[Berserker burst please change the setup of F1/F2]

On 11/18/2022 at 12:14 AM, oscuro.9720 said:

These types of complaints are very much fixable by playing the spec enough to get used to it. 
 

It helps if you change how you think about it;

F1 is your burst skill. F2 is a state change. It changes your burst skill, but isn’t a burst itself. So your burst is always on F1. 
 

The current system makes more sense imo than what you’ve suggested. 

Except I never want to even use core burst in wvw or pvp even by accident. So keeping the whole zerker related skills on the same button is preferable for me, but now I can't set it up that way even if I wanted to: I need 2 keybinds, when I only need one and in the past it was one.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

3 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

It's a thread about your server, and another server you faced.

/matchup thread.

 

/gotcha

you wanna close every thread referencing a match

#Einstainlives

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

2 hours ago, SFShinigami.1572 said:

 

I can think of maybe one or two times in which Deso has had comparable numbers to Gandara at that time fri/sat and it was because we had a link that also had night people and a regular commander.  At most Deso topped at 35 and it was when we linked with RoF and there was no resistance.  The usual is 10-15.

Deso for a long time has had similar coverage to Gandara. The scoring when both servers were unlinked was close and you might have beaten Gandara once. Of course you need to keep in mind that when servers are unlinked the population also drops for everyone but probably a little less for Gandara which is used to playing alone. The main difference in those matches are typically the points accumulated at the weekend when we have better organised open tags (which are really part guild tags) than most servers and scouts.

[Enginier Golem]

1 hour ago, Justine.6351 said:

Because they didn't want people getting blown up with no chance of revival regardless of build. It's not rocket science.

You're right, it's not rocket science: 1v1 if you get downed you are going to die almost every time. It's only when it's 3v1 or 4v1 that your friends can help you...

Also define 'blown up'. Sounds very much like a skill issue to me, especially in WvW with nearly unkillable builds and so there is no need to have a mechanic for people playing poorly, just so that they can get carried by others or many others.

[How does ANET Measure Population in relations to WvW?]

2 hours ago, Morden Kain.3489 said:

This is not entirely accurate.  It is just "playhours"... as in time played.  Take the following as examples for a single map and a "single" server:

(50p x 24h x 3d) + (15p x 24h x 4d) = 5040 "playhours" (p = Players; h = Hours; d = days)

(30p x 24h x 7d) = 5040 "playhours"

In the above examples, the 30 players, rolling 24 hours a day, for 7 days has just as many "playhours", yet would be considered to have better coverage.  Therefore your "reflects coverage" is not wholly accurate.

I do agree that a queue does not mean playhours.  They are two different items of measurement.  However, a queue can be considered a reflection of playhours for the time slot it is happening (ie: Reset).

@Chaba.5410 Please explain a bit more in depth what you mean by "Playhours", or did I get the gist of your meaning in the above math?  Thank you.

Bingo. What Chaba disregarded in his analysis is that there are:

a) structural limits, ie you can't have 300 people on a map and queues are indicative of whether your team is playing at maximum capacity or not. During the beta we had times with 4 queues. 4 queues means you are clocking the maximum theoretical 'playhours' possible at that given time. No queues means you are below that threshold, but does not tell you how much. Still if others have queues and you are not they definitely outnumber you

b) there are other in-game indicators, like the horrible little red icon that says outnumbered, that your population at a given time on a map is significantly lower than the combined enemies. So if you are outnumbered on EB and your home border simultaneously, it's safe to assume you are greatly outnumbered overall and the playhours you are clocking are far below your opponents and I don't know how someone could argue the opposite

[How does ANET Measure Population in relations to WvW?]

22 minutes ago, Riba.3271 said:

Biggest flaw with server system is how 2 servers together ruins whole population balance and transfer costs. You see full status is defined by highest population server, any server that has close to same population is marked full:  If 2 servers are linked, full status does very little. It still allows people to make Full + big server combinations every 2 months and beat everyone. In addition to this, most good main servers being full or expensive, it forces people and guilds to transfer to links. This puts the population cap lower and lower overtime and the system breaks since lot of servers have so many daily hunters that they can't fit any real WvW players anymore.

Death to all PVErs! Oh wait, that includes myself also as I play all game modes except open world.

Oh yes I just remember that kill number 14 in my streak earlier this week was a guy who was idle after capping my spawn camp (I arrived late). Salty whispers ensued because I jumped him and didn't wait until he finished whatever he was doing.

[How does ANET Measure Population in relations to WvW?]

3 hours ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Oh so tiresome.

 

 

That's what having coverage means.

 

 

 

It seems some guys playing on NA fail to communicate in English properly, but maybe you would feel more comfortable with Spanish and BB after all... Which goes to show, language considerations are largely overblown if we're struggling this way!

Having 'round the clock coverage' does not mean 'having coverage'. As I very clearly stated any server with equal numbers and no coverage at prime time would win every match with the current system. That is not round the clock coverage and it was as clear as it could possibly be.

[How does ANET Measure Population in relations to WvW?]

18 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Anet probably wouldn't even need to check on timezones either if players manage to organize themselves into alliances with round the clock coverage.

 

It's funny how the very first alliance in the game all the way back in 2012 showed the flaw of the system, but also showed how to win the game, yet barely anyone has managed to replicate it in 10 years, it might come back after WR if the stakes are high enough for players to bother. But most players don't care for anything else other than their own time of play is stacked.

You don't need coverage around the clock. You need to:

a) outnumber your opponents in the majority of time slots (so generally off-peak since peak has hard caps in place and it may be literally impossible)

b) crucially greatly outnumber the opponents before the start of the off-peak (so late night in the last populated time zone) so you can upgrade an insurmountable amount of objectives on multiple maps, while the opponents have a bunch of paper stuff and whoever is playing during off-peak has an easy time maintaining the status quo, defending T3 towers and keeps and flipping paper targets.

On EU an alliance with equal numbers and zero coverage at prime time would just easily win every match with the current scoring system.

[How does ANET Measure Population in relations to WvW?]

29 minutes ago, Chaba.5410 said:

I don't understand why people get so confused about playhours and queues.  The "population" status of worlds is based on playhours, or number of hours a player spends in WvW.  Queues are based on actual players trying to get on a map and have little to do with playhours.

Playhours reflects coverage.  If your server is full of grinders who PPT and Ktrain all day and inflate the playhours, that's not anyone else's problem.  If your server was overstacked with a PvE population prior to the algorithm change, you have more casuals than anyone else who can suddenly enter WvW and add playhours.  World restructuring will remove those casuals as servers are removed.

There is no confusion. There is the reality that Gandara that has no coverage morning and afternoon and we also are outnumbered 5 evening/nights a week. So our playhours, as you put it, cannot logically be higher than many other servers who do have queues AND have very strong PPT in the morning/early afternoon. Now, if they do not count exactly total playhours, but perhaps only specific time-slots or each time-slot is weighted (so prime time will have a higher weight) then it may be possible that we appear larger than we actually are. However as we have no queues at prime time, it just shows we don't hit the map cap and, whatever that is, it's a hard number that is the same for every team. I experienced 15x, 20x the amount of queues during the beta than I do during my normal WvW play and that may be an understatement.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

9 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

You're right I use text to speech, but even my text to speech program didn't want to read your brick.

Please throw out another insult, it's all you've been doing in this matchup thread.

 

Calling someone bad or incompetent in the game mode and asking that Anet to help them is an insult now? Good to know. I wonder how we ended up with Mechanist...

Also again creative comprehension and misdirection, it's a recurrent trait evidently. This is no matchup thread, any server that has to play them for 2 months will tell you the same thing. It's a general problem with EU WvW and it all stems from decisions Anet made, that can and should be improved. Which is what I'm asking. This thread is not about Gandara or Riverside and their match with BB, it is about this odd outlier we have, subject to special rules different from anyone else, that Anet has created.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

3 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

TLDR I only read TheGrimm brick of words.

That seems like a stretch.

Don't wanna get banned by the usual unhinged mod (he knows who he is) for someone that really doesn't matter...

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

28 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

/travoltalooksaround

Pretty sure you started this thread....

And you are whining about BB....

Are you talking to your mirror right now?

🤡

 

An attempt at deflection but unfortunately pretty mediocre! lmao

In any case you are wrong, someone didn't do too well in English literature. I'm not complaining about BB. They are highly farmable to the point of boredom. If they leave them like this they will keep being bad and they will keep getting farmed by both servers they outnumber and servers outnumbered by them. So treat them like everyone else. I didn't bring up population difference, that's a problem that is obvious to see, but it's people like you like who like talk about that. BB is a running joke on EU servers because they need to call a large blob to kill a few roamers, if they had a population similar to Riverside they would lose every match in a calendar year and I mean literally every week for 52 weeks they would come last in T5. In the past full BB 50 man squads were also known to run away at the first sight of much smaller enemy blobs (and that was a much smarter tactic, I must say). So yeah, I don't think closing them is a viable long-term solution. And asking the devs have a good look at this situation and that they are treated the same way as everyone else is not complaining or whining. What's the worst that could happen anyway? They may have similar numbers as the stackatron, but in their case it would make absolutely no difference, they wouldn't even come close to T1.

In any case, in 10 days we will probably have a link because considering how many servers are currently full EU Gandara has dropped its playing population enough. Apparently we are the benchmark and everyone that is full on EU has a higher population than us even with the skewed Anet metrics that obviously overstate ours.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

25 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

/slow clap

I play on NA, try again.

Right, so why don't you ask to have the same situation as EU? Go on make my day.

Note that the BB situation you are whining about, as usual, could be replicated for any other server. There is ZERO logical reason to treat one server in a different way than anyone else. IRRESPECTIVE of what players said, they could pick 2 servers, I don't care which ones, it can be any of Gandara, Desolation, SFR, Drakkar, Elona, AR, Piken, GH etc, and treat them the same way as BB. Never full, never linked. Their population would get close to BB and you'd have more balanced matches (participation-wise)

See how easy it is? They just need to manually open 2 servers at very high or high (until they reach a larger population similar to BB) and keep them that way.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

12 minutes ago, Xenesis.6389 said:

Gandara now wants another server closed, while crying on behalf of that server to also get a link, probably in hopes anet would also consider giving them a link in the process. It's the newly updated "open bg" strat. 🤭

The only joke around here is Gandara comes to the forums to cry about being full, having no link, outnumbered all day every day, no commanders to be seen, unjustly stuck in tier 5, while at the same time also admit to purposely tanking. Don't worry, relinks are next week, I'm sure you'll get a link again, and all your fair weathers will log back in, while you all pretend a medium server somehow fully ppt carries your server back to dominate tier 1, and brag about your roamer kdr that puts zerg servers to shame.

/mic drop

🙄

 

They tried, players said no.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Hypothetically-Speaking-New-Worlds/6173458

Poor thing, you have been really owned hard by Gandarans haven't you? There are more positive ways to take out your frustrations.

I'm simply asking to normalise BB and treat them like everyone else. They will benefit the most since they can't fight to save their lives.

Also, Riverside has definitely fewer players than us. I have no problem admitting that. It's not hard to see and I tell it like it is both when we are outnumbered and when we outnumber.

Participation for servers without a link just plummets naturally, you don't have to tank. You have to tank, while despite this hard cold truth, you are still Full and unlinked for stretches of 6-8 months.

Now go cry somewhere else please.

[Enginier Golem]

ops

[Enginier Golem]

So that we are clear on Mech: the golem stun (F3) that some people mentioned is so bad that if you by any chance press it, you will see your golem running around chasing people and not doing anything, no damage, nothing, just strutting around. i don't wanna think about people who set it on autocast. Anyway, the golem needs to get almost in melee range of the target enemy and will do a very obvious jump, so your opponent has ample times to move out of range (with superspeed, blinks and other movement abilities) or very easily dodge/evade frame the cc.

When I played mech in spvp, where arguably sky circus, or whatever it's called, is more useful since it affects 5 people, I immediately swapped to the pve dps option (jade mortar?) which has 1200 range and does not stop the robot from using auto-attacks from range. Besides if you think of using it in a group fight on a node, you better be sure you have someone to strip the enemy stability otherwise it's again useless. 

And even in down state as a mechanist, you still want your mech to dps, because the procs and the damage may get the opponent down, while the cc ability will do almost nothing other than delaying you being stomped by the few seconds it takes to dodge. And again the robot trotting around is actually extremely counterproductive, you may be already dead by the time the robot reaches its target.

[Enginier Golem]

8 hours ago, Justine.6351 said:

I assume you either play a safe build or a glass cannon.

Assume what you want. Assuming others only play 1 build tells me everything I need to know about you already...

And downstate in this game in both competitive modes is just awful. At least in pvp you are forced into an equal number fight and you can't rally off NPCs, so it's at least tolerable. In WvW it's simply one of the dumbest game design in the game and it's just total garbage that should have never made it to a live version of the game.

[How to fix WvW (personal opinion)]

I have to say the reasoning about alliances beta is spot on. I play on a server that is usually unlinked and virtually never has queues (there may be a small one at reset and at the weekend at prime time on one map). Alliances beta: 3-4 queues, the EB queue being 60-70. And because the amount of players didn't change and the amount of matches didn't change then it means that this is the day-to-day week-to-week reality for other servers...

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

A merger is the opposite of that however. Its another server taking over your indentity and claiming it as their own. People crying server pride and whatnot might have issues.

Who are these people? Let them speak for themselves, because most of the small servers have seen significant movements of people, so it would be very surprising if they do have any form of identity beyond their guilds.

But they could also just create 3 new empty servers with free transfers and give everyone a link. Also this excuse that because they are the only Spanish server they deserve to be an exception and never Full should really stop. If they bought into the alliance concept where player language will not factor at all in the world structure, there is no reason right now to make an exception for BB. Lock them, give them links once or twice a year like everyone else.

Before someone starts screaming alliances are coming so this is pointless, I don't wanna go down the rabbit hole of discussing how many years of 'alliances are coming' we've seen. Now it's been a very long time we've had betas for it, as well. 

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

19 hours ago, Khenzy.9348 said:

Funny how bitter you sound that you resort to make a generalization and call all Baruch players bad while also making an underhanded flex about you killing them while outnumbered, very petty and immature. Baruch has some extremely competent players.

 

Funny that at the times I play (noon and early afternoon) we (Baruch) are the ones always extremely outnumbered and I (a solo roamer) have 99,99% of my deaths while outnumbered and ganked 3 to 1 at a bare minimum.

 

Our perspectives seem to be diametrically opposed huh? Baruch just has a few more people at night but it's completely barren and outnumbered at the times I play. It's a server with different time peaks, it doesn't make it any better or worse than any other server, just different.

lol a 'few' more people, must be nice living in the nile wherever you are from. Explain what you see here:https://ibb.co/RcXGHw2. For your information I have some devs I spotted in the past in WvW which play at night and whom I asked to record PPT scores like 440-8-0 (BB being the 440), multiple times in the last 3 weeks and I invited to send those pictures to their bosses, so that it's clear to everyone what people are talking about when they talk about your numbers (which was not my point but here we are). As an anecdote: this week at 3am spanish time I am cataing my garri on my own, fully intending on capping it by myself. One of you comes, doesn't dare coming at me, so I pull him from the wall and kill him. 2 more come and they attack me. Killed them both also. 1 minute later a 35+ blob arrives. 3am CET. To kill one person lol. I still got 6+3 points and you got 0 out of it, which is why you can't win with equal numbers and you need a link to learn from, but THIS is how you operate.

There is a reason why we start our matches with a 1.8-1.9 kdr and you at 0.5-0.6 and then, lo and behold, we are at 1.2 at the end of the week. There is also a reason why despite your numbers you can't manage a kdr close to 1 in any match, even the ones you win, and you can't beat teams that are close to you in numbers.

BB is the worst server on EU skill wise. Just take the link, accept being closed for the duration of it (because people can still join you through the linked server) and be grateful that the rest of us are merciful.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

2 hours ago, muerte.3842 said:

What BB problem? https://ibb.co/RcXGHw2

Surely working as intended?

I mean you don't want a fair matchup do you?

I mean BB having squads that can take your bay, hills and garri on home / EB at the same time while you try and defend with less than 10 people is not an issue right? (each squad with 30+)

but that map's not even that bad: they will get enemy garrisons to T2 and T3 because they have so many people that have nothing to do and so they defend those! 🙂 I mean, I've seen the map on weekdays around this time or later...

And next week they will be farmed by equal or superior number teams and will be last again. Nothing new, but something needs to be done.

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

2 hours ago, Svarty.8019 said:

Everyone except Gandara. They are exploiters of the system and deserve no link.

yeah the exploiters who got no link 8 months out of 12? Sounds legit mate...

you wanna spot when Gandara tanks (and it's happened for a few weeks in the last 2 years when people got fed up of not having a link, nobody has ever been quiet about it)? It's very easy: watch as the number of  'Full' servers magically goes from 2-3 to 8...

[Berserker burst please change the setup of F1/F2]

Not sure who had the brilliant idea of having skills moving slots depending on whether you are in berserk mode or not, but please move him/her to another department. Keep all zerker related skills on F1 or on F2 and the same for core skills, no flip flopping and please consider that berserk mode may end abruptly and while you wanted to use the berkerker burst skill, maybe you have no use for blowing resources on core burst, but you still might accidentally, because the skill has changed position.. 

[Enginier Golem]

Just remove downstate from any competitive mode, especially WvW. One less thing to balance around. Problem solved. 

[Do something about Baruch Bay]

16 minutes ago, Aeolus.3615 said:

Players complaining to something that is intended in game. 😛

Expect massive organized alliance vs randoms RNG aliances of no guild players and small guilds to keep the same Ktrain lvl ;), or big alliances vs empty alliances... sooon.

What's intented? Servers of higly farmable stock allowed to grow with no criteria? Since they are the only exception in the entire game, I beg to differ.

Give them a link, at least they will learn from the linked server.