World Restructuring Update 3

[Kovu.7560]

If they want to address afk pip farming and improve the rate in which active players earn reward track experience the solutions are simple enough:
• Increase the amount of base reward track experience earned by everyone (while reducing bonuses granted by boosters if they feel that would need to be counterbalanced).
• Reward pips actively rather than passively and tie them less to wvw rank and more to actions performed in the gamemode, such as defending a dolyak, killing a player or capturing/defending an objective. Pips could still be rewarded every 5 minutes effectively putting a once-per-tick limit on all of the individual methods of earning them to encourage gameplay diversity and prevent earning a whole whack of pips simply by being on the correct end of a large scale fight.

They could also throw some shinier (or more interesting) drops in the heavy loot bags. Many of the "rare" drops in the loot bags were items that had a decent amount of value back in the day -- but now not so much. That said, I don't think wvw is in that bad of a place in terms of earning straight gold. They're added a lot over the years and reduced the gamemode's gold sinks. One could also introduce a set of wvw "weeklies" that once completed generate some gold, if they wanted to tack a bit more economical value onto the gamemode. Capturing 10 towers, 25 camps etc. Tweaking reward tracks and adding new ones are also an option. I do think the economy of the game as a whole is getting a little too inflated too quickly though, and its mostly the fault of pve rewards.

Just some random thoughts. I doubt there's anything here that hasn't been suggested before.

~ Kovu

[ThomasC.1056]

3 hours ago, Justine.6351 said:

You are right, Diablo 2 actually has pvp.

It also has fun.

 

.... Whoops, sarcasm again. Sorry ! ^^;

[Burial.1958]

What i do not understand. The Alliance system how does this work? I can remember that u could make an alliance in GW 1 and the Guilds joinend them as a division. Why not introduce this system again?

 

Alliance XZY

 

-Guild XZY

-Guild XZY

and so on

 

limited to 500 players.

 

Im a leader of a small Smallscale Guild and i really want to play again with those peoples i know now 9 years.

Edited September 11, 2021 by Grebcol.5984

[Magnuzone.8395]

"Active WvW players that have not selected a WvW guild before the start of a season will be automatically matchmade onto a team."

Lol fighting for what then? Rewards? Dear God this will be such a mess

[killforbeers.7534]

This reminds me of RIFT's Conquest... only thing when I was playing that game you had to quickly join one of the allegiance before it maxed out if you ended not joining of either of the two dominant sides then you pretty much ended up in an automatic losing allegiance side which is not  much fun and many would just leave and it would be really 2 large guilds fighting each other. I really hope it does not end up this way. ANET should also looking what made RIFT fail and succeed in that area. As for GW2 allegiance new WvW focus, I like the idea it will get rid of the constant dead time zones which will be nice. I hope ANET makes it work because when Allegiance battles both in RIFT and AION were active they were alot of fun and no matter what time you logged in there was always massive battles and you can see a sea of red enemies everywhere.

[Substance E.4852]

2 hours ago, Magnuzone.8395 said:

"Active WvW players that have not selected a WvW guild before the start of a season will be automatically matchmade onto a team."

Lol fighting for what then? Rewards? Dear God this will be such a mess

This was always going to be the end result

They're taking a system that already barely works as intended and making it that much more complicated

The same people rigging matchups will figure out how to break this system as well and newbies who are already apprehensive about diving into a pvp mode (one that still relies on having BiS pve gear, at the very least ascended weapons) even more likely to just say "no thanks" and then complain that they need gifts of battle

Especially if they prefer "non meta" classes like ranger and thief or classes that have limited use like mesmer

Telling these people they have to sit at a forever jumbled pug table isn't going to be very appealing

[Woop S.7851]

3 hours ago, Grebcol.5984 said:

What i do not understand. The Alliance system how does this work? I can remember that u could make an alliance in GW 1 and the Guilds joined them as a division. Why not introduce this system again?

Great discussions by a community that cares about the game! 👍

Good point, though it's likely the current WvW system is much more complex than GW1 Alliance Battles, the only traces of that GW1 system in GW2 would be EOTM (4-hour matches with 6 matches a day) where 3 teams (alliances of worlds/servers) fight it out non-stop, the only issue with that map would be if you are on the 'opposite team/server', and during peak times, the map had 'overflow' instances/copies of itself, you'd then be fighting 'against' a friend or on another 'instance' instead of beside them...the map died off due to the differences in map design + removal of rewards/PIPs/progression, it was really fun back then & always packed 😄, hope it gets revived too!

On the topic of alliances, 3 keywords stood out from the post for WvW:

-> "matchmaking", "set schedule", "seasons"

A. Objectives/Premise:
- Capturing + holding objectives score points
- Killing players scores points

B. Questions (matches' time limit + player behavior):

1. In a 1-month match (higher fluctuations of participants), how would an alliance of 500 players behave knowing it's 1-month long? (Will population imbalance + night-cap still persist?)
2. In a 1-day match where 500 players 'must sleep' sometime...how would the match work?
3. In a 4-hour match (what the current EOTM uses) Will a 500 man Zerg focus on fighting another Zerg while risking holding objective points? (the previous EOTM when it was still active had constant combat/movement/flow from all 3 sides, barely any scenarios of camping in towers as capturing objectives was the primary goal + scored more points within the 4-hour time limit)

Any thoughts? 🧐

**Reference text from post:
Introducing a matchmaking system to the game mode, where players, guilds, and alliances (player-managed groups of guilds) are programmatically redistributed to new “teams” (previously known as shards) on a set schedule. This gives us more flexibility and granularity when creating new teams and helps address natural fluctuations in population over time...Matchmaking, when teams are destroyed and recreated, occurs at the beginning of each season. The term “season” in the context of WvW describes the period of time between each matchmaking event. The length of a season is not yet finalized, but could be up to eight weeks long.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Woop S.7851

[Dawdler.8521]

4 hours ago, Woop S.7851 said:

B. Questions (matches' time limit + player behavior):

1. In a 1-month match (higher fluctuations of participants), how would an alliance of 500 players behave knowing it's 1-month long? (Will population imbalance + night-cap still persist?)
2. In a 1-day match where 500 players 'must sleep' sometime...how would the match work?
3. In a 4-hour match (what the current EOTM uses) Will a 500 man Zerg focus on fighting another Zerg while risking holding objective points? (the previous EOTM when it was still active had constant combat/movement/flow from all 3 sides, barely any scenarios of camping in towers as capturing objectives was the primary goal + scored more points within the 4-hour time limit)

Any thoughts? 🧐

 

All completely pointless questions ignoring how reality works.

The community guild I'm in today has almost 500 members. 

Do you think we have 500 man zergs? Do you think we break the queue system when we raid? Do you think we dont sleep?

Dont your server have large guilds too?

[Stand The Wall.6987]

hopefully it works out. wvw was my jam for a while and its great to see it get some love

[Nightcore.5621]

On 9/10/2021 at 10:25 PM, Justine.6351 said:

Sorry but I will be playing Diablo 2 Resurrected.

Yeah me too lol... To late for me to care about wvw now

[Luthan.5236]

Regarding the pips: Currently I'm only playing weekly on reset to get wood tier done. For the +1 pip in the following week. (So I will have that +1 pip always ... should I decide to play more WvW.)

I always found the participatoin system pretty annoying. Afaik it also counts down (timer) in obsidian sanctum. Which is bad. In the regular WvW maps ... there is an incentive to just cap (recap) some camps ... every 10 minutes or so. Always safe near the corner in some enemy borderlands (especially the Alpine BL). Roamers often cap caps near your spawn and you can just recap and then go afk. Better than having to walk over the whole map.

I'd be more willing to "really" play (as intended) if that system with the timer got removed. You can run with the zerg. But if you get wiped without getting any kill ... timer counts down and you might have to talk back (a looong way maybe ... if you are owning a lot of tha map and need to talk to the enemy corner for some fight sor stuff to cap) you might lose participation.

I even see people killing some NPC guards - probably desperate to at least rest the timer to 1-2 minutes. (Even when guard killer is not on daily.)

I like the suggestions @Kovu.7560 made. For defensive play (scouting and putting up/refreshing siege) I think the shared participation by squads should be used? (Never really played in squads.) I guess the alliance system will get more people to join guilds (also considering this and joining one atm) - to maybe get a feeling closer to the old system (without linking and more "server identity but now more people in guilds). Maybe more strategy will be possible - because of this. If people try to organize more. We don't know yet. Could still be that a lot just stay random without a WvW guild.

I still find it annoying that defensive play (when it actually should seem to be intended to upgrade and defend stuff - instead of capping/recapping) is less rewarding. Just sitting somewhere and scouting will get your participation down if you do not join squads with shared participation. And it does not even give rewards. There should be rewards based on how many objectives you hold (and how much they are upgraded) + combined with that participation system. Not for capping/recapping.

Edited September 12, 2021 by Luthan.5236

[Dawdler.8521]

1 hour ago, Luthan.5236 said:

Regarding the pips: Currently I'm only playing weekly on reset to get wood tier done. For the +1 pip in the following week. (So I will have that +1 pip always ... should I decide to play more WvW.)

I always found the participatoin system pretty annoying. Afaik it also counts down (timer) in obsidian sanctum. Which is bad. In the regular WvW maps ... there is an incentive to just cap (recap) some camps ... every 10 minutes or so. Always safe near the corner in some enemy borderlands (especially the Alpine BL). Roamers often cap caps near your spawn and you can just recap and then go afk. Better than having to walk over the whole map.

I'd be more willing to "really" play (as intended) if that system with the timer got removed. You can run with the zerg. But if you get wiped without getting any kill ... timer counts down and you might have to talk back (a looong way maybe ... if you are owning a lot of tha map and need to talk to the enemy corner for some fight sor stuff to cap) you might lose participation.

I even see people killing some NPC guards - probably desperate to at least rest the timer to 1-2 minutes. (Even when guard killer is not on daily.)

I like the suggestions @Kovu.7560 made. For defensive play (scouting and putting up/refreshing siege) I think the shared participation by squads should be used? (Never really played in squads.) I guess the alliance system will get more people to join guilds (also considering this and joining one atm) - to maybe get a feeling closer to the old system (without linking and more "server identity but now more people in guilds). Maybe more strategy will be possible - because of this. If people try to organize more. We don't know yet. Could still be that a lot just stay random without a WvW guild.

I still find it annoying that defensive play (when it actually should seem to be intended to upgrade and defend stuff - instead of capping/recapping) is less rewarding. Just sitting somewhere and scouting will get your participation down if you do not join squads with shared participation. And it does not even give rewards. There should be rewards based on how many objectives you hold (and how much they are upgraded) + combined with that participation system. Not for capping/recapping.

Roamers dont have any of the issues you describe.

[Hotride.2187]

2 hours ago, Luthan.5236 said:

I'd be more willing to "really" play (as intended) if that system with the timer got removed. You can run with the zerg. But if you get wiped without getting any kill ... timer counts down and you might have to talk back (a looong way maybe ... if you are owning a lot of tha map and need to talk to the enemy corner for some fight sor stuff to cap) you might lose participation.

I even see people killing some NPC guards - probably desperate to at least rest the timer to 1-2 minutes. (Even when guard killer is not on daily.)

If you are actually playing, roaming or as a part of a squad, your participation doesn't even drop below t6.

People are probably killing guards to get credit if the objective gets taken at some point, while they are doing something else on the map.

[Luthan.5236]

But that is boring to me - running around until you find a few enemies to kill - or stuff for capping/recapping (only to lose it quickly again). (Especially boring when your team is a lot stronger. I usually preferred when it was equel or even when the other servers were stronger. Weirdly then less people seemed to play on my server/link. Then just waiting and playind defensively as possible.)

So ... I guess I'd rather sit at spawn wait for a camp nearby to get flipped (which always happens as soon as the 5 min timers is off) - going there to recap it to reset the timer to 10 minutes. Efficient to get pips (which I try at least until wood tier at reset at friday). I can do other stuff in that few minutes - not having to pay attention to the game. 😄

(And then others complain of people seem afk - when it isn't our fault but ArenaNets fault for designing the reward system in that way.) I actually preferred the old system back then at release. Less reward pressure. Just playing what you want. (Of course you can still play the way you want - without paying attention to rewards. And in a lot of cases they just pop up naturally ... it matchups are balanced. Found it most boring if the server is a lot stronger then others ... and it still turns to capping/recapping and everyone running around just flippign stuff and you have to search the few enemies of the weaker servers.)

Maybe the alliance system will actually creat matchups where it is not too imbalanced. (Like in highest or lowest tiers now.)

 

Edited September 12, 2021 by Luthan.5236

[displayname.8315]

Wow the full guilds really really want to stay stacked together.  Only dead crap guilds should need the guaranteed hand hold of an alliance.  Really sadge to see the demands for stacked servers already.

Edited September 12, 2021 by displayname.8315
Grammer

[Gibson.4036]

So, am I understanding right that “world” will be disappearing completely? Once this is fully implemented we can join and run with a guild regardless of the world chosen at account creation?

I’m a (sort of) newcomer to WvW and all this has me scratching my head.

I feel the pressure to join a guild so WvW isn’t as random as anonymous as showing up to a world boss. I like the idea I won’t be restricted to the small slice of guilds on my current world.

At the same time, I feel a little stuck right now. Join a guild on my current world while I’m learning knowing I might switch to another that fits me better when alliances are implemented? Join a guild on another world and pay for a transfer so I’ll have a home when alliances happen? But who wants to spend that money when it’ll be unnecessary soon? Or just learn WvW pugging my server and find a guild later?

[Maliel.8362]

Can we please have barricades like the ones from the marionette fight? Those would be great for creating choke points

[Strider Pj.2193]

1 hour ago, Gibson.4036 said:

So, am I understanding right that “world” will be disappearing completely? Once this is fully implemented we can join and run with a guild regardless of the world chosen at account creation?

I’m a (sort of) newcomer to WvW and all this has me scratching my head.

I feel the pressure to join a guild so WvW isn’t as random as anonymous as showing up to a world boss. I like the idea I won’t be restricted to the small slice of guilds on my current world.

At the same time, I feel a little stuck right now. Join a guild on my current world while I’m learning knowing I might switch to another that fits me better when alliances are implemented? Join a guild on another world and pay for a transfer so I’ll have a home when alliances happen? But who wants to spend that money when it’ll be unnecessary soon? Or just learn WvW pugging my server and find a guild later?

Unless you know of a guild that you enjoy running with, might I suggest waiting until it goes live?  
 

The first ‘world’ you get assigned to may have some guilds on it that you enjoy running with.

 

Many of these guilds will be working at recruiting, whereas now, that is difficult to do in WvW because of the current server system.  

Once you join that guild, and then designate it as your WvW guild, you will move to each new world that your guild moves to.

[Gibson.4036]

2 minutes ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

Unless you know of a guild that you enjoy running with, might I suggest waiting until it goes live?  
 

That seems like the way to go. Transferring also seemed like a bad idea while trying to unlock the Warclaw and other basics, since as far as I understand there’s a freeze on earning progression for a while after transferring.

I hope it doesn’t take long for them to settle on a system so we don’t have to linger in limbo too long.

[hugeboss.5432]

THE "TOO MUCH TIME PLAYED = GET REKT 1v30" SCENARIO
Regarding team balancing, I'm sceptical due to on my old locked server, i was constantly finding myself playing 1v30 and still locked. So I transfered to an open less populated world and they had anywhere from 3-300 times our numbers in every timezone(!). Players cannot upbalance a team on that level just because of lots of ingame hours & high kdr with teammates that arent even online and call that "a well balanced team". I'm really not that good that i can constantly fight 1v30 blob and win for the server (scored a few kills due to no-down-state event before i had to run tho lol).

But thats over the top ridiculous with the game mechanics regardless, but thats exactly how it was many months ago. Not only does it ruin the match for the player ("i cannot do anything"), it also messes up stuff for the entire team ("kept locked"), and also for the opponents who actually want a good matchup ("there's nobody to fight") = GG Everyone logs off, hoping server opens next matchup ("it doesnt").

BAD PLAYERS?
Even worse if a bad player has lots of ingame hours clocked in, that player would be almost like "serverbane", enemies can kill your team simply by exploiting any  "overrated computer efficiency rating" that may exist in the system and planting them on your team. Average headcount has much more stable balance and less exploitable by the "bad player with lots of time = scaling us up & locking our team" scenario. I've already heard of players getting kicked from guilds because they're not good enough for the slot they might be occupying for the upcoming alliances. This is very bad and needs to be looked at.

MULTIPLE ACCOUNTERS
Many players play multiple accounts, but they dont get hit with stats from multiple accounts, creating lots of accounts really downleveled compared to what they are actually should be worth. Those who play legit single accounts are going to get rekt with the balancing system proposed, since lots of players (i know tons & tons of players with multiple active wvw accounts) arent balanced to even half of what they actually are playing across all accounts! Don't let alliances be exploited like this! There needs to be a better solution to the proposed balancing system! I hope there will be a more indepth and experienced analysis in regards to this.
 

[hugeboss.5432]

WVW PLAYED TIME BALANCE ISSUES + A BETTER SOLUTION
WvW has a wide variety of playstyles. Some people form up at specific time and go full throttle for 2hrs nonstop action, 7 times a week. Then there are roamers that randomly login and take camps and do small scale operations. Then we have camp defenders, yak escorts and treb shooters that do "minimum wage" type jobs. Some like engaging in mapchat in between and use wvw also as a place to esocialize etc. I can't see how balancing this in regards to their wvw time played can ever work well, since the ppt contribution is going to vary at such a wide difference across actual hours spent in wvw.

THE OPTIONAL "SUPERIOR" SOLUTION ("devs dont like player generated superior solutions yadda yadda")
Instead, make a (hidden?) statistic counting the "directly generated server ppt income" a player generated after matchups (something like a wxp income without any individual modifier). This will balance far better than actual played time & then even awesome teams get to keep those extra fluff bad players (every team need a few of those after all - "Here! Take this manual minesweeping kit!"). We don't really want stale picture perfect teams without any comedy do we? ;)
They can each keep their spot on a team without being hated + gkicked. Also, a team can actually get the right type of players a team needs to reach balance and everyone gets to keep their individual playstyle they enjoy (we don't want to be losing anyone from wvw). Remember, this isn't a 5 minute PvP match, wvw vets & regulars actually do a lot of chatting too, sometimes without doing much else.

This would solve so many problems with the current proposed balancing plans, and there are of course issues that the devs will need to rethink, tweak and solve along the way, aka its not the final solution (devs don't like that anyway, they gotta keep on dev'ing), but more like a step in a more flexible & "open for all" direction. This is such a logical routed solution, that it has likely been proposed before (if so, my apologies to whoever that may be).

[StrangerDanger.3496]

I dont understand the issue.  Add a numerical value to everything that can be done in WvW thats considered participating.  Choose a set time frame per pip.  All your points for that period go into progress then the next time period starts and you are at zero.

 

Right now you gain progress that slowly depreciates, which I sort of do like, as I can take a super short break and hop back in with no real downside to me. But even with this slower depreciation of participation AFK for a short time and you get nothing.  So the only easy solution is to have each time period start at 0.

 

I really dont see that many people AFK in WvW, maybe some servers are really bad....also doesnt WvW kick you out the instance when its been too long too keep people from reserving spots on maps longer term?

 

Is this really an issue basically?