World server a single map to defend.
    3) Let players pick any three maps to fight on weekly.
    4) During the week show players the top three enemies attacking their home map.
    5) Finally only reward players when they fight on a map or an enemy map that is "Ranked Higher or Equal to" their home map.


    The above helps to provide...A Better Match-Up Mechanic where:

    1) Players don't need to transfer to find fights, but can still transfer if they really want to.
    2) Players weekly pick their own match-ups.
    3) Players picking popular maps will have to wait in queue to enter, but can pick maps with smaller queues as part of their weekly choices.
    4) Players can play with friends & family from any server by choosing to meet on a shared enemy map.
    5) Players from different time zones protect each other's home map through retaliatory attacks against their shared enemy's map. An attack against one is an attack against all.

    We continue using an overall "World Max Capacity Seats" to control how many players can declare a Server their Home World.

    While tweaking the "Reserved Map Entry Seats" to control how many players can actually enter a Server map to fight on.

    Reserved Map Entry Seats:
    50% = Home Defenders
    40% = Enemy Attackers
    10% = ANet GMs

    Adjustable %


    It's better to Fix things by using Better Match-Up Mechanics...imho

    We tried to use Better Team-Creation Mechanics like World Linking...which failed & destroyed most if not all Guest Server communities

    The same use of Better Team-Creation Mechanics of Alliance Linking...will also fail...and I'll predict...destroy most if not all Host Server communities as well.

    In the Long-Term...ANet is slowly killing off the "Goose that lays their golden eggs" as they kill off the long standing WvW communities that provides a major draw to why players return to GW2.

    When the Long-Term WvW crowd of players is short-shortsightedly being encouraged to drift away from playing WvW...the real money that they've been spending in the Gem Store...will to ANet's misfortune...follow them out the door...imho

    Sadly...the players here won't really care & will continue to focus on discussing silly topics that don't really matter to the long-term health of the game & ANet's financial future.

    We don't demand ANet to be held accountable, and ANet doesn't want to be held accountable...it's a Win Win situation...but we all lose when the game shuts down.

    Yours truly,
    Diku

    Credibility requires critical insight & time.

    The Goose That Laid Golden Eggs

  • Ubi.4136Ubi.4136 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gop.8713 said:

    @Bristingr.5034 said:
    Servers would be more active if incentives for going higher were worth it. We need another WvW Seasonal Tournament.

    Servers would suffer even more population imbalance if there were any reward for winning at all. If alliances provide anet with the tools necessary to create balanced matchups -- and that's a huge if -- then it would be possible to increase the rewards for winning . . .

    With so many players willing to bandwagon for free, paying them to do so seems counterintuitive . . .

    Yeah, giving a "real" reward isn't the solution. A lot of players are already willing to pay to transfer just for easy fights (so loot and ranks) where they almost always outnumber their opponent. Not sure there is a solution to be had as long as server transfers are available.

    Lost in the Maguuma (TC)
    For the geographically challenged, yes, Tarnished Coast is located IN the Maguuma Jungle.

  • Jaruselka.5943Jaruselka.5943 Member ✭✭✭

    A watched pot never boils...

  • subversiontwo.7501subversiontwo.7501 Member ✭✭✭

    @Jaruselka.5943 said:
    A watched pot never boils...

    Nore does a pot without fire fuming it from below.

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:

    @Jaruselka.5943 said:
    A watched pot never boils...

    Nore does a pot without fire fuming it from below.

    Or a pot without water.

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    06210311 251521 121512

  • Gop.8713Gop.8713 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @sephiroth.4217 said:

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:

    @Jaruselka.5943 said:
    A watched pot never boils...

    Nore does a pot without fire fuming it from below.

    Or a pot without water.

    Have to account for atmospheric conditions as well, if you are accustomed to boiling water at higher altitudes, for example . . .

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Don't think anyone thinks alliances alone is going to save wvw(in fact it's probably too late to save it at this point), it only partly solves the population problem and not even going to solve off hours coverage as they're not even going to include time zones in their population shuffle, there's certainly a lot of other problems that need to be looked at. But it is one of the biggest problems that is required to be fixed in order to be able to provide certain other content to wvw.

    Class balance needs to be looked at for groups and zergs, classes have core and two elite specs and still forced into either roamer or group and not much variety for both or very niche.
    Damage balance needs to be looked at for all levels roaming group zerg blob, one shots to aoes from class to class.
    That leads to combat mechanics, boons vs corruption, damage immunity, shields, etc should be looked at.
    Wvw game play could use a refresh, siege damage, structure upgrades, time to cap could to be looked at, time for one level of walls and gates?. Put actual mechanics to split zergs up, not a 5 cap ruins that only requires 2 people to do.

    PPTing, PPKing, could also be looked at. Scoring mechanics, like the leading side structures should reward more when enemy cap it. The 2v1 on the weakest team should not be promoted, players should want to go after the leader to keep them from increasing their lead, they shouldn't be beating up on the weakest and be content with being 2nd and not really pushing for 1st always. People shouldn't want to tank, it's one of the dumbest things that happens in wvw.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

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

    @sephiroth.4217 said:

    @subversiontwo.7501 said:

    @Jaruselka.5943 said:
    A watched pot never boils...

    Nore does a pot without fire fuming it from below.

    Or a pot without water.

    But water without a pot boils just fine in a vacuum.

    Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
    No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.

  • Cristalyan.5728Cristalyan.5728 Member ✭✭✭

    I'm thinking to a very probable situation in the future and if the Alliance system can solve it.
    Think at a player, member of several guilds. Each of the guilds is member in a different Alliance. By playing for one guild, that player may be put in the situation to fight against the other guilds he is member in. This is not an improvement of the actual situation.

    The problem with the Alliance system is that it is not a rework of the WvW starting from the base. It is a tentative to modify something already existing. But, unfortunately, the actual WvW system has so many problems that I'm afraid few changes to some aspects will not be able to make it too much different from what we have now.

    So, it is very possible to wait a lot of time for the Alliance system. And in the moment when it will be released to see that (almost) nothing changed.

  • Strages.2950Strages.2950 Member ✭✭✭

    I revived the thread mostly because over a year ago, this community was promised something major, and we've only had two mediocre updates about a system that was supposed to save/fix/improve our game mode. Instead we've been given half-baked 'features' and changes that make very little sense to the general population (3 dodge un-CC'able mounts) without much explanation at all. Even the interesting tweaks (invisible commander tag) were promptly taken away because they were 'not ready'. Ready for what? Ready for there to be no players at all?

    Honestly, at this point I'm looking at anything that will shake up WvW in a positive way. I can't even get my hopes up with these week-long events (btw Anet, just make them week-end events) because usually half the mechanics are broken anyway.

  • Kylden Ar.3724Kylden Ar.3724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    The update is that they are canceled and not happening.

    How many times we gotta tell you GRIND IS NOT CONTENT there ANet?

    Leader of Tyrian Adventure Corp [TACO], [RaW][TACO] Alliance, Kaineng.

  • Aeolus.3615Aeolus.3615 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 5, 2019

    @Kylden Ar.3724 said:
    The update is that they are canceled and not happening.

    Instead they will add rewards that happen if players avoid fights.

    New event of ktrain that will also remove enemies from map.

    New class is passive aoe 100% uptime.
    This how ic seee Anet atm.

  • enkidu.5937enkidu.5937 Member ✭✭✭

    @XenesisII.1540 said:

    @enkidu.5937 said:
    Obviously, I'm too dumb to understand what they are working on and why it takes years.

    Instead of 27 servers (EU), that are currently linked with each other to a total of 15 worlds, they want smaller compounds to handle world population more precisely, fine.

    So, what exactly is the problem? Just keep the current 27 servers and add the opportunity for guilds to create additional mini-servers aka alliances, where the more competitive players can organize themselves.

    Then create match-ups as it is now.

    Done.

    I would prefer, that the current servers and the newly created alliances get separate match makings. Then add a leaderboard, where every server / alliance gets its victory points or whatever score (since the current positions in tier 1-5 actually dont say much, because of server linking and bandwaggoning). I also would prefer a shuffle every 4 weeks, with the possibility to transfer from one server / alliance to another only in the last days before the next shuffle. If alliances and non-alliance players are put in the same world, it will be too hard for the latter ones to find ppl to play with.

    We've seen like 5 different multi guild alliances in NA the past 2 years that have formed and basically failed because they become bored, meanwhile screwing up populations after relinks and leaving vacuums in servers when they leave. Can't leave anything to players cause they'll just screw it up even more, plenty of history to support that.

    Alliances will populate servers to fill in the numbers to make all worlds as close in player numbers activity time. The system will be fully automated (it isn't right now), and can do this on a more individual level, rather than having to use a big chunk of players (current servers) to put together for a world, like a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle instead of the kiddy 27 piece giant sized ones.

    Once the automation is in place and worlds can be refreshed every two months (even that can easily change when it's automated) more evenly than now, I believe they be able to do tournaments/seasons.

    First part of their alliance system: Switching from the current transfer system to the new one (=transfers only allowed 1 week before re-linking).
    → This could have already been implemented. Because it should only take weeks, not years.

    Second part: Creating more puzzle pieces.
    → Just keep the current servers, and add a button „create alliance“, a second button „invite guild“, and a third button „We are ready!“. That would make everyone within this alliance (who chose the respective guild as „my WvW guild“) to (temporarily) leave his / her home server and instead get linked as part of this alliance for the next 8 weeks. Creating some buttons also should only take weeks, not years.

    Third part: Improve the automated linking mechanics.
    → This has to be done after the above two parts are already implemented. Improving the linking mechanics beforehand seems impracticable to me.

    So, I still dont see why what they are working on for years.

  • Baldrick.8967Baldrick.8967 Member ✭✭✭

    I hate to say 'I told you so' , so I won't.

    WVW might have one intern looking at it on a Friday afternoon if some NPC's toenail doesn't need an urgent makeover- that's about where it sits in Anet's priority list.

    Much hype when they announced it- since then it's been crickets apart from the rare statement about it still being a 'priority'. Despite there being no one actually working on it full time and no dedicated wvw team..

    At this stage I should push back my estimated release date as my first guess is looking way too optimistic...let's just say I'm not really hopeful it will ever happen in the format they first proposed.

    You can tell the love wvw gets by the number of new and exciting maps that have been released and the number of skills that are changed for wvw only to ensure balance in the mode....

  • Diku.2546Diku.2546 Member ✭✭✭
    edited July 7, 2019

    Hmm...this is just my personal observation & opinion.

    ANet should seriously be concerned when & why content providers begin to leave their game due to the toxic community that's attracted & enabled by your game design.

    I'm not the only one saying Alliances is predicted to fail because it fails to address the core problem. Population in-balance...which could be resolved by directly replacing the Match-Up mechanics that is creating a bottle-neck that allows certain servers to consistently win over 80-90% of the time since GW2 launched.

    Server Linking failed to fix this population in-balance & it destroyed Guest Server Communities in the process. Focus was to use better Team-Creation.

    Depriving the Guest Servers of their identities was the worst idea ever...we stripped them of their honor & dignity. Concepts that are intangible to measure were the primary reasons to fight for...in a cause greater than any single player, guild, or alliance of guilds could provide...imho

    We now fight for Red, Green, or Blue...it's no wonder players can turn toxic...when every link...you'll get a new Host/Guest server that you'll have to help carry or leech from.

    Alliance Linking is using the same concept of trying to improve Team-Creation....and it will next destroy Host Server Communities in the process.


    I'll sadly be there saying..."I told you so".

    You don't have to believe or agree with me, but it breaks my heart to watch these self-inflicted wounds happen over the years...but when your bottom line consistently falls out & your revenue streams consistently come up dry...it's going to make me really sad...when this game has to shut-down due to a lack of funds.

    ANet's has a huge stake in this...their financial survival is directly tied to the long-term health of communities that only exist within the WvW ecosystem...which in turn should be a primary motivation to encourage players to return & play GW2 to make purchases in their gems stores.

    Using Guilds to replace WvW servers will change the inter-personal dynamics & allow players to create toxic communities as Guild Officers decide who stays or goes in being able to win.


    Players that truly love GW2...even though they may say..."they're done with it"...will carefully continue to watch from the sidelines...please give them a good reason to return & support GW2...imho

    Please replace the actual Match-Up mechanics (Fixed 3-way Battles Locked in Bronze, Silver, and Gold Tiers) & stop fussing with the Team-Creation mechanics already...which is useless in addressing the core problem & tends to nurture the creation of a toxic community in the Long-Term.

    Yours truly,
    Diku

    Credibility requires critical insight & time.

    I think I'm done with GW2 [News + Future]
    Published on Jul 6, 2019

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Well a few things about that video...
    He was mostly talking about the twitch community being appreciative and toxic at the same time and he's tired of it. Thing is if anyone has spent time in any twitch chats you know this is how that community is overall because there are many streamers who promote trolling and toxicity, then those people go to other chats and think it's the normal thing to do, trolling and being toxic for every little thing. There are some clean streams out there, but they have to be highly moderated, and maybe Jawgeous didn't do that? and let it get to him.

    This isn't something Anet can do anything about, they don't run twitch, and they already highly moderate their own forums.

    Pvp is always going to have toxicity in it, it naturally breathes from competition, it isn't a pillow fighting where you're hitting each other giggling the entire time, which some people apparently think it should be. People need to grow some thick skin in pvp and learn to start ignoring or roll with the toxicity. But even games like league of legends have a huge amount of this and yet has a large player base and audience. If you don't want to deal with that level of toxicity then there's pve to do. There is nothing Anet can do here, there are no redesigns that can break toxicity other than removing all in game chat.

    Second part of his rant is about the future of gw2, he hated living story 4 and the future of the game is up in the air, wvw getting alliances but that will not fix the core issues, as he points out that it will go nowhere if balance isn't looked at which I highly agree with. A lot of streamers have already quit gw2, this was just one of the last few who still bothered to stream gw2.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

  • Well, they need to do something.
    Even with bonus stuff this week it feels dead, the game mode is dying on its backside.

    WvW used to have the most committed, passionate player base I've seen in any game, it's just a shame and a waste the the developers didn't share that passion.

  • @Usagi.4835 said:
    warclaw was an unnecessary change (that was welcomed by many for some strange reason)

    Not sure where people wanted Warclaw... from what I've heard through chats and forums, everyone didn't want a mount.

  • XenesisII.1540XenesisII.1540 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Only the people who couldn't navigate a map and wanted to go straight from point a to point b without getting attacked... in a pvp map.

    "Is there pvp stuff for this?" "Absolutely, eh we actually have a new armor set coming soon."
    "From the back of the room!, the one pvp fan! we got him! WoAH!"
    || Stealth is a Terribad Mechanic ||

  • Strages.2950Strages.2950 Member ✭✭✭

    @XenesisII.1540 said:
    Only the people who couldn't navigate a map and wanted to go straight from point a to point b without getting attacked... in a pvp map.

    3 dodges and no way to CC. That's a very clear stance on what Anet thinks about roaming/small scale combat in WvW.

  • Rod.6581Rod.6581 Member ✭✭

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

    There. No need to open new topic, just cos you lazy to search.

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2019

    @Bristingr.5034 said:

    @Usagi.4835 said:
    warclaw was an unnecessary change (that was welcomed by many for some strange reason)

    Not sure where people wanted Warclaw... from what I've heard through chats and forums, everyone didn't want a mount.

    Actually.... Here are some comments.

    @JayAction.9056 said:
    I just took the time to actually play first story of PoF.

    I think mounts should be usable in WvW.

    and later comments

    @JayAction.9056 said:
    REMEMBER,

    Thumbs up bros if you want to join Raptor Boiz 😎.
    Fun for everybody. Get the with the program family.

    Raptor Boiz 😎.

    That was May 2018, he got 13 thumbs up. Isn't this dude a PvP player?
    Anyway I bumped the thread if you wanted to read it for yourself.

    There's another one in April 2018 that was just linked by @DemonSeed.3528
    https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/37089/please-add-mounts-to-wvw/

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion.
    06210311 251521 121512

  • hunkamania.7561hunkamania.7561 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 9, 2019

    @XenesisII.1540 said:
    Well a few things about that video...
    He was mostly talking about the twitch community being appreciative and toxic at the same time and he's tired of it. Thing is if anyone has spent time in any twitch chats you know this is how that community is overall because there are many streamers who promote trolling and toxicity, then those people go to other chats and think it's the normal thing to do, trolling and being toxic for every little thing. There are some clean streams out there, but they have to be highly moderated, and maybe Jawgeous didn't do that? and let it get to him.

    This isn't something Anet can do anything about, they don't run twitch, and they already highly moderate their own forums.

    Pvp is always going to have toxicity in it, it naturally breathes from competition, it isn't a pillow fighting where you're hitting each other giggling the entire time, which some people apparently think it should be. People need to grow some thick skin in pvp and learn to start ignoring or roll with the toxicity. But even games like league of legends have a huge amount of this and yet has a large player base and audience. If you don't want to deal with that level of toxicity then there's pve to do. There is nothing Anet can do here, there are no redesigns that can break toxicity other than removing all in game chat.

    Second part of his rant is about the future of gw2, he hated living story 4 and the future of the game is up in the air, wvw getting alliances but that will not fix the core issues, as he points out that it will go nowhere if balance isn't looked at which I highly agree with. A lot of streamers have already quit gw2, this was just one of the last few who still bothered to stream gw2.

    Mighty Teapot is about to quit the game and i kind of wish he does it ASAP seeing that's a massive streamer and maybe they'll try to appease him but i doubt it lol

    Ferguson's Crossing Server Leader

    WVW LEADER

    VR

©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.