MaLeVoLenT.8129

"World restructuring, commonly referred to as the Alliance system, remains our top priority for WvW. " Cool and swell till you realize WvW isn't even a priority to begin with right. 4 Living Story teams right.

bro gvg us xD I don't GvG.

ArenaNet: We messed up. They are going CRAZY on us. They know we don't care about WVW!!! Quick Do something fast!

"Typically If you're into WvW, you're really into PvE."

Curious - what happened to the 'Alliance' on KN - Mal et al? They seem to be in the process of moving off, OR they finally fell apart. I still see Mal's dorito and OnS tags up here and there, but by and large it's a hot mess. Maybe one of them will see and respond before this gets locked for being a matchup thread. I really wish they'd just dump the links until alliances are ready and let KN go back to being a >T5 world in peace again. Owls, RaW, TACO, and others miss it being a mostly havoc tier. And while I'm not going to knock the Alliance's idea of fun, it's not a good mix with the OG Kaining folks. We just don't mesh well. No. Nope. Not going to happen. The alliance is fine. No plans on leaving. Coverage is coverage and PPT is PPT. Sometimes we're about that life sometimes we're not. Sometimes it depends on our link or just IRL. Let's be honest... The game hasn't changed. Under 1 up 1 Down Tier 4 isn't a great depiction on who is "dying" or "suffering" and at large we're happy to float between T3 and T4. Syike we're moving to FA. Well, I can't say I'll miss you all when you move, but you do you. One thing we agree on is that the fun in this mode is what you make of it. You do you. I'd be happy if they just killed links till alliances so KN could go back to our old small scale in T6 to T8, and you could have your big fights in T4-T5. Still gonna need some proof on that, since I am pretty sure I saw @MaLeVoLenT.8129 in WvW just this weekend. They might be in process of moving, but they are not gone yet. Huh, unless he posted from jail it looks like you folks are a bunch of false rumormongers... I don't know you to miss you nor do I care for your opinion.

Those guys are only in it for the fights. They spend most of their logged in time (about 4 hours out of the day), fighting other players and they want to be T3 where the fights are more evenly matched. The "problem" is that anyone not in their group gets pushed into a tier that effectively runs over anything not in one of those guilds and spends the rest of the day defending paper whereas in T4 the opposite happens. They also split their time with EU so we don't always have a raid running. T3 also tends to have coverage where T4 is mostly devoid of coverage. Many players log in, check the score and if it is ugly or there isn't a commander log out which has been an issue since day one. This feeds on itself and causes most "casuals" or "guildless" to stop logging in beyond the daily. This in turn exacerbates an already out-manned servers ability to be competitive. Please note I am not complaining about the fight guilds. They should be able to enjoy WvW in their own way and I support that. The system itself is at fault both for servers that are chronically under-manned as well as those that are in the Kaineng situation. We get burnt out from PPT. This is year 6 for a lot of us and we've been playing the game consistently for that long. My guild has done everything in this game in terms of coverage and ppt during this time and we've been fighting the same people for just that long as well. In some ways you hit the nail on the head. We log on largely to enjoy ourselves and kick it with our friends. There isn't much that can surprise or shock us with WvW these days. OnS also doesn't split our time, we recently took in the MI player base and created a second division we're trying to build up. So our focus atm, is shifting for the moment to more the of the guild. Plus on the NA side, Bullyfoot and Roy is hosting another tournament. We might gear ourselves to enter. The score is ugly because of the bandwagon that happened after relinks when Arena Net opened all servers, and AR HoD, and NSP got stacked which were the servers we've been constantly fighting ever since. Because those servers are fat in certain timezones, they've been sustaining us this entire relink cycle in terms of activity and fights, hence the KDR. I wouldn't call OnS a fighter guild, we're still hybrid and choose when we want to focus on fights or PPT depending on the situation at large.

Curious - what happened to the 'Alliance' on KN - Mal et al? They seem to be in the process of moving off, OR they finally fell apart. I still see Mal's dorito and OnS tags up here and there, but by and large it's a hot mess. Maybe one of them will see and respond before this gets locked for being a matchup thread. I really wish they'd just dump the links until alliances are ready and let KN go back to being a >T5 world in peace again. Owls, RaW, TACO, and others miss it being a mostly havoc tier. And while I'm not going to knock the Alliance's idea of fun, it's not a good mix with the OG Kaining folks. We just don't mesh well. No. Nope. Not going to happen. The alliance is fine. No plans on leaving. Coverage is coverage and PPT is PPT. Sometimes we're about that life sometimes we're not. Sometimes it depends on our link or just IRL. Let's be honest... The game hasn't changed. Under 1 up 1 Down Tier 4 isn't a great depiction on who is "dying" or "suffering" and at large we're happy to float between T3 and T4. Syike we're moving to FA.

Guild leaders still have this power today. when they kick people and transfer off a said server. Its in reality no different. Considering a pug can transfer despite alliances to play with whom they want. Kicking them out of a guild doesn't boot them off the server until the end of week 8. The matchmaking system would take your friends and who you play with into account, as the mega world system already does when it places you in an Lions Arch. Currently if you get kicked out of your wvw, guild you can still play with your friends because they are on the same server as you, with the new system, if you get kicked out of your wvw guild, after 8 weeks when the wvw matches reset, that will no longer be the case.Thats what I just said. But you are still match made as an individual based on whom you play with. So the chances of you still being on the same world after the reshuffle given your example is still pretty high. Even if it messes up, you can still transfer as Arena Net pointed out.

Guild leaders still have this power today. when they kick people and transfer off a said server. Its in reality no different. Considering a pug can transfer despite alliances to play with whom they want. Kicking them out of a guild doesn't boot them off the server until the end of week 8. The matchmaking system would take your friends and who you play with into account, as the mega world system already does when it places you in an Lions Arch.

This comment is generally for ArenaNet. I don't see the point in giving a title for the current world you're on, when the system we're coming from invokes us to transfer. It would make more sense for that title to be rewarded based on the server your account has been on the longest. If you give a title for the current world you're on, what you'll then see is people mass transferring just for the right server title before all servers are ripped apart. Secondly, if you want to provide time for guilds and players to join up and form alliances before the alliance overhaul drops, you should probably open all servers and allow us to do just that. My second point isn't a big deal, but it would help some.

I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless. a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though.. Super effective just the same as a 5-8 man group? If your 25 person group is just as effective as a 5-8 person group you're doing something wrong. If you're just as effective as a 25+ person group then why are you afraid to tag, you're adding only a fraction of total wvw time to your guild's total wvw hours?No read again. I said a 25 man can be Super effective just the same as a 5- 8 man can be super effective. I did not say they will put in the same amount of work or do the samethings. I said they can both be super effective within their given play styles. Those play styles may differ, but who are you to say what is and isnt effective based off my play style?

I can follow that rookie players may think the map's empty if they can't find a pin, but on the flipside if they can find a pin, then running a second pin isn't always constructive. I'm running in tagless squads of 5-10 fairly frequently. We'll often be running in a different part of the map than the main commander, who needs the bodies. We don't have enough to make a significant difference to a zerg fight, but we do have enough to pick off upgraded towers and keeps where the other servers are distracted by the larger force. Picking up 5-10 rookies on top of that will just scale up NPCs and feed the enemy servers more bags if their zerg comes and forces us to bail. This may make it sound like tagless squads could actually be more effective in certain situations, but I suspect the tagged squads still win out due to PPK. Oh I agree and my group of 5-8 friends that I run around with regularly do similar things. I just get frustrated when I see a group of 25+ people running tagless.a group of 25 can be super effective just the same though..

They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too. You're confusing opinion with fact. If you have a guild of 50 people, and they all average 100 hours a week (just using nice round numbers here to make math easy), and you have larger squads so they double your commanders wvw time so you magically have 200 hours. That extra 100 hours on your 50 person guild with 5000 total hours for the week is pretty small. Just a little food for thought.their numbers in calculation are estimations and examples.. Yet still 50 adds up considering the number of commanders on a serverThat small number could mean the difference of size capacity, world capacity amonst other things.

I guess? Possibly? Though I personally doubt that would be something you could use to reliably determine such a niche thing. That's game politics/trolls and something a metric can't solve in of itself. Aye. With regards to tagless commanders, even if my proposed metric is not strictly true for an individual, for the sake of a metric it is better than nothing. Said player would at least (hopefully) have competency in the game mode that they could be a passable commander if they absolutely needed to be if nothing else? I can't really imagine any other way they could judge the metric of tagless commanders when the metric they could use, the tag, isn't being used. lol I just wouldn't use commander hood as a metric. I think their are other metrics they could use. Or they could perhaps use the commander metric but not directly in relation to player hours.

They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts. That's the type of commanding that leads servers to fail. People log in to see if there's a tag to run with, and see nothing so they log out or go do other things. Then they start complaining that wvw is dead. If you're doing it so you don't get pin sniped guess what that part doesn't matter they'll eventually figure out who the commander is, if the enemy zerg can find the commander without seeing the tag I'd be willing to bet Anet could too.You're confusing opinion with fact.

You should understand that such a metric is difficult to measure since players who command tagless are willingly opting out of the metric they would use to measure this. It is something Anet should consider though as it certainly is something that happens. Something along the lines of: If this player has an ungodly amount of time in WvW + owns a tag, but with fewer hours on tag than should be expected, player is potentially a tagless commander. Something like that. Yes such a metric is difficult to measure which is my entire point.

They could probably also look at who throws siege in a tagged squad or even who is throwing siege in a tagless squad. You only hurt yourself and any community building opportunities if you run a tagless squad. thats not true. As a guild whose ran tagless and tagged plenty of times there is a tactical advantage to running without a pin. If I'm large enough as well in my own squad, I do not need a pin. Meanwhile, a large number of guilds actually prefers to run this way as people pointed out. This will continually invoke that. Arena Net has once said they don't want private commander tags because they want to promote everyone playing together. Well this goes against that. If they want to promote public commanders, they shouldn't hinder them for their efforts.

And what if I command without a pin. You saying that you will hinder a alliance size or world size based off someones commanding potency. Makes me not want to wear a pin what so ever. Honest question here but... why? I mean, what detriment is there to wearing the pin if you are already doing everything else? if they are going to add on 50 more hours to my play time because i command large forces simply for wearing a pin they will adjust me, the preferred way for any fighter is to run without a pin anyway. People will start to do this more so and I will to because its unfair to add on hours played just because I'm an effective commander. Its even more harsh to limit said world, guild or alliance based off someone commanding. It absolutely is fair. It's not just you getting higher hours, it's ALL commanders. All worlds will be calculated with the commanders getting higher hours. It can't get any fairer. And if you choose to run without a pin, then so be it. You will be less effective. so If I dont wear a pin and be just as effective because lets say I have a well oiled coordinated alliance. I get away from being adjusted with 50 more play hours. Got cha. Say what you will, but you simply will not be as effective. Small advantages that occur while following a pin add up eventually.That depends on the size of my guild and alliance and coordinated folk around me.

There's only so much any model can do to predict what would happen if this group is paired with that against another group paired with two others. All ANet can do is identify the factors that are highly correlated with even matches. Hours played is clearly going to be the biggest factor; everything else is going to be used to modify how they use hours played. People who tag up are going to have a disproportionate influence over people who don't; guilds that play together will impact outcomes more than guilds that play at varying times. Big guilds with high rep will dominate over even tight-knit smaller ones with high rep. My hope is that they identify more factors than they plan to use on day 1 and setup the formulas so they can tweak ratios and breakpoints and add (or remove) factors from the formula, without having to overhaul the system again. The two issues I see running tagless isIn the new world restructuring, not only do you want to balance play hours but you would want to balance commanders.Maps with no tags will be the biggest deterrent to WvW growth because players look for a pin when they enter the map. We've all told new players, "go to a map, find pin, follow pin, get on TS".Yeah I thought they would want to encourage more pins not sway them from pinning at all.

And what if I command without a pin. You saying that you will hinder a alliance size or world size based off someones commanding potency. Makes me not want to wear a pin what so ever. Honest question here but... why? I mean, what detriment is there to wearing the pin if you are already doing everything else? if they are going to add on 50 more hours to my play time because i command large forces simply for wearing a pin they will adjust me, the preferred way for any fighter is to run without a pin anyway. People will start to do this more so and I will to because its unfair to add on hours played just because I'm an effective commander. Its even more harsh to limit said world, guild or alliance based off someone commanding. It absolutely is fair. It's not just you getting higher hours, it's ALL commanders. All worlds will be calculated with the commanders getting higher hours. It can't get any fairer. And if you choose to run without a pin, then so be it. You will be less effective.so If I dont wear a pin and be just as effective because lets say I have a well oiled coordinated alliance. I get away from being adjusted with 50 more play hours. Got cha.

What if i have 50 players all running a commander pin. goofing off in wvw(this has happened) what is Arena Net going to do? increase everyones play time by 50?Of course this is a flawed example but you get the point. Pins are used for strategy and coordination. They should not be used to determine server status or or they shouldn't increase someones play time for wearing one.

There's only so much any model can do to predict what would happen if this group is paired with that against another group paired with two others. All ANet can do is identify the factors that are highly correlated with even matches. Hours played is clearly going to be the biggest factor; everything else is going to be used to modify how they use hours played. People who tag up are going to have a disproportionate influence over people who don't; guilds that play together will impact outcomes more than guilds that play at varying times. Big guilds with high rep will dominate over even tight-knit smaller ones with high rep. My hope is that they identify more factors than they plan to use on day 1 and setup the formulas so they can tweak ratios and breakpoints and add (or remove) factors from the formula, without having to overhaul the system again. I dont expect them to identify someone commanding without a pin which is why I think this metric is a terrible idea. Guilds already command without pins. We have an entire server that is very well known to swarm without a pin. For them to hinder commanders and increase they're play hours for helping their community, when they dont have to and when they're playing the same time as everyone else is unfair and because of this, more people will choose not to wear a public pin. But that will not stop them for continually commanding. Overall this is a very bad thing to track and when you bring in the coordination of alliances .

Let's be careful, however, not to overstate the actual numbers or the importance of the metric. The link doesnt show linked pairs. Linked servers can equate or surpass blackgate. Still BG singularly doubles that of the average server and linked pairs dont make up the difference due to lack of organization and time used to make a solid effort to compete.

And what if I command without a pin. You saying that you will hinder a alliance size or world size based off someones commanding potency. Makes me not want to wear a pin what so ever. Honest question here but... why? I mean, what detriment is there to wearing the pin if you are already doing everything else? if they are going to add on 50 more hours to my play time because i command large forces simply for wearing a pin they will adjust me, the preferred way for any fighter is to run without a pin anyway. People will start to do this more so and I will to because its unfair to add on hours played just because I'm an effective commander. Its even more harsh to limit said world, guild or alliance based off someone commanding.

And what if I command without a pin. You saying that you will hinder a alliance size or world size based off someones commanding potency. Makes me not want to wear a pin what so ever.