Riba.3271

Points didn't matter when the server system was in place either, unless you were playing for pride, Capturing mattered because your team still learnt things and you pushed peoples playhours up. If you want people to get used to eating lot of hamburgers, best way is to put hamburgers restaurants around the country. Same applies to providing WvW content: If you PPT at 2 pm, it will also lead to having more players and experience at 6 pm. Also there was actual competition regarding points, and it was no different than trying to clear PvE raids or winning sPVP games. Or are you saying people shouldn't try their best to win for their team? The person above you, who said they couldn't find any tags during off-hours. He didn't say he was tagging up and actually what he said was "I am not crazy enough to tag up myself".

This is a tricky one to solve, because there's only so many people who are willing to tag in the first place. You can try and spread them out, which the Restructuring system purports to do, but commanding and tagging is inherently player-driven, not game-driven. If you don't see any tags around, you can always throw one up yourself, and it's an excellent opportunity to get involved with organizing the community and achieving some goals while making friends as well. People don't tag off hours anymore because: - If they were not leading on voice comm, they were most likely playing for points. Points don't matter with server system gone. - If they were on voice comms, then it is impossible to get people to voice now unless you create a guild and set raiding times. Yes, you can build up some people willing to join in 4 weeks with hard effort, but then it will be reset again. I have done off-hour guild and we got strong... But lets be honest, it is not something you can setup a raid schedule for because often there are no enemies and you are forcing yourself to play the game for nothing... You can't even play for points anymore. And all you need are 3 people who can play the game, and some fodder, after that you can kill 99% of enemy groups at offhours, so its very boring to actually have a guild at offhours. - Now on the off case that they were one of the lunatics that were tagging up for sake of leadership position and skipping the whole "actually having fun and facing challenge" part, maybe new system is fine. But who would want to follow such people during hours when there is very little going on anyways.

These have been systematic issues for a long time. It's probably why, in the last year, we've seen changes to siege, wall HP, matchmaking, server system, and scoring, when these are mechanics that have gone largely untouched for years, as players slowly bleed off from the game. They're fundamental problems with the game mode that are finally getting a balance pass. When one doctor does a bad prescription, another doctor shouldn't give a bad one as well but replace it with better one. Issue is that they are never fixing problems the introduced to WvW: Too fast upgrading keeps/castles, objectives losing meaningful value, Red home border still being unpopular, shield gens blocking all siege, gliding in combat, how minstrel/cele make people too tanky, and many others. All they are doing are introducing more systems that are making objectives even more meaningless. Okay, recently they fixed boons affecting golems, but that was a nobrainer and in same patch they ruined scoring again. It was fine when they made all timezones "equal" with skirmish point system, but now they made the timezones "unequal" again. Even if there are 100 primetime players voting for the remaining 30 to lose all their belongings and hand it over to them, it doesn't mean that it is right.

If I’m not willing to play on EB can we remove that too? We can add another EB since it is most popular map.

Step 1: Start with boon/condi duration changes (to nerf cele/minstrel): Concentration: 1% boon duration per 15 -> 1% boon duration per 25. Expertise: 1% condi duration per 15 -> 1% condi duration per 25 Step 2: Follow up with specific boon/buff adjustments: Quickness action boost: 50% -> 25%, Alacrity cooldown reduction: 25% -> 15%. Superspeed/Speed Relic: Movement speed 100% -> 66%. Step 3: Return some damage to CC skills so smaller groups are not limited in their damage output first couple seconds. Crowd control skill damage: 0% -> 25% Step 4: Fix siege balance Shield gens bubble around them and limited to 1/spot. Wall/Gate hitpoints increased by 25% on T2 and T3 objectives so defenders have time to show up. Additionally Watchtower only actives when tower is contested to keep NE/NW on alpine and inner towers on EB possible to capture if unscouted. Step 5: Make mapstate playable when smaller groups log in Keeps should take 50% more dolyaks to upgrade and Stonemist castle 100%, so smaller teams can attack something that doesn't take too long. Additionally remove desert borderlands so people are willing to play any servers map. Step most important: Return monoservers So people care enough to log in, defend and group up... And can setup communication channels to call offline people.

Impossible, proper matchmaking (monoservers) is only way to split casuals from tryhards. You will never get rid of sweaty groups with 500 guild cap since if they ever start to lose more 1 fight in a row, they will just recruit more people Only way to make decently sized teams, is make guild potential size much smaller, so they have lot of guilds to work the algorithm with and even if 1 guild goes inactive/active, it won't change much. 1 guild (<70 people) per 1 guild, not 500 people.

Issues of WvW are more systematic than combat balance. This includes siege, wall hp, upgrading, matchmaking, server system, scoring and many others. If I have to say something about meta... There has never been meta where smaller groups have been as hopeless about dealing with larger groups.

If your focus is to keep numbers equal, it is better to adopt following system: - No tiers/servers, just 3 colours, but more maps are added as existing maps start getting filled up - Team (single player, guild, blob, roamergroup) joins WvW map and get thrown into the most outnumbered team - The next team that queues for that map gets thrown into the new outnumbered team - If you want to join an outnumbering team that is already on a map, you can first join their squad then queue up to that side and get in after both enemy teams gets 1 more player - If you leave squad/party or it gets disbanded, you get kicked out of the map. However you can join existing squads/parties provided youre not in one yet. Positives of such system: 1. If you are already outnumbering enemies, any new group on the map will be for the enemies. 2. All maps will never be queued since more maps will be added 3. All teams will have similar amount of players Negatives of such system: 1. Since you can be any colour depending on when you join and there is only 1 tier, score won't matter (but it doesn't matter in restructuring anyways) 2. Bigger guilds will probably struggle with queues less, so amount of them might spike 3. Asymmetric map design won't make any sense (home borderlands)

"WvW is not 24/7 gamemode, only log in at primetime" If the game was released with this scoring system, it would be same as telling Asians/Australians/Russians that they are just not the games customerbase. Same applies to other people who cannot play during primetime. Imagine if Samsung only released phones/TVs with Korean language and no way to change it.. Would be pretty bad sales, right? I don't see how the gamemode, or GW2 as whole, would be as succesful if it was released with this new scoring system. Hopefully the devs try to be constructive rather than destructive in the future.

Mono servers worked great til it didn't. For example each server starts with 50 players, everything's great. 5 people from server a quit the game, not you've got imbalanced servers, the longer this goes on with me players joining their friends servers and others leaving the game. 10 years down the line and you've got a big old unbalanced mess. This argument fails because: - No system could work with 9 tiers and current playerbase, Monoservers had 9 tiers and about same playerbase when it started failing. - Biggest flaws around time of monoservers was glicko matchmaking, preventing servers from climbing/dropping tiers - The transfer system around monoservers didn't prevent people transferring to stacked server since they were open at night So while monoservers might seem like the guilty side with superficial inspection, there were actually 3 much bigger beasts at the time destroying WvW.

Personally, I'd love it, but I think it would do more harm than good to the overall community. You need at least some time to get to know people on your team, work together, socialize a bit, otherwise it's just going to further widen the gap between players with guilds and players without guilds and make the gamemode more isolated. The last six weeks have definitely reinforced the idea that eight weeks was too long, but I think anything shorter than four weeks would be too short for meaningful community building to occur. Ideal system is monoservers to get to know people, build community and organise events. If intent is to make worlds equal according to previous weeks datas, then shuffling should happen as frequently as possible. I would actually argue it is impossible to build a community with restructuring system since no1 will take it seriously if they know it is just temporary. Might as well give up on it. It was already impossible to get most people on same page during linking system. So best option is monoservers, which will never happen since it didn't seem to even be consideration over this, but if they are adamant at trying to create equal teams, which is impossible, it is better to rebuild teams as often as possible. They should choose systems that are logical together rather than starting a fire inside electric sauna.

Yea. There is no point. It should resuffle teams at least weekly, ideally every 3-4 days.

You can uprage all you want but all you will get out of it is "What is next for WvW" and promise that "they will communicate better" dev post. Has happened several times before, but nothing changed. It has gone downhill ever since long time ago when they gave developers anonymous forum accounts. What ended up happening is that none of there were posting anymore. In the end probably their contracts now has a clause that means they are responsible for any financial loss that their words cause, and at least gives grounds for termination. For lawyers it is easy to spin words so that agreeing with any constructive critisism is same as causing financial loss.

M O N O S E R V E R S Lets go. Slay this evil system and let a new dawn arise.

If the game was released in state where 1 side had desert borderlands and 2 sides had alpine borderalnds, everyone would complain. In ideal WvW, score would matter, so people who care about score would complain that enemy won just because they had different map. People who like fights would complain that one map is easier to defend than another. Asymmetric map distribution is just not great and any game that does it can't be taken seriously and has no longetivity. Imagine if in PvE you only had access to wing 4 this week and other players wing 3. Imagine if PvP maps were designed so that one side has 2 points near their spawn and the other 0. Okay, there are marginal differences even in sPvP maps, which is comparable to how EB (25% of maps) corners was different, so people didn't complain too much. But when you change one sides home border, also offensive borders and defensive borders become different and it is way too much. What I am trying to say is that the game should strive to be better if it was released today in this state. But unfortunately we have arrived to state where not only the matchmaking, siege balance and language distribution are worse, but how fair individual matchups are based on colour. Everyone here needs to do some deep thinking of how this game will be improved, and not just based on "what you like". Even if you like desrt border what you should be doing is suggesting a better system where you can play desert border, not promote that we keep a worse one. Let me give you an example: Let us make desert border punishment for playing badly and only lowest tier would be 3 desert borders. This will guarantee that 80% of players will want to avoid lowest tier and WvW activity will spike. Everyone, even guilds, will be PPTing off hours to avoid playing on desert borders. And if you like desert border, you can transfer to lowest tier (if we get monoservers back as deserved). What makes this suggestion even better is that if you are for keeping 1 desert border it is obvious you prefer environment with less players anyways and don't care too much about matchup outcome due to being fine with one side having different border. However we all know with 3 desert borders lowest tier would be ghost town and desert border would be removed even there eventually... But lets give desert maniacs one more futile chance to prove that many people want to play on that map.