Karagee.6830

You must be confused. Try again with Jade Sea organised groups (like 10 players from the same guild) hounding enemy spawn camps (redvale and bluevale, greenlake and redlake) and ignoring everything else and maybe, just maybe, I'll believe you. You are in T1, Gandara in T5. Not only that, you have been in T1 most of the last link period and Gandara is always T5. The last time we played (other than at the beginning of this linking period when you were linked to Deso and we were striking) was mid December 2021, your kdr was 0.85, our kdr was 0.85, your K+D were 90k our K+D were 59k, your total score (1st place) was 467k our totals score (last) 380k. What a welcome contribution to illustrate our point made elsewhere about Gandara's situation. Now get @Chaba.5410 to reassure you about how much you were outnumbered and ganked, one time, 6 months ago, based on the numbers above and some irrelevant ANet posts. I'm pretty sure even him will have some trouble with this.

How about we increase stats, including boon duration based on how outnumbered people are and we also give random boons in combat, if they are totally outmatched? Also remove down state for people fighting outnumbered enemies. Then we're talking: 2v8 with permanent stab, protection, resistance, swiftness, quickness, alac and might, +120 to all stats and no way to rally for the larger group...the smaller group is still at a substantial disadvantage but it levels the playing field some.

Come on man nobody said 2 weeks. We tanked for 3 weeks and people came back after the 3rd consecutive unchanged status.

And I told you it's a very common occurrence for us to see PPTs split of 250+/50/30 where we either are the 50 or the 30 depending on who the linked server decides should be in 3rd to their benefit. K+D numbers shouldn't be taken in a vacuum and I always reminded you that the PPT from objectives is completely lopsided as well. Besides when you have 20% lower K+D in the same match from 2 servers compared to the winner, that is undeniably indicative of participation disparity within the tier. And if a server easily wins t5 with 40k K+D and then has 70k K+D in T4 the following week that is also indicative of population disparities. It's like saying that being the shortest student by 8 inches in your class doesn't tell you anything about your overall height. And that if the tallest student in your class is put with different class mates and he's now average or the shortest person there, that also doesn't mean anything about you being short or tall. It doesn't tell you your exact height, but it does tell you you're way below average and quite likely the shortest in the school.

You haven't claimed that Kodash was outnumbered all the time. You claimed that they were the benchmark server locked for and almost always without a link. Are you backpedalling once more? I already told you afkers are not the problem with Gandara. Virdo seems to have a problem with his server and since I respect him, unlike you, I believe him but people chilling at spawn for 10 minutes is not my experience for Gandara, otherwise I would be complaining about it and asking to remove people leaking participation from the population statistics. I assume this is a more common problem with servers that outnumber others as most objectives won't change hands frequently and running for the north camps might be a chore, so people just wait for the south camp on alpine to come off cd. Notably those people do still enter the k+d probably more than me, as properly roaming involves a lot more running.

That's not enough. They need to play only the classes they have nerfed into ground and are now unplayable in each game mode. And lets see them clearing the new strikes CMs with core classes or a setup of our choosing that is able to provide all the standard boons. I'd watch a stream of that.

Wow so you can actually understand what you quoted and you were just misrepresenting. Now let's see if you can do an extra step and reconcile how we have 2 Full+Full pairings right now and 2 medium+vhigh and all of the above.

Alright I'll make it easy for you: provide a record that shows of how many months the server was locked and how many months it was without a link. Anyone can double check this for Gandara, this is a hard fact, this is not debatable, it happened. Once you provide the same for Kodash, we'll talk on how Kodash was Gandara, before Gandara and how ANet always failed at one thing or another, doing things directly in contrast with their own official policy.

The people in that chat confirmed it was true. What exactly do you want more lol? You need a written statement under oath by the developer? Not that statements under oath have any value for you americans seeing how even your supreme court judges openly lied under oath. The dev was doing his job getting feedback on possible changes and talking to some well known members of the community for their thoughts and their advice. I see no problem there. The problem is the admitted incompetence on his part (like that he has to look for skills on the wiki because he doesn't know what they do, that he never played some classes he was going to 'balance' such as thief, warrior and ranger), the fact he disregarded or flatly ignored the advice being given to him and the total and utter lack of care and respect for you, chaba, my helpful bumper and also his valued customer.

Still with the strawmen and moving goalposts, bumpingnman? The outnumbered buff doesnt tell you about server average population. A server which is full and is constantly outnumbered at home or EB, while taking a beating in the scoring, just tells you it has a far lower population than the opponents. And since we're talking T5, it means a far lower population than anyone else. K+D and scoring are the only tools we have to account for participation. In a balanced matchup PPT scores of 250-450 by one server are unattainable (and yes we have seen 450). It may be that Anet can count participation and fails elsewhere: e.g. keeping Gandara full and with no link, having multiple Full+Full playing Medium+VHigh is done manually rather than looking at population. Everybody can see something doesn't add up somewhere, but you. And the funniest thing is you haven't provided a shred of evidence about any of these possibilities to either prove or refute them. Keep going. Btw, discord chat was confirmed to be true and accurate by multiple participants. How strange, who could have possibly seen that coming.

That is anecdotal data, which is better than the no data and hearsay you provided, and I don't get upset when people moan and whine and can't understand what they quote. At the end of the day, because you can't understand basic things, you are a useful tool bumping this thread. On Monday, if the situation doesn't change, I'll make a different thread and I look forward to you being the bumping tool once again.

Wow either we are speaking a different language or one of us does not understand English. The quote you used says servers, servers not highest population server. And those servers are used to set the links, not who is open and who is closed. From the quotes the only things you can understand are: a) they have a threshold they set and every server is compared to that threshold to determine if it's open or closed. Nothing is said about one server's population being the number they use to set the threshold and therefore that server being full by default. b) population of servers is used to set link, to prevent high population server being linked together and low population servers being linked together (which we currently have multiple examples of) As we know what they say may not be what they do, but here you are completely misrepresenting what they officially said as well.

In pvp lowest gold division, I'd say you hit about 50% of the times if you also have bull's charge to help you bait a dodge. Now, if you play condi zerker then you have more problems: you actually need to be in berserker mode to do anything, since it's the only way to do decent damage other than the fire shield from torch. So when you don't hit HB the odds of filling adrenaline and using berserker mode are almost zero, you could weapon swap a couple of times, but with no adrenaline you'll probably need to stay on mace/shield to survive so you really can't. You'll have to wait for you next HB and by then you will be dead, one or more of your teammates will be dead because you applied zero pressure or you'll have been carried hard. In the end you're forced to take signet of fury exclusively for the 30 adrenaline and open up with that while keeping HB for a more advantageous situation, like catching the edge of a dodge. For the record, in my measly gold setting, I haven't lost to a power zerker on a condi zerker on a side node this season. It doesn't really matter since we will all play shoutsworn after the patch.

lol alway the nitpicking and always the chicanery. Have you read the chat? Do you think someone would write 73,000 words (140 pages in MS Word without formatting) using names of actual people we know and recognise (none of whom has come out and denied this btw) because they are content creators, making an entire chat up? Alright, keep believing in fairies. And that is not out of context: it's the whole dump of a discord chat. I see you are not worth spending time on, you are a like a covid denier or a flat earther. I still have hope that one day, at some point in your life, you will stick to facts and logic.

As usual you move the goalposts. I did not accuse you of saying the use the full threshold to link worlds, I quoted back to you that they claim to link servers to balance population and we have 2 Full+Full and 2 medium servers linked to not full servers. Now to beat the dead horse and repeat for the 110th time: either the medium to full grading is not in line with what Anet said or the linking procedure is not in line with what they sayd. The quote doesn't say that high population servers are the benchmark. lol this is either delusion or wilful ignorance, mate. I've already explained how full servers and linked servers have double and sometimes more the K+D that Gandara has. Let's be generous here and, for the sake of argument, say Gandara is the highest population server (it's not, but we will entertain the thought) valued at 10 and the other full servers are with 10% of its population. You are claiming that 9+9=18 and 4+7=11 is a match that fulfils the requirements Anet said they follow? OK... I'm sure you can understand those quotes. Based on those quotes Anet has ever claimed they use 1 server as the benchmark, they explicitly used the plural there. And the servers with the bandwagoners always exceed that threshold and in fact we have now 2 links that are full. All of those servers have a population at least similar to Gandara and most likely higher and deserve to be without link just as much as Gandara and more, seeing they never have been without a link or have had no link for a very long time.

Look the bottom line is: I can prove Gandara has been locked for 2 years (and counting) save for a glitch when all the servers became open and has been without a link for 10 months, you cannot or are unwilling to prove the same thing for Kodash. Try back when you can, thank you.

What you say is impossible if you are truly outnumbered because while you split in 5 groups of 10 your opponent will have a group of 50 and 5 groups of 20. With this your chances of taking anything of value are next to nothing. So people will stick to 1x50 blob fighting 1x50 blob, while the second 1x50 blob or several smaller groups do some capping. Bottom line splitting in smaller groups is tactically and strategically irrelevant at the moment, because there are no balanced matchups (on EU) not in T5 and not in T1. If the stars align you can have a truly balanced matchup in a middle tier once or twice a year. If you are permanently in T5 because you are full and unlinked, getting out of T5 and avoiding playing against the same people over and over for 2 months does matter.

So you are talking about the situation in which your 50 man tag is attacking a camp on your border and you and 9 others are left to defend your keep on the other side of the map against 60 opponents? If the buff does not indicate that one side has a very tiny percentage of players on a map, then what is it indicative of exactly?

As someone almost permanently outnumbered in wvw, I get no tangible advantage from the outnumbered buff, now not even in terms of pips. And a flat boost to stats stacking with how much you are outnumbered isn't even enough, because the inherent advantage from being able to access more boons and cc in a larger group and because of limits to how many targets a skill can affect. Also downstate is stupid when one side is outnumbered, as securing kills is much harder when not impossible. Down state should disappear for whoever is fighting an opponent with outnumbered buff.

@Chaba.5410 I hope you have read carefully what ANet devs are saying privately on discord chats and you never ever bring up points on forums that read like 'but ANet's devs said this is how it works, so you need to believe it'. If those chats are legit nobody can make a case for that anymore and the glaring inability to assess participation and link servers in a rational way is only the tip of the iceberg.

ok but say you have 100-150 names you can recognise right now, because they join your tag at least once every couple of weeks, what would be different if all of them were and you were on a different server right now. You probably wouldn't see much difference at all tbh. Like I said during beta for me it was very different because we ended up running with people we have fought hard against to the point of begrudging each other in the past. And I'm sure we all enjoyed not having the guys from the other server bothering us all night (sometimes in our favour and sometimes theirs). We took out tags of 20+ trying to defend with that combined group, something we'd never be able to do separately. I'd be surprised if your experience was much different than it currently is if most people you know and usually play with are in the same alliance. And I appreciate you may have an open tag, but you'd have core people who are normally there and you could try to stick together with them.

Alliance is quite balanced. 500 people per alliance is enough for everyone to play with enough people they like. If they don't like the alliance they selected they can go solo and get assigned to a random team where they may meet and find people they like and join their alliance.

You are sure the dev will be removed but you think it might take 2 or 3 more years even if he/she is removed? I'd like to know if I have to look forward to 2 or 3 more years of no link and perma full. Or 5 or 10.

You didn't help anyone but what you quoted from Anet in that thread to make your point is: As you can see, nowhere they even stated that one server is always full by default because it is used as the benchmark for all other servers. They said they have a threshold and they compare every server to that threshold. What Anet said there is very logical, but now you're claiming that some servers, including Gandara at present, are the benchmark or heavily influence it. If this is true, the statement by Anet you quoted cannot be true or at the very least it is misleading. The quote about links also clashes hard with reality. Look at the alleged population of the EU pairings (medium to full) and tell me how it reconciles with balancing population. 2 very high+medium, 2 full+full and several other pairings are full+very high. Again, something's gotta give: either Full v Very High etc are not really indicative of the actual population (i.e. Anet cant count population) or they have a monkey selecting the links.

They can manually rotate who gets a link or they can create 2 or 3 new servers to use as link if they can't fix more troublesome issues regarding population. Alliances will happen in 5 years if we are lucky.