Bro do we really still not have the option to manually switch instances?

[Magek.4718]

So many games have this and it makes everything so much better. Why do we still not have this?

 

This. This right here is what we need 

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/NifxxfoJ3NU/maxresdefault.jpg

[Handsel.2891]

This is a feature in Guild Wars 1, at least for the outposts and towns, which are the only maps that are not instances and where you can randomly meet other players. Maybe there is a technical reason why they didn't implement it into the GW2 but I'm only guessing.

[erapago.4387]

1 hour ago, Magek.4718 said:

So many games have this and it makes everything so much better.

Like what?

[zealex.9410]

1 hour ago, erapago.4387 said:

Like what?

For one poe.

[Linken.6345]

1 hour ago, zealex.9410 said:

For one poe.

Yea but it is not an mmo so abit different there.

[Dawdler.8521]

Dude do you really think its going change now when it was literally one of the first complaints/suggestions after they changed to megaservers some 8 years ago?

[AgentMoore.9453]

1 hour ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

Dude do you really think its going change now?

No, but we can screech into the void about it. That's what forums are for, right?

@OP: Loved having this feature in other games (and GW1!) and would love to see it in this game too. So much easier to coordinate with people when you can just zip directly to an IP instead of playing musical chairs with map changes, party requests, and portal jumping.

[kharmin.7683]

3 hours ago, AgentMoore.9453 said:

@OP: Loved having this feature in other games (and GW1!) and would love to see it in this game too. So much easier to coordinate with people when you can just zip directly to an IP instead of playing musical chairs with map changes, party requests, and portal jumping.

Isn't that what Teleport to Friend is for?

[AgentMoore.9453]

5 minutes ago, kharmin.7683 said:

Isn't that what Teleport to Friend is for?

No.

[b k.1648]

Teleport to Friend isn't a useful solution to bad instance management. Instance selection like GW1 had, plus a queue system like WvW has, should have been implemented years ago.

Current system makes even some active areas look dead, which is hardly ideal when the game is already struggling to retain players.

[HnRkLnXqZ.1870]

Wanted to request it again in the QOL section, with a few custom ideas for GW2. But without the image-embedding option, posts like this just look meh. But as you have opened a separate thread, I'll just add it here: 

https://i.imgur.com/snQVoQq.jpeg

(preview of Drizzlewood Coast map-instance overview)

Legend:
ID = Just a number to differ the different map-instances easily.
Age = Uptime of the map-instance, since its creation.
Progress = map-meta event progress.
Squads = number of squads currently in the map.
Groups = number of parties currently in the map.
Tags = listing all tags that are currently present. By hovering over the tags, you can get a small tool-tip window with the commander, squad message, size and the name of the map-region they are currently in. This only shows public squads, private ones are only indicated by the Squads category above. 
Capacity = shows how full the map really is [empty slots]/[max. slots]. The 200 are a guess, I DO NOT KNOW!
Termination = Indicates if the termination of the map-instance is about to take place. The timer gives information about the remaining time before the map-instance gets removed. 
Requests = And the orange request buttons are used to purge a malfunctioning map manually. The hard part would be to figure out an algorithm, which decides what a reasonable number of requests is, to initiate a purge. But we should have an option, instead of waiting several days for a miracle or reset to happen. If a meta-event is stuck, we should be able to intiate a map-purge on our own. But the system should be good enough to prevent trolls from ruining active maps. I would recommend that the purge only works when the map is < 50 % populated and at least 80 % of those players request a purge.
Action = Join Instance, Queue, Current  - that is self explanatory.

If such a detailed instance-overview would be enabled, we could easily see the afk-farmer infested maps and leave them to their business. We can also see the maps with active meta-squads. So when we want to do the story or just some exploration, we can avoid those as well. Squads can be seen and if a map has multiple squads but no active tags, this indicates private squads. In core-tyria maps, this could mean guild-mission squads. 

 

[Astralporing.1957]

10 hours ago, MikeG.6389 said:

This is a feature in Guild Wars 1, at least for the outposts and towns, which are the only maps that are not instances and where you can randomly meet other players. Maybe there is a technical reason why they didn't implement it into the GW2 but I'm only guessing.

The "technical reason" is that it makes it easier for players to see and monitor the levels of activity in game. When you can see exactly how many active instances are for each map, you can also try to estimate the size of active player population. For some reason nowadays all but the most succesful of games don't like anyone to be able to access such information.

[DrKoss.9023]

10 hours ago, erapago.4387 said:

Like what?

 

SWTOR had it few years ago when I played.

[erapago.4387]

9 hours ago, zealex.9410 said:

For one poe.

 

30 minutes ago, DrKoss.9023 said:

 

SWTOR had it few years ago when I played.

Nah, like what's actually better, not which games have it.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

I don't remember there being many maps to choose from in Guild Wars, except during Festivals and at major cities. 

I don't think the servers are going to spin up a bunch of maps unless there are players to play in them.  Thus, it's not much different than the LFG, except for some way to indicate full maps.  That might be difficult as map population can be always changing, and you would need to refresh all the time to see if there was space there wasn't a few seconds ago.   🤷‍♂️

[Hyde.9726]

bc you could spam gather resource nodes like that, would be kind of OP. also players will try to fill out maps as much as possible, the idea is you need maps to feel decently populated, otherwise you'll have weird disparities probably.

[BobbyT.7192]

Coming to a gem store near you .....

[Artic Frisko.2361]

This item is not avaible in your region

[Arnox.5128]

OK, there's a lot of misunderstanding in this thread.

1. If you need to switch to an instance your party inhabits, you can just right click one of the player icons and select "Join in whatever". That's literally all you need to do. Now granted, occasionally the map fills up before you can do so, but if that happens, just wait a little bit. Slots open up fast.

2. If players were allowed to switch instances whenever they want, this would almost entirely defeat the purpose of megaservers. Each instance (or shard) is automatically created and destroyed based on player influx and outflux. You guys are complaining about megaservers now, but they're responsible for ALWAYS ensuring that you will be in at least a somewhat populated instance. Sometimes you do get put in a brand new instance, but if you just wait for like one minute or so, you will find the instance WILL populate with a bunch of new players.

TL;DR - This game does have problems. Instancing is not one of them.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Arnox.5128

[AgentMoore.9453]

2 hours ago, Arnox.5128 said:

OK, there's a lot of misunderstanding in this thread.

There is, because your points aren't what we were talking about.

Megaservers: great for some stuff, not so great for others. Roleplayers in particular tend to get scattered across multiple instances of the same map. Sometimes they know one another, sometimes they don't - this means they often aren't in a party with someone they can right-click and join and are often stranded in an instance where most of the map is doing other stuff. Current workarounds involve awkwardly whispering people for what's known as a 'taxi', manually leaving and returning to the map through a portal, popping into a guild hall or other instance and back out, or waiting roughly an hour for the inevitable 'this map is dying, long live the map' message and hoping you get into an active instance.

It's possible people have other reasons for wanting to glance at a list of instances and pick one, but this is the first one that comes to mind in an MMORPG like this one. Pairing this with the fact that megaserver map closing doesn't always seem to work as intended, I stand by my opinion that being able to choose your instance (even if they only limited this to towns), would real Real Nice™.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

So...how do Role Players know which instance to choose if they are not communicating?  And, if they are communicating, why can't they party/squad up to join a map?

Or was the hope that ArenaNet would always spin up a map just for that group of players...on demand, whether the population called for it, or not? 

[AgentMoore.9453]

7 minutes ago, Inculpatus cedo.9234 said:

So...how do Role Players know which instance to choose if they are not communicating?

By awkwardly whispering people they might not know but have seen once or twice to ask 'hey bro is your instance active?' and then playing musical chairs with map loads and party invitations or by cycling maps and visiting the usual RP hotspots to see if anyone is there. I said all of that in my post, so you may wish to read it again.

GW1 and other MMOs I've played had instance selection (Champs Online comes to mind) and it was useful and appreciated there.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Guild Wars only had multiple maps when the population called for it, and that was only during Festivals in cities.  Also, you still had to communicate which map you wanted to join in with others of like mind. 

Again, do you believe there will always be a 'RP' map waiting, whether the population calls for it or not?  If so, what about other groups of players that want their own maps?  Will ArenaNet placate them, as well? 

[hudisgreat.8492]

I believe there is a roleplay section in the lfg tool. 

[b k.1648]

5 hours ago, Arnox.5128 said:

OK, there's a lot of misunderstanding in this thread.

1. If you need to switch to an instance your party inhabits, you can just right click one of the player icons and select "Join in whatever". That's literally all you need to do. Now granted, occasionally the map fills up before you can do so, but if that happens, just wait a little bit. Slots open up fast.

2. If players were allowed to switch instances whenever they want, this would almost entirely defeat the purpose of megaservers. Each instance (or shard) is automatically created and destroyed based on player influx and outflux. You guys are complaining about megaservers now, but they're responsible for ALWAYS ensuring that you will be in at least a somewhat populated instance. Sometimes you do get put in a brand new instance, but if you just wait for like one minute or so, you will find the instance WILL populate with a bunch of new players.

TL;DR - This game does have problems. Instancing is not one of them.

1. For joining party members, it would still benefit from a proper queue so you don't have to spam join requests if the instance is full.

2. And the problem is, there are some times when trying to join a full instance is actually the best thing you can do for gameplay. Dragon's Stand, for example, is an utter waste of time if you're not on a well-populated map. So is Mad King's Labyrinth.
The megaserver system does not populate instances properly by itself, either - it has put me in dead Labyrinth instances that remained dead for over 3 hours without shutting down. It also routinely starts the shutdown timer on Crystal Oasis instances that are well-populated during the Casino Blitz event, and if you're foolish enough to move to a new instance, you get dumped in an one that actually is empty where the event isn't running. I imagine that's not the only situation where this happens, either; just the one I personally see most frequently.
If players switching instances to join one that's actually playable would defeat the purpose of megaservers, I think that purpose is more than a little questionable.