Which WvW system do you prefer?

[Abanga.7451]

now 60 players are voting on the beta test out of the total number, and on February 22, people will simply stop going to wvw at all because some will go to alliances and some will stay on normal

[Abanga.7451]

it can be seen that the events in tyria are packed with no soul in the new maps the very fact of the denial of mounts by the players has long been obvious nothing is being done with this why should a new experiment with bbb be carried out and suddenly some other interesting game will come out at this moment and in general no one will return as after the mounts even after 2-3 years

[Strider Pj.2193]

26 minutes ago, Abanga.7451 said:

now 60 players are voting on the beta test out of the total number, and on February 22, people will simply stop going to wvw at all because some will go to alliances and some will stay on normal

Wait..  60 players ‘voting’?  Love to know your source lol

 

WvW pop always drops for a couple of weeks when an expansion or large content drop hits.

 

And alliances WILL be the normal…. There won’t be two forms of WvW.  (And don’t try to say EoTM is WvW )

 

 

[Strider Pj.2193]

27 minutes ago, Abanga.7451 said:

it can be seen that the events in tyria are packed with no soul in the new maps the very fact of the denial of mounts by the players has long been obvious nothing is being done with this why should a new experiment with bbb be carried out and suddenly some other interesting game will come out at this moment and in general no one will return as after the mounts even after 2-3 years

Gotta say you sound slightly confused…. Like maybe you are stuck in 2014…

 

People have been saying ‘some interesting game will come out’ for 8 years now…. And nothing has really dented the population.  The game has aged, yes, and of course people have left.  But there has been no game killer…

[Abanga.7451]

72 numbers ppl says about it)

 

[Abanga.7451]

you can make sure of this if in the 3rd update in turn there will be places inaccessible without mounts, they will be deserted, although it's easier to get mounts, it's easy for people not to like it)

 

and a year has nothing to do with it at all, for example, the Blizzard company has been throwing money away for 14 years for new abstract things of its own until they began to end, but that game because of which people in principle paid attention to them brings them money and now as soon as they paid attention to the players and not to someone there, it went with the polls

 

[HazyDaisy.4107]

It took me a long time to get over losing my server.  Yet, still today when there is no quote un-quote server pride, I still see obvious signs of server pride.  I know I still hate certain servers, matched against and especially paired with, but realistically, we can't go back to 24/27 and if there were a way, it would've been atleast sampled by now.

 

The current system isn't bad and I really see no difference between it and what alliances should theorically become once fully implemented.  There will still be blobs, roamers, unfair matches and run away ppt, and for abit there may still be remnants of server pride.

 

My only wish is they lower the length of the linkings.

[Abanga.7451]

I am also writing this that as a result of such voting by too few players, it is already an empty game in all maps except for Tyrria, it is impossible to draw conclusions at all based on votes of less than 1 percent here, and even more so to make any changes

[Abanga.7451]

the last adon is too much different from gw2 in principle, I agree there are few enemies and events on the same plane, there is absolutely nowhere to climb and see, but the previous parts are quite interesting and there is where to climb players are so repelled by the movement of en mantach that it is empty there, as well as there were votes and seeing such a finale, why hold them again

[Abanga.7451]

the catch of this vote is that those who are not interested in alliances should share on point 1 and point 2 and who are for alliances just point 3 here you need to consider 1 and 2 point 1 as a whole with such tricks to promote strange innovations it's just to kill online on wvw the goal is apparently

[Abanga.7451]

1 we are against the alliance

2  we are against the alliance and want to change the transfer)

3 we are for alliances

4 we are against everyone)

 

and why not just make a public vote FOR alliances and AGAINST alliances so that opinions are divided into 2 and not 1 and 3 abstract

[Abanga.7451]

if you initially want to cheat and divide all the players who don't like the idea of alliances into 3 groups so that your item gets more votes, they see it and there is no reaction, so you're sitting with your friends here creating the appearance of mass character, no sane fan of wvw will want online to be divided into alliances and usual in both places, it will be a little and uninteresting to play as a consequence, because of your joke, we all will not have wvw activity

[Xenesis.6389]

5 hours ago, Abanga.7451 said:

1 we are against the alliance

2  we are against the alliance and want to change the transfer)

3 we are for alliances

4 we are against everyone)

 

and why not just make a public vote FOR alliances and AGAINST alliances so that opinions are divided into 2 and not 1 and 3 abstract

You know you could just make your own poll instead of spamming the thread with nonsense?

[ArchonWing.9480]

The real question is how people are formatting posts to be unreadable in dark theme....

 

Why bother formatting at all?

[Chaba.5410]

On 12/11/2021 at 4:04 PM, Abanga.7451 said:

72 numbers ppl says about it)

 

Only a single map queue?

Edited December 13, 2021 by Chaba.5410

[Riba.3271]

The original with following:

- Remove lowest population servers (4 or 5 tiers, I understand lower tiers won't be that active outside peak hours but its how people prefer it)

- 1-up-1-down remains (optional)*

- Transfer costs to higher tier servers are high (so 1800 gems or full) so no link transfer abuse*

WvW infrastrustruce also fixed:

1. Remove packed dollies counting as 2 for upgrade*,
2. increase amount of dollies required to upgrade (keeps 1.5x, castles 2x as much)*,
3. increase defensive siege vs siege damage,*
4. rework shield gens to not block siege fire (except maybe acs),
5. guild claiming buff reworked to non-combat bonuses (like OOC speed, less supply spent and siege v siege damage),
6. reduce dolyak escort buff 90%-> 60%* and
7. remove gliding in combat*

With some necessary balance fixes:

1. AoE superspeed cooldowns increased significantly (to HoT levels ~40s cd per class that has it available),
2. Damage turned up slightly ~10%,
3. Short cooldowns increased to less spammable level
4. Concentration stat efficiency towards outgoing (not self) boons halved in WvW. Keeps lot of roaming builds intact while nerfing minstrel.*

 * = Incredibly easy fixes that any programmer can do in less than an hour. Rest can take longer and require some decision making/data manipulation.

 

And this is the minimum what anet needs to do to fix WvW.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Threather.9354

[Strider Pj.2193]

5 hours ago, Threather.9354 said:

The original with following:

- Remove lowest population servers (4 or 5 tiers, I understand lower tiers won't be that active outside peak hours but its how people prefer it)

Effectively Alliances will do this.  And do it dynamically.  By removing lower pop servers, you basically reward all the bandwagonning that occurred over the past 9 years.

5 hours ago, Threather.9354 said:

 

WvW infrastrustruce also fixed:

1. Remove packed dollies counting as 2 for upgrade*,
2. increase amount of dollies required to upgrade (keeps 1.5x, castles 2x as much)*,
3. increase defensive siege vs siege damage,*
4. rework shield gens to not block siege fire (except maybe acs),
5. guild claiming buff reworked to non-combat bonuses (like OOC speed, less supply spent and siege v siege damage),
6. reduce dolyak escort buff 90%-> 60%* and
7. remove gliding in combat*

 

1.  Packed dolyaks would never be used.  
2.  Shrug..  Won’t really make a difference.

3.  What is ‘defensive siege’. I can give you defensive uses for every piece of siege.  Tell us what you really want.  Defensive siege says nothing.

4.  What is the @$&)( do you want shield gens to do then?  The whole purpose of a shield gen is to block siege fire…. And they already removed the ability to shield itself.

5.  Meh…. I know you’ve gone on a whole personal campaign about the claiming buff destroying WvW but the bump is rarely felt by competent groups.  
6.  Why even consider this?  So few people hunt yaks and even fewer escort them….

7.  If you are in your own territory, you get that option.  Plan engagements better.

 

5 hours ago, Threather.9354 said:

With some necessary balance fixes:

1. AoE superspeed cooldowns increased significantly (to HoT levels ~40s cd per class that has it available),
2. Damage turned up slightly ~10%,
3. Short cooldowns increased to less spammable level
4. Concentration stat efficiency towards outgoing (not self) boons halved in WvW. Keeps lot of roaming builds intact while nerfing minstrel.*

1.  No real complaint here

2.  No.  Not across the board.  
3.  Define ‘short cooldowns?  Generally I would say no.  I mean unless you also want to reduce Ele Meteor Shower to a 20 second cool down and a 2 second channel, then maybe we talk.  😉

4.  As a stat, Minstrel doesn’t need nerfing.  Look to individual classes for boon control.  

[Riba.3271]

5 hours ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

Effectively Alliances will do this.  And do it dynamically.  By removing lower pop servers, you basically reward all the bandwagonning that occurred over the past 9 years.

1.  Packed dolyaks would never be used. 
2.  Shrug..  Won’t really make a difference.

3.  What is ‘defensive siege’. I can give you defensive uses for every piece of siege.  Tell us what you really want.  Defensive siege says nothing.

4.  What is the @$&)( do you want shield gens to do then?  The whole purpose of a shield gen is to block siege fire…. And they already removed the ability to shield itself.

5.  Meh…. I know you’ve gone on a whole personal campaign about the claiming buff destroying WvW but the bump is rarely felt by competent groups.  
6.  Why even consider this?  So few people hunt yaks and even fewer escort them….

7.  If you are in your own territory, you get that option.  Plan engagements better.

1. As it is there are no reason to use speedy dollies as it is currently as packed is superior in every way. However you do bring up a good and that packed should carry more supply instead (like 3 or 4x?) while speedies should make upgrading faster and easier.

2. Of course it will make a difference. Less time it takes to upgrade = less valuable is it to defend it. And there will be more to do since logging in to too much T2/T3 stuff on maps is terrible for groups of all sizes. It also affects the median upgrade status.

3. Well, siege vs siege damage was halved unintentially in the patch they made conditions and crits work against siege meanwhile doubling siege hp. After this any regular defensive trebbing (against catas and rams) or clearing siege behind walls, just died out. Overall I mean that siege should do more damage to siege. Of course this will affect attackers also but to lesser extent as they will usually use their siege on gates/walls.

4. Shield gens shouldn't have been implemented at all. There shouldn't be "this blocks all siege and makes game braindead easy to play" button. But since they're already in game, you can just make them pulse damage reduction instead so it makes siege tankier while providing a combat advantage when enemy pushes your siege. And keep the AC fire blocking ability of it. There are of course other ways to go with it as well, like making the bubble grant superspeed or pulsing boon removal. Of course it will still be "why is this siege even in this game", but at least it won't make other siege useless.

5. Maybe super organised fights it doesn't matter, but it is what carries clouders and bad builds. Especially the movement speed. Of course having 10/20% extra damage and 10/20% extra survivability also ruins dueling and equal roaming (very important aspects for competitive players). Another hourly occurance is having a pug group that misses some of their skills (standard) fight another, then swap to the opposite servers corner, there is too much of a swing in stats (up to 400 power, 400 precision, 400 toughness, 400 vitality, swiftness necessity) to keep up or finetune nice fights. Of course organised groups don't fight each other inside keeps anymore so you have "artificial feeling" that it isn't felt, everyone is just avoiding the spots. Overall if one burns their hand on a stove too many times, even idiot will stop doing it.

6. Even I wouldn't do it myself anymore since dolly snipers are usually pretty bad minionmancers, but before reaching certain level, it can (and was before dolly escort buffs, increased supply amounts and reduced upgrade times) be quite entertaining scene that I wouldn't want others to miss out on.

7. The issue isn't the fights or their outcome itself. It is having small skirmishes inside keeps or towers when one side outnumbers another. When the defender has option to glide away and random pugs just think they can pewpew on walls, it is kind of an issue. Also gliding speed is comparable to superspeed so any slope down a lordroom grants defender too much mobility. Overall the most unfun thing is that it makes clouding braindeadly safe at places like alpine bay or desert fire keep lord rooms. And lot of towers.

 

Summary: I tried to depict as well as I could how WvW used to be, how it is unbalanced for one side currently and lot of these things have nothing to do with blobbing, guild raiding or commanding.  Just having plethora of activity and options back that were removed from WvW.

 

 

5 hours ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

1.  No real complaint here

2.  No.  Not across the board.  
3.  Define ‘short cooldowns?  Generally I would say no.  I mean unless you also want to reduce Ele Meteor Shower to a 20 second cool down and a 2 second channel, then maybe we talk.  😉

4.  As a stat, Minstrel doesn’t need nerfing.  Look to individual classes for boon control.

2. True, I just feel like the damage is very low right now, might be that boon upkeep is too much.

3. I mainly mean condition cleanses, mantras, superspeed and boon removals. If you have 3 AoE sources of boon removal and condi cleanse available every 10 seconds, it removes cooldown management of WvW and makes it just a train fiesta.

4. How I see it is that if you nerf individual boon durations like firebrand, tempest, herald and scrapper boons, you will also affect any respective roaming/small scale/DPS builds that use same traits or skills. Overall nerfing boon output duration towards allies from concentration stat is the least damaging way to nerf the current excessive boon durations.

Edited December 18, 2021 by Threather.9354

[Chaba.5410]

3 hours ago, Threather.9354 said:

Summary: I tried to depict as well as I could how WvW used to be, how it is unbalanced for one side currently and lot of these things have nothing to do with blobbing, guild raiding or commanding.  Just having plethora of activity and options back that were removed from WvW.

I really don't see the logic in going back to use the same system that caused the population problem in the first place.  We can't consolidate tiers all the time because of queues.  Maybe programmatically it's simpler to implement, but that's been the problem: the old system was too simple and easy for players to abuse through bandwagoning and overstacking.

Edited December 19, 2021 by Chaba.5410

[Zephyrus.9680]

People who voted the original system have some serious nostalgia bias. That was like a dead game mode most of the time outside of prime time and T1. The borderlands are already dead enough as it is. 

 

Alliances should be best hands down once their algorithm starts balancing time zones rather than just playtime. 

[Za Shaloc.3908]

Alliances on a 3-week rotation.

[Riba.3271]

On 12/19/2021 at 4:45 AM, Chaba.5410 said:

I really don't see the logic in going back to use the same system that caused the population problem in the first place.  We can't consolidate tiers all the time because of queues.  Maybe programmatically it's simpler to implement, but that's been the problem: the old system was too simple and easy for players to abuse through bandwagoning and overstacking.

Bandvagoning and transferring is even worse now with:

1) Open servers

Yep, just go to link if main is full. It requires ton of stacking to fill both main and link, but still happens every 2 months.

2) Cheap transfer costs

You can actually get to T1-T2 server with max 1000 gems

3) Unstable playerbases

It is simple. Every 2 months there are new leeches that will be loud and self-centered drowning out the voices of regulars. Any progress you made regarding The server or raiding times will be nullified

4) Terrible matchmaking for half the time

Relink happens and soon to be T1 servers start in T5 and other way around. Every matchup is a landslide for several weeks

5) Similar activities

Lot of people and guilds prefer different kind of activity levels  Some servers like Kodash dont want to play without 60+ players 24/7.  Relinks try to make every tier the same activity and population when most of WvW players preferred massive pug activity. And quite a bunch preffered being only Guild in T4  or lower activity bunch.

 

 

And I am not suggesting going back to 9 tiers, but 4 or 5 max, with 1-up-1-down system. Then it would be manageable for larger communities to start over at the bottom and climb up within a month. It would still have very different feel from old system while offering people choice of what flavour they want instead of choosing from 5 different strawberry ice creams.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Threather.9354

[Cyninja.2954]

20 minutes ago, Threather.9354 said:

And I am not suggesting going back to 9 tiers, but 4 or 5 max, with 1-up-1-down system. Then it would be manageable for larger communities to start over at the bottom and climb up within a month. It would still have very different feel from old system while offering people choice of what flavour they want instead of choosing from 5 different strawberry ice creams.

 

The issue here is: you are once again advocating for a system which does not scale well. Alliances and their design simply scale better with player numbers, in both directions.

 

There is no point in introducing an already lacking system. Not 9 tiers but 4-5? What about a surge of player activity and count? Suddenly you get queues on every map. Increase tiers again? What about a sudden drop in player numbers? Suddenly half the tiers are empty.

 

The past sizes and matching sizes (founded in servers) have proven that they are to inflexible and inefficient at managing shifting player numbers. The bandwagon server hopping was simply a symptom of this core issue.

 

As to what players prefer: in the long run, blobbing over 1 or 2 other servers costs players. Not on the blobbing server, but on the opposing sides. Unequal player counts over extended periods of time cost players because quite frankly, the game becomes very un-fun. Both in getting blobbed as well as having to karma train 24/7.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Cyninja.2954

[Dayra.7405]

I would like 3-8h matches with alliance relink after each match and adjustment of the number of matches depending on expected players for that time most.

 

It's the only way to handle the huge differences in player during prime- and off-time. Only if the number of matches in a time-frame adjusts to the number of available player you can avoid both queues in prime and empty matches outside prime.

Opposed to EotM you can choose in Alliance-Relink with whom you will play the next match. Alliances can provide the necessary team identification and they could even be scored and ranked in the leaderboard.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Dayra.7405

[Riba.3271]

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

 

The issue here is: you are once again advocating for a system which does not scale well. Alliances and their design simply scale better with player numbers, in both directions.

 

There is no point in introducing an already lacking system. Not 9 tiers but 4-5? What about a surge of player activity and count? Suddenly you get queues on every map. Increase tiers again? What about a sudden drop in player numbers? Suddenly half the tiers are empty.

 

The past sizes and matching sizes (founded in servers) have proven that they are to inflexible and inefficient at managing shifting player numbers. The bandwagon server hopping was simply a symptom of this core issue.

 

As to what players prefer: in the long run, blobbing over 1 or 2 other servers costs players. Not on the blobbing server, but on the opposing sides. Unequal player counts over extended periods of time cost players because quite frankly, the game becomes very un-fun. Both in getting blobbed as well as having to karma train 24/7.

Aa I see it alliances have similar problem to relinkings: 

- Does not allow server stability (activity hours, server building, median amount of commanders)

- same loudmouth reset frequently and unfair matchmaking

- monotonous uniform server populations causing lack of choice regarding how WvW plays out.

- points mattering very little (actually providing pugs content is bad). It is gonna be same round and round around the SM lord room.

 

And yes, being slightly outnumbered was sometimes a problem with old system. But at least it had tiers in place and lower pop servers faced each other.  Now it is complete transfer bonanza.

 

I am not against alliance system to rebalance populations as it could be great...  With at least 6 month period before rearranging servers. I am big advocate of server stability and maintaining some degree of how things play out there. With shorter periods you just get punished for doing well or building a strong bunch... Fighting alongside a weak or obnoxious bunch 🙂

Of course alliances are great for alliance vs alliance fights. But why are the pugs or roamers even there? Why not just make a GVG mode similar to GW1 one? It is what "alliancers" want anyways. Not to build a strong server, but to build a strong "guild".

Edited December 23, 2021 by Threather.9354