Custodio.6134

shouldn´t be necessary, since your post did not include anything that can actually be tracked back to a specific player. As i said before, your post is too vague to do anything, and at wors it will just get closed by a moderator

if you have an NVIDA-GPU, it´s very easy to provide the evidence needed (dunno about other manufaturers though): NVIDIA GeForce Experience allows to automatically record a set amount of time constantly, and save it as a replay if necessary. this allows to provide any evidence needed, as long as you also show the account-names involved via the method i explained before

block the player(s), then check your block-list for the newly added accounts. You can also just empty your block-list beforehand and note down the players you had blocked before to get their account-names. So while it´s a bit more complicated, it IS possible to exactly identify the accounts involved. this is irrelevant, because the forums are not the right place to report players. From the Forums Code of conduct ( https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/the-forums-code-of-conduct/ ):

first: a message in the forums will accomplish nothing, especially with the lack of information required. second: we´ve had this in our guild very recently, where one of our mates also contacted support about similar issues/exploits. The response is simple: Without any clear information, there is nothing that can be done. They need AT LEAST the account-names of the people involved, as well as concrete evidence about what happened (in other words: video evidence, since that´s basically the only form of media you can provide that shows exactly what´s going on). Also, just to note: "all from the guild [SA]" doesn´t allow to find those players AT ALL. because guild-tags are NOT unique. We don´t even know which megaserver your are on. which team. when it happened. what players (accounts) were involved. And the most critical part: you provided ZERO evidence that this actually happened. I don´t doubt that what you said is true, but neither are the forums the right place, nor are you providing anything substantial that may lead to consequences for the exploits

not only are queues not visible, but sometimes the queue-popup comes up even if there isn´t actually a queue. relogging to loading-screen over and over again eventually lets you join the map

Exactly. This team creation is bound to be inaccurate, because 1. It's based on player data from the old servers, which does not fully reflect the way people play now (only to a certain degree) 2. We don't have any data to adjust post-WR balancing yet. It will take at least until next team creation to fully take the intended effect (perhaps even longer) 3. Players most likely are also playing differently than usual due to the system being new. Meaning: previously more active players that dislike wr probably become less active, while previously less active players that are excited about it play more 4. There even may be some bugs that didn't show up in the betas (but at least not a single player from the "alliance" I am in got placed wrong, so that's at least looking good) 5. Also, people that were used to steamrolling enemies will now face more resistance on average, which may frustrate them to the point of stopping to play. Which further distorts the balancing A good indicator of the current population being unusual is the fact that both, NA and EU each got an additional tier of matches. So we have an unusual high amount of players, if the system judges additional tiers to be necessary. So, at least 20% of things that may look bad at first could just be caused by the players, and the majority of issues left may even sort itself out naturally. Which makes any judgement at this point in time completely pointless

Yes, they said they were attempting to DEVELOP alliances, this is true. but at no point did they say they would RELEASE alliances. development =/= releases all announcements of anything being launched (be it in temporary beta-state, permanent beta-state or permanent full release) have been about world restructuring WITHOUT alliances

correct. ANet never announced alliances to be launched. whenever ANet talked about the betas, they ALWAYS talked about world restructuring, NOT alliances, so thank you for confirming my point

This only shows how disconnected people are from their WvW-communities. We have known for YEARS now that it will eventually come And we have known for over half a year (shortly before the previous temporary beta in January) that WR would come this year. We´ve also been told in March that the next beta is intended to be permanent And finally, we got noticed in May, that WR is coming with the exact date of yesterday. So, you had over a month to prepare from the last anouncement. This was also constantly discussed every time new info dropped within the WvW-communities. Don´t pretend there was no way for preparation, because.... there was FAR more than enough time and opportunity to prepare. If there weren't, all those "alliances" that exist now and are properly organized couldn´t exist (and there are quite a lot of them actually). Don´t blame your inability, des-interest or laziness to organize with other people on anyone else than yourself.

I´ll bet they expected a complete overhaul of skill-balance, a new billion-dollars datacenter just for WvW and a free god of WvW title-box (the title is rainbow-colored), and now are upset that we got EXACTLY what we were told

I've seen servers die, revive and die again an uncountable number of times over the course of the years, so that's factually false. Yes, the server still exists, even if it dies out. But even with linking, it was regularily obvious that some servers are straight up dead (in those cases, being linked with one of the dead servers, or not being linked at all literally made zero difference in the amount of people you met in those linkings).

playing since release, i have experienced this exactly ONCE in a community-guild. However: that was not exactly a single person (despite the, at that time, the "owner" of the community-guild being involved), but rather a bunch of guilds. So what happened was effectively: owner of the voice-server and the community-organizers in the comm-guild transferred with a bunch of guilds, kicking everyone from the community-guild that didn´t go with them, and then shut down voice right before the reset they mass-transferred. again, in my 7 years that i played actively (technically since release, but with a big break inbetween) i have experienced this exactly ONCE. Despite there being drama every now and then, and the players on the server frequently not being in aggreement with each other. and yet, nothing drastically has ever taken place (and despite some people potentially attempting this, they never succeeded). I´m not saying that it cannot happen, and it probably WILL happen in a guild at some point. But this ALSO can totally happen in a server-system (considering this already HAS happened before)

That is a Game-Balance issue, not a world-structure one, so WR doesn't change anything (and it's also not supposed to, since that's a totally different dev team and system responsible for that). Again, a general Game-System issue that is unaffected by WR And WR is limiting this, creating an overall better population balancing due to limits in guild size (and potentially limiting transfers in general, because we don't even know if ANet will allow mid-season transfers. So far we only know that ANet is considering it, but we have no confirmation if it actually will be a thing or not). Currently a world consists of a lot more players (presumably between 1000-1500 players if not more, considering inactive players are not accounted for, yet are still assigned to servers). With WR you're limited to stacking 500 players max, hard capping how much you can overstock a single team (it will probably still be possible in some way, but it cannot be abused even remotely as much as with servers, considering transfers before relink, but after new links were already decided is simple to abuse)

Exactly. And that has always been the case, but the players themselves had far less ways to actually influence that. With the new system, you have the choice. You can choose to find any type of guild/"alliance" (and if you actively look for one you WILL find one that suits you). Or you choose not to do, then you need.to live with the consequences

Well, I can only speak for the "alliance" we found during the betas, and this shows an entirely different picture, despite not even being a "stacked" (500 players) guild. In February we had ~300 members total out of which are ~8 guilds accounting for 200 members ~ 100 non-guilded players, including public zerglings and roamers 11 commanders that were willing to tag up public (but even more "non-stablished" commanders actually tagged up) Total numbers have increase a bit since then (but not by much) and during the beta we had a blast. Plenty of publics, guilds working together with pugs, good general activity with everyone, roamers, small-scale, guilds and zergs. The MAIN problem is not WR, but the unwillingness of players to organize themselves with anyone else (the people of their server that they "value" so "highly", quotation marks intended)