Jump to content
  • Sign Up


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not only Deso! Gandara, Seafairies, Piken. I mean, for goodness sake, S**** (a certain well known pug farm commander) even has an alt on Underworld! WvW RN - "Which server has a known commander? OK, I play on that alt account to blob up, farm helpless pugs, PPT, and have zero content because the most active players are stacked on one server! Much fun!" Hopefully alliances will fix this total mess, but I fear these same players will just park their alts in different alliances as well for zero content.
  2. Caedmon, you will always be an FSP legend! I love you bro!
  3. • Your assigned team: Stonefall• Your original home shard: Far Shiverpeaks• The name of the WvW guild selected: Black Knights Order [Zero]• A description of the issue: Placed on Stonefall instead of Seven Pines.
  4. Also the Garrison was not upgraded. Major credit to Augury Rock as well as they were not backing off but instead determined to get their Garrison back. It was not a case of just walking over them either, they wiped us a good few times, it was good fun and a proper contest.
  5. There has certainly been no issues with having fights for the past week. Just last night on reset we had great fun capping and defending AR's Garrison, WITHOUT siege. You should not make assumptions when you do not know facts, It only ruins your credibility and kills your argument.
  6. You may also want to include a 20v60 engagement in your example as reason.
  7. The current leader of FSPG is also the leader of a well established "raid guild" called Kalevala, which does not want to be in top tier because of the type of fights that exist. So now this leader is telling the world link to lose the matchup and drop tier just for the "raid guild" to have easier fights. I hope this makes sense...
  8. You are making the mistake by assuming players will want to transfer to the full world. You are missing the point where a group of players that transfer to an open world after re-link/re-balance will directly effected the coverage of their initial world and impact the competitiveness of that world where it causes imbalance. There is no balance in allowing transfers after a re-balance.
  9. Is the purpose of the restructure not to create balanced matchups? By allowing transfers after a re-link as we have it now OR a re-balance as is being proposed we will just be sitting with the same problem.
  10. Hackers are out of control and definitely worse than effort, but this very sad and selfish act has been around for quite a long time. Have a look at this video by a fairly prominent player... https://www.reddit.com/r/Gw2WvW/comments/7u0mgt/hackers_in_wvw_are_still_a_problem/ It is just very unfortunate that ArenaNet is not dealing with the issue, but I guess that allocating resources to it will cost too much.
  11. Hi Raymond You guys are currently making a great effort to "restructure" World vs World... I would like to point out 2 major issues which will not change a thing with all the work you are doing unless it is addressed. Firstly, just this past Friday we had a new re-link for servers. I am not sure if you guys are aware of developments like these, but I play on Far Shiverpeaks and with the new re-link we lost no less than 3 core guilds contributing to more than 100 players who all transferred to another world. Now I am not talking about your average player who jumps into WvW for "30 odd minutes"
  • Create New...